(a) The Theological Malice.--It is mortally or venially sinful to be negligent against temptation, according to the greatness or smallness of the danger to which the negligence exposes one (see 256-262). Thus, it is not a serious sin to omit all resistance to a weak and dying temptation, or to neglect from indolence or other venial fault all external resistance when the danger is made remote by the internal displeasure or resolution; but it is a serious sin to trifle with any very attractive temptation or to put off resistance until a progressing temptation has grown formidable and made self-control difficult, and this is true even though consent is not finally given to the impure suggestion.
(b) The Moral Malice.--Negligences in reference to carnal temptations do not differ specifically but only in degree, according to the approach the stimuli make towards complete l.u.s.t. Even when there is an object (e.g., fornication, adultery) before the mind, the difference in species of the object, it seems, does not induce a difference in species of the sin, since the sin is the general one of carelessness in presence of temptation. Hence, it suffices to confess that one has been remiss in banishing impure emotions or thoughts.
2503. Applications.--(a) The principles here given in reference to emotions of the sensible appet.i.te and rebellions of the flesh should be applied to other involuntary acts in the imagination, reason and will (see 129). Thus, thoughts or images of impure scenes that pa.s.s through the mind should be treated in the same way as temptations of the flesh.
(b) The principles here given about the person who suffers temptation should also be applied to the person who causes temptation. Since it is a mortal sin to commit impurity, it is also a mortal sin to solicit impurity; since it is a mortal sin of l.u.s.t to make oneself drunk in order to experience carnal emotions, it is also a mortal sin of l.u.s.t to make another person drunk that he may become likewise inflamed; since it is a mortal sin to expose oneself to extreme danger by reading a p.o.r.nographic work, it is also a mortal sin to wish to expose another to a like danger. And this is true even though the temptation is unsuccessful. Physicians who minimize the wrong of masturbation, or who counsel fornication to young men on the absurd plea that continence is unhealthy or productive of impotency, share in the guilt of pollution or fornication which they counsel; and young persons who seek to win the sinful love of others by nourishing their hair, painting their faces, exposing their bodies, etc., have the guilt, if not the gain, of seduction.
2504. Non-Consummated Sins of Impurity.--These include all those preparatory sins in which unlawful s.e.x pleasure is not carried to completion by coition or pollution. We shall speak first of the internal sins of thought, delight, and desire (see 232 sqq.), and next of the external sins of unlawful looks, words, kisses, and embraces.
2505. Impure Thoughts.--Impure thoughts (_delectatio morosa_) are representations in the mind or imagination of impure venereal objects in which deliberate pleasure is taken.
(a) They are representations, that is, mental pictures or images of things absent from the senses, but thought of or imagined as present.
Thus, impure thoughts differ from desires, which consist in attraction with will to accomplish, and also from sense contact of various kinds with objects present to the eyes, ears, or touch.
(b) They are joined with deliberate pleasure of the will, that is, one intends them or consents even momentarily to them after perceiving their presence and malice, even though carnal pleasure is not felt or does not threaten. Thus, impure thoughts differ from tempting thoughts, which are transient and unwished forms that appear in the mind, and are thought on before their true character is adverted to, or which gain a lodging in spite of efforts to eject them. A tempting thought is not sinful, but an occasion of merit when resisted, no matter how long it endures (see 2497 b).
(c) The pleasure is taken in a venereal object, that is, in the thought of fornication, adultery or other carnal sin, committed by oneself or by another. Hence, impure thoughts are not to be confused with the pleasure taken in knowledge about impurity (e.g., a professor of medicine or morality is not impure when he rejoices at the s.e.xual knowledge he possesses and which is necessary for his duties, or willingly thinks about s.e.x matters when it is necessary or useful for him to do so), or with pleasure taken in the morally indifferent manner of the venereal sin. For example, amus.e.m.e.nt over a ridiculous feature of a sin which one detests is not an impure thought (see 233-236).
2506. The Malice of Impure Thoughts.--(a) The Theological Malice.--Impure thoughts are mortal sins: for he who deliberately rejoices at the thought of sin, loves sin and is therefore guilty of it. They are venial sins when there is imperfect advertence, and also when there is lightness of matter on account of the remoteness of the danger of a thought only indirectly voluntary. They are mortal when there is full deliberation and the impure thought is directly voluntary or gravely dangerous (see 2496).
