Responding to Ben Shapiro Responding to Me
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 27 ก.ค. 2024
- Ben Shapiro recently responded to my conversation with Dennis Prager on lust, sexual desire, and p*rn. Here's me reacting to him reacting to me ... How cool would it be if he reacted to me reacting to him reacting to me. ...And then I react to him reacting ... you get it.
My chat with Prager: • Heated Debate on Porno...
My article on what I should hav said to Prager: pintswithaquinas.com/my-heate...
0:00 Intro
3:29 Shapiro on Lust & Sexual Desire
6:12 Matt Defining Lust
7:37 Shapiro Reviews the Prager/Fradd debate
9:00 Matt Clarifies His Stance on the Evil of P04n
12:02 The Severity & Gradations of Sin
13:26 Objectification of persons & Lust
16:50 The Marital Act as a Sacred Act
19:00 Matt's Closing Thoughts & Wrap-up - บันเทิง
Well, go on, what do you think?
I think I need to hear you do a cover of "Tribute"
Please write a book on this subject!
Beware letting social climbing lead to corruption.
I think that Ben Shapiro is my third favorite Jew.
I think your conversation with Dennis Prager was really interesting and this commentary was good. I find it weird Shapiro and Prager don’t seem to distinguish between sexual desire and lust… Also I feel like English needs a one word noun for enjoyable and immersive sex which is also spiritually wholesome: I feel like maybe this is what Prager and Shapiro might be talking about when they use “objectification”. In contrast, they might think Matt/Christians are walking on spiritual eggshells when having sex for fear of lusting (and therefore having spiritually wholesome but maybe less than enjoyable and immersive sex). That’s my speculation, though.
Thanks for your work! God bless!
Converted to Catholicism from atheism thanks in part to you Matt! Praise God! Received my first communion this Easter vigil. Just wanted to say thank you.
That is a very "cool" conversion, all the way from atheism. God bless you and welcome home.
May sound weird, but thank YOU for responding to God's grace. Welcome home
Based and Christpilled.
Bless you, brother, welcome to the family😊✝
your phrasing feel that you always was a theist, you cant just be atheist and suddenly discover god
I became a atheist because i wanted to be closer to god and search for answers, was devoted Christian until i turned 20-22 then 5 year journey. But i am glad you find something that brings you joy and meaning, atheism is not for everyone and can destroy weak minded. Current society is proof of it self its not ready.
A wise Jewish man once said “And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. For it is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body go into hell.”
The first part is not to be taken literally of course. He’s saying do all that you can to avoid sinful behaviour.
The same wise man said: “But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart.”
Wow that wise man should have his own gospel written about him
Jesus obviously meant to say that lust is as mortal a sin as or in the same line of adultery. In fact, before you fornicate with a woman you're not married to, you have to lust for her first. So Jesus is also saying that the beginning of sin in an adultery is long before they go to bed.
Why do you assume that it is not literal? Do you have special wisdom that allows you to determine what is literal or not?
@@jacobkarlin6147 You protestants...go ahead, cut off both your hands and pluck both your eyes for surely you have used them to sin and Jesus said so!!!!!! 😎
why is the first quote obviously figurative but the latter isn't? what are the assumptions and context one needs to consider to come to that conclusion?
Once upon a time, Matt was my high school music minister and changed a lot of lives. We listened to him singing about squirrels and didgeridoos and made great memories. To this day, his wedding mass was one of the best I’ve ever been to. I discerned becoming part of the NET Canada ministries with him and his lovely bride after college. And now, I’m almost 35 with a husband and two babies of my own and I love seeing all of the amazing things Matt does. The Holy Spirit does amazing things!
im a protestant here. while i have issues with catholicism and orthodox denominations, ive found you to be a powerful voice within christianity. keep up the good work.
May I ask what you find wrong with Catholics and orthodoxes? Not trying to start a debate, just wondering. God bless❤
@Manguy Flame, Same and I completely agree with you.
Womp womp,come home brotha and submit to rome ❤️ much love
@@danyzeppeli5884 Why not submit to Eastern Orthodox?
@@curiousgeorge555 Why not be in communion with the whole church and revere each other?
-Catholic here
You won the debate with Prager. Be the leader in this space, Matt. Keeping shining the light ✨
The fact that the DailyWire (and PraegerU) have been elevated to this Catholic conversation, I consider this a win for everybody. May God bless your ministry Matt, thank you.
Interesting take, thank you for that.
Why would we celebrate the elevations of apostates to the Catholic conversation? Seems we were fine conversing among ourselves until we let them in with their poison.
Yes! This ❤
@@Thomas-oc2ln because we want them to come to the fullness of truth - if not for love of the person themselves, but for love of God. The Daily Wire conversations are elevating the profile of Matt's ministry and helping to reach more people. That is a good thing.
@@hacker4chn841 If you're not converting them, they're converting you. As everyone involved has pointed out, this wasn't a debate as much as it was a statement of faith, or as Shapiro and Fradd said "talking past each other"
Nothing was accomplished aside from drawing a distinction, (an important distinction) that judaism and Christianity are diametrically opposed and entirely incompatible. Unfortunately, that's not the lesson intended, nor the lesson received by most.
The "right wing" is not on our side. These jewish characters are the establishment. They represent the "ideal" endpoint of any right wing movement. They define the boundary which keeps others within the Overton Window. A conversation framed around "personal freedoms" is bound to be colored against any Catholic because that is not what we value. We value the Church and the Social Kingship of Christ.
The average WASP protestant Republican watching Shapiro's show on repeat for entertainment is going to watch a representative of his "greatest ally" arguing against someone who is "against freedom" As neurotic as these people are for mindless argumentation, they'll make you an enemy very quickly.
Matt, you are right about lust in marriage, and I know this from personal experience. When I was a young husband, I lusted after my wife for many years. After I returned to the Church, I eventually realized this was sinful behavior. Sex, and my marriage, was even better when I stopped viewing my wife as a sexual object. Better for her, and better for me. Something that shocked me about what Mr. Prager (whom I admire) said (on the original video) was that Judaism is external and not internal like Christianity. It's disturbing to me that Jesus' words to the Pharisees in Matthew 23:26 are still valid today. Jesus said, "You blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup, so that the outside also may become clean."
