Is Hugging/Kissing acceptable when done on their own?

[YinYangMom]

lifeisbeautiful:

Since you said in another post: "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."
and later said:
“The unitive and procreative aspects of sex can indeed be separated.”

It sounded like you use the term sex to talk about the marital act etc.

Ah, I see now how that was not as clear as it could have been. Thanks for pointing it out. Yes, when I used the term sex I was talking about the marital act itself.

If I recall correctly the distinction I was trying to make was that “leading to it” part…I was trying to show that one can begin the dance toward the marital act on a Monday knowing that the dance can’t start until Friday (in the instance of NFP, or getting over a cold/flu, or wrapping up studying for finals, or a big presentation at work)…in that the displays of affection on Mon, Tues, Wed, Thu which culminate with the marital embrace on Friday are part of the same act and therefore not sins of lust in and of themselves and therefore morally disordered.

I see the real confusion comes from my using the term “all”…in those cases I was referring to the intent/motivation behind giving intimate displays of affection. And I see now where a marital embrace couldn’t ever be only about the procreative since the unitive is intertwined in that. Of course, I suppose if that ever did happen that could be wrong - I’m thinking about people who are trying hard to conceive so they ‘unite’ when they ‘have to’ rather than when they want to??? - but how could wanting to create a life ever be wrong??? I digress, sorry.

Anyways, there is no substitution for the unitive aspect of the marital embrace. Actions can be unitive, but the unitive aspect of the marital embrace cannot be fulfilled without the marital embrace, which in itself must include the procreative aspect.

I believe we’re in agreement here, because we’re speaking specifically about the marital embrace itself, wherein you are absolutely correct that each engagement of that embrace must be unitive and procreative. But is seems you recognize the distinction that certain actions outside the marital embrace can serve to unify a relationship and thus serve the unitive purpose of sexual intimacy. The acts themselves do not complete the unitive purpose of the sex act, but they do help to unify a couple when sex is not possible for one reason or another. No?

Also, the Catechism says:
2351 Lust is disordered desire for or inordinate enjoyment of sexual pleasure. Sexual pleasure is morally disordered when sought for itself, isolated from its procreative** and **unitive purposes.

It does not say or… this is why contraception is morally disordered.

You lost me here because I was not aware contraception was part of this discussion.

We agree that sexual pleasure cannot be sought for in and of itself. But intimacy between couples both being desirous of union - whether in 15 minutes or 1 week or 2 months (say one of them is going away on a long business trip or something) when both parties are giving and receiving the displays of affection in love and sincerity does not fall under “sought for itself”. And I’m talking about passionate kisses and caresses which arouse in anticipation but not to the point of leading them to lustful thoughts and actions like doing everything but going all the way (that, just makes no sense for any married couple, imo).

This is a sticky subject and it is very personal to each couple as each couple has different boundaries or different levels they can reach without causing deliberate arousal, so I would not dare to venture into trying to say what each couple can or cannot do if they are not planning on participating in the marital embrace, although there are a few obvious things that cannot be done outside the embrace like reaching climax, etc.

Agreed. It is clearly between the couple and God. I just didn’t want any married people out there thinking it’s a sin to passionately kiss their wife goodbye in the morning because it gets him and/or her excited. There has to be respect and love in said actions though, at all times.

Here’s a question/answer from the ask an apologist section that can help:

Was that for my benefit or the original poster’s? I’ve never suggested making out like that is part of the unitive function of displays of affection. And even the OP stated he was only talking about kisses and caresses, not that other stuff.

 

[lifeisbeautiful]

YinYangMom:

Ah, I see now how that was not as clear as it could have been. Thanks for pointing it out. Yes, when I used the term sex I was talking about the marital act itself.

If I recall correctly the distinction I was trying to make was that “leading to it” part…I was trying to show that one can begin the dance toward the marital act on a Monday knowing that the dance can’t start until Friday (in the instance of NFP, or getting over a cold/flu, or wrapping up studying for finals, or a big presentation at work)…in that the displays of affection on Mon, Tues, Wed, Thu which culminate with the marital embrace on Friday are part of the same act and therefore not sins of lust in and of themselves and therefore morally disordered.