(b) The Moral Malice.--Impure thoughts have the same specific malice as the representation of the object which is entertained as a welcome guest in the mind; for not only is impurity given the hospitality of the mind, but a particular kind of impurity (see 90, 235). Hence it follows, first, that a specifically different object (as is the case with different consummated sins) makes a specifically different sin (e.g., to think pleasurably of unlawful intercourse is mental fornication if the persons in mind are unmarried, and is mental adultery if the person in mind is married); secondly, that objects not specifically different--as is the case with different non-consummated sins of lewdness--do not make specifically different sins (e.g., to think pleasurably of a sinful kiss and to think sinfully of a sinful touch are both mental lewdness or impure thoughts); thirdly, that special malices of the object from which the mind can prescind--viz., those which in the external act do not change the species or do not explain the venereal pleasure--and from which it does prescind, are not incurred (e.g., to think pleasurably of sin with a woman who is married and a relative, if the thought that she is married or one"s relative is not pleasing or is displeasing, is mental fornication, not mental adultery or mental incest). In praxi vero consulitur confessariis ut regulariter abstineant a quaestionibus de specie morali delectationis morosae; nam fideles plerumque nesciunt faciliter distinguere inter species morales cogitationum, et sic interrogatio evaderet vel inutilis, vel etiam ratione materi perieulosa. Ad hc quum casus crebriores sint, maximo esset incommodo, tum confessariis, tum poenitentibus, si sacerdos exquireret qu vix cognosci possunt.
Sufficit igitur ordinarie sciscitari de specie theologica (utrum voluntas complacuerit), vel de specie morali generali (utrum actus internus delectatio morosa vel potius desiderium fuerit). See Canon 888, 2; Norms for Confessors in Dealing with the Sixth Commandment, Holy Office, May 16, 1943.
2507. Impure Rejoicing.--Impure rejoicing is a deliberate pleasure of the mind yielded to the recollection of a past sin of impurity. Hence, this sin of rejoicing is committed when one thinks with approval of a fornication of former days, but the sin of rejoicing is not committed when one confines one"s pleasure to some good consequence of a fornication (e.g., the excellent child that was born), or to a lawful pleasure of the past, as when a widower thinks without present carnal commotion or danger of his former married life. The circ.u.mstances are more readily willed here than in impure thoughts, for here the mind is picturing an actual, not an imaginary case of sin, and the mental representation will therefore be more distinct; nevertheless, in the case of impure rejoicing the moral sub-species--at times even the distinction between impure rejoicing and impure thoughts--is usually not perceived. The principles of the previous paragraph apply to impure rejoicing.
2508. Impure Desires.--Impure desire is a deliberate intention to commit impurity in the future.
(a) It is a deliberate intention, that is, a purpose or will to which consent is given internally. Hence, an impure desire is not the same thing as a statement of fact, as when a pa.s.sionate person declares that he would sin, were it not for fear of the consequences, meaning only that he is frail, not that he wishes to sin. Neither is it the same as a mere velleity, which desires venereal pleasure under circ.u.mstances that would make it lawful, as when a married man wishes that he were lawfully married to a woman other than his present wife, or that both he and the other woman were free to marry each other. But these velleities are foolish and venially sinful, and often on account of danger they are mortally sinful. An impure desire exists when the will consents unconditionally (as when a person decides or wishes to fornicate tomorrow) or conditionally under a proviso that does not take away the malice (as when a person decides that he would fornicate were it not for fear of punishment, or Wishes that it were lawful for him to practise fornication).
(b) It is an intention to commit impurity, and hence there is no impure desire in wishing what is not venereal pleasure (e.g., the spiritual, mental or bodily relief that follows on an involuntary pollution), or what is lawful venereal pleasure (e.g., when engaged persons think, but without carnal commotion or danger, of the benefits of their future married relationship).
2509. Malice of Impure Desires.--Impure desires are mortal sins and have the malice of the object and of the circ.u.mstances that one has in mind; that is, one commits the same kind of sin in desiring as in performing impurity. Hence, Our Lord declares that he who looks upon a woman to desire her unlawfully has already committed adultery in his heart (Matt., v. 28), and hence also the ninth commandment forbids sins of impure desire. The principles given in 2506, 2507, apply also to impure desires with this difference that the mind when it wills external performance considers the object as it is in itself, not as it is mentally represented, and hence is less likely to prescind from actual circ.u.mstances known to it, But even here confessional investigation is sometimes not necessary on account of its moral impossibility.
2510. Lewdness.--After the internal sins follow the external sins of lewdness or indecency (_impudicitia_). These may be defined as "external acts which are performed from or with deliberate venereal pleasure that is not consummated, and which are not directed to the conjugal act."
