Dear Charles:

The Seven Deadly Sin and Seven Virtues are not emotions.  In the realm of emotion there can be corollaries, but a corollary does not imply that are the same. The Seven Deadly Sins and Seven Virtues reflect a spiritual condition of the soul. An emotion is a biologically based response to stimulus affected by environment and experience.

Now, one can lead to the other. The Sin of Pride, for example, lead to conceited emotions that one is better than others. Similarly, the spiritual Virtue of Humility can lead to emotions of compassion and caring for others.

So while emotions and Deadly Sins/Christian Virtues are not the same they relate to one another.

The Deadly sin are always sin, but do not confuse a spiritual state of soul for an emotion.

As for the idea that the emotion of anger does not have an opposite, I disagree. Just as the deady sin of anger opposes the Virtue of Gentleness, the emotion of anger opposes the emotion of gentle demeanor toward others. Perhaps even a better opposite would be patience. Anger and Patience are certainly opposites

In terms of your teachers, I am afraid that, in my opinion, they are both wacked.

To say all emotion is good, it is only what you do with it is a trite psychobabble of the modern religion of psychology. Jealously, for example, is a destructive emotion, even if it is not expressed outwardly; so is the motion of bitterness and unforgiveness. In fact, in the extreme, bitterness and unforgiveness can lead even to demonization.

The emotion of anger can be beneficial when it is holy anger, it is also a normal response to things that upset us, but when anger reaches a rage or when anger is prolonged, then sin is around the corner.

The fact that unchecked anger leads to things like bitterness, resentment, unforgiveness, or revenge is why it is a Capital Sin (Deadly Sin) -- because it leads to other sins.

I am utterly dismayed at your teachers understanding of lust. Lust is an emotion and it is also a sin. The attraction that a man and woman have for each other, when it is not distorted or dysfunctional, is not lust. A married couple are engaged in the mutual self-giving of each other in love. This is not lust.

Lust is defined as the "inordinate desire for or enjoyment of sexual pleasure." The operative word here is "inordinate" and thus the normal desire for and enjoyment of sexual pleasure in marriage is not lust.

The definition continues: "The desires or acts are inordinate when they do not conform to the divinely ordained purpose of sexual pleasure, which is to foster the mutual love of husband and wife and, according to the dispositions of providence, to procreate and educate their children." (Source: Father Hardon's Pocket Catholic Dictionary)

I would advise learning these theological, philosophical, and moral issues from a good loyal and orthodox Catholic and not listen to these teachers (at least as you have presented their ideas).

God Bless,
Bro. Ignatius Mary