Is holding hands and kissing before marriage a sin?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Avermaria
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
It seems that St Alphonsus is conflating any and all romantic attraction with sexual pleasure, and thus being forbidden outside of marriage.
 
I held hands with my ex. She didn’t end up pregnant and there was never the slightest temptation (at least on my end) to have sex with her. There is such a thing as too prude.
 
I have come to rely upon the saints as the only reliable sources of moral guidance, in this day and age. Sobering, direct, unambiguous, non-apologetic, unafraid, unrelenting, truthful, in full alignment with the message and tone of biblical prophets, etc… and above all, authenticated and validated by their canonization.

The worse that may come from following their example is sacrificing perhaps a smidget more fun than necessary. Considering what is at stake, I would call that a small price to pay 🙂
 
ThomasMT said:
I’m saying that I’m content to defer to a Saint’s wisdom on the matter being discussed. He may not have had access to a smartphone, but I’m sure he knew what time is w
Click to expand...
Perhaps, and I don’t think we should dismiss his insight out of hand. But this seems dangerously close to making saints and their opinions equal to infalliable church doctrine. Not only that, but overly strict opinions, especially when not church teaching, can lead to either scrupulousity or despair, a danger which should not be taken lightly.
 
Last edited:
Ah, you sweet summer children.

We’re not talking about handholding here. Noooo, we’re talking about your period hand fondling, in such a way that the hand is treated like…um… other body parts… would be treated today.

I mean, there’s a reason why politely kissing the hand actually often meant making a kissy movement above the hand, or why intimacy was in some times signaled by whether you let the guy shake one or two fingers, or your whole hand, or both hands. Because sometimes, under cover of big froofy cuffs or cloaks, there was some serious handling going on.

So yeah, I’m pretty sure that using your hands to simulate venereal intimacy by “entwining” them was a no-no for Catholics. But holding hands like normal people holding hands? No.

Probably you would want to research contemporary mores, if you really wanted to be sure. But he wasn’t exactly living in a time where nobody got up to stuff.

Similarly, I never understood why St. Rose of Lima was so strict, until I found out that cheating on your husband was like the most popular women’s sport in Lima, and they did a ton of freaky things to facilitate it. Everything she did was actually about signaling, “NO, I am not secretly going to have sex with you and every other man in town, and this virginity thing isn’t a coverup for that!”
 
SPBlitz said:
But this seems dangerously close to making saints and their opinions equal to infalliable church doctrine.
Click to expand...
CAF consensus hardly constitutes Church doctrine. And I know that you aren’t trying to suggest that this Saint is undermining actual Church doctrine.
 
Last edited:
ThomasMT said:
CAF consensus hardly constitutes Church doctrine. And I know that you aren’t trying to suggest that this Saint is undermining actual Church doctrine.
Click to expand...
Not exactly. But if a saint says that holding hands is a mortal sin, and the church does not, then they can’t both be right. Either the church is mistaken or St Alphonsus is.
 
Depends on various factors. It is certainly forseable how an interior disposition, brought upon by a mear holding of hands, could put one in a state of mortal sin. I would have to look into this particular teaching of this saint further, in order to reconcile the seeming discrepancy. However, on the surface I wouldn’t hesitate to defer to the inherent wisdom.
 
We don’t assume that. No one is saying don’t consider what a saint had to say. We’re saying don’t just blindly assume that something is true because a saint said it. Saints have said things that are definitively wrong. They were human.

And no, we don’t assume “looser is better”, but we also don’t automatically assume “harsher is better.”
 
Last edited:
Nonetheless I think that we can take the teachings and sensibilities of the saints with much greater confidence than those of online strangers.
RolandThompsonGunner said:
And no, we don’t assume “looser is better”, but we also don’t automatically assume “harsher is better.”
Click to expand...
Idk, when in doubt there is generally more risk with “looser.” 🤷‍♂️
 
Again, the greater danger is with the former rather than the latter, IMHO. If the modern era isn’t a testament to that danger, I don’t know what is.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, because holding hands is a one way ticket to the bedroom.

Give me a break.
 
Mintaka said:
We’re not talking about handholding here. Noooo, we’re talking about your period hand fondling, in such a way that the hand is treated like…um… other body parts… would be treated today.

I mean, there’s a reason why politely kissing the hand actually often meant making a kissy movement above the hand, or why intimacy was in some times signaled by whether you let the guy shake one or two fingers, or your whole hand, or both hands. Because sometimes, under cover of big froofy cuffs or cloaks, there was some serious handling going on.
Click to expand...
That’s actually pretty interesting, and makes a lot more sense.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top