(a) They are external acts of the body, such as the looks of the eye, the speech of the tongue, kisses of the lips, touches, fondling, embraces, pressure of the hand, etc. Those also are guilty of lewdness who permit themselves to be petted, kissed or otherwise impurely handled, unless it is morally impossible to resist, as when a woman who gives no internal consent cannot defend herself against a forced kiss without being killed, or cannot without great scandal refuse to shake hands with one whose motive is impure love. Lewdness (e.g., an impure look) may also be directed to one"s own person, or to an animal, or to an artificial object, such as a statue or book.
(b) They are performed from or with pleasure; that is, pa.s.sion either causes or accompanies the impure look or other act. These non-consummated acts are indifferent in themselves and may be licitly performed for a just cause; they become sinful by reason of the evil pa.s.sion that animates them. The carnal motive appears either from the end of the act (e.g., an indecent kiss naturally tends to impurity or grave danger thereof, no matter what good purpose the kisser may have), or from the end of the one acting (e.g., a decent kiss becomes an impure act if the one who kisses is moved by carnal desire). Hence, there is no sin of lewdness when one of the acts now considered is performed becomingly as to externals and innocently as to the internal motive and quality (e.g., from a sense of duty, not from pleasure).
(c) The pleasure intended or consented to is venereal; that is, such as is consummated in copulation or pollution. Hence, there is no sin of lewdness when the acts in question are performed becomingly and with and for pleasure of a spiritual kind (as when members of a family give one another the customary kiss or embrace of affection), or of a merely sensual kind (e.g., when a nurse kisses the tender skin of an infant).
On the distinction of intellectual, sensual and venereal pleasures see above (2461).
(d) The external act is not consummated by copulation or pollution.
These are often its result but they are a different degree of sin, and lewdness is committed even without them (see 2486).
(e) Lewdness is an action not directed to the conjugal act. Coition itself is lawful in the married state, and this legitimatizes all the preparatory or accessory endearments. Hence, the rule as to married persons is that venereal kisses and other such acts are lawful when given with a view to the exercise of the lawful marriage act and kept within the bounds of decency and moderation; that they are sinful, gravely or lightly according to the case, when unbecoming or immoderate; that they are venially sinful, on account of the inordinate use of a thing lawful in itself (85 a), when only pleasure is intended; that they are mortally sinful, when they tend to pollution, whether solitary or not solitary, for then they are acts of lewdness. The rights and duties during courtship and engagement will be treated below in Question III.
2511. Cases Wherein No Sin Is Committed.--Since lewdness proceeds from or is accompanied by culpable venereal pleasure, it does not exist in the following cases:
(a) in children who have not attained p.u.b.erty and the capacity for s.e.x pleasure, and hence there is no sin by reason of proximate danger in looks or touches exercised by them, which would be gravely sinful in those who have reached the age of p.u.b.erty. These children may, however, sin against modesty or obedience, at least venially. They should be trained from their earliest years to reserve and decency, and it is a most serious sin to scandalize their innocence. The question of s.e.x instruction for the young will be dealt with in the Question on the Duties of Particular States. If an adult person were as unmoved as a child by the stimulus of pa.s.sion, such a one would incur no personal guilt of lewdness by kissing and the like acts, but such an adult person is very rare;
(b) in adult persons when a dangerous act is exercised by them, without consent or proximate danger, and with a sufficient reason for the exercise. Thus, a student of literature may read an erotic story from the cla.s.sics, if he is proof against the danger and intends only improvement in style, though for the young such books should be expurgated; a professor of medicine or moral theology may discourse prudently to his students on venereal diseases or sins; an artist may use naked models in painting, if and as far as this is necessary; farm hands may attend to the service of female by male animals; looks and touches that would otherwise be immodest are lawful for proportionate reasons of utility, as in bathing oneself, in performing the services of nurse or physician for others, etc. (see 2497 sqq.).
2512. Conditions Governing Propriety of External Acts.--The becomingness of the external acts spoken of in 2510 b includes two conditions.
(a) On the side of its object, the act must not be directed unnecessarily to the parts of the body that are shameful and private (i.e., the genitals and immediately adjacent parts). It is customary to distinguish the remaining or non-shameful parts of the body into becoming, which are uncovered (e.g., face, hands, feet), and less becoming, which are covered (e.g., legs, breast, back). But as to less decent parts much depends on local usage. For example, at a bathing beach it is not unbecoming to appear in a mixed crowd with uncovered legs or arms, and in very warm countries it is not improper to go about in public with less clothing than is worn in colder climates.
