Cuddling during Mass

[beckers]

I appreciate your questions, but my point is being lost in them. Forget for a moment what *I think *is acceptable specifically, and what you find acceptable.

I maintain that anyone who is being honest will plainly admit that there is *a certain point *at which a display of affection which would be acceptable in another public setting is unacceptable at Mass. If you’re wiling to agree to that (and frankly it would be silly for anyone not to) the question is why? I answered it - the sacred time and place render it so. I may be surprised, but I don’t think any of us would feel the need to disagree with this.

My point then is this - we would do well to focus on what it is about the sacred time and space of Mass that places unique demands on us this way, and then revisit the original question in light of this.

I don’t know if i agree with it just only being a sacred place and time but a fact that you shouldn’t be doing it anywhere (church, school, grocery store, movies etc…). I never want to see couples “making out” in front of me. Sex and intimacy are God’s gift to married people and we the people do not need to see the the fullment of that gift. I tell my friends all the time “That is Too Much Infomation”

You keep saying mass is sacred place which you will get no arguement from me on but i am speficially asking you to tell me how people can show reverance in this holy space and in mass. What are your standards? How do you judge someone’s behave to be correct or not correct in worshiping God?

 

[paramedicgirl]

I don’t know if i agree with it just only being a sacred place and time but a fact that you shouldn’t be doing it anywhere (church, school, grocery store, movies etc…). I never want to see couples “making out” in front of me. Sex and intimacy are God’s gift to married people and we the people do not need to see the the fullment of that gift. I tell my friends all the time “That is Too Much Infomation”

You keep saying mass is sacred place which you will get no arguement from me on but i am speficially asking you to tell me how people can show reverance in this holy space and in mass. What are your standards? How do you judge someone’s behave to be correct or not correct in worshiping God?

That depends on who you ask. Some here will say that anything that is done is Christian love and charity is not only acceptable, but pleasing to God, on the same level as a prayer.

Others will say that the presence of God requires reverence, holy meditation and worship.

 

[Jenny_Z]

We’re not focusing on each other. We’re looking towards the Eucharist together.

 

[Conciliar]

I don’t know if i agree with it just only being a sacred place and time but a fact that you shouldn’t be doing it anywhere (church, school, grocery store, movies etc…).

What constitutes proper decorum in the sacred time and place of Mass in general? That is a subject of its own. Maybe a good topic for another thread, but pretty open ended. This thread is about a specific activity that I want to stick with. BTW - thanks for at least trying to play along, I really appreciate it. I wish others who defend the cuddling would.

You seem to be saying that you see no distinction between what you would deem an acceptable amount of physical contact in public regardless of venue. i.e. What is acceptable anywhere is acceptable at Mass. Hmmmm… I don’t believe that if you really think about it this is true.

Example: you have your brother and his wife and some other couples over for dinner. Afterwards, everyone sits and chats or maybe watches a movie. Your brother and his wife are on the sofa arms around one another cuddling… I find it hard to believe that there is no level of contact that you would find OK in your home entertaining that you wouldn’t find out of place at Mass. Of course there is.

There’s no real “gotcha” coming. I’m simply asking some here to look at this issue from a new angle. My point is simple - the time and place of the Mass dictates what fits and what doesn’t, not the relationship between the couple. That is the piece of the discussion that merits more attention here. The lenient minded people are overly focussed on a loving exchange between husband and wife, when the real issue lies elsewhere; the time and the place.

Proof? None of us truly believe that the pew at Mass and the sofa at a friend’s house are equals when it comes to the appropriateness of this activity.

 

[Leopard]

It’s one thing to give someone a quick hug, but that rubbing thing that couples do gives me the willies. A arm will go out to the other person’s back and the rubbing up and down begins. To me that’s not affection, but a sexual act…

With no disrespect intended, in the nicest way possible, I am sure you are a good person who means well, but this is just wrong. Gestures of affection are normal ways for family members to interact with each other. I often show such signs of affection to my wife and children - pat or rub their back, give their shoulder a squeeze, tousle their hair, etc. - and they to me. I would take strong exception to anyone saying that these are sexual acts, whether in church or anywhere else.

