occasion to sin

[dairygirl4u2c]

Please add anything you feel is relevant.

Edited February 2, 2005 by dairygirl4u2c

[Socrates]

"And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil." ~ The Lord's Prayer

"I firmly resolve, with the help of Thy grace, to sin no more, and to avoid the near occasions of sin." ~ Act of Contrition.

The Church commands us to avoid near occassions of sin if possible.

[MulletBoy]

Quick answer....yes!

Putting yourself in a place of temptation is sinful. Whether you actually fall to the temptation itself is a different matter, and a different sin. But allowing ourselves to be open to temptation is like playing with fire in a gas station. Whether the gas station blows up or not, you've still done something wrong!

It is an entirely different matter when temptations present themselves of their own accord. These temptations can even be good! Every time we turn away from temptation and instead remain, through grace, fixed on Christ we are strengthened and blessed. God allows us to be tempted so we can grow in our love for Him! What an amazing way of looking at temptation! (well, I think anyway)

There is some scripture somewhere about the devil prowling around seeking the ruination of souls. Don't make his like easier!

Hope that helps.

Blessings

[Cam42]

[quote]Quick answer....yes![/quote]

I disagree. By Catholic definition; temptation is an incitement to sin whether by persuasion or by the offer of some good or pleasure.

The important part is the second. Temptation can be a good thing. Temptation is not in itself sin. No matter how vivid the unholy image may be, no matter how strong the inclination to transgress the law, no matter how vehement the sensation of unlawful satisfaction, as long as there is no consent of the will, there is no sin.

The important part of this consent of the will. The very essence of sin in any grade is that it should be a deliberate act of the human will. Whether one puts one self into the situation, unless there is consent of the will there is no sin.

While temptations as such can never be intended by God, they are permitted by Him to give us an opportunity of practising virtue and self mastery and acquiring merit. Insofar as this is the case, temptation can be a good thing.

Also Aquinas says about the consent of the will, "Consent implies application of sense to something. But "consentire" [to consent] is "to feel with," and this implies a certain union to the object of consent. Hence the will, to which it belongs to tend to the thing itself, is more properly said to consent: whereas the intellect, whose act does not consist in a movement towards the thing, but rather the reverse."

What does he mean by that? That there must be an implicit move toward agreeing the sense. If one does not bring oneself into union with the temptation, then there is no sin.

It really is not all that hard, but temptation is not a sin unless there is a consent of the will, regardless of the situation in which one finds oneself. Really, temptation can be seen as a good thing, because it brings one into a state of self mastery.

Cam42

[Mrs. Bro. Adam]

However, we should always do everything within our power to stay away from temptation, because we, as human, are very weak beings, and we can never know when or where we will yield to that temptation.

[Cam42]

[quote]However, we should always do everything within our power to stay away from temptation, because we, as human, are very weak beings, and we can never know when or where we will yield to that temptation.[/quote]

Descartes espoused that philosophy. What was his end? We cannot let fear of an action guide us, otherwise there will be no certainty outside of our own self. And we will end up sitting in a corner staring at a fire, wondering if we are anything more than a mind thinking.....afraid to take a step, that step is reality.

We have to be willing to make that step and put our faith in the fact that our intellect will assent and our will will consent to the grace which God affords us.

Otherwise.....we end up with only "cogito ergo sum." I think therefore I am. This is in direct conflict with "Ego sum qui sum." I AM who AM; the name of God.

So, temptation is permitted because to overcome it brings one to a greater understanding of "Ego sum qui sum."

Cam42

[Mrs. Bro. Adam]

However, we shouldn't needlessly put ourselves into an occasion of sin.

[HomeTeamFamily]

the way ive always thought of it is that if you are knowingly walking into a place where i know there will be sinning, regardless of whether or not i intend to sin, i am saying to God "ok God, im going to surround myself with sin, but i want you to hold me up and keep me from sinning"

God helps those who help themselves.....i would not want to test my God by intentionally placing myself at risk of sin

[Mrs. Bro. Adam]

That's a good way of putting it, VoloHumilisEsse!

[Cam42]

AND LEAD US NOT INTO TEMPTATION.....

"Lead us not into temptation" implies a decision of the heart: "For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also. . . . No one can serve two masters."

In this assent to the Holy Spirit the Father gives us strength. "No testing has overtaken you that is not common to man. God is faithful, and he will not let you be tempted beyond your strength, but with the temptation will also provide the way of escape, so that you may be able to endure it." (CCC 2848)

God does not want to impose the good, but wants free beings. . . . [i]There is a certain usefulness to temptation.[/i] No one but God knows what our soul has received from him, not even we ourselves. But temptation reveals it in order to teach us to know ourselves, and in this way we discover our evil inclinations and are obliged to give thanks for the goods that temptation has revealed to us. (Origen, De orat. 29:PG 11,544CD.)

This petition goes to the root of the preceding one, for our sins result from our consenting to temptation; we therefore ask our Father not to "lead" us into temptation. It is difficult to translate the Greek verb used by a single English word: the Greek means both "do not allow us to enter into temptation" and "do not let us yield to temptation." (CCC 2846)

So, what am I getting at? Temptation is a part of our lives. They are trials in which we must engage and we must pass, in order to become like the saints. The saints endured them and so should we. We are called to be in the world, but not of the world. Satan wants for us to be of the world. No matter how much we try to avoid this, we are confronted with it every day. As the Church teaches, ""If we live by the Spirit, let us also walk by the Spirit."