(b) On the side of its subject, the act must be performed with moderation and respect for reasonable custom. Thus, columbine (popularly called "French") kissing and the ardent or prolonged embraces known as "necking" or "petting" are admittedly indecent, even when not accompanied by s.e.xual excitement. Oral abuse committed by or with either s.e.x is indecent both as to the object, i.e., the part of the body involved, and as to the subject, i.e., the mode of action. It is the filthiest form of lewdness and is usually joined with pollution (irrumation).
2513. Morality of Kissing and Similar Acts.--(a) _Per se_, or from their nature, these acts are indifferent, since they can be employed, not only for evil (Job, x.x.xi. 27; Luke, xxii. 48), but also for good, as we see from the examples of the kiss of peace (I Thess., v. 26), the kiss of fraternal greeting (Gen., xxvii. 26, 27), and the kiss of respectful homage (Luke, vii. 38, 45).
(b) _Per accidens_, or from their circ.u.mstances, these acts are often venially or mortally sinful against purity or against some other virtue, or against both. Thus, justice is offended by injuries or violence (e.g., stolen kisses, unhygienic kisses that transmit venereal or other disease); charity is offended by scandal given the object of affection or the onlookers (e.g., kisses given by way of greeting to a member of the opposite s.e.x by an ecclesiastic or religious, kisses forced upon children by grown-ups and which are harmful to the youthful sense of modest reserve); purity itself is offended by familiarities which, though not impure in themselves, const.i.tute a peril for the virtue of one or both parties, as is true especially in demonstrations of sensual affection or pleasure. But even though there be some carnal commotion, it is not unlawful to give with a pure intention the decent salutation customary in one"s country (e.g., to shake hands with a lady, to kiss one"s stepmother or sister-in-law).
2514. Morality of Sensual Gratification.--Sensual gratification, or the pleasure experienced from the perfection in the sensible order of some object, is indifferent and lawful in itself (see 2461, 2492). When it is aroused by objects not venereally exciting (e.g., the beauty of the heavens or scenery, the harmony of music, the tender softness of the rose), it does not tempt to impurity; but when it is aroused by objects that are venereally exciting (e.g., the beautiful face or eyes or sweet voice or soft skin of a person much admired), it approaches so closely to the confines of venereal gratification as to seem almost the same thing. Hence arises the question; is deliberate sensual gratification about objects s.e.xually exciting always a mortal sin?
(a) Many theologians answer in the affirmative, and give as their reason that in the state of fallen nature there is no one who can be a.s.sured that such gratification is not for him or her a proximate occasion of pollution, or of what is morally the same thing, of inchoate pollution. This opinion does not include gratifications not deliberately sought or yielded to, nor those in which experience has shown that the venereal attraction of the object, at least for the subject concerned, is nil or practically nil (e.g., sensual kisses of an infant by a nurse.)
(b) Other theologians dissent from the rigorous view, and argue that, since sensual and venereal attraction are really distinct, there is always the possibility of intending the former and excluding consent to the latter.
(c) To the present authors it seems that there is room for a middle way between these two extreme views. As was said above (2497), it is sometimes sinful and sometimes not sinful to encounter temptation, according to the intention and reason one has, and a temptation willed unjustifiably but only indirectly is a grave or a light sin according to the great or small danger that is risked. Now, it seems that certain forms of sensual gratification (e.g., those derived from beautiful but modest music or paintings) have only a very slight s.e.xual allurement for even the pa.s.sionate; whereas other forms (e.g., those derived from the warm kiss or caress of a handsome adult person of the opposite s.e.x) are vehemently alluring. Hence, if sensual pleasure of the first kind is sought inordinately, or if it is dangerous to purity, there is a venial sin; if sensual pleasure of the second kind is sought, there is very likely mortal sin.
2515. The Theological Species of the Sin of Lewdness.--(a) _Per se_, or from its nature, this sin is mortal, even though the external act (kiss, etc.) be decent (see 2512) and of the briefest duration; for lewdness is consent to unlawful venereal pleasure, which from the nature of the case is a serious matter, tending either to illicit copulation or to pollution (see 2496). Hence, even a shake of the hand made with l.u.s.tful intent is a mortal sin. If the guilt of adultery is found even in libidinous thoughts (Deut., v. 21) and glances (Matt., v.
28), much more is it found in lewd kisses, embraces, and conversations.
