French kissing

  • Thread starter Thread starter Windfish
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
W

Windfish

Guest
I have a question on french kissing. Tim Staples received a question on it yesterday, and it prompted some thought.

The Church has not issued any teaching on the sinfulness (or lack thereof) on french kissing. It has, however, taught that one should avoid near occasions of sin. A couple in a relationship should avoid actions or states of affairs which could lead to fornication. Now, the prudential question is Does french kissing qualify as such an action? And can there be legitimate disagreement among Catholics about that?

My thinking is that a total condemnation on french kissing among non-married couples is simply not warranted for several reasons. For one, the Church has not sought to stipulate a teaching on it, so it falls within the realm of prudential judgment, perhaps according to each individual and each situation. Following that, while I definitely think french kissing can lead to near occasions of sin and probably often does, I don’t think that is always the case. There are all kinds of factors both on a local level (e.g., intent of the kiss, intensity of the kiss, duration of the kiss, etc.) and on a global level (e.g., culture and cultural attitudes, etc.) which may mitigate the circumstances.

So, do you think there can be legitimate disagreement among Catholics in this regard?
 
Bookcat said:
Unless you are French…and are kissing in a moderate chaste way (ie not what we term french kissing)…then such is for the married…(for such is usually geared toward directly arousing the parties…)

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8096972&postcount=4
Click to expand...
From the link:
(On inappropriate actions.) Some examples of these would be: prolonged and passionate kissing, impure embracing or petting, and sexual intercourse.
Click to expand...
“Prolonged” and “passionate” are important qualifiers that I alluded to in my original post - I placed them under the canopy of “local” factors. Tim Staples also included those qualifiers in his answer. What I am suggesting is that french kissing, or when two tongues make contact, is not always “prolonged” or “passionate” enough to place one near an occasion of fornication. And I think that is easily imaginable. And your link acknowledges that, too:
Near Occasions of Sin
Click to expand...
Since people are different, different things can be for them near occasions of sin. By near occasion of sin we mean anything that “sets the stage” TO sin.
Click to expand...
As you can see, your link acknowledges the “local” and “global” factors that I was referring to in my original post. These factors mitigate whether or not this or that instance of french kissing is a near occasion of sin. So it is not a simplistic, unilateral condemnation.

I think that about settles it, but I really do think there is something to be said about the fact that the Church has not stipulated any teaching at all on the matter, which definitely makes it a matter of prudential judgment and not a simplistic condemnation. We have to determine, through reason, if this or that case of french kissing is appropriate. Of course, that is very legalistic, and to anyone reading this, what is more important is developing an attitude of chastity and purity so that you will instinctively avoid such situations.

Still, as I said, I think there can be legitimate disagreement on this matter.
 
French kissing is pretty much by nature in the “directly stimulating actions” that you will note in he article from EWTN are never to be done by the unmarried.

It does not have to be “prolonged” or “passionate”…it just has to involve the tongue…

such really is to be left to the married…

Directly stimulating things…are not just near occasions …they are the very matter for sins against the virtue of chastity.

(though deliberately entering or remaining in near occasions can be sins too)

Many things of the moral life do not receive direct detailed teachings from the Magisterium…the Church teaches the virtue of Chasity etc etc…but moral theology often is left to give certain details…

It would seem to me that such kissing is pretty much by nature in the directly stimulating category.

I can not see such as just a chaste sign of affection for the unmarried…it is directly orientated towards arousing…as a form of foreplay in marriage.
 
Bookcat said:
French kissing is pretty much by nature in the “directly stimulating actions” that you will note in he article from EWTN are never to be done by the unmarried.

It does not have to be “prolonged” or “passionate”…it just has to involve the tongue…

such really is to be left to the married…(who desire to kiss that way as part of their marital relations)
Click to expand...
“it just has to involve the tongue”

Where does it say that in the link?