 

[beckers]

What constitutes proper decorum in the sacred time and place of Mass in general? That is a subject of its own. Maybe a good topic for another thread, but pretty open ended. This thread is about a specific activity that I want to stick with. BTW - thanks for at least trying to play along, I really appreciate it. I wish others who defend the cuddling would.

You seem to be saying that you see no distinction between what you would deem an acceptable amount of physical contact in public regardless of venue. i.e. What is acceptable anywhere is acceptable at Mass. Hmmmm… I don’t believe that if you really think about it this is true.

Example: you have your brother and his wife and some other couples over for dinner. Afterwards, everyone sits and chats or maybe watches a movie. Your brother and his wife are on the sofa arms around one another cuddling… I find it hard to believe that there is no level of contact that you would find OK in your home entertaining that you wouldn’t find out of place at Mass. Of course there is.

There’s no real “gotcha” coming. I’m simply asking some here to look at this issue from a new angle. My point is simple - the time and place of the Mass dictates what fits and what doesn’t, not the relationship between the couple. That is the piece of the discussion that merits more attention here. The lenient minded people are overly focussed on a loving exchange between husband and wife, when the real issue lies elsewhere; the time and the place.

Proof? None of us truly believe that the pew at Mass and the sofa at a friend’s house are equals when it comes to the appropriateness of this activity.

I understand your point i really do. What i guess I am not understand is who has made us the emotions police? How do you know if that couple cuddling are just supporting each other in a time or need or are they doing it out of sexuality? You can’t know unless you go up and ask. That is where my issue is. Instead of giving couples who are showing small amounts of affection towards each other by holding hands or having an arm over the shoulder the benfit of the doubt we are jumping to the far conclusion that they are doing it for sexually reason or that their very touching each other is showing a disrespect towards Jesus. That is why i am asking what the standards are. I would hate for people to come to mass and not know that someone believes that they are disrespecting Jesus through their behavior.

And yes there are different levels of cuddling. My sister is family and if she wants to cuddle with her husband on the couch during a baseball game then she can. They are not making-out or petting each other.The relaxing Lounge cuddling you discribed is something that is not what you would do at church. Just like you wouldn’t grab a chair and put your feet up on the altar. I am not deny that there is a standard (ie not talking, no chewing gum, no cellphones, correct clothing etc…)but i think this black and white standard of no contact at all and making people into robots of emotions is wrong. Not everyone gets the same thing out of mass at the same time. You can’t know the intentions or complete enternal reverance someone is holding in themselves. I think it is dangerous ground to become the “thought police” or the “you must worship a certain way police”.

 

[mary_Felt]

I always wanted to have sex with a man of the cloth, those type just make me feel soooooooooooooooooooooo hornyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy!!!

 

[beckers]

That depends on who you ask. Some here will say that anything that is done is Christian love and charity is not only acceptable, but pleasing to God, on the same level as a prayer.

Others will say that the presence of God requires reverence, holy meditation and worship.

I don’t think anyone here is saying that it is okay for a couple to start having sex in the middle of church because it is after all an act of God’s love.

Sex is a wonderful act that has God at the center of it. You have a couple who should be revering the fact that they are receiving another person and joining themself as one, As a couple you should meditate on the graces that God has given you through having this other person in your life and the possible gift of a child and you should worship and put God at the center of your relationship through praying together and making sure you stay on a faithful path etc… Sex is healthy for a married couple BUT not in a church or anywhere in public.

