Is reading something that accidentally sexually excited you a sin?


#1

Ok 2 things to start, I am scrupulous and I am a man who has same sex attraction(those two things will make this a lot easier) I was reading a nonfiction book about early america(specifically massachusetts) and the puritans and it explained how they would punish criminals, it talked about one case where they stripped a man and whipped him. I naturally have a tendency to find that sexually exciting, and as I started to read that part(it was only 3 or 4 sentences long) I realized this material has potential to arouse me, but I thought I would plow through anyway and read it since deep down I was thinking that it's a non fiction book and its explaining history-not a porno so I should be able to read it even if I find it arousing(and by the way I was just reading it, not fantisizing or falling into lustful daydreams). So I read it anyway, of course all this happened in maybe 10-15 seconds.

Now I am being very scrupulous about it and part of me thinks I comitted a mortal sin since I deliberately read on even though I knew the subject matter had potential to arouse me. But the other part of me says that I never had any intent of picking up this book and finding anything sexually stimulating in it and I continued to read on since it is of historical importance. And even if I did deliberately read it it was only briefly(around 10 seconds) and I have an examination on conscience that lists "brief entertainment of impure thoughts" as a venial sin

Do you think it was mortal?


#2

Sinful actions require willful intent to be considered sinful.


#3

Not it was not even venial, you restrained yourself therefore you did not sin.

Sin requires us to willfully cooperate with the sinful action, thought.

Peace!


#4

[quote="singer878, post:1, topic:331464"]
Ok 2 things to start, I am scrupulous and I am a man who has same sex attraction(those two things will make this a lot easier) I was reading a nonfiction book about early america(specifically massachusetts) and the puritans and it explained how they would punish criminals, it talked about one case where they stripped a man and whipped him. I naturally have a tendency to find that sexually exciting, and as I started to read that part(it was only 3 or 4 sentences long) I realized this material has potential to arouse me, but I thought I would plow through anyway and read it since deep down I was thinking that it's a non fiction book and its explaining history-not a porno so I should be able to read it even if I find it arousing(and by the way I was just reading it, not fantisizing or falling into lustful daydreams). So I read it anyway, of course all this happened in maybe 10-15 seconds.

Now I am being very scrupulous about it and part of me thinks I comitted a mortal sin since I deliberately read on even though I knew the subject matter had potential to arouse me. But the other part of me says that I never had any intent of picking up this book and finding anything sexually stimulating in it and I continued to read on since it is of historical importance. And even if I did deliberately read it it was only briefly(around 10 seconds) and I have an examination on conscience that lists "brief entertainment of impure thoughts" as a venial sin

Do you think it was mortal?

[/quote]

As another poster stated, it probably wouldn't be considered a sin at all. Jesus was like us in all ways but sin. Since he was a healthy man, this means he must have also been sexually aroused from time to time. But sexual arousal is simply a temptation, and we know Jesus was tempted. It is only when we formally engage in entertaining the thoughts by (a)scheming about how to commit adultery - that is, formally lusting after someone, (b) masturbating, (c) intentionally watching (or attempting to watch) pornography, (d) entering an "adult" bar, (e) propositioning someone for sex, etc. that we commit sin.

The thoughts themselves are merely a temptation of the flesh. And, being human, we all have sexual temptations. As a sidenote, when I was in college, I spent a summer semester as a "Chapel Rat" at the Catholic church on campus (I lived in the rectory for low rent, but was expected to work to maintain the church grounds). During that time, our church had a seminarian in residence (he would later leave the seminary to get married, but that's beside the point). IIRC, he told us (the other summer chapel rat and me) that one of the things they did in his seminary to see if a man could be a chaste priest was to bring in female cheerleaders as room guests and see if the seminarians could practice self-control.


#5

Whenever in doubt, you should talk to a priest and confess it. (Better safe than sorry) and he has had the teaching to understand these matters more.

From my laymen perspective, I don’t think you committed a mortal sin, but possibly a venial one for the very reasons you gave. You knew it might put you in the near occasion of sin (even though it wasn’t a sinful book) and you did it anyway.
For example, nude art, like Michelangelo’s David, is not sin to look at and admire it’s beauty. But, for a person prone to impure thoughts, it could be an occasion of sin, and that person should avoid it knowing that it could lead them to sin.

Now, you didn’t want to be aroused, and your intentions were initially to be learning about history, so I don’t think that qualifies for mortal sin as (to me at least) it doesn’t seem like a grave matter or done in complete freedom to sin. However, there was still a deliberate choice and an act of the will to put yourself in the near occasion of sin, so that would be considered venial sin.


#6

Hi PowerofK; interesting example you quoted. However i have to say that i dont agree with that behaviour of deliberately placing the seminarians in a position of temptation - that is in itself a sin ie. to deliberately tempt someone to sin, & seriously mixed up psychologically anyway. What about where Jesus said: 'things that cause people to sin are bound to happen, but how terrible for the one that makes them happen', & further, 'if anyone causes one of these little ones to sin (or lose faith in me), it would be better if a millstone were tied around his neck & he be dropped in the bottom of the ocean' (or words to that effect). so basically - shame, shame, shame on them for risking the seminarians chastity like that. Wasnt it the devil who took Jesus & tempted Him? Are they behaving therefore under the influence of the devil? Sorry, but on so many levels that is seriously twisted.


#7

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.