Wow. Powerful.
You just spoke my mind about Mr Prager and our Lord's chastisement to the Pharisees.
That's so right! I remember my roomate who is like he said agnostic Jewish, doing some fasting for "tradition" and I was like "do you actually know why you do it or for what?" and he was like "tradition" and bro so sad
Well said!
Well spotted, BNAF. Also, this verse comes to mind. Hebrews 8:10 This is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put my laws into their minds, and write them on their hearts, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
Insane timing for me to find this kind of information/dialougue in my life. I just converted to catholicism after 10+ years of a non/self-diagnosed sex-addiction. I went from giving up porn last fall (starting after a few months in RCIA) to 40 days cold-turkey during lent, and the entire experience has been nothing but miraculous. It has been incredible how confronting my sexual desires and will to control them has caused a physiological change in my recognition of 'good'. Thanks Matt for being able to discuss these kinds of things and having the courage to speak your mind and have difficult/intense conversations.
🙏🙏
Hmmm... Just in my casual read, I wonder if your change in attitude and willingness to change your approach to the porn obsession is the cause of your awareness of 'good'. Or is the grace you received by rejecting porn and (I presume) confessing that sin given you the explosion of grace God was waiting to give to you so now your awareness of Good is rooted more in your acceptance of the deeper connection to God, Who is Good itself?! Welcome home!!
Glad you overcame your addiction. I recently overcame my pornography addiction that started at age 14, now 26. I'm a woman, but yes even women struggle with porn and lust. So, it's been a while struggling with stopping to watch porn. Wasn't till recently where I randomly discovered this 2hr podcast talking about the evils of porn, pushed me to want to quit. Did cold turkey. Been 3 weeks now and no porn. And I'm very proud of myself, longest I've gone without porn.
It's a long story honestly, of what led to my porn addiction, not the best stuff happened to me at age 14. Made me develop a weird sexual fetish, become addicted to porn and excessive masturbation. But I'm proud of overcoming it all. I'm still a virgin woman, so lustful thoughts have been a struggle of mine for many years, but it's getting better. Glad that I'm just improving.
@@_chemicalbeat_ 🙏🙏
@@_chemicalbeat_ ... God Bless you! ... Addictions are an ABSOLUTE STRUGGLE ... I would absolutely recommend Holy Confession and the recitation of the Holy Rosary as often as possible. I have no doubt it was these which helped me, through God's grace, overcome these Sinful vices..🙏
There is a difference between sexual desire and lust. Any women who has had a man look at her as if she were something to eat could tell you that.
❤👏👏👏👏
This is a great reminder of why Christ says you can only get to the Father through him.
I pray for Ben and Dennis to convert.
THAT PART!!
Jews for Jesus are the real Jewish people.
As a non-Christian, I think this comment might have helped me understand something… is it because it’s not enough to follow God’s law but you have to actually embody the underlying principles of them, too? (Im sorry if my question doesn’t make sense; like I said I’m not Christian and have a hard time figuring out what is meant by some things.)
@@brittybee6615 A suggestion: read Jesus's encounter with the rich young man in Matthew 19: 16-22 and Mark 10:17-27. Here are a few questions you may wish to consider: What does the rich rich man's encounter with Jesus reveal about himself and reveal about Jesus? Did the rich young man have a correct assessment of himself? What does his rejection of Jesus tell the reader about Jesus, the moral law, and humanity? What was the purpose(s) of the law? Has anyone completely kept the moral law all their days? Where does that leave us and what has God done to address this dilemma? I sincerely hope these questions help you think through your question(s). At the age of 62, I thank God that in my inability and failure, He does for me what I am utterly incapable of doing, He comes to me and embodies me - transforming heart, mind, soul, and strength through the person of His Holy Spirit: God in us and through us for His glory and the benefit of all! What a gift, what a blessing that keeps on giving. I think I have gone enough. May this bless you on your journey and encourage you to consider the person and work of Jesus Christ. I shall pray for you. Grace and peace.
@@brittybee6615 in a sense yes. You can outwardly follow God’s law for the wrong reasons. An example would be giving to the poor because you want other people to view you as generous, not because you really care about them. But Jesus calls us to go further beyond just performing good deeds. An interior conversion of the heart is necessary as well. In the gospels, this is the central theme of Jesus’ rebuking of the Pharisees. They followed God’s commandments to a T, but inside their hearts were full of pride and hatred. I pray for the conversion of Prager and Shapiro because they are stuck in the Pharisee way of thinking.
You're absolutely right, Matt. Even within marriage, there are times when a husband can take away the dignity of his wife during the act; as a wife, I can attest to this (and it can be done without conscious malice or intent, nevertheless it is still not ok and we all need to be made aware of this as a form of charity). There is a reason why lust is a capital sin.
@@amymargaretabigail THIS 💯
@AMAPB no no its sexist that is if you adhere strictly to the Bible and its view of the hierarchy between men and women. Its just most pretermit this fact. Just as they neglect other aspects of the Bible when it suits them, while purporting to be Christian.
Well said, couldn't agree more.
As a kid, at some talk in a Catholic Church, maybe it was even a guest speaker after mass, the guy was talking about marriage and family programs and how to avoid divorce.
At one point he said something to the effect, ‘If only the Church would allow men to lust after their own wives, maybe there would not be so much divorce’.
The creepy chuckles throughout the church was creepier than the cringe statement the guy made.
It was quite disgusting, and I still feel this when I think about it.
I guarantee you if you ask a woman what she thinks of her husband’s pornography you will get a completely different response. It is so damaging, soul destroying even in a marriage. How can you look at your spouse and respect that person knowing he is at the very least committing adultery in his mind. How is that not marital unfaithfulness? It is a betrayal of trust.
Matthew 5:28
Amen!
Agree a thousand percent. Start asking women how it completely wrecks their self-image, worth, etc. Matt needs to bring more women on who have been affected by other's porn use
I totally agree. If my husband looked at porn, our marriage would be over in an instant. I could not divorce him being Catholic, but I’d live separately like a nun. It would be too painful to go on with him and I’d never trust him again.
