Is Hugging/Kissing acceptable when done on their own?

  • Thread starter Thread starter cynic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

cynic

Guest
For husband and wife, is it ok to passionately hug and kiss (clothed) if there is no intention to have ‘relations’? From what I read it sounds like all contact that is possibly arousing - even if not deliberately so - should be restricted to the moments directly prior to ‘relations’ and not done at all outside of this time. So other than small kisses and holding hands, all other forms of contact should be avoided. Is this what you have to believe?
 
Passionate hugs and kisses in the morning or afternoon can be the initiation of intended marital embrace that evening so that would be perfectly within the proper context of the action. The stresses of the day can interfere, of course, so that by bedtime the embrace doesn’t take place as intended, but that doesn’t mean the morning/afternoon hugs/kisses are suddenly sinful.

Sex is to be unitive and/or procreative. The expressions of love throughout the day for a married couple serve the unitive purpose of intimacy. So even if one doesn’t intend to follow through with “the” act that evening, giving a passionate kiss/hug to one’s spouse ‘just because’ we’re so in love and excited about that person is a unitive expression of that love.

Modesty is still called for if other people are in within eyeshot of our actions, however, as JimG noted - so no, we would be overly passionate in front of the children or out in public.

Where it gets hazy is when one party passionately kisses/hugs the other in an attempt to initiate sex and the other party is not open to that idea at the time. When that person indicates their disinterest in going there then the initiating party needs to respect that. When he/she doesn’t and continues to pursue or even insist - not because the person wants to please the other person, but because he/she wants their own sexual drive satisfied - then that’s when the line gets crossed.

It’s all about respect, dignity and love for the other.
 
40.png
YinYangMom:
Passionate hugs and kisses in the morning or afternoon can be the initiation of intended marital embrace that evening so that would be perfectly within the proper context of the action.
Click to expand...
but what if it isn’t? what if for some reason the couple are abstaining from relations, nfp etc. Lets just assume here that no sex is going to take place. Wouldn’t hugging/kssing in this situation involve a physical pleasure outside of the greater ‘purpose’ of it, ie new life?
 
the purpose for marriage and relations is to create children for God let the flesh descend and the spiritual ascend
 
Of COURSE hugging and kissing (even passionately) is acceptable for husbands and wives, as long as they’re doing it with each other! 🙂

Spouses may see each other naked, and take pleasure in doing so. They may touch and caress each other in places others may not. And they may do these things at times when intercourse is not an option. They should do so discreetly, but without shame.

One of the fondest memories of my childhood was to see my father kiss my mother and caress her bottom. He was not ashamed to display his affection in front of us kids. It was clear that he loved her and it gave us kids a real sense of security. Of course, he didn’t go any further in front of us!

So spouses should always feel free to express their love and affection in obviously sexual ways, as long as it is not likely to arouse the spouse to the point of it being an occasion of sin, most likely the sin of masturbation. It all forms a sort of “remote” preparation for their lovemaking later on, even if “later on” isn’t today.
 
40.png
cynic:
but what if it isn’t? what if for some reason the couple are abstaining from relations, nfp etc. Lets just assume here that no sex is going to take place. Wouldn’t hugging/kssing in this situation involve a physical pleasure outside of the greater ‘purpose’ of it, ie new life?
Click to expand...
Well, heck, if the couple is practicing NFP, all the more reason to delight in the hugs and affections which demonstrate love for each other and the anticipation of the time they will be able to reconnect. Intimate displays of affection, especially during the ‘off’ days of NFP can go a long way to maintaining the loving commitment a couple shares. Remember we’re called to renew our vows every morning we are blessed to wake up next to each other…that doesn’t mean the entire act of the marital embrace, but in any way which mutually communicates that renewal.

As noted before, the only time one needs to worry about crossing the line if one imposes his/her own desires onto the other.
 
