Attended my Pre-Cana class..now worried?

[somethingborrow]

Hi all. My fiancee and I attended our weekend pre-cana class.Overall the class was pretty informative. We had an “old school” priest teaching the class and some of the comments he said didn’t sit right with us. ISomeone asked the Priest, What types of foreplay is allowed in marriage? The Priest replied, with “kissing”. That’s it. He stated that only kissing was the only form of foreplay. Not allowed was open mouth kissing, or french kissing, oral sex, body touching (including breasts, vagina, or penis), or body kissing.

Everyone in the room looked dumbfounded. The Priests reasons for no oral sex, body touching or body kissing was that your breasts are used to breast feed your child, your vagina is used to have a child, and the penis is used in conjunction to produce a child. Everything sexual has to do only with producing a child. Open mouth kissing can not be used because it could lead to lust, which is a sin.

A family member of mine that took the class 10 years ago and had the same priest told me to take what he says with a grain of salt.

Can anyone shed some light on this? I’m very confused.

Thanks

 

[Della]

The good Father is simply wrong. Lust can enter into a married relationship, but it has very little to do with foreplay and more to do with simply using one’s spouse to get arousal no matter how it might affect the other. Foreplay ought to be pleasureable to both, for example, if a particular action makes one of them feel bad/frightened/used, it shouldn’t be forced. True love takes into consideration the feelings of the other and doesn’t insist on having one’s own way. It should be a sharing of love and respect, not merely a means to an end.

 

[Nate13]

haha sounds a little old fashioned. There are tons of past threads on these kinds of sexual issues first of all if you do a search on your specific questions, but I’ll try to answer some of the things you have brought up.

Someone asked the Priest, What types of foreplay is allowed in marriage? The Priest replied, with “kissing”. That’s it. He stated that only kissing was the only form of foreplay. Not allowed was open mouth kissing, or french kissing, oral sex, body touching (including breasts, vagina, or penis), or body kissing.

The Church’s teaching on sex can be summed up as such. “The Church teaches that the sexual act has been inherently designed by God to be unitive and procreative each and every time it is performed”

This basically means that every time there is an ejaculation it should be through vaginal intercourse. You can use oral sex, any of the kissing you mentioned, ect… as foreplay but not as the ends of the act. If a woman is unable to achieve orgasm through normal intercourse, oral stimulation is allowed and actually encouraged so a woman can achieve orgasm as well as the man. You can read through other threads to get more in depth about the “what ifs” but if you keep in mind that the end of every sexual act for both spouses is for both to give completely of themselves selflessly and for the act to be ordered towards procreation you will be on the right course at least according to Church teaching which is what it sounds like you are searching for.

Ordered towards procreation: ejaculate in the vagina and not doing anything to purposefully hinder the fertility of either party despite whatever state of fertility either is in naturally.

Unitive: both man and woman are giving themselves completely to one another and putting the the other person and their needs/wants before their own. Completely implies their fertility no matter what their current state of fertility is.

If you keep this in mind you can probably answer most of your own questions at least with respect to what the Church teaches.

 

[Bookcat]

Such is not the teaching of the Church…nor would I actually call it “old School” as one can find even in the older moral manuals that were used by priests hearing confession that foreplay is permitted…(other than kissing) from more than 50 years ago…

It seems to be his thoughts or perhaps others too…but not the norm.

Foreplay can take a number of reasonable and dignified forms…not just kissing.

(note though the the husband is not to climax other than in the actual intercourse …his climax necessarily needs to be only then)

And of course it is not just “anything goes”…it is to be in keeping with dignity etc Keeping the marriage bed undefiled as Hebrews 13:4 notes

A Christian though certainly needs to avoid hedonism and lust etc…and to be moderate.

Catechism

2362 "The acts in marriage by which the intimate and chaste union of the spouses takes place are noble and honorable; the truly human performance of these acts fosters the self-giving they signify and enriches the spouses in joy and gratitude."144 Sexuality is a source of joy and pleasure:

The Creator himself . . . established that in the [generative] function, spouses should experience pleasure and enjoyment of body and spirit. Therefore, the spouses do nothing evil in seeking this pleasure and enjoyment. They accept what the Creator has intended for them. At the same time, spouses should know how to keep themselves within the limits of just moderation.145

vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P86.HTM (all of course is important to read)

 

[Nate13]

Such is not the teaching of the Church…nor would I actually call it “old School” as one can find even in the older moral manuals that were used by priests hearing confession that foreplay is permitted…(other than kissing) from more than 50 years ago…

It seems to be his thoughts or perhaps others too…but not the norm.