It IS cheating and it IS devastating, especially to women. Men seem to not grasp this concept of how destructive and hurtful pornography is. I believe they are both as equally sinful! Both gets you to hell! Both are a mortal sin! Both destroy marriages! Both lead to complete distrust and severe insecurities! Both are looking at the most private parts of men and women! No, pornography is not the same as noticing a good looking individual walking down the street and maybe lusting after them for a brief moment. That’s such a ridiculous argument! To look at porn, it is an action taken willfully to go seek out and find the porn and watch it while most likely touching yourself for gratification! So much premeditation there! It’s in the mind, in the heart, in the soul, and you’re using your own body for pleasure, so this is on the same level as having an affair! It is completely being unfaithful and cheating on your spouse!
Lol no. Many women understand that it's no betrayal; men simply love a woman's form and are strongly hardwired to look for and respond to that.
Glad you said something to Prager on lust, Matt. Your "that's despicable" clip is one of my favorites! Also, for anyone not aware, it's the second day of the "weekend of blasphemy" going on at the Boston Marriott Copley Place until April 30th. TFP Student Action did a Rosary stream yesterday praying and playing music, just did another one, and will be doing one at 12:30 tomorrow. Please pray!
Oh no, what's happening at the hotel? I used to go to school at Boston Conservatory down the street from there...!
@@melissat9120I believe a satanic conference
Thank you for spreading awareness! Let us conquer evil and darkness with light ! Ave Maria
@@lildude5164 You're welcome. God bless.
@@DavidOrtiz-fd2lb Been trying to share every opportunity but some of the words don't work. Take care!
Matt, the more I hear you speak on this topic, the more respect I have you!!!
JPII's Theology of the Body changed my life! And you clearly "get it".
THANK YOU for being brave enough to fight for human dignity!!
Second this, JP2s Theology of the Body is mind blowing
Pornography destroyed my marriage. Idk how you popped up in my feed but I am immediately a fan and new subscriber. I am a huge fan of Dennis and when I heard his view on p*rn it broke my heart, bc I know first hand that it destroys and NEVER satisfies. Pornography will ALWAYS require more from you. Period.
This. This right here, is why I am Catholic and proud. We aim for sainthood. Interestingly enough, I remember Dennis saying something like "I'm not interested in people being saints, I'm interested in people being good".
Yes. I'm Catholic and that was very sad to hear. Totally missing the mark on life... Jesus didn't die so we can be "good". He died so we can be saints
Irrespective of your faith background, wouldn’t you simply not want to be enslaved to your baser instincts and animalistic urges?
No one respects a porn addict. Self control and decency go hand in hand.
@@Danaluni59 sure. I agree with you. Repress the animal instincts; I just feel we can also aim higher and choose the good consistently over a very long time.
For what it's worth (from an Orthodox Christian), having struggled with this during my life, I agree with you 100% on this.
I totally agree with you Matt. If these gentlemen can't comprehend the the differences, I seriously question their ability to differentiate between many important values and virtues. Really life....Crickey! Yikes!😮
That's why they are Jews and not Christians...
We are all learning, i think it might be slightly prideful 🤏to assume any of us have all the answers in any given moment. I would like to speak to him down the track and see if any of the seeds Matt planted took root. He or they, may in fact have grown in their understanding because of this conversation. Thats the beauty of a great conversation with someone you respect, you usually walk away enriched in some way for having had it. 😊
As a mental health counselor I see sexual desire as something that can happen without much intention or choice, such as seeing an attractive person and feeling a physical or emotional reaction to their attractiveness. Most people quickly turn that off because they know it’s wrong, impossible, inappropriate, etc. kind of like being exposed to a strong desirable food smell and suddenly wanting to taste that food even if you aren’t hungry and had no intention to eat.
Lust is an unhealthy craving to seek out these triggers, or using past memories of triggers, in a way that is maladaptive, obsessive, manipulative, inappropriate, illegal, unethical, or unwanted (and in terms of sexual lust that would include when they other person wouldn’t consent to being involved). For example, when someone forms a sexual fantasy involving someone who has never consented or has terminated consent [such as an ex-partner] to having sexual interactions with you in real life. You can also lust for someone you’re in a committed relationship with when your fantasies or desires veer from what is normal and acceptable in the relationship, whether that is a kind of specific act they wouldn’t consent to, or wanting much more sex much more often and using obsessive fantasies to try to “fill the void” (which can cause significant problem in your relationship and your ability to perform your other responsibilities, like letting your fantasy life or obsessive thoughts disrupt your school or work performance.
We can lust for things that aren’t sexual, such as the lust for wealth, or power, or fame. It is a form of coveting. It can involve seeing the person as “just an object” for your pleasure. But people can also have lust for someone that they don’t believe they are objectifying (because they can actually crave a relationship with that person, not just permission to engage in an act and move on). The problem is they are breaking the boundaries that currently exist in that current relationship or non-relationship. For example, an ex partner or friend you continues to fantasize or ruminate on the past is breaking the expected boundary that they wouldn’t consent to being pursued or engaged with again.
Some people use their lust to inappropriately deal with other issues, such as loneliness or depression or unhappiness with their current situation/relationship. This shuts down their ability to clearly see and address the actual problems in their life. It can also destroy a current relationship with that person or relationships with other people in their life. Lusting for your husband to be some kind of ideal fantasy version you wish he could be degrades the current relationship you have. Lusting after partners with very different qualities or attractiveness than your current partner destroys your ability to honor and respect the qualities they do actually have.
Porn triggers both of these problems. It hijacks your natural sexual desires and bombards your brain with so much stimuli that you start to not be able to match that level of “enjoyment” responses in real life situations. It also teaches you to lust after specific body types, sexual scenarios/situations, and emotional responses or psychological states that you can’t replicate in real life. It also removes all responsibilities or effort/work that you would need to successfully navigate to replicate the same event or get the same payoff in real life. This can radically alter your ability or willingness to do the hard work to have real and satisfying relationships, creating an entrapment loop where you keep returning to the “easy payoff” even when you truly want “something real.” And that’s when you cross into the territory of addiction, or even criminal/psychopathic behaviors.