40.png
cynic:
but what if it isn’t? what if for some reason the couple are abstaining from relations, nfp etc. Lets just assume here that no sex is going to take place. Wouldn’t hugging/kssing in this situation involve a physical pleasure outside of the greater ‘purpose’ of it, ie new life?
Click to expand...
If they are abstaining, either temporarily or permanently, they are in a courtship phase. With NFP we refer to the courtship followed by the honeymoon. Any hugging or kissing that was appropriate before marriage is appropriate during a time that can not lead up to the marriage act.
 
40.png
Dmitri451:
Of COURSE hugging and kissing (even passionately) is acceptable for husbands and wives, as long as they’re doing it with each other!
Click to expand...
Spouses may see each other naked, and take pleasure in doing so. They may touch and caress each other in places others may not. **And they may do these things at times when intercourse is not an option. **They should do so discreetly, but without shame.
…
So spouses should always feel free to express their love and affection in obviously sexual ways, as long as it is not likely to arouse the spouse to the point of it being an occasion of sin, most likely the sin of masturbation. It all forms a sort of “remote” preparation for their lovemaking later on, even if “later on” isn’t today.

This sounds very logical and common sensical. Indeed, I have said essentially the same things before. However, I was challenged to support these positions (especially what I have bolded) with citation to authoritative Church teaching and was not able to.

Do you have any support for theses ideas?
40.png
LittleDeb:
If they are abstaining, either temporarily or permanently, they are in a courtship phase. With NFP we refer to the courtship followed by the honeymoon. Any hugging or kissing that was appropriate before marriage is appropriate during a time that can not lead up to the marriage act.
Click to expand...
2 questions: Is this then meant to say also the corollary, namely that hugging and kissing that was not appropriate before marriage is not appropriate even between spouses if it is at a time that will not directly lead to the marital embrace?
What is the authoritative support for this position?
 
40.png
CuriousInIL:
This sounds very logical and common sensical. Indeed, I have said essentially the same things before. However, I was challenged to support these positions (especially what I have bolded) with citation to authoritative Church teaching and was not able to.

Do you have any support for theses ideas?

2 questions: Is this then meant to say also the corollary, namely that hugging and kissing that was not appropriate before marriage is not appropriate even between spouses if it is at a time that will not directly lead to the marital embrace?
What is the authoritative support for this position?
Click to expand...
It’s at times like these when Jesus’ admonishments of the Pharisees for living the letter of the law instead of the spirit of the law come to mind.

The intent behind the demonstration of affection is key here…as well as modesty, respect, dignity…when those three are center to the motivation behind the action then the displays of affection are unitive for the marriage. They are honest expressions of love and committment.

When the motivation is self-centered then the exact same actions which were ok before are not ok now. They become expressions of control, selfishness, dominance, ownership.

That’s why the Church doesn’t develop an extensive list of specific acts in which married couples can/cannot engage. They deal with the more prevalent ones, but stop there. Instead their writing and teachings address human dignity and the responsibility married couples have to each other, to God, to their children and to mankind in general.

There’s a bigger picture to be focused on instead of spending all one’s attention on the small details. That’s why Jesus condensed the 10 commandments down to 2. We were way too caught up in 10, so He made it simpler by helping us to focus on the heart of God’s will.

Learn what marriage means to God and mankind and the rest will follow.
 
40.png
LittleDeb:
If they are abstaining, either temporarily or permanently, they are in a courtship phase. With NFP we refer to the courtship followed by the honeymoon. Any hugging or kissing that was appropriate before marriage is appropriate during a time that can not lead up to the marriage act.
Click to expand...
does that mean that if they are abstaining, that only small kisses (no ‘french kissing’) and holding hoands is appropriate? what if they aren’t abstaining but just aren’t about to … do it, again should any affection not directly related to the sex act be limited to small kisses and holding hands (if that)?
 
It’s strictly forbidden, unless they plan on conceiving a child before nightfall.