Foreplay can take a number of reasonable and dignified forms…not just kissing.

(note though the the husband is not to climax other than in the actual intercourse …his climax necessarily needs to be only then)

And of course it is not just “anything goes”…it is to be in keeping with dignity etc Keeping the marriage bed undefiled as Hebrews 13:4 notes

A Christian though certainly needs to avoid hedonism…and to be moderate.

Catechism

2362 "The acts in marriage by which the intimate and chaste union of the spouses takes place are noble and honorable; the truly human performance of these acts fosters the self-giving they signify and enriches the spouses in joy and gratitude."144 Sexuality is a source of joy and pleasure:

The Creator himself . . . established that in the [generative] function, spouses should experience pleasure and enjoyment of body and spirit. Therefore, the spouses do nothing evil in seeking this pleasure and enjoyment. They accept what the Creator has intended for them. At the same time, spouses should know how to keep themselves within the limits of just moderation.145

Moderation…so that means like keeping it to 3 or 4 times a day right

 

[Della]

Moderation…so that means like keeping it to 3 or 4 times a day right

Well, perhaps in the honeymoon stage. I remember something Joan Rivers once said. When she and her husband were newly married she’d act coy and tease, “Chase me! Chase me!” while skipping around the room. After a few years it became, “Chase me. Chase me” said with a decided lack of enthusiasm. It so true. The crazy feelings wax and wan as the relationship develops. It’s just a natural part of living with one’s spouse.

 

[manualman]

Is it possible he misunderstood the question and thought the asker was asking about physical intimacy while ENGAGED?

That’s the only way his answer makes any sense to me.

 

[Sheadad]

The priest must have misunderstood the context of the question, and meant that the engaged couple must adhere to a strict policy of “kissing only”. Even the old school priests, per se, have much experience with the teachings of the church and certainly do not live in a bubble. The problem is that most of the couples in the pre-cana classes are confused themselves about the teachings of the Church and I’ll venture to say that some of them are living as husband and wife already. The world has changed dramatically from the time he was in his younger years and everyone (or most) young couples in the 40’s or 50’s dated, became engaged and shortly after married. The sexual union was rightly ordered because “kissing” was all that was allowed, and still should be, but isn’t adhered to. This all has nothing to do with marriage as the above posts spell out clearly. I think as practicing Catholics in the time we live in, for those with children or those that God will grant the gift of children, we should take the responsibility of teaching this to the kids. The future of our Church needs to hear and understand fully the rightly ordered design that the Lord has made clear to us in the gospel and the teachings of the Magesterium. In Pope John Paul’s “Love and Responsibility”, his teachings are fully explained on these matters and I think we could really make an effort within our own circle of influence to shed light on this subject.

 

[twoangels]

Hi all. My fiancee and I attended our weekend pre-cana class.Overall the class was pretty informative. We had an “old school” priest teaching the class and some of the comments he said didn’t sit right with us. ISomeone asked the Priest, What types of foreplay is allowed in marriage? The Priest replied, with “kissing”. That’s it. He stated that only kissing was the only form of foreplay. Not allowed was open mouth kissing, or french kissing, oral sex, body touching (including breasts, vagina, or penis), or body kissing.

Everyone in the room looked dumbfounded. The Priests reasons for no oral sex, body touching or body kissing was that your breasts are used to breast feed your child, your vagina is used to have a child, and the penis is used in conjunction to produce a child. Everything sexual has to do only with producing a child. Open mouth kissing can not be used because it could lead to lust, which is a sin.

A family member of mine that took the class 10 years ago and had the same priest told me to take what he says with a grain of salt.

Can anyone shed some light on this? I’m very confused.