Also, it’s hard to know what people like Ben and Dennis consider to be “normal/average porn” that people are exposed to because that has changed dramatically since the Internet reached the masses (and continues to rapidly devolve every couple of years). Not to say that makes them right, but it does mean they may be thinking the old days of magazines is just online now instead of realizing how depraved and violent the “average” stuff on the front page of an internet porn site offers up for people (much less what’s just beneath the surface with the search bar of these sites… much less how deep and dark the well goes on paid sites). When I’m assessing how damaging a client’s porn exposure is I have to assess how far down the depravity well they have fallen, not all porn is equally damaging even though it’s safe to say all porn is risky.
Excellent job at making distinctions
Beautifully said
Selah R., Suburb analysis! I worked as a case manager/social worker in an Addiction Recovery center for part of my career. We dealt with with both chemical and process addictions ( gambling, overspending, sex, etc.). I was exposed to literature & research put out by Patrick Carnes, Ph.D who goes into considerable depth on how various addictions will hijack the brain and distort our ability to understand ourselves and interact - in a healthy manner - with those closest to us.
Very well explained, thank you!
@@Vulture402 I’m surprised you focused on “consent” and dismissed “maladaptive, obsessive, manipulative, inappropriate, illegal, unethical, or unwanted” and then assumed that was some kind of Catholic belief system. Wouldn’t most Catholics focus in on God’s design for sex within marriage and virtues of piety, modesty, and self-control? I’m not Catholic, I’m a Christian, but my answer was coming more from a secular “rehabilitation counseling psychology” framework which focuses on making wise/informed decisions to improve biopsychosocial functioning. “Consent of the other” would not be the key driving issue in that framework.
as a catholic wife with anxiety around sex sometimes it actually does help to be thinking "I am actively willing your good" (and especially "you are willing mine too") during the marital act in order to focus on my husband in the present moment rather than spinning around in my head and wounds, so there's a place for those sorts of "spiritual things" too :)
"I am actively willing your good!" 😂 made me spit out my drink
Hello from the homeland 🇦🇺
Thank you for exploring this and drawing the distinctions.
So many women feel dehumanised by the man they love, it’s really confusing and makes women feel unsafe where they are in the arms of their protector.
Which as you say interferes with climax and deep intimacy and sexual pleasure.
"33 day consecration to st. Joseph" by Fr. Don Calloway is a great way to start the movement of your body, mind, and soul away from porn and lust.
Thank you Matt for your conversation with Prager!
Full props to you sir. Respectful debate is the foundation of civil society. We are currently lacking this in today's day and age.
I thought the interview was great!
On a personal note, Matt, you are the only Catholic my husband will watch and that's saying a lot. Glory and praise to Jesus Christ. I Praise God for your channel.
What about Trent Horn?
@@VizziMoto
Taylor Marshall is very close to a heretic.
He is basically rejecting the Pope (far from my favourite pope btw.), Vatican II. etc.
Somewhat ironically he is acting like a Protestant (I know better than the Church, I create my own dogmas etc.).
I’m also a Protestant who loves Matt’s work. Plenty of wonderful Catholic brothers and sisters out there. Praise God.
@@Antonio_Serdar The moment I saw a bunch of his followers saying that they would stop even talking to people who attend Novus Ordo masses (simply because they do), I started skipping everything related to his content (I was never subscribed to him anyway). He's only fueling the fire to separate the Catholic church even more, every single video of his is condescending and judgemental and I've never seen him giving a message of love or hope during difficult times or actually talking about Jesus. Glad to see someone with a similar opinion.
@@angelicaudrey
I agree, I think he is a very negative personality in general.
And I am saying that as a young (well, 30, lol) traditional Catholic who is very much AGAINST the Church "going with the flow" and abandoning its teaching.
Matt, you have an amazing ability to explain things in a simple way. Truly God given. You did a great job.
It was a great debate. I really enjoyed it!
I highly recommend the book “Glittering Vices” by Rebecca DeYoung and its chapter on lust. Her definition of lust, roughly: excessive, disordered desire for one’s own sexual pleasure, such that one fails to love God or one’s neighbor because of one’s pursuit of sexual pleasure.
I think that’s pretty good and clearly shows the difference between mere sexual desire and lust (which is always a vice).
Sounds like the purpose behind the porn industry
Ben’s “many such cases” and Matt’s “I AM WRETCHED” absolutely sent me. Impeccable vibes. God bless these men I believe they both have good hearts and intentions and they do good works ❤️
Well one of them is going to hell
So no chance for virtuous pagans and non-believers? I'm not a great metaphysical or theological thinker, but I am pretty sure neither of us can see either the future, or into another man's heart.
@@ronaldfrechette2045 a virtuous pagan can claim ignorance, a blaspheming jew cannot. we'll see in hades.
@@none11flop9 I suppose we will. Of course repentance, forgiveness, and salvation are things too . . .
As someone with intrusive thoughts issues, knowing that my will makes a difference gave me so much peace. I'd be minding my own business going somewhere and I see a cute child or baby and then a random thought pops in my head saying "kick it, smack it".... and before I would panic and think I was a bad person and try to fight it........ now I just ignore it and say beautiful things and start praising Jesus, because those thoughts were not of my will. ........it's the same with lust and sexual desire........ you can't stop being turned on by someone/something.... but you can say something positive like "God bless their beauty" and not lust after them by using your will power or asking God to protect you or something....... Lust is to turn something into an object, being turned on is a natural feeling designed by God to populate the human race. If sex felt like doing homework for school, the human race would be extinct. lmao.
I appreciate your comment. Intrusive thoughts run in my family. I hope it helps you for me to say that the thoughts tend to be an anxious brain's way of testing itself to know if it could tolerate its worst fears taking place. It's not a moral issue, but almost an OCD symptom to poorly cope with anxiety. Bless you!
Excellent! 👍✝️😊
@@mydreamsarecomingtrue energy what now??
I like the analogy!
Funny you say that, I know people that hate sex and look at it as an annoyance or work. They know they have to do it to keep the spouse happy, but they loathe the act and do not enjoy it at all.
Thanks for clarifying the difference between lust and sexual desire, hope you will continue this clarification on the the other sins like pride vs Confidence or exhaustion vs sloth and greed vs prosperity etc.. however I understand the lust from sexual desire distinction is one most people don’t get it.
