There are many ways to sin when talking about matters related to the Sixth Commandment. Approving impurity is one obvious way.

But there are also many other ways to sin when talking about purity and impurity. For example, a person sins if he talks without great delicacy and great caution even when condemning impurity. Here is how the Council of Trent Catechism warns priests not to commit these sins:

In the explanation of this [viz., the Sixth] Commandment, however, the pastor has need of great caution and prudence, and should treat with great delicacy a subject which requires brevity rather than copiousness of exposition. For it is to be feared that if he explained in too great detail or at length the ways in which this Commandment is violated, he might unintentionally speak of subjects which, instead of extinguishing, usually serve rather to inflame corrupt passion.¹

Everyone, not only priests, must use great caution and delicacy on this subject. In an encyclical to all Catholics, Pope Pius XI declared that “purity of morals” is a “most delicate matter”.²

Sins of impurity usually arise from weakness of will and not from a lack of information (as modern society claims).³ Thus, the primary Catholic way to fight against impurity is not with a great deal of information but rather with a strong and holy will. This is why the Council of Trent Catechism orders great caution on this subject, great delicacy, and brevity.

Our wounded nature inclines people, and especially young people, more to impurity than to other sins.⁴ Our Lady of Fatima shows this truth by warning: “More souls go to Hell because of sins of the flesh than for any other reason.”

For this reason, matters concerning purity and impurity should be treated:

• only if, when, and as much as truly necessary;⁵
• in private;⁶
• only by the person responsible (the parent) for teaching that particular young person about such matters;⁷ and
• only with “every precaution taken”.⁸

Pope Pius XI reminds us that “evil communications corrupt good habits”.⁹ Similarly, St. Paul warns us about the damage which can be done “in this extremely delicate matter”¹⁰, when he says “fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not so much as be named among you”.  Ephesians, 5:3.

Four sins which a person commits when he talks about purity (or impurity) without extreme delicacy.

Because we address this article to Traditional Catholics, we leave aside words approving impurity, to focus on indiscreet discussion of matters pertaining to the Sixth Commandment.

This lack of extreme delicacy can be sinful in four ways. A person can:

1. Sin by ruining a person’s innocence (partially or completely), through telling him things he should not know, or when he should not know them;
2. Unjustly violate parents’ rights to decide when, how and how much to inform their own children about such matters;
3. Sin against even those persons who already know the “facts of life”, when such matters are indelicately or needlessly mentioned or dwelt upon, serving to desensitize those persons; and
4. Sin by bad example, talking about such matters without reserve, in public, and/or without warning the listener to speak only as needed, in private, with his parent or confessor.

Below, we discuss each of these four sins.

1. A person sins by ruining persons’ innocence, through telling them what they should not know, or when they should not know it.

Manifestly, persons’ innocence can be destroyed by words, even though the speaker intends to condemn impurity. Thus, in the quote above, the Council of Trent Catechism took for granted that the pastor would not approve impurity but warned him to say nothing about the Sixth Commandment without great caution, great delicacy and brevity.

Likewise, a person could condemn impurity by displaying large pornographic pictures and telling children “this is evil”.  Doing that would destroy innocence even while condemning impurity.

One crucial reason for using great delicacy is that, when talking about matters of purity and impurity, one cannot “un-ring” a bell. In other words, innocence once destroyed can never be regained. This shows the need for great caution in speaking about matters of purity.

2. A person sins by unjustly violating parents’ rights to decide when, how, and how much to inform their own children about matters of purity.

Parents have the right and duty to school their children in truth and virtue, including in the “facts of life”. It is unjust for anyone to usurp this right by interfering with the parents’ decisions exercising this right.¹¹ The parents’ right to make their own decisions on the education of their children is inviolable,¹² inalienable, and inseparable from their roles and duties as parents.¹³

So important is a parent’s right to educate his children, including on “the facts of life” and all matters concerning purity, that parents must be vigilant to maintain control of their children’s education.¹⁴

Thus, parents have the duty to keep their children from listening to someone whom they reasonably foresee might say things regarding purity (or impurity) which would destroy their children’s innocence. Id. This is true both to protect their children’s innocence as well as to “make absolutely sure that the education of their children remains under their own control” (quoting Pope Pius XI, who is repeating the teaching of Pope Leo XIII.)¹⁵

When a father talks with his son (or a mother with her daughter) about the “facts of life”, the parent should explain and warn as appropriate to the child’s development stage and maturity.

A parent must prudently weigh many factors when determining when and what his offspring should know on matters of purity, including his offspring’s:

• physical development;
• emotional/intellectual development;
• home environment and other environments to which he is exposed;
• whether he has suffered the tragedy of partial or complete destruction of his innocence already, whether by words or other means; and
• the discretion of the child and his ability to keep the information confidential and not talk about it with siblings, friends, etc.

The right time for such discussion depends on the particular circumstances of each adolescent and is not the same for each.¹⁶ Parents know their own children better than anyone else does and are in the best position to prudently assess what their adolescent needs to know and when.

Anyone who mentions these matters to someone else’s children without the parents’ prior informed consent, unjustly breaches the parents’ right to control their children’s education.¹⁷ Thus, any public speech or sermon on such matters gravely wrongs the parents of children present, except what is said with great caution, great delicacy and brevity.