:tsktsk:

:whistle:

:bounce:

:tiphat:
 
40.png
cynic:
does that mean that if they are abstaining, that only small kisses (no ‘french kissing’) and holding hoands is appropriate? what if they aren’t abstaining but just aren’t about to … do it, again should any affection not directly related to the sex act be limited to small kisses and holding hands (if that)?
Click to expand...
In answer to this and the previous question on corollary, I will say this: It is all about the WHY.

Is someone kissing that way to push each other too far? How soon is ‘directly lead to the marital embrace?’ It isn’t about the exact actions it is about the WHY. Is it right to put a knife into another man’s stomach? To mug him for his money? No. To remove his ruptured spleen? Yes.

Is it right to french kiss? I don’t know. What is the purpose? Are the types of affection appropriate for directly leading to the marital embrace appropriate as my husband is leaving for work? If we plan to ‘embrace later,’ then sure! If we don’t get the chance because the baby got sick, it doesn’t change anything.

Jason Evert says it so well when he says, “The question should not be ‘how far can I go before it is wrong?’ but instead, ‘how close can I get her to God?’” This applies to the married and unmarried. Of course my question uses the pronoun ‘him’ since I am a female, but you get the idea.

The only authoritative source I have on this is that three-legged platform I always stand on: Scripture, Tradition, and the Magisterium.
 
40.png
LittleDeb:
If we plan to ‘embrace later,’ then sure! .

.
Click to expand...
and what if you don’t plan to embrace later?

from what I gather, catholics have a view of affection in that it serves a function, it has no value on it’s own, the value is in what it leads to. It must be tied to openness to life and unity with God. Even the relationship itself exists only to serve a function - the glorification of God. Any kind of passionate affection that isn’t tied to the dual purposes - openeness to life and glorificaion of the big G, is wrong because it “frustrates the purpose”. So if a couple were cuddling on the sofa, this is ok only if they at least plan to have ‘relations’ later on. If not, it is innapropriate and shouldn’t even be thought about.
 
40.png
cynic:
and what if you don’t plan to embrace later?

from what I gather, catholics have a view of affection in that it serves a function, it has no value on it’s own, the value is in what it leads to. It must be tied to openness to life and unity with God. Even the relationship itself exists only to serve a function - the glorification of God. Any kind of passionate affection that isn’t tied to the dual purposes - openeness to life and glorificaion of the big G, is wrong because it “frustrates the purpose”. So if a couple were cuddling on the sofa, this is ok only if they at least plan to have ‘relations’ later on. If not, it is innapropriate and shouldn’t even be thought about.
Click to expand...
I see where you are coming from. On some things I can start to agree with you, then it makes a left turn in front of traffic and I am not following anymore.

Yes, the marriage and all we do in life is about the greater glory of God. No, it is not about a ‘function.’ Actions have intrinsic value in and of themselves. The action of affection is in itself a good thing, period. How people might choose to use it might be a problem.

For me these questions seem to come from those who might be ‘bound by time.’ “Embrace later” is a good one. How much later? We don’t know. As Catholics we tend toward a deep understanding that God is outside time. Many non-Catholics live their lives on a timeline. The reason I asked the question about appropriate action as my husband is leaving for work is a good example of that concept.

If I were spiritually bound by time and my husband did arousing things and then left, I might be offended. “Gee, thanks honey now I have to wait 8-10 hours before I see you again and I am stuck in this state of wanting to ‘embrace’ and you’re leaving!” OTOH If I am not bound by time I can say, “Hmmm, hubby’s in the mood for some embracing. I think I want to get my stuff done early so I am available and well rested in 8-10 hours!”

Cuddling on the couch is great. I just don’t see the problem. If it leads to the marital embrace, terrific. If not, that is fine too. The only times physical intimacies are inappropriate is outside of marriage or as a deliberate replacement of the marriage act.