Wow, thanks Exhaustion vs Sloth & Pride vs Confidence isn't something I considered. I always default to meh...I've been prideful, or lazy at times. It's interesting not to beat myself up too much - that would be nice :)
Actually he is wrong on lust vs sexual desire because lust is strong sexual desire, to lust over something is to have a strong desire over something, and I agree with you on the other stuff you said, you don't need his validation if you know the truth you should make your own videos because if you do I know I will watch them. 🫰
Watched the Praeger interview with my 18 year old son. First in-depth sex talk with him. We're fairly adherent Anglicans. I commend the piece for fathers and sons as a way to frame difficult topics as boys come of age. Caveat: I watched it in full first then we played it and talked through it together on a road trip.
With all due respect, do you not think it is a good idea to have these conversations a little earlier than 18? I am still young and don't have any kids, and I was exposed to sexual content through my classmates and a younger age and I feel it is better to have some conversations about it when it starts entering their life, which will inevitably be before they are 18. Just wanted to see if you were happy you waited till then to discuss it or if it was something you'd wish you had done sooner? Again, not criticizing your parenting, just something I'd like some advice on for when I do have my own children. Thanks!
@@PizzaEater124 Drat, lost my first posting. TY for the respectful approach and valid question, Jackson. We are candid parents, about every topic. Money (how much we make/save, where it goes, what we support; all about taxes, investing); drugs/alcohol past and present; and sex. But my son declined opportunities to talk about sexuality beyond superficial treatment until the context of this interview - hence the magic. It wasn't the first "sex talk" but it was the first no-holds-barred sex talk - the deferral was his choice. I am persuaded as a Christian parent that it is demonstrated, lived openness and availability for these candid discussions (but against Christian backdrops) during post-puberty ages, that gives our children the control over the subject matter that they need. My son and daughter would both witness publicly that they have readier access to facts about the most challenging topics than their peers - but also that they control that access. When they do or do not exercise that choice is the parenting power in it because it is a signal for you about your children's development.
Now I'm waiting for Shapiro responding to Matt responding to Shapiro.
Intellectuals without intuition have a hard time grappling with spiritual concepts: Sex with love is so much more than that of merely instinctual urging, but is miles beyond the hag ridden joyless emptiness that is lust. Thanks Matt!
Contraception reduces your spouse to an object, whether you meant it to or not. Great commentary.
Are you saying sex without the pursuit of pregnancy is reducing your spouse to an object? Can sex be a bonding experience of love shown towards your spouse?
1 Corinthians 7 speaks clearly on this. Let me know your thoughts.
Are you saying sex without the pursuit of pregnancy is reducing your spouse to an object? Can sex be a bonding experience of love shown towards your spouse?
1 Corinthians 7 speaks clearly on this. Let me know your thoughts.
@@madgameman1 you don't have to be actively trying to get pregnant, but you have to be open to it. Anything else is self gratification and making your spouse your pleasure object.
@@jackieo8693 Yet even with contraception there is a chance for pregnancy which would mean that by engaging I'm martial sex, you are agreeing to possible children.
@@m_d1905 well, that is partly True, but we have to remember that marriage is all about family and children. Many people resort to abortion when contraception fails. Contraception has given us a promiscuous and abortion ridden society.
I think your definition of lust is very accurate and creates a clear difference between the concept of rightly ordered sexual desire and disordered sexual desire (aka lust)
Love the way you break it down for everyone Matt. This isn't semantics, or word play, it's a very specific way to look at both these terms referencing our biblical heritage and Catholic faith. Thank you for having this conversation, i know it's helped many to clarify. Hope you are feeling bettet after that bike incident too 😊❤️🇦🇺
I think the issue here is the language that Theology of the Body (TOTB) and it's descendants tend to use is confusing. When you stress how we can't use someone as an object, it can come across as "your motives have to be pure. There can be no stray thoughts or emotions that enter you."
As an example, when I purchase something at the store from a clerk I am using them to purchase a product. I have no immediate concern for if they are having a good day, they are brushing their teeth, they had a nice breakfast. This mindset you describe comes across as a nagging voice that would be in the back of mind shouting "You need to care about their day, you need to care about their soul, you need to care about their teeth! Do you really care about them as a person or do you want their good? Even if you behave in a good way towards them, do you REALLY want their good?"
This is unsustainable. When I interact with the grocery person, I use them to buy a product but I also know there are certain rules with which I should conduct myself that embody the ideal I aspire to (the ideal of love). I don't concern myself with if my feelings or thoughts are passionate about their good, I concern myself with if my actions are communicating that. I am polite, if they ask how my day is going I respond pleasantly and ask how theirs is, I try to organize the groceries in such a way to make it easier for them to scan, etc. I embody the principle, but I don't navel gaze over my internal state during the interaction.
Where I think the disconnect happens with you and Shapiro on sexuality is that he interprets you as saying that when a man has sex with his wife, his emotional and mental state must be one that aligns to an amorphous ideal of love. "You can't use her as an object, you must love her as the end." Shapiro's question (as I perceive it) is "well how is that embodied? Don't give me poetry about the beauty of the human person and how we ought to respect the fundamental goodness of the body in our hearts. Give me something concrete and tangible. These principles are meaningless if not embodied."
From there, it devolves into Shapiro saying "if a man is embodying the principles of love by respecting his wife by his actions, then he is not treating her as an object." Your response seems to be "Ah, but in your heart you may still be treating her as an object!" What does that even mean? Whatever motives and thoughts and feelings may be floating through me, if what I chose to act on is "I will constrain my behavior to be in accordance with the ideals of love," then I'm am embodying it. You may say "but you can do loving things for an evil end, such as treat your wife nicely just so you can get sex, not because you love her." But again, that cashes out as an embodiment question. Down the road, will I embody love (continue to treat her nice even if I don't get what I want) or stop being nice when I don't get what I want?
This means that when I experience strong desire for my wife, it may include a desire to have sex with no regard to the fact that she is tired. That desire is not sin, it simply is part of a person's experience (I think this is Shapiro's point). The question is what I will embody by my actions (think faith without works is dead). If I chose to ignore her needs, I am embodying lust and selfishness. If I chose to respect her need for sleep and am sensitive to it, then I am embodying love. It doesn't matter that the temptation to run roughshod over her needs exists.