Scripture strongly condemns every form of lewdness: impure speech ("Uncleanness let it not so much as be named among you, or obscenity, or foolish talking," Eph., v. 3, 4), impure reading ("Evil communications corrupt good morals," I Cor., xv. 33), impure looks ("Whosoever shall look on a woman to l.u.s.t after her hath already committed adultery with her in his heart," Matt., v, 28), impure kisses and other touches ("It is good for a man not to touch a woman, but for fear of fornication let every man have his own wife," I Cor., vii. 1).
(b) _Per accidens_, this sin may be venial as follows: first, on account of the imperfection of deliberation, as when a person under the influence of liquor, drugs or sleep acts with only a partial realization of what he is doing, especially if the lewd offense has not occurred before; secondly, on account of the lightness of the matter, when the lewd act is indirectly voluntary and the danger remote (see 2496), as when slight danger is risked in gratifying the sensual desire to gaze at a famous painting, or in yielding to an impulse of curiosity, levity, or playfulness, to indulge in suitable recreations or even unnecessary conversations in which occur glances or touches that arouse some small degree of s.e.xual emotion. Were mortal guilt of impurity incurred in these instances, very few could remain free from it unless there was a general retirement into isolation. But even in the _per accidens_ cases there may be other mortal sins (e.g., that of drunkenness or of scandal).
2516. A large proportion of the sins of lewdness are only indirectly voluntary, and hence they are mortal or venial according to the amount of danger to which one exposes oneself. No ironclad rules, however, can be given to determine universally what things are gravely and what slightly dangerous, since the force and direction of concupiscence are not the same in all persons. Some persons are overs.e.xed or pa.s.sionate, others are unders.e.xed or cold; some have normal, others abnormal inclinations (e.g., h.o.m.os.e.xuality, sadism, masochism, s.e.xual fetishism) in matters venereal. Hypers.e.xuality and abnormal s.e.xuality are not in themselves sinful, but are manifestations of that inordinate concupiscence that is the effect of original sin and, if yielded to, becomes the cause of actual sin. Proximately they may be due to disease. But since these subjective differences do exist, what we shall set down in the following paragraphs about gravity and lightness of danger is to be understood of the average or normal person and in the abstract, for it is impossible to consider every individual case.
2517. Circ.u.mstances That Increase or Lessen the Danger of Sin.--(a) The Person Acting.--There is less danger before and after than during p.u.b.erty, less for an invalid than for a person full of health, less for an inhabitant of a cold region than for a dweller in the tropics, less for one habituated to suppress venereal pa.s.sion (e.g., a bachelor) than for one who has been accustomed to indulge it (e.g., a widower), less in some cases for the married who can lawfully enjoy s.e.xual intercourse than for the single who cannot. Familiarity also can give a certain amount of immunity (e.g., where naked bathing or naked statuary in public places is according to custom, the natives are less disturbed by these things than outsiders). Those who know (without self-deception) from their experience that certain things excite them very little do not run grave danger in encountering such things.
(b) The Person or Being Who Is the Object of the Act.--There is less allurement in an animal than in a human, less in a small than in a large animal, less in a representation than in the original, less in young children than in adults, less in one"s own person or s.e.x than in another person or the opposite s.e.x, less in an elderly or homely person than in one who is young and attractive.
(c) The Sense Used.--Hearing (and, for a similar reason, reading) is less dangerous than sight, for hearing is nearer to the immanent activities of thought and desire, while sight has more of an emanant character (e.g., to hear or read about an obscene act is farther removed from it, and hence less seductive, than to see it in picture or reality). Sight in turn is less dangerous than touch, for sight is a more elevated and less material kind of perception, being exercised by a cognitional, not by a physical contact with its object, as is the case with touch (e.g., to behold others embrace is not so moving as to give or receive an embrace). Thus, impure touches (kisses, embraces, handling) are the most dangerous form of lewdness.
(d) The Sense-Object Acted Upon.--The degree of danger corresponds with the approach made to the act of generation (e.g., s.m.u.tty stories are worse when they deal with consummated than with non-consummated acts) or to the genitals (e.g., impure touches are worse when directed to the organs of reproduction than to the non-shameful regions).
(e) The Manner.--There is greater danger when the act is prolonged than when it is momentary, when it is ardent than when it is calm (e.g., a pa.s.sing glance or peep at an obscene picture is not as dangerous as a leisurely inspection, a loose linking of arms not as dangerous as a hug). The more exposed the object of attraction and the more secluded the parties themselves, the greater the danger (e.g., love-making between parties who are not fully clothed or who are alone in the dark or in a closed and curtained room is more dangerous than love-making between those who are properly dressed and seated among a crowd of people).