Thanks

The priest doesn’t just need to be taken with a grain of salt. He’s misrepresenting the Church’s teaching and delegitmizing what the Church actually teaches. Moreover his attitudes toward sex are sexually damaging. I grew up with very similiar suspecions toward sexuality. It took my husband and I two months to be able to consumate our marriage. It took therapy. For some women who are raised so strictly, they end up living for years in unconsumated marriages often to only end up abandoned and divorced by their husbands. Knowing these facts makes it very difficult to argue against the secular culture’s claim that the Church’s position on sexuality is archaic.

I’ll tell you a few truths that I learned. Sexuality is not limited to engaging in sexual intercourse or even longing for a sexual climax. Sexuality is being male or female. The sexual embrace is the special embrace of the sexes based upon their sexual complimentarity. But beyond the urge for the sexual embrace and the pleasures it gives, breastfeeding and childbirth are sexual things because they deal specifically with what makes us the female sex. And the experiences are sexual. The hormones involved in the sexual union are the same hormones involved in breastfeeding and labor. In fact, it is possible for women to experience spontaneous orgasms while they are in labor. When they do experience these spontanous orgasms, the orgasms act as a natural pain reliever.

When it comes to understanding Catholic sexual morality, the thing to understand is that its really about affirming the beauty of how God made us. Its about acknowledging that fertility is a part of our sexuality and acknowledging how degrading it is to pursue sexual pleasure while being hostile toward our fertility. NFP helps keep a couple seeing the unity of sexuality and fertility. If you space or limit your family size, you are restricting the use of your sexuality and missing out on the unitive (bonding) aspects of sexuality. Sex is good for your marriage. Its not merely a utilitarian tool to reproduce that can be tossed aside when you don’t want more children. NFP helps us to weigh out our priorities. Is not having a child worth the abstainence? Are we being selfish? Do we need to trust God more with the monetary gifts he’s given us? It keeps us connected and keeps your sexuality integrated within ourself.

In marriage let sex be what it is. Immorality comes with divorcing it and trying to change its nature to pursue one aspect independantly of the other. As such, the big thing to remember is that when you are abstaining, you’re abstaining. You’re not trying to pursue sexual pleasure other ways. You’re not engaging in contraceptive behaviors even if its less effective things like pulling out or making the man climax in some alternative way outside of the woman. Where I disagree with some on this board is the overemphasis on insisting that the man must always climax inside of the woman. I think this is the ideal, but since my husband and I did have challenges to overcome, I think its important to not get hung up on “This is what sex is supposed to look like.” Sometimes things don’t work out perfectly and it just doesn’t happen that way. Fretting about it not happening that way exasterbates the problem. You frett about it and its going to happen more. Stop fretting and then things will develop naturally and you’ll find those occurances occuring less frequently. Where it becomes sinful is where we see an added benefit of “wait I can still pursue this but not get pregnant if I cause it to mess up.” That’s where its sinful. But allowing imperfections to happen are perfectly ok. Don’t let anyone give you a timetable of how long that’ll take. I’ve heard people say it should only be a handful of times, but my husband and I have been married over a year and things still aren’t perfect.

 

[tafan]

This is not old-fashioned. It is simply not what the church used to teach any more than what it teaches now. I hate these things being represented as old-fashioned, as if the church has changed its teaching. It has not.

 

[tafan]

Is it possible he misunderstood the question and thought the asker was asking about physical intimacy while ENGAGED?

That’s the only way his answer makes any sense to me.

With all respect to the OP, I have to wonder if the OP misunderstood the question. That is also a possibility

 

[EasterJoy]

Is it possible he misunderstood the question and thought the asker was asking about physical intimacy while ENGAGED?

That’s the only way his answer makes any sense to me.

I agree with this. A married man may not touch his wife’s breasts? There is no way he meant that.

 

[Seatuck]

Read The Good News About Sex and Marriage by Greg Popcak or Sex AuNatural by Patrick Coffin for a clear understanding of what is allowed.

 

[Newbie2]

I agree with this. A married man may not touch his wife’s breasts? There is no way he meant that.

Yeah, what is one to do, just stare at them?

Sounds to me like he was talking about pre-married couples, not married couples. Such things leading to lust for a married person? 'cuz it’s perfectly OK to be hot-to-trot with your spouse; otherwise sexuality is reduced to reproduction only, enjoyable or perhaps not, more like a chore.