I agree that actions that lead one to a stimulation that is specific for sex are a near occasion of sin, but what those actions are is entirely contingent on a whole range of factors, many of which I have stipulated and others which the article in your link has stipulated. Determining what those actions are is a matter of prudential judgment, and so a unilateral condemnation of simple “tongue-to-tongue” contact is arbitrary and misunderstands that we are in the realm of prudential judgment - if simple tongue-to-tongue contact leads you (I am speaking generically in the second-person) to a stimulation that is specific for sex, than that is a near occasion of sin for you. That informs the prudential judgment you must make. For others, that may not at all lead to such an occasion.
 
As someone who simply could never find French kissing enjoyable at all (back in the day when I would engaged in such things) I dare say it’s not the mere fact of tongue to tongue contact that is inherently wrong outside of marriage (though I can’t think of any legitimate reasons for it either) but in general engaging in activities, whatever they may be, to stimulate sexual feelings.
 
Aelred_Minor said:
As someone who simply could never find French kissing enjoyable at all (back in the day when I would engaged in such things) I dare say it’s not the mere fact of tongue to tongue contact that is inherently wrong outside of marriage (though I can’t think of any legitimate reasons for it either) but in general engaging in activities, whatever they may be, to stimulate sexual feelings.
Click to expand...
Right, as I said, determining what those activities are is not a matter of Catholic Church teaching, so it is a matter of reason. We want to avoid occasions in which we are lead into stimulation that is specific for sex (I say “specific for sex” because there are all kinds of stimulation), but it is not fair to say that tongue-to-tongue contact always and necessarily leads to such an occasion. I think the EWTN article is understanding of that. I do not think there is any objective basis for totally condemning tongue-kissing unless it can be shown that it always results in an occasion for sin. But as the article says:
Dating - What's Too Far?:
Since people are different, different things can be for them near occasions of sin. By near occasion of sin we mean anything that “sets the stage” TO sin.
Click to expand...
ewtn.com/expert/answers/dating.htm
 
Aelred_Minor said:
As someone who simply could never find French kissing enjoyable at all (back in the day when I would engaged in such things) I dare say it’s not the mere fact of tongue to tongue contact that is inherently wrong outside of marriage (though I can’t think of any legitimate reasons for it either) but in general engaging in activities, whatever they may be, to stimulate sexual feelings.
Click to expand...
I’m with you. I’ve been married for 41 years, and the only person I’ve ever frenched with has been my wife. I have to say that tongue-dueling and trading spit is NOT a turn-on for me.

That said, it app’ly is a turn-on for some, and therefore I fall on the side of those who say that people who are not married to each other should not be practicing their French on each other.
 
Culturally, kissing is sometimes not even sexual at all. However, I know that you’re referring to French Kissing as the passionate open-mouthed version.

In my mind, there are only two situations where a kiss has been sinful.

One, was the kiss of betrayal by Judas on the Christ.

The second, is when these kisses are a part of a much larger problem. The issue of opening your gift of sexuality to a person you are not married to, in essence, sharing that gift with someone who it doesn’t belong to (assuming it belongs to your spouse, or your future spouse.)

However, I do think that kissing, even when it is sexual, can be a precursor to an eventual full marital relationship. The issue is, how sexual is it? Is it so sexual that it can be considered a gateway to the eventual sin of premarital sex? Or is it a single separate act of affection, a “step” along the way of many “steps” we take before finding ourselves married at the Altar.

I think that we as single Catholics can go out and date, and engage in physical contact such as kissing, even when it is of a sexual nature, so long as two conditions are met:
  1. It is dating for the purpose of developing a relationship. I’ll kiss my girlfriend if I’m seeking to develop this relationship further, I will continue to kiss her as my fiance, and I’ll kiss her again (hopefully) after she’s my wife. The kisses after marriage, no matter how “French” are never sinful. The kisses before marriage, are dependent upon the situation. On whether or not these kisses are a part of the process of pure courtship, or a precursor to a selfish misuse of sexuality.
  2. The kiss is not “just a kiss” but as I stated, a part of a larger relationship. Wether that is the pre-marital relationship that leads to marriage, or the marital bond itself. “Making out” just for the sexual gratification is a sin. But I think saying that you have to save your kisses for marriage, is taking the idea of chastity a bit too far.
But then again I am a teenager, and maybe I’m a bit biased.
 