Bottom line, Shapiro wants to know how this all cashes out in actions, but TOTB seems to remain in this amorphous land of poetic ideals that leads to navel gazing over if my motives are pure enough to be considered love. This is what Shapiro and Prager (I believe) are perceiving and pushing back against. IMO, when TOTB is applied in a grounded, embodied way it is a powerful guide to sexual expression. When it is not, it goes haywire. Try applying the principle of "Love does not treat another person as an object" to buying sneakers made slave labor. Moral culpability arguments go out the window if we reduce this to a question of an individual's heart motivation and there is no way to buy the sneakers. But when embodied, we can argue that the remoteness of our participation is so great that we cannot be held culpable.
As a side note, this is why I define lust (the Greek word the Bible has Jesus using is covet) as simply "If I could, I would." If I could sleep with her, I would. If I could cheat on my wife, I would. If I could run roughshod over my wife's needs, I would. It's an orientation of the heart that is ordered towards the embodiment of the principle "my desires trump the needs of others," or "my will be done." Even if my body and emotions are screaming "I would love to cheat on my wife right now," if my rationality arrests control of my will and says "No, I will obey the Lord and love my wife," and acts in accordance (embodiment: walks away from the temptation to sin) then I have not lusted. Now yes, it is ideal to not experience those things (heaven), but in this fallen world it happens. Concupiscence is a reality we must struggle with. The flesh desires to do that which the spirit does not and wages war against the spirit.
Thank you, this has been my TED talk. Cookies are in the back.
I am so happy that I happened upon this video. I have never seen sexual desire and lust as being different. Now I do and I appreciate the distinction. Thank you so much.
This was a great response Matt!keep up the awesome work and God bless you and your family, channel, and ministry always.
I think you are totally right. I've been married twice. First husband was a slave to his lust and a narcissist. I felt like a vending machine to provide goods and services, not like a person. My husband now is thoughtful, considerate and truly loves me. Huge difference!
I can deeply relate to this. I definitely agreed with Matt’s view that lust is never good, even within a marriage. I’d venture to say it’s particularly insidious within a marriage bc the person being used feels they have nowhere to run, and like they shouldn’t be feeling used. I’m so grateful for Matt’s voice in this conversation and happy for you to have a marriage where you two both honor each other. God bless!
It's extremely easy to objectify your wife or husband: every time you use artificial contraception.
So if me and my wife want to wait a year before we have a baby, we aren’t allowed to have sex? Can’t even use a condom? Damn.
@@batmanrobin6848 the Church says you must be open to life anytime you participate in the marital act
@@Molly-sv9yn So the only way people can limit their family size is by not having sex? This isn't the 1700s or Sub-saharan Africa, where people have as many kids as possible, the majority of them die in infancy, and the two or three survivors are economic assets since they can work on the farm by the age of six. People today, who can expect all of their kids to survive most of the time, make the responsible choice to use protection and limit their family size, so that they can better care for the kids they do have. In our modern society having children is a huge economic burden.
Are you really telling pro-life married couples that the only moral way to avoid poverty from having 6+ children is to not have sex? I detest the deadbeat guys who tell their girlfriends/wives they got pregnant to have an abortion, but contraception is a great way to avoid that situation. That doesn't even mean the guy is right to avoid parenthood entirely, but I think we can both agree contraception is better than abortion.
@@batmanrobin6848 it's a moral issue, is it not at least weird to avoid life by using contraception? to avoid the very thing sex is for?
@@none11flop9 So should old people have sex with each other? Are there benefits to that, even though children likely won't come out of it? You could make a case that sex before marriage, or people trying to avoid parenthood entirely, has had negative consequences for society, but demonizing any use of contraception just seems irresponsible to me.
Love the spirited discussions and wish there were more people who would do them!
Matt, I've been following you since your synopses of the Summa back in 2016. It's amazing how far you've come. Keep up the great work.
your drilling on the relationship of object/subject is very important & under-appreciated. Keep it up.
Dennis lost me when he said that his dad (a rabbi if I remember correctly) subscribed to playboy.
As a recovering porn addict (over ten years) stay the course Matt. It’s one of the greatest accepted plagues of our time.
Lust is like any other sin. It’s like drinking salt water. Your thirst won’t be satisfied.
I honestly felt like Prager's views on porn are just him being unable to admit that his otherwise good father had a very awful vice.
Neither Dennis nor his father were/are rabbis.
@@rosecorcoran -"very awful vice". A man looking a 1950s and 60s cheesecake pictures, while he's in a happy marriage and his wife is aware of it? How do you classify gossip and being miserly to charity? Does Matt make videos about that?
@@marchess286 But why was he looking at it? I'm assuming for the purpose of sexual arousal in order to masturbate. Masturbation is a very awful vice. Even if his wife is aware of it, it is still a vice. Wives' approval doesn't change the moral character of an act. Swingers, for example, were still engaged in a vice, even if both spouses were happy about it.
And actually, yeah, Matt and Father Pine have made videos about Aquinas's response to sins like gossip (ie detraction) and the like. Heck, one of Matt's great sorrows and the sin he most often talks about himself currently struggling with (as opposed to his former porn addiction) is his anger with his children. He considers that a vice, because he's not going to make excuses for himself. Prager, similarly, should not make excuses for his father. Having a vice does not make one a terrible person, and Prager ought to be old enough and mature enough to praise his father's virtues while also criticizing his vices.