Maybe I am missing the point, but the cuddling that my husband and I do does not replace the marriage act. The marriage act is much better! I guess I don’t understand why anyone would want to get to a full point of arousal and then NOT follow through with the marriage act. That would seem so frustrating and mean to myself and my spouse.
 
40.png
LittleDeb:
I guess I don’t understand why anyone would want to get to a full point of arousal and then NOT follow through with the marriage act.
Click to expand...
I think one point is, regardless of whether you understand why folks would do this, is this wrong for spouses if the intention is not to follow through (at least not soon)?
 
40.png
cynic:
and what if you don’t plan to embrace later?

from what I gather, catholics have a view of affection in that it serves a function, it has no value on it’s own, the value is in what it leads to.
Click to expand...
What part of our explanation of the UNITIVE purpose of sex do you not get???

Sex and all actions leading to it serve unitive AND procreative functions for a married couple.

Sometimes it’s all about the unitive.
Sometimes it’s all about the procreative.
Sometimes it’s all about both.
All times it’s about God.
 
40.png
CuriousInIL:
I think one point is, regardless of whether you understand why folks would do this, is this wrong for spouses if the intention is not to follow through (at least not soon)?
Click to expand...
You know, I’m sitting here trying to conjure up what an example of this would be…and I just can’t.

Your question seems to be addressing intimate kissing and hugging which is so intense it could lead to sex, but then you’re saying the person initiating such an display of affection has no intention of taking it that far…I don’t see how that is even possible - that the initiating partner has no idea what he/she is up to when they start something that hot and heavy…

Perhaps you can share an example of what your scenario would look like…

and then you threw in that (at least not soon) part…well as LittleDeb pointed out, ‘soon’ is a relative term. Soon could be in 1 hour, in 8 hours, in 1 day, in 3 days, in the next open window according to NFP which would be ideal to conceive, or in the next open window according to NFP which would not be ideal to conceive. It depends on the couple.

The guiding rule for Catholic couples is that whatever they do to express their love for each other should be centered on God. It should be a matter of giving, not taking. It should at all times be about human dignity, love, respect and honor.
 
40.png
YinYangMom:
What part of our explanation of the UNITIVE purpose of sex do you not get???

Sex and all actions leading to it serve unitive AND procreative functions for a married couple.

Sometimes it’s all about the unitive.
Sometimes it’s all about the procreative.
Sometimes it’s all about both.
All times it’s about God.
Click to expand...
I agree with this but have no basis for believing that the underlined portion of the quote is fully in line with Church teaching. I am not saying that it is not, I am saying I have nothing to support it.

If this is true and supportable, then, for me at least, that answers my question/hypothetical.

To be clear, let me state what I think would be the hypothetical situation. Intimate kissing and hugging between spouses which is so intense it could lead to sex (full arousal by both), but does not. And, because of, for example, schedules, both spouses no that they have only 5 minutes and there is no time for sex now, nor do they have in mind when the next time for sex may be. Not saying they will permanently abstain, simply that in their minds at that time it is not this is in contemplation of tonight or tommorrow or next week. It simply is what it is at that point. Does this help clarify? (Actually I think I confused myself more and should stand on the first part of this post.:confused: )
 
Let’s consider what is probably a fairly common example. When my wife and I get dressed in the morning, we often see each other naked. Of course, I like to see my wife naked, and she likes to see me. Often, we hug and kiss each other like this, and even briefly and gently caress and kiss each other’s private parts. There is no intention to have sex right then, or perhaps even for a few days.

THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THIS, PEOPLE!

It’s obviously sexual, and it definitely expresses our love and intimacy. As long as we don’t arouse each other to the point where we are tempted to masturbate, and this point will be different with each couple, this is a perfectly acceptable way for a husband and wife to express their affection.

Husbands and wives should learn to take unashamed and guiltless joy in their nakedness with each other. It is an affirmation that sex is good and that God made it for our benefit.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top