I see the real confusion comes from my using the term “all”…in those cases I was referring to the intent/motivation behind giving intimate displays of affection. And I see now where a marital embrace couldn’t ever be only about the procreative since the unitive is intertwined in that. Of course, I suppose if that ever did happen that could be wrong - I’m thinking about people who are trying hard to conceive so they ‘unite’ when they ‘have to’ rather than when they want to??? - but how could wanting to create a life ever be wrong??? I digress, sorry.

I believe we’re in agreement here, because we’re speaking specifically about the marital embrace itself, wherein you are absolutely correct that each engagement of that embrace must be unitive and procreative. But is seems you recognize the distinction that certain actions outside the marital embrace can serve to unify a relationship and thus serve the unitive purpose of sexual intimacy. The acts themselves do not complete the unitive purpose of the sex act, but they do help to unify a couple when sex is not possible for one reason or another. No?

You lost me here because I was not aware contraception was part of this discussion.

We agree that sexual pleasure cannot be sought for in and of itself. But intimacy between couples both being desirous of union - whether in 15 minutes or 1 week or 2 months (say one of them is going away on a long business trip or something) when both parties are giving and receiving the displays of affection in love and sincerity does not fall under “sought for itself”. And I’m talking about passionate kisses and caresses which arouse in anticipation but not to the point of leading them to lustful thoughts and actions like doing everything but going all the way (that, just makes no sense for any married couple, imo).

Agreed. It is clearly between the couple and God. I just didn’t want any married people out there thinking it’s a sin to passionately kiss their wife goodbye in the morning because it gets him and/or her excited. There has to be respect and love in said actions though, at all times.

Was that for my benefit or the original poster’s? I’ve never suggested making out like that is part of the unitive function of displays of affection. And even the OP stated he was only talking about kisses and caresses, not that other stuff.

Sounds like we are astarting to get on the same page now

I posted the thing from AAA more for the answer part than the question:

"Fore play is just that. It is what happens beFORE intercourse. To deliberately arouse ** one’s spouse sexually is to invite him or her to intercourse. To do otherwise is to act in an overtly un-loving way. Certainly, playful actions that are sexual but do not arouse can be appropriate in marriage.**

Fr. Vincent Serpa, O.P."

Also, the fact that both people love each other and are participating does not guarantee that sexual pleasure is not sought for itself.

I did not understand what you were saying about starting the dance before…
Are you saying foreplay can start on Monday if the act will culminate Friday?

 

[YinYangMom]

lifeisbeautiful:

Also, the fact that both people love each other and are participating does not guarantee that sexual pleasure is not sought for itself.

Well, I suppose so, if both are prone to lust and self gratification and are only using each other, but that would mean they don’t really understand what love is and so to say ‘both people who love each other’ is kind of contradictory, no? But I get what you’re driving at and I would agree.

I did not understand what you were saying about starting the dance before…Are you saying foreplay can start on Monday if the act will culminate Friday?

Sure, why not? Hypothetically, let’s consider an example:

My husband, for the past couple of days has been suggesting with words that he ‘wants me’ but when he’s done so I’ve been in the kitchen cooking or in the family room folding laundry or changing into my pajamas after an especially tiring day.

Well, I know he’s in the mood, but I’m not, but I also know I need to get myself in the mood relatively soon or else he will begin to feel rejected, taken for granted, unappreciated, undesireable, etc. Running through my calendar in my head there is work, committee meetings, carpooling the kids back and forth between different activities, basically the stuff which keeps me running from 6:30am until 10pm with little rest in between (and he’s one to be asleep by 9pm no matter what)…but I do see a free Saturday at the end of the tunnel. So I set my sights on emotionally keeping stress to a minimum all week so that by Saturday I can be relaxed and open to my husband. This is going on in my head only, my husband doesn’t have a clue.

So, let’s say that was on a Monday…Tuesday morning as we get dressed in the morning before heading to work, I make a special effort to give him a passionate kiss and hug to tell him how much I love him and that I’m thinking of him ‘in that way’ (definitely different that what we’re used to - enough to give him a little ‘charge’ but not too much as to leave him frustrated). He goes to work feeling happy, loved, secure. That evening