 

[plant]

There was family who used to sit in front of us who were a large group. Every Sunday for at least a year, the wife would lean over and rub the husband’s back. Then he would rub her back. Then they would rub the teenage children, It was really distracting. I found myself watching them instead of listening to God. I think we are responsible to the other people who are attending mass also, by being quiet during mass. My goodness, they put up animated movies in the theaters asking people to be quiet. This is the place to cuddle though without distracting others. Within reason. This group of people came in after we did and there was no other place to sit in case anyone thinks we could do that.

 

[palmas85]

Yeah, even though “God is love” and these people are married and living their marriage vocation publicly and expressing their faith together, I find this disgusting.

Marriage vocation. You know I wonder how this ever actually came about, It is of course perfectly natural that people fall in love and marry but to actually term it a vocation such as the religious life, I feel went way too far. Much the same as the vocation of being single.

When I went through catechist training one of our assignments was to act out a skit explaining how the religious life, the single life and the married life were all vocation wise actually the same and indistinguishable from one another in the grand scheme of things. I found that disturbing then and still do.

I recall from the Old Baltimore Catechism:bigyikes: being taught that the religious life was regarded as a higher calling and in effect a better calling. I remember the picture showing a wedding, saying this is GOOD. Then a picture of a Sister praying and saying this is BETTER.

How did we lose the concept that the Priesthood and religious life as a whole was indeed a higher calling? Where did the Religious life become nothing more than another option for the well rounded young Catholic to pick and choose from? Nothing special, nothing unique, just another option? When did the idea of sanctified virginity offered up to God become old fashioned and out of touch? Tell me, where did it go and more importantly, why did it go?

We’ve lost something here, something deep, something meaningful and something that I think may be at the very root of many of the problems facing the Church today, and we need to get it back. Somehow, somway

Sorry for sidestepping but the whole issue of the ordained Priesthood and religious life in general being viewed in the same light as marriage or even the single life just doesn’t work for me, I’m sorry.

Back on subject, I see nothing wrong with a husband and wife holding hands, having a slight hug every now and then or even exchanging a chaste kiss during the sign of peace. I’m not sure that I agree with a non married couple doing the same however. I don’t think it is necessarily a bad thing or wrong but I’m just not sure it is proper to do so at Mass…

 

[mary_Felt]

Listen, people need to stop acting like Nazis and if you don’t like what someone is doing,deal with it, life isn’t perfect my friend.

 

[plant]

I think it comes down to being considerate of others around you. People do notice and what you do can be distracting. The people I see doing this do it as a regular habit. We know each other so there is not the question of a tragedy going on. We would know that. Just be considerate and realize there are people behind you who really came to worship God.

 

[rayne89]

If someone was so totally focused on God how would they notice such things in the first place. All this talk about focusing about God during Mass- how the cuddling couple focus is not where it should be etc. and yet the complainer is obviously focusing on the behaviors of those around them.

I have put my head on my husband’s shoulder, took his hand in mine and he has put his hand around my waist while standing. How nice for people to judge my heart and where it is and where it isn’t. Our marriage used to be a disaster, my husband used to have a drinking problem and he was an atheist. He is now a sober, devout Catholic and our marriage is sold and happy. Sometimes during the Mass I see my husband’s head bowed in prayer and I just overwelmed with thankfulness to God for all the blessings he has given us -in those moments while prayerfully thanking God and may reach out and take my husband’s hand or lean my head on him.

There is also another part - I have congestive heart failure, my health is declining and especially these last couple months I have encounter new difficulties. Sometimes just getting up from kneeling leaves me completely winded. I am 35 years old and I do not look sick. You’d never know by looking at me. Sometimes I need my husband to physically support me and sometimes it’s just emotional because facing this at 35 can be overwhelming and frightening at times.

I can not believe faithful Catholics who obviously love Christ spend so much time at Mass being distracted by judging others. Please focus on what you are there for and leave others be. Why can not we not see Christ in everyone, epecially at Mass? We worry about others offending God so much yet we may be doing that ourselves by this type of behavior.