@@rosecorcoran - thank you for your thoughtful reply, which I agree with and disagree with, in parts. I look forward to finding the time to write and articulate reply. In the meantime, here is a reply I wrote to a discussion by Candace Owens on this subject. You may find it of interest, 'Anyone who wants to read Prager's views on this subject can find them on pages 141-142 of his book, "Happiness is a serious problem". I don't entirely agree with Prager but he's not saying viewing porn is desirable. He calls the behavior "unholy (one could think also the word "animalistic")" because the mere act of viewing porn (assuming it doesn't come from a source who was in any way coerced*) does not harm someone else, in the sense that an act of adultery or rape harms someone. He calls acts that actually harm another "evil" He distinguishes between two the types of bad acts, "evil" and unholy". I've watched Prager for 40 years (although I haven't been a great fan for the past 20 years), and he seems to be a bit past his prime, ie, not as sharp as he once was and not articulating his views as well as he once did (as he did in his book). Matt Fraid struck me as taking advantage of this during the interview by intentionally not understanding or recognizing nuance Prager was trying (poorly given his age) to give. Fraid seemed to me to be looking to score clicks by "taking down" a former conservative icon. If I had behaved this way in my 30s towards an elderly uncle who was no longer quite with it, I'd hang my head in shame, especially if it was in front of a crowd. But, for Fraid, the great evil is apparently pornography, not cruelty. Same goes for Candace, in speaking about a man who was apparently once her benefactor.
* Yes, I've heard about the vile ways in which the contemporary porn industry exploits women. I'm not talking about that. I would happily vote to censor a lot of porn.'
It was good to see you engage in dialogue with someone you disagree with. I dont agree with all you say but listen and learn.
Matt, thank you for approaching this with humility. It is not an easy topic to navigate. You have been extremely charitable and through your approach with our Hebrew brethren I have gained a greater understanding in our Catholic view. Please continue in your mission. May you, and your support staff, be blessed by God.
Enjoyed this. I found it very helpful, because lust is one of those sins that always confused me. Especially the 'look at a woman in lust and you have committed adultery.' Your explanations really helped me see the differences.
This is really helpful. I especially appreciated the clarification of lust vs. sexual desire. Loved your episode with Denis Prager. You rock 🤟
Really love how well you explain these terms! Just recently found your yt channel…keep up the good work! :)
Thanks so much!
"let's read the Summa!" 😂😂😂 Excellent video, very funny moments. I find it strange that Shapiro and Prager who would advocate for "the best" on other moral issues won't do it when it comes to this topic.
😂 Ben and Dennis don’t agree on this topic. Matt is basically going in circles, they both agree on the same thing but have different terms hence the meaning of lust
this is the first time i'm watching your videos and I have to say I love the way you talk about stuff. Subscribed!
He's awesome!
I appreciate your comments on Prager’s debate style. I’ve not listened much to Prager, though I’m familiar with his work. I was struck by his combative and aggressive style because I have a combative and aggressive style! People sometimes think I’m angry when I debate, but I’m not usually. If I get angry, I’m no longer debating but having a temper tantrum. There’s a difference! 😅
😂😂😂 I can totally relate
SAME!!!!!
Same.
I guess the difference is, I have watched a lot of Dennis Prager videos and he’s typically calm 🤣 he definitely was not calm
@@millier.206 do these involve debates? I’ve not seen him debate before.
Lust is sexual attraction without love.
That’s how I’ve always understood it. I keep researching definitions and it legit says sexual desire. But I think the lack of love is the problem no?
Love and commitment
@@IAmJeka my issue with that then almost every first date is an act of lust. You've not built love for them yet but are sexual attracted to them.
That's not Matt's point-- he would say that you can experience sexual desire without love, and that that's not always lust
@williamofdallas if we want to get technical, lust is Satan's perversion of godly sexual desire. It is want for the physical gratification without spiritual edification. From my personal experience no sexual attraction outside seeking or building a marital relationship with a mate is positive. So I would classify all extramarital sexual desire as bad, and by extension, lust.
Tbh I don't have any theological backing to this, it's just from my personal experience battling lust and pornography as a young guy. Sexual desire has never ever led to positive things for me. God is teaching me to not even fantasize about future sexual experiences in marriage. It's just dangerous. Like playing with fire.
Thanks great clarity on these issues which have sought so much discord certainly in my life. Also the figuring out and gulps of whisky made me lol!
Dropping some excellent Tenacious D!!!! Mad respect brother! Good Bless, Happy Easter.
Awesome work. Captivating to see your apologetic skills activate such thought provoking discussions.
Matt singing Tenacious D was not what I had on my Pints with Aquinas bingo sheet.
So Good Matt! I truly admire your heart expressed in pursuing clarity & sound wisdom regarding this highly important matter!
My new favourite channel! I love your approach on this topic❤️
I seen it all!! A Tenacious D reference on Pints with Aquinas!! 😂
Perfect approach Matt. Keep it up!
Great video! Thank you so much for what you do. I thoroughly enjoyed it and learned a lot from it.
Great episode! Really interesting back and forth all around. Matt, you spoke very well and convinced me
You did a great job in that debate!
I hear what you are saying about lust not being JUST a strong sexual desire Matt. However, if someone is going to google the definition of the word lust that (a strong sexual desire for someone) is exactly what you will find that it is to mean. With that in mind I find it hard to fault anyone for using lust in the context in which they have done even though I understand your stance because you’re coming from the Biblical perspective of the word.
Fair enough, and I would say that Christians ought to take their definitions on sin and virtue not from the dictionary but from the word of God and from the Church.
@@PintsWithAquinas Agreed. However, the people that you are being critical of for using the dictionary definition in this video are not Christian. Although as closely related as Judaism undoubtedly is, it is different.
They may be cousins but they weren’t raised the same. While sharing some virtues and values there are significant differences as you well know and are more qualified to speak on than myself.
I just find it best when interpreting someone with different views to take the words they say as they tell me they mean them and not as I may define them based on my particular world view.
Well, they were both expressing what they believe is Gods will for man. Neither of them are concerned about a secular definition. So your point is now moot. They are either both wrong or one is more right than the other. And that is the point to having an argument. To discover what the truth is through our God given intellect.
@@MNskins11My comment was specific to his issue with the word lust in the way that Shapiro uses it because he defines it differently. You say neither is concerned. I disagree. Here is why.
In the video that we are commenting on Matt mentions that his definition of lust is reducing someone to their sexual value. I don’t believe that’s how the term is used biblically because its usage biblically seems to be in keeping with the secular definition. However, I do acknowledge the existence of the negative association with the word lust in church. From the video we can gather that Matt thinks reducing someone to their sexual value is bad. In this video Shapiro says in so many words that porn is bad because it causes people to view others merely sexual objects. Essentially the same thing Matt says is the definition of lust. We can also deduce that Shapiro thinks that reducing others to their sexual value is a bad thing, well because he says as much in above clip.
