Responding to Ben Shapiro Responding to Me 

Well, go on, what do you think?

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.

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.”

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.

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.

You won the debate with Prager. Be the leader in this space, Matt. Keeping shining the light ✨

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!

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."

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.

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.

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!

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.

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.

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.

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!!

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".

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.

For what it's worth (from an Orthodox Christian), having struggled with this during my life, I agree with you 100% on this.

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.

Now I'm waiting for Shapiro responding to Matt responding to Shapiro.

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!😮

Lust is sexual attraction without love.

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 :)

"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!

Converted to Catholicism last year and became full member this Easter. Best decision I’ve ever made. Full stop.

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.

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!

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).

Matt, you have an amazing ability to explain things in a simple way. Truly God given. You did a great job.

"I am actively willing your good!" 😂 made me spit out my drink

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 ❤️

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.

Contraception reduces your spouse to an object, whether you meant it to or not. Great commentary.

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.

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 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)

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.

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.

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 😊❤️🇦🇺

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.

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.

It's extremely easy to objectify your wife or husband: every time you use artificial contraception.

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 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.

For what it's worth, The Catechism states that "Lust is disordered desire for or inordinate enjoyment of sexual pleasure. Sexual pleasure is morally disordered when sought for itself, isolated from its procreative and unitive purposes (CCC 2351)." So inordinate sexual desire towards a woman you are not married to--or, if unmarried, do not intend to be married to--is lustful. Likewise, sexual activity within marriage becomes lustful if it is pursued without openness to conception and procreation.

your drilling on the relationship of object/subject is very important & under-appreciated. Keep it up.

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.

Love the spirited discussions and wish there were more people who would do them!

I think Ben and Matt agree even more than they think. Part of it is a question of vocabulary and defining terms.

So Good Matt! I truly admire your heart expressed in pursuing clarity & sound wisdom regarding this highly important matter!

"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.

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! :)

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.

Dropping some excellent Tenacious D!!!! Mad respect brother! Good Bless, Happy Easter.

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.

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! 😅

My new favourite channel! I love your approach on this topic❤️

this is the first time i'm watching your videos and I have to say I love the way you talk about stuff. Subscribed!

Matt singing Tenacious D was not what I had on my Pints with Aquinas bingo sheet.

Awesome work. Captivating to see your apologetic skills activate such thought provoking discussions.

Great video! Thank you so much for what you do. I thoroughly enjoyed it and learned a lot from it.

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!

Can't wait for Ben's response video!

It's a problem that the Cambridge dictionary definition of lust says "a very strong sexual desire."

Great episode! Really interesting back and forth all around. Matt, you spoke very well and convinced me

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.

This was an interesting video! Thank you for your work! I appreciate Ben and Prager for all of their good work.

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

Where's the link to the discussion of the sin of Onan?

You did a great job in that debate!

You and Ben should get together… I bet you guys could go on for… like… 5 and a half hours!

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.

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.

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.

Perfect approach Matt. Keep it up!

Matt, can you link to the video of what you are commenting on?

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

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.

I seen it all!! A Tenacious D reference on Pints with Aquinas!! 😂

You have made it! What a great call out on a huge show!

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.

There are time in a marriage / partnership where you will long for the delicate, gentle, romantic and sweet love making and then there will be times when either you or your spouse basically just want to get your rocks off. Both situations if you are in a balanced, trusting, loving and secure marriage will be healthy and good for the marriage or partnership. Trusting each other takes time and requires both parties to be honest, open and un- embarrassed about their preferences and sexual needs

Simples -Jesus holds us to a higher standard.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Loved the comment about high views of the body. Very important in all discussions about sexual sin!

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!

Matt, you should write a book on Christian sexual desire.

"Saying you cannot lust after someone who becomes your spouse is like saying you cannot exploit a man who becomes your employee." That tracks pretty well with Shapiro's opinion of labor unions.

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.

I agree with Pints With Aquinas. Differentiating the words is good.

It's not a hard concept...healthy sexual desire is fine. Having sexual desire for your spouse (whether its your husband or your wife) is normal, and dare I say healthy. It's when youre reducing that person you say you "Love" to merely someone who you can "get it in" with and then go about your day without a word, where it becomes lust. There is a distinction. If you say you have sexual desire for your spouse, but conflate that with lust, you have a lot of personal issues you need to figure out.

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.

I must say the quality of this video is phenomenal !!