ARTICLE II: ON LUXURY IN GENERAL

483. Definition. Luxury (so called from loosening) is the inordinate appetite for, or use of, venereal delectation or sense.

Venereal delectation (libidinous, luxurious, simply carnal) is that which arises from the movement of the spirits serving generation, and is felt around the genitalia.

It differs specifically from sensitive delectation (natural, sensible), which is had from the contact of a smooth thing, without any movement of the genitalia being present. There are those who distinguish this species of delectation into sensitive carnal, which arises from contact with living flesh, and simply sensitive or merely organic, which arises from contact with any other soft thing.²

Division. One luxury is directly sought, which is had when libidinous or carnal pleasure is intended precisely in itself. Another is indirectly willed, when another thing is intended, from which the aforesaid pleasure arises, as happens, for example, in looks or readings less chaste from curiosity or another illicit end.

The species of luxury are various, as they are recounted in Chapters II and III.

484. Principles. - I. Luxury of any species whatever directly willed is a grave sin from its whole genus, so that every venereal delectation, even slight, taken with full advertence and consent is a mortal sin.³ For the Apostle openly declares that the luxurious are excluded from the kingdom of God,⁴ and Alexander VII condemned proposition 40, which said: "that a kiss had for carnal and sensible delectation, which arises from the kiss, is only venial." The reason is, 1° because every carnal delectation or venereal movement is a certain begun effusion of semen or movement toward it; and therefore, if it is sought outside the legitimate act of marriage, it tends toward a grave disturbance of essential order: 2° because the character of delectation of this sort is such that it corrupts the whole rational nature. For we are much affected by those things in which we delight; and therefore reason is either altogether taken away or very much weakened concerning other things in him who lingers in carnal delectations.¹

II. Luxury, indirectly willed, admits smallness of matter, that is, it is judged grave or slight according as the action from which carnal delectation is foreseen as going to follow influences it either proximately and gravely, or only remotely and lightly. The reason is that an evil effect following beyond the intention from an action is judged evil in that degree in which the cause itself is evil. Cf. Scavini.²

485. Questions. - Quaer. 1° Can lightness of matter be given in sensible delectation, if someone, for example, is delighted by contact with the hand of a woman as by contact with a smooth thing?

Resp. Several affirm with St. Antoninus, Sylvius, etc.; for, they say, just as he who hears a sweet voice or tastes savory food precisely for organic delectation does not sin except venially, so he is judged to sin only venially who looks at a beautiful woman, or touches her hand or face, on account of organic delectation alone, willing or feeling nothing further.

But indeed, this opinion is not practically probable, and St. Alphonsus teaches that the opposite is altogether to be held, at least as a general rule. The reason is that, on account of corrupted nature, it is morally impossible to take that natural delectation without carnal and venereal delectation being felt, especially by persons apt for copula; and especially if those acts are had with some affection and delay. Moreover, to expose yourself to the danger of consenting to venereal delectation is of itself mortal. - Wherefore St. Doctor admits the first opinion only "in some rare case, in which through long experience someone would be morally certain that no danger of consent threatens him; but this case," he adds, "when will it be?"³

Yet the Saint notes "that to act on account of sensible delectation is one thing, to act with such delectation another, in which lightness of matter can well be given; provided (it must be added) that the agent not rest in it, but detest it in act. Otherwise he would act not only with delectation, but also on account of delectation; which cannot be separated from the danger of falling into venereal delectation."¹

Quaer. 2° Can invincible ignorance be given concerning sins of luxury?

Resp. It can be given, experience testifying, invincible ignorance concerning the grave malice of certain sins of luxury, whether not consummated, or even consummated: 1° in adolescents, for a short time, especially when deep silence concerning these things has been kept before them; 2° in the rude (indeed perhaps also in others for a short time), when a special circumstance intervenes apparently lending an honorable appearance. Thus, for example, the grave malice of unchaste kisses or touches between betrothed persons can be unknown; the malice of onanism among the unmarried, or even among spouses who are now burdened with a numerous family to be fed. Likewise "rustics, commonly speaking, judge rape a greater sin than simple fornication; on the contrary they do not know the malice of adultery; therefore with those who have the habit of this vice, it is not expedient to admonish them concerning the malice of adultery, when it is foreseen that the admonition will be of little profit, but will only effect that the penitent sin with a twofold sin if he does not resist the concupiscences of the flesh."² Yet carefully beware lest from this you generally conclude for practice that penitents who inculpably do not know that some act of luxury which they have posited either is a sin or is mortal are to be left in good faith; for ignorance of this sort is usually only very harmful to the penitent. For on account of the very ignorance he will repeat that act more easily, and therefore also more often. From this there will soon exist a habit, and one which will put down roots deeper day by day. But amendment is most difficult for a habit of luxury, especially a rooted one: for the sin of luxury, as St. Thomas says,³ is of the greatest adherence.