So we have Matt and Shapiro saying reducing others to sexual objects is bad. Everybody is on the same team giving high fives and life is good. However this does not stop Shapiro in the slightest from using the word in a way that makes Matt cringe when implying that he can have lust for his wife. This would give most people paying attention the clear signification that Shapiro isn’t using Matt’s definition of lust. Shapiro also says earlier in the video that he doesn’t know if there is a difference between lust and sexual desire which would fall more in line with the secular definition of the word.
Matt,
Thank you. This precise issue was a thorn in the side of my marriage for too long. I was honestly not sure if I could lust after my wife, or if that were wrong. Doug Wilson's exposition of 1 Thessalonians 4:4-5 changed my thinking, and I am forever grateful. You are exactly right, and there are protestants who really can agree with you here.
You have made it! What a great call out on a huge show!
Can't wait for Ben's response video!
This was an interesting video! Thank you for your work! I appreciate Ben and Prager for all of their good work.
Awesome intro with the tenacious D reference. 😂 Great singing
Matt, you are fantastic. I've repeatedly watched this video and sent it to my teenage boys.
I was just thinking about this reaction from Ben! Glad Matt made this video.
Lust is devoid of intimacy. It is akin to simping in a way where a man's 'little head' hijacks control of his person for the short term pleasure (i.e. cheap pleasure). Corn robs a man of his virility and self-control.
I agree that corn is truly a nefarious vegetable (actually a grain!)... but I suspect there's a little typo, friend.😅
Enjoyed this!
Your points are very well fleshed out. Lol. But seriously, they are, and I agree. Love this perspective and deep dive on defining these terms and their surrounding interplay within life.
I think Ben and Matt agree even more than they think. Part of it is a question of vocabulary and defining terms.
Yes, there are a lot of semantic arguments here.
Yeah, I felt like Matt and Dennis were 85% in agreement with each other, and then I think Ben and Matt were more like 97% in agreement. Maybe there's a slight Orthodox Jew/Roman Catholic distinction but it seems like they were in agreement on the moral underpinnings.
@@kall_me_kiwi6145 I read that as semitic arguments and had to double-take. 😅
Yeah, this is a very detailed disagreement.
Usually the lack of definition of terms is a conservation killer. Well said
the doctrines of the passions are a christian understanding. Devolped after the church started. I am not surprised Jewish people would be confused. They dont have that theology.
Wow, so refreshing are your values, and you are up against such an opposition. Thank you for your commitment to this subject. I ordered your book The Porn Myth and can't wait to read it. Please keep talking about this subject because more men need to learn this.
Thank you very much for dealing with these bad positions being spread around right now Matt.
I have a few issues with JPII’s definition of lust though
It was utterly disturbing what Mr. Prager expressed on your show regarding particularly this topic with children. The modern mindset has become so confused. It’s never OK. Thank you for trying to illuminate his ideas.
Your doing good work, keep it up because we need the voice of truth in the midst of people that are right about most things but wrong about some things
After following spiritual journeys, I call it new age deceit. During a search for growth I leanred the important of holding on to values not just for you but for your husband, wife and family. It's wonderful to listen to good examples of healthy relationships. I love to hear the discussions of wholesome relationships I thank God all is not lost. Thank you for sharing.
Every sin has pride in its centre, and that is the opposite of love. Part of it is objectifying others because to love is to give yourself selflessly to another person, and pride makes it impossible. So yes, it is possible to stop loving one's wife (or husband) and still go to bed. It's not making love anymore, but so isn't 'doing it' with just anyone.
It's a problem that the Cambridge dictionary definition of lust says "a very strong sexual desire."
Great point. We have to be discerning of the cultural definition of words and contexts, and choose Christ over the world's definition always.
Good job on the Tribute cover☺️
Matt singing Tenacious D just made my Tuesday 🤣 Didn't see that one coming.
Matt, you should write a book on Christian sexual desire.
This is really strange to me that people don’t know the difference between lust and sexual desire. I know love and sex addiction are on the rise but I didn’t know it was this bad. These are two very different things. Like anger and rage.
The entire world is confused.
Some of the confusion could be absolutely manufactured. Pro-porn people would use our natural sexual desires as a reason why watching porn is good, using the confusion for their cause.
Also grateful for your insightful article. I had heard Prager's argument about Onan before and thought it might be correct, but found the natural law perspective sufficient. It's good to know the passage on Onan pertains to the natural law too.
Thank you for the initial conversation and this response, Matt. I am a Lutheran and my husband is Catholic...which always keeps things lively! On this subject though, him and I are in full agreement. Keep it up! And your wife is awesome!
This whole thing is unnecessarily confusing. In simple terms, we should avoid thinking of sleeping of other women that aren't our wives and should will the good of our wives all round, right? That's a good summary.
Lust is a habitual vice and not simply an involuntary movement of passion. It requires the objectification of the other and reduction of their value to the gratification of my satisfaction. It also divorces the pleasure of sexual experience from the good of the loving union to which it’s meant to be attached. Dr Therrien
Great episode! Love your delivery
I agree with Pints With Aquinas. Differentiating the words is good.
Yes. You are correct! Is there is a little too much lust going on in the heads of these men, who profess to be extremely adherent to their beliefs, that they have to psychologically make an excuse for their unusually high and/or frequent feelings of lust, by saying that it is a perfectly okay thing to do.
My mother always said that men who are "too" religious, especially those who needlessly profess it often, and outwardly, are a sign of narcissism and/or " there is one (or several) of the seven deadly sin(s)" they wish no one to see.
FYI, just before our said "seven deadly sins" I was typing it!!! Don't know what that means??? Sadly, NO ONE gets a prize!
Simples -Jesus holds us to a higher standard.
Well just started the Shaprio segment and already I see this is going to be another debate over definitions. And when you set out to define your terms, there usually needs to be testing of whether it has too many false positives or false negatives.
Loved listening to your discussion with Prager and now this. There is definitely some sort of barrier of language/definitions which is so interesting and important to distinguish. But there is such a deepness in the Catholic theology that is missing from Prager and Sharpio….I pray they find theology of the body for a deeper meaning in their lives.