Further, because matters concerning the Sixth Commandment should be discussed privately¹⁸ and only if, when, and as much as truly necessary,¹⁹ no public speaker can tailor his talk to the circumstances of each listener and so must say nothing without great caution, great delicacy and brevity. Thus, any other speech or sermon on this topic is sinful.

Conclusion of this section: Unless using the greatest caution, delicacy and brevity when talking about purity to someone else’s children, a person commits a grave sin of injustice against their parents. Parents must keep their children away from such a person and his foul speech.

3. Even among adults who know the “facts of life”, it is evil to treat matters of purity/impurity indelicately and needlessly because that treatment desensitizes them.

All faithful Catholics should speak most reluctantly regarding matters of impurity. Thus, St. Jean Baptiste de la Salle declared that “only brazen and shameless people can tell lies with ease or say or do something unseemly without blushing.”²⁰ 

On the contrary, a faithful Catholic should blush when hearing matters of impurity discussed without great delicacy. St. Jean Baptiste de la Salle teaches:

The finest ornament of the cheeks is a modest reserve, which makes wellborn people blush when an indecent word, a lie, or a slander is uttered in their presence.²¹

That is why God describes the wicked as not knowing how to blush.²²

Our Lord’s enemies know that, when people are accustomed to hearing unreservedly about impurity, they become desensitized, so that it is no longer shocking and revolting.

A main goal of persons promoting unnatural impurity, is to desensitize the public to their conduct by constantly talking about it (through Hollywood, the media, etc.). This leads the public to become bored by such words and thus to think such conduct is “no big deal”.

For this reason, our Lord’s enemies who promote unnatural impurity, advise that the first step to achieve acceptance of their vice, is to “Talk about [unnatural impurity] as loudly and as often as possible.”²³ Two promoters of this vice explain “The principle behind this advice is simple, almost any behavior begins to look normal if you are exposed to enough of it at close quarters”.²⁴

Conclusion of this section: Even among adults who know the “facts of life”, it is evil to hear matters of purity/impurity treated indelicately and needlessly because that treatment desensitizes them.

Using words regarding impurity in other contexts

Besides the sins of indiscreet and indelicate discussions about impurity itself, some Catholics follow the sinful practices of the barbarians around us by using impure slang in many other contexts (e.g., in sports) which do not otherwise have any connection to the Sixth Commandment. This is sinful for eight reasons:

1. This language tends to desensitize the speaker and the listeners to those words so as to consider those words part of everyday conversation.
2. It shows pride to call attention to oneself through shocking speech.
3. This language makes us poor representatives of the Traditional Catholic Religion.
4. This language likens us to the barbarians in our society. Any Catholic is on the wrong path if people cannot tell he is a Traditional Catholic by how he speaks. His speech must tell barbarians that he is not “one of them”. He must be a sign of contradiction to the world and this must be evident in the way he speaks. Further, if one speaks like the barbarians around us, he is more likely to act like them too.
5. We should always live in the presence of Our Lord and His Blessed Mother. We should be embarrassed if they heard us talk about impurity without great caution, discretion, and true need.
6. Every act that one chooses to do is either sinful or virtuous.²⁵ The words we choose are sinful unless they are part of a virtuous statement. Indiscreet, indelicate language is not part of a virtuous statement. Thus, it is a sin.
7. We should always act in the way that, at our Judgment, we would want to have acted. At our Judgment we will not want to have talked about impurity without great caution, discretion, and true need. Therefore, we should not.
8. If we put all people into one of two groups—either those who condone that language or those who don’t—in which group are most (or all) of the friends of Christ and His Mother? We should think and talk like the friends of Christ and His Mother so we can be in that group.

4. Indiscreet, indelicate language regarding purity is a bad example, especially to immature and impressionable persons.

Although people of any age can be endangered by impurity, adolescents are especially susceptible to this moral poison.²⁶ When adolescents hear public, indiscreet, and indelicate talk about purity, they are especially prone to imitate that bad example for three reasons:

1. The young, especially boys, are prone to be indiscreet. They would tend to be even more imprudent than an imprudent adult concerning when, how and with whom to use these words;
2. The young, especially boys, like to speak shockingly to get attention; and
3. The young, especially boys, tend to think that foul speech makes them sound like an adult.

Because bad example is easily given by indiscreet, indelicate language regarding purity, we should not use this language.

Sinful language does not cease to be sinful because “everyone talks like that”.

One might superficially object that unreserved, indelicate language about purity is no longer sinful because “everyone talks like that”. But common sins are still sins. Those sins still offend God. When a person approves of sinful language, this shows he is callous and spiritually blind but it does not make his sin cease to be sin.

Concerning the idea that indiscreet words relating to impurity cease to be sins when everyone is “used to it”, Pope Pius XII called this type of argument the most insidious of sophisms. Here are his words (in the context of people falsely “justifying” immodesty using this excuse):

The most insidious of sophisms, which are usually repeated to justify immodesty, seems to be the same everywhere. One of these resurrects the ancient saying “let there be no argument about things we are accustomed to”, in order to brand as old fashioned the rebellion of honest people against fashions which are too bold...

Pope Pius XII, Address to the Latin Union of High Fashion, November 8, 1957.

Conclusion

We should only speak about purity and impurity with great caution and delicacy. We should only speak briefly; only if, when, and as much as is necessary; in private; and (usually) only with our own children.