 

[beckers]

Marriage vocation. You know I wonder how this ever actually came about, It is of course perfectly natural that people fall in love and marry but to actually term it a vocation such as the religious life, I feel went way too far. Much the same as the vocation of being single.

When I went through catechist training one of our assignments was to act out a skit explaining how the religious life, the single life and the married life were all vocation wise actually the same and indistinguishable from one another in the grand scheme of things. I found that disturbing then and still do.

I recall from the Old Baltimore Catechism:bigyikes: being taught that the religious life was regarded as a higher calling and in effect a better calling. I remember the picture showing a wedding, saying this is GOOD. Then a picture of a Sister praying and saying this is BETTER.

How did we lose the concept that the Priesthood and religious life as a whole was indeed a higher calling? Where did the Religious life become nothing more than another option for the well rounded young Catholic to pick and choose from? Nothing special, nothing unique, just another option? When did the idea of sanctified virginity offered up to God become old fashioned and out of touch? Tell me, where did it go and more importantly, why did it go?

We’ve lost something here, something deep, something meaningful and something that I think may be at the very root of many of the problems facing the Church today, and we need to get it back. Somehow, somway

I am going to disagree with your comment. There are two vocations. Relgious and Marriage. Yes Relgious is a Higher calling but not necessary a better calling. If it is your calling from God then it can’t be bad or worst then someone else just different. Different is okay. Men and women are different but their very natures. Marriage is a vocation and i might say the first.

Gensis chapter 2
23And Adam said: This now is bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called woman, because she was taken out of man. 24

 

[anniemart]

just got through reading all these posts.

My belief is that the only intimacy one should have at mass must be with God. Gestures of kindness in helping those with physical problems are not to be included. Besides, I’ve always understood intimacy to equal some degree of privacy.

Now here’s a genuine thought to ponder (* I ask is that you have respect for the source) *Our priest told my husband this past Christmas that it irriates him when he looks out and sees people “relaxing” on another’s body. Barring the young child, he stated that he sees it as a sign of disrespect. It also makes him think that no one is really paying attention. *Please don’t blur through the rest of this post…*He then added that what really gets his goose is when he sees men resting their arm(s) over the pew as if at home watching television.

Would you like to know how this topic came up? He called my husband out for doing just that. (resting his arm across the pew; not on my shoulder, back, etc.) My husband was taken aback but apologized. Did we get mad? Did we accuse him of judging our behaviour? did we think “what about everyone else?” NO.

Sometimes it’s the harder thing to do to take a little criticism and not make it less important that your reaction to it. Hence, keep your reaction from becoming the message.

By the way, our priest said he wasn’t angry but that he knows he isn’t alone in this thought and that many of his fellow brothers of the cloth wish they could see a lot more reverance at mass in posture and behavior…did this experience change my viewpoint, posture, behavior? You bet it did. And I’m glad too.

maybe you can take an informal poll this weekend with your parish priest and come back and post the replies? I’d be willing to read them?

 

[Conciliar]

I understand your point i really do. What i guess I am not understand is who has made us the emotions police? How do you know if that couple cuddling are just supporting each other in a time or need or are they doing it out of sexuality? You can’t know unless you go up and ask. That is where my issue is. Instead of giving couples who are showing small amounts of affection towards each other by holding hands or having an arm over the shoulder the benfit of the doubt we are jumping to the far conclusion that they are doing it for sexually reason or that their very touching each other is showing a disrespect towards Jesus. That is why i am asking what the standards are. I would hate for people to come to mass and not know that someone believes that they are disrespecting Jesus through their behavior.

And yes there are different levels of cuddling. My sister is family and if she wants to cuddle with her husband on the couch during a baseball game then she can. They are not making-out or petting each other.The relaxing Lounge cuddling you discribed is something that is not what you would do at church. Just like you wouldn’t grab a chair and put your feet up on the altar. I am not deny that there is a standard (ie not talking, no chewing gum, no cellphones, correct clothing etc…)but i think this black and white standard of no contact at all and making people into robots of emotions is wrong. Not everyone gets the same thing out of mass at the same time. You can’t know the intentions or complete enternal reverance someone is holding in themselves. I think it is dangerous ground to become the “thought police” or the “you must worship a certain way police”.