2518. Cases Wherein the Danger of Sin Is Grave or Slight.--A physician must know the difference between mortal and non-mortal diseases, and likewise a priest must know the distinction between various kinds of spiritual leprosies. But when certain cases are listed as less dangerous, this does not mean that they are not dangerous at all and that no account should be taken of them. Especially in the matter of impurity should the warning of Scripture be remembered: "He that contemneth small things shall fall by little and little" (Ecclus., xix.
1). With this in mind, we now subjoin some examples of grave and slight danger for cases in which a lewd act is indirectly voluntary, but is prompted only by curiosity, joke, levity or other such insufficient reason.
(a) Speech.--Dirty or suggestive stories, conversations, songs, music, or radio entertainments are a grave danger when the persons present are very impressionable (e.g., on account of age or character), or if the topic is utterly vile (e.g., descriptions of filthy or unnatural s.e.x acts), or if the manner is very seductive (e.g., the terms used are unfit for polite society, or the story is very detailed, or sin is boasted about, or the conversation is prolonged). On the other hand, the danger is light when the persons present are of mature age and not strongly inclined to impurity, especially if the topic and the language are not very disgusting; but there may be serious sin on account of circ.u.mstances, as when the speaker or approving listener is a person from whom good example is expected. Obscene talk is generally not a serious sin when the persons are husband and wife, or a group of married men or of married women; on the contrary, it is generally a serious matter when the persons are a group of young people of the same s.e.x, more serious when they are a mixed group, and still more serious when they are a boy and a girl or a young man and a young woman. The fact that those of the younger generation often do not admit this, does not change its abiding truth.
(b) Reading.--The remarks made on speech apply also to reading, which is a kind of silent speech. A noteworthy difference between the two in the present matter, however, is that reading is often more dangerous than conversation, since it is usually more protracted. Love letters and romances were once the chief temptation in this line, but today they seem mild in comparison with the supply of p.o.r.nography that is easily accessible to all (e.,g., the magazines and papers that pander to depraved tastes, the stories and pseudo-scientific books that corrupt the youth of every land). Even without grave danger to self, one may still be guilty of grave sin in reading obscene books on account of the coperation with the vendors of immorality, or the scandal, or the disobedience thereby shown to the Church (see 1455 sqq., 1529, 1530).
(c) Looks.--There is generally no danger in a look at the full nudity of a small infant, or at the less becoming parts of a person of the same s.e.x; there is generally only slight danger when the object is the privates of self or of another of the same s.e.x, or the coition of animals, unless the gaze be fixed, prolonged and the object near; there is grave danger in beholding a completely non-infant naked person of the opposite s.e.x, or the coition or other grave external s.e.x acts of human beings (unless the glance be brief or not attentive), or even at times the less becoming parts of the opposite s.e.x, if the look is very intent and continuous. Representations of the bodily parts or acts just mentioned (pictures, drawings, diagrams, etc.) have generally the same dangers as the originals, though the allurement in itself is less vivid; circ.u.mstances may even make the representations equally or more dangerous (e.g., on account of a thin veil of concealment in paintings or sculpture that only increases the attraction; or on account of the suggestive music, the voluptuous dance, the crowd atmosphere that accompanies an immoral scene on the stage or screen). The saying of Oscar Wilde that esthetics are above ethics is opposed both to morality (since all conduct should be guided by reason) and to art (for the highest beauty is that of virtue and the spirit and purity).
(d) Touches.--Kisses are seriously dangerous to purity when warmly or lingeringly exchanged between adults of different s.e.x who are attracted to one another as male and female; in other cases, kisses, if impressed on decent parts of the body and in a decent manner, may be only slightly dangerous. Holding or grasping between such adults is also a serious danger when it is vehement (e.g., the tight squeeze or hug of certain dances) or long (e.g., the repeated or hour-long fondling of love-makers); it is of slight or no danger in other cases, as in the customary handclasp of greeting, Handling or feeling, if pa.s.sing, hurried or light, is generally not dangerous, when it has to do with the becoming parts of another person, or with the less becoming parts of a person of the same s.e.x, or with personal private parts; it is only slightly dangerous, under the same conditions, in reference to the verenda of animals or small infants; it is gravely dangerous when directed to the privates of another person who has pa.s.sed infancy, or to the less becoming parts of a person of opposite s.e.x, or to the b.r.e.a.s.t.s of a woman, unless it be entirely casual, pa.s.sing, or light.