We are engaged in the battle "between flesh and spirit"; this petition implores the Spirit of discernment and strength. What is the petition? LEAD US NOT INTO TEMPTATION......

Temptation is necessary.

Cam42

[Carnanc]

I believe different types of occasions of sin exists, like if it is sometime that is difficult to avoid, than you probably aren't sinning, but say you purposefully go to a website that has a link that has led you to sin in the past, and it is totally your option to go there. that would probably be playing with fire and sinful.

Heres a definition from the Catholic Encyclopedia
----------------------------------------------------------


Occasions of Sin
Occasions of Sin are external circumstances--whether of things or persons--which either because of their special nature or because of the frailty common to humanity or peculiar to some individual, incite or entice one to sin.

It is important to remember that there is a wide difference between the cause and the occasion of sin. The cause of sin in the last analysis is the perverse human will and is intrinsic to the human composite. The occasion is something extrinsic and, given the freedom of the will, cannot, properly speaking, stand in causal relation to the act or vicious habit which we call sin. There can be no doubt that in general the same obligation which binds us to refrain from sin requires us to shun its occasion. Qui tenetur ad finem, tenetur ad media (he who is bound to reach a certain end is bound to employ the means to attain it).

Theologians distinguish between the proximate and the remote occasion. They are not altogether at one as to the precise value to be attributed to the terms. De Lugo defines proximate occasion (De poenit. disp. 14, n. 149) as one in which men of like calibre for the most part fall into mortal sin, or one in which experience points to the same result from the special weakness of a particular person. The remote occasion lacks these elements. All theologians are agreed that there is no obligation to avoid the remote occasions of sin both because this would, practically speaking, be impossible and because they do not involve serious danger of sin.

As to the proximate occasion, it may be of the sort that is described as necessary, that is, such as a person cannot abandon or get rid of. Whether this impossibility be physical or moral does not matter for the determination of the principles hereinafter to be laid down. Or it may be voluntary, that is within the competency of one to remove. Moralists distinguish between a proximate occasion which is continuous and one which, whilst it is unquestionably proximate, yet confronts a person only at intervals. It is certain that one who is in the presence of a proximate occasion at once voluntary and continuous is bound to remove it. A refusal on the part of a penitent to do so would make it imperative for the confessor to deny absolution. It is not always necessary for the confessor to await the actual performance of this duty before giving absolution; he may be content with a sincere promise, which is the minimum to be required. Theologians agree that one is not obliged to shun the proximate but necessary occasions. Nemo tenetur ad impossibile (no one is bound to do what is impossible). There is no question here of freely casting oneself into the danger of sin. The assumption is that stress of unavoidable circumstances has imposed this unhappy situation. All that can then be required is the employment of such means as will make the peril of sin remote. The difficulty is to determine when a proximate occasion is to be regarded as not physically (that is plain enough) but morally necessary. Much has been written by theologians in the attempt to find a rule for the measurement of this moral necessity and a formula for its expression, but not successfully. It seems to be quite clear that a proximate occasion may be deemed necessary when it cannot be given up without grave scandal or loss of good name or without notable temporal or spiritual damage.

[Cam42]

[quote]It is important to remember that there is a wide difference between the cause and the occasion of sin.[/quote]

Exactly.

[quote]All theologians are agreed that there is no obligation to avoid the remote occasions of sin both because this would, practically speaking, be impossible and because they do not involve serious danger of sin.[/quote]

What I am speaking to.

So, the point is still this....we should not outwardly avoid those things that tempt use because we may fear that it will lead to sin. (We are not to yield to temptation) If it is placed in our way, then we are called, by God, to overcome them. It is a free choice to do so.

Here is a graphic illustration. A teenage girl is pregnant. In order to go to work, she must pass by Planned Parenthood, which is in the next suite of the office building in which she works. Society tells her (erroneously, albeit....notice my statement about Satan's role, previously) that she is justified in having an abortion. She has even contemplated it. She has resisted this temptation. Is she to avoid passing in front of Planned Parenthood, thus missing out on work?

No. She is to confront this temptation and overcome it. She is to show moral fortitude and become like a saint.

Remember, as the Catechism teaches us, LEAD US NOT INTO TEMPTATION is rooted in FORGIVE THOSE WHO TRESSPASS AGAINST US. Not vice versa.

Cam42

[Socrates]

Cam 42,

Please note how the poll question was worded ("without sufficient reason.")

We are commanded to avoid near occasions of sin. There will be plenty of temptations in one's life, but one should not willfully seek them out.

One should always avoid near occasions of sin, unless they are unavoidable or there is a good reason or necessity to encounter that occasion of sin.

Putting oneself in occasions of sin for its own sake is always wrong.

[Cam42]

[quote]There will be plenty of temptations in one's life, but one should not willfully seek them out.[/quote]

I agree and I have not said that. What I have said, is that we must not avoid the temptations that are presented to us. I have not said anything about [i]willfully seeking them out.[/i]

I am simply saying that if one avoids temptations, one is being overly cautious and that should not be either.

That is what I have been getting at.

Cam42

[crusader1234]

I don't think 'putting yourself in a position where you'll be tempted' is sinful. If you go into a situation where you'll probably be tempted, and you care about your soul, you're probably thinking 'I can handle this' or something. If you can handle it, good for you. However, if you go in thinking that and it turns out you can't... well I suppose we know what that means.