Thanks again for your thoughts.

We’re not so far apart here, Beckers. We should NOT be thought police. I agree 100%, and that is part of my point.

I think too many people place way too much weight on this notion of “intention” as it concerns behavior at Mass. Realistically, the intention of the cuddling couple isn’t the point. We cannot know that, and it really doesn’t matter.

Personal intention shouldn’t be the determining factor in what constitues appropriate behavior and what doesn’t at Mass. The sacredness of the time and space should be the determining factor. If we use the former as the measuring stick, we’re opening ourselves up to all sorts of nonsense. i.e. If good intention is all it takes to make a particular behavior at Mass acceptable, we’re in trouble. What appears as no big deal now will only grow in time. It’s a slippery slope for sure.

Thank you again for your good natured way.

 

[KathleenElsie]

just got through reading all these posts.

My belief is that the only intimacy one should have at mass must be with God. Gestures of kindness in helping those with physical problems are not to be included. Besides, I’ve always understood intimacy to equal some degree of privacy.

Now here’s a genuine thought to ponder (* I ask is that you have respect for the source) *Our priest told my husband this past Christmas that it irriates him when he looks out and sees people “relaxing” on another’s body. Barring the young child, he stated that he sees it as a sign of disrespect. It also makes him think that no one is really paying attention. *Please don’t blur through the rest of this post…*He then added that what really gets his goose is when he sees men resting their arm(s) over the pew as if at home watching television.

Would you like to know how this topic came up? He called my husband out for doing just that. (resting his arm across the pew; not on my shoulder, back, etc.) My husband was taken aback but apologized. Did we get mad? Did we accuse him of judging our behaviour? did we think “what about everyone else?” NO.

Sometimes it’s the harder thing to do to take a little criticism and not make it less important that your reaction to it. Hence, keep your reaction from becoming the message.

By the way, our priest said he wasn’t angry but that he knows he isn’t alone in this thought and that many of his fellow brothers of the cloth wish they could see a lot more reverance at mass in posture and behavior…did this experience change my viewpoint, posture, behavior? You bet it did. And I’m glad too.

maybe you can take an informal poll this weekend with your parish priest and come back and post the replies? I’d be willing to read them?

Thank you for this post.

 

[palmas85]

palmas85;2618651:

Marriage vocation. You know I wonder how this ever actually came about, It is of course perfectly natural that people fall in love and marry but to actually term it a vocation such as the religious life, I feel went way too far. Much the same as the vocation of being single.

When I went through catechist training one of our assignments was to act out a skit explaining how the religious life, the single life and the married life were all vocation wise actually the same and indistinguishable from one another in the grand scheme of things. I found that disturbing then and still do.

I recall from the Old Baltimore Catechism:bigyikes: being taught that the religious life was regarded as a higher calling and in effect a better calling. I remember the picture showing a wedding, saying this is GOOD. Then a picture of a Sister praying and saying this is BETTER.

How did we lose the concept that the Priesthood and religious life as a whole was indeed a higher calling? Where did the Religious life become nothing more than another option for the well rounded young Catholic to pick and choose from? Nothing special, nothing unique, just another option? When did the idea of sanctified virginity offered up to God become old fashioned and out of touch? Tell me, where did it go and more importantly, why did it go?

We’ve lost something here, something deep, something meaningful and something that I think may be at the very root of many of the problems facing the Church today, and we need to get it back. Somehow, somway

I am going to disagree with your comment. There are two vocations. Relgious and Marriage. Yes Relgious is a Higher calling but not necessary a better calling. If it is your calling from God then it can’t be bad or worst then someone else just different. Different is okay. Men and women are different but their very natures. Marriage is a vocation and i might say the first.