I think it’d be weird to not kiss someone (other than in the way you would your grandma) until you marry them. Especially if you date that person for years and years before getting married.

Can french kissing be a near occasion of sin? Sure it can. But so can hugging, so can holding hands, and so can even SEEING the person you’re in love with. Any of these things can ultimately lead to sin if you let them. :rolleyes:

If we’re going to start making boundaries based on things being “near occasions of sin,” then where would it stop? Would we even know the other person well enough to marry them?

French kissing, in itself, is NOT a sin. And that’s all you need to know. If you can’t handle french kissing without going farther and actually sinning, don’t do it. If you can, go for it.

My husband and I could, and we dated for more than 4 years before we were married. Never to cross the boundary. 👍
 
Windfish said:
“it just has to involve the tongue”

Where does it say that in the link?
Click to expand...
It does not…the link is only giving a few “examples”.

But really …think about it…it is really is not a sign of affection outside of marriage…it is a fire starter.
 
Windfish said:
"

I agree that actions that lead one to a stimulation that is specific for sex are a near occasion of sin, but what those actions are is entirely contingent on a whole range of factors, many of which I have stipulated and others which the article in your link has stipulated. Determining what those actions are is a matter of prudential judgment, and so a unilateral condemnation of simple “tongue-to-tongue” contact is arbitrary and misunderstands that we are in the realm of prudential judgment - if simple tongue-to-tongue contact leads you (I am speaking generically in the second-person) to a stimulation that is specific for sex, than that is a near occasion of sin for you. That informs the prudential judgment you must make. For others, that may not at all lead to such an occasion.
Click to expand...
Again I would say that French kissing…which by nature involves the tongue to tongue is in then area of the things to not do…by their very nature…until marriage.

You will note that the article divides into two parts…the first part speaks of things that can never be done by those who are unmarried…for they are direct stimulation.

French kissing would be more in that category I would think… It by its very nature is not an ‘affection’ sign for those who are not married…it is rather more in the area of direct stimulation.

Now can it happen that there are some that it does not have its usual effects on? Sure.
Does that mean that it is then a good sign of affection for them? I would not argue such. Despite what our culture tells us in the movies…it really is not such for those who are unmarried. I mean why are tongues meeting?? (for the unmarried). The kiss has a meaning in human culture and kissing on the lips has a further meaning…but kissing with ones tongues…seems to have more of a strictly marital meaning.

Now does this mean that one has to “kiss” ones beloved like one does ones Grandma? as some suggest…or not kiss at all? No …such would not be the case. Chaste and moderate kissing can be a good. Though some have chosen to forgo even a chaste kiss (beyond Grandma).
 
Bookcat said:
Now does this mean that one has to “kiss” ones beloved like one does ones Grandma? as some suggest…or not kiss at all? No …such would not be the case. Chaste and moderate kissing can be a good. Though some have chosen to forgo even a chaste kiss (beyond Grandma).
Click to expand...
To my understanding, a closed mouth kiss = a grandma kiss, while an open mouth kiss = a french kiss. Am I missing something in between? :confused:

Please enlighten. 🙂
 
Debora123 said:
To my understanding, a closed mouth kiss = a grandma kiss, while an open mouth kiss = a french kiss. Am I missing something in between? :confused:

Please enlighten. 🙂
Click to expand...
Grandma kiss = little peck

French kiss= tongues (called tongue kissing or soul kissing in the past…)
 
Bookcat said:
Grandma kiss = little peck

French kiss= tongues (called tongue kissing or soul kissing in the past…)
Click to expand...
I’d like to get an ex cathedra statement on it before I’m believing any of you.

I’m a teenager, and easily deceived. Papal infallibility or it didn’t happen!
 
jnewaz said:
I’d like to get an ex cathedra statement on it before I’m believing any of you.