Gensis chapter 2
23And Adam said: This now is bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called woman, because she was taken out of man. 24

Wherefore a man shall leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they shall be two in one flesh.

That sounds like God is establishing Marriage as a valid vocation. Also shows that sex is something that is healthy and God driven since it say" they shall be two in one flesh".

I don’t think relgious life is just something you pick if you can’t get married. I have discerned my vocation during this singleness time of my life. I have come to the conculsion that I am not called to be a Nun. I know many women who have also discerned and been open to the reglious life. Some have gone that route and others have gone towards marriage. Neither one is a bad discernment as both paths are going to led to God.

Your argument is not really persuasive and in fact is not persuasive at all. Quoting scripture, as I have seen many on this forum do in order to support their particular position, does not establish in any way the validity of their point of view. Scriptural verses can and often are used to justify anything and everything under the sun. I have always felt that individual interpretation of scripture should best be left to the protestants since they have no Church to interpret for them.

And I will repeat, I think that the religious life is a higher and a better calling and should be treated as such. Sorry you disagree.

 

[beckers]

beckers;2618708:

palmas85;2618651:

Marriage vocation. You know I wonder how this ever actually came about, It is of course perfectly natural that people fall in love and marry but to actually term it a vocation such as the religious life, I feel went way too far. Much the same as the vocation of being single.

When I went through catechist training one of our assignments was to act out a skit explaining how the religious life, the single life and the married life were all vocation wise actually the same and indistinguishable from one another in the grand scheme of things. I found that disturbing then and still do.

I recall from the Old Baltimore Catechism:bigyikes: being taught that the religious life was regarded as a higher calling and in effect a better calling. I remember the picture showing a wedding, saying this is GOOD. Then a picture of a Sister praying and saying this is BETTER.

How did we lose the concept that the Priesthood and religious life as a whole was indeed a higher calling? Where did the Religious life become nothing more than another option for the well rounded young Catholic to pick and choose from? Nothing special, nothing unique, just another option? When did the idea of sanctified virginity offered up to God become old fashioned and out of touch? Tell me, where did it go and more importantly, why did it go?

We’ve lost something here, something deep, something meaningful and something that I think may be at the very root of many of the problems facing the Church today, and we need to get it back. Somehow, somway

Your argument is not really persuasive and in fact is not persuasive at all. Quoting scripture, as I have seen many on this forum do in order to support their particular position, does not establish in any way the validity of their point of view. Scriptural verses can and often are used to justify anything and everything under the sun. I have always felt that individual interpretation of scripture should best be left to the protestants since they have no Church to interpret for them.

And I will repeat, I think that the religious life is a higher and a better calling and should be treated as such. Sorry you disagree.

First i agreed with you. Religious life is a HIGHER calling. I just pointed out that higher does not necessarly mean better. Just Different. We should each strive to fullifill to the fullest whatever vocation God is calling us to. I should not sit back and go. Well i am married but being a nun is better so let me leave my marriage. Well that wrong because if being a married and being mother is my vocation then i am fullfilling God’s wishes by being a mother. I am not a mother instead of being a nun but a mother because that is my calling.

And i didn’t make the interpretation of the scriputal reference up. I suggest you read the Theology of the Body by Pope John Paul II or Matthew chapter 16 “Therefore now they are not two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let no man put asunder.”

But instead of stealing this thread we can move to another one if you want.

 

[patches]

What’s disgusting in a wife resting her head on the husband’s shoulder while he has his arm around her?

Personally, I would find that rather endearing.

I would agree. I have trouble imagining Jesus telling John to remove his head from the Lord’s shoulder at the Last Supper.

My wife and I lost a son to cancer a few years ago, and we leaned on each other a lot, even-- and sometimes particularly-- during mass. Much more like a leaning post than a PDA, I assure you.

That said, a showy display of affection intended to call attention is another matter…