I’m a teenager, and easily deceived. Papal infallibility or it didn’t happen!
Click to expand...
Then you will need more study on how things work in the Church…we are not just to hold what is “ex cathedra”…and not just to take “ex cathedra statments” as the sole guide in faith and morals…(though I imagine your joking here …)

I encourage your theological studies. I too began as a teenager…started becoming Catholic when I was around 15…🙂

On a side note: Make sure your read these

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/messages/youth/index_en.htm

You should also attend a Steubenville conference or two…
 
Bookcat said:
Then you will need more study on how things work in the Church…we are not just to hold what is “ex cathedra”…and not just to take “ex cathedra statments” as the sole guide in faith and morals…(though I imagine your joking here …)

I encourage your theological studies. I too began as a teenager…started becoming Catholic when I was around 15…🙂

On a side note: Make sure your read these

vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/messages/youth/index_en.htm

You should also attend a Steubenville conference or two…
Click to expand...
I was completely joking.
 
Bookcat said:
So I imagined…

But really read those links…they are very good (even if your really 60 or 70…)
Click to expand...
If I get the time I definitely will. I have the Theology of the Body in my library by the late Pontiff. I haven’t even started that one. Currently im about halfway through Spirit of the Liturgy by then Cardinal Ratzinger. It’ll take me a while to catch up. Just trust me, I understand the Church’s teachings on morality. While (as I said in my earlier posts) I think “french kissing” does have a place along the journey a couple takes before they reach the altar, I do understand that it can be a gateway to unchaste behavior and sin.

That’s how I feel about the subject. There have been things I’ve done with a girl that I have felt the need to confess, and others that I didn’t because I thought I was truly “in love”. Its a process, and I learn more after each relationship. I learn the limits of my own conscience, but I am not going to blindly restrict myself from all romance simply out of fear of being unchaste. I believe God has an optimistic view of sexuality, and that view is echoed by the Pontiffs. As for kissing before marriage, like I said, it can exist, it can be useful, it can develop the relationship that you want to eventually take “all the way”. So long as it does not involve the sharing of your body in a way that belongs solely to your married spouse.

Thats what I believe, and as far as I can tell, I believe that this is in line with the Church’s teachings. If the Pope would say otherwise, and specifically teach that kissing is prohibited outside of marriage. I would still be a Catholic teenager, albeit significantly more bored.
 
jnewaz said:
While (as I said in my earlier posts) I think “french kissing” does have a place along the journey a couple takes before they reach the altar, I do understand that it can be a gateway to unchaste behavior and sin.

That’s how I feel about the subject. There have been things I’ve done with a girl that I have felt the need to confess, and others that I didn’t because I thought I was truly “in love”. Its a process, and I learn more after each relationship. I learn the limits of my own conscience, but I am not going to blindly restrict myself from all romance simply out of fear of being unchaste. I believe God has an optimistic view of sexuality, and that view is echoed by the Pontiffs. As for kissing before marriage, like I said, it can exist, it can be useful, it can develop the relationship that you want to eventually take “all the way”. So long as it does not involve the sharing of your body in a way that belongs solely to your married spouse.

Thats what I believe, and as far as I can tell, I believe that this is in line with the Church’s teachings. If the Pope would say otherwise, and specifically teach that kissing is prohibited outside of marriage. I would still be a Catholic teenager, albeit significantly more bored.
Click to expand...
I refer you to my posts above. I do not see French kissing as something one who is unmarried is to do…

Yes God has a very optimistic view of sexuality…as does of course the Church. The problem is with the results of the fall…via concupscience (which brought a great weakness in area that needs be countered by virtue) and also personal and cultural sin…which is a grave distortion of the that optimistic view.

I do not say…nor does the Church teach that kissing is prohibited outside of marriage…though of course one still needs to approach it with serious evaluation.

Chaste kissing can be good (taking into consideration what is outlined in the first link I posted from the theology dept at EWTN)

But we are not here speaking of the “kissing of affection” of the unmarried.

French kissing is kissing with the tongue…it is more suited to foreplay of the marital act (if engaged in at all) …

Here is by the way the response of one of the Catholic Answers Apologists:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=37374&highlight=french+kissing

As for the other links I gave you to the addresses of the Pope at WTD…take one a week…or one a day…they are not too long and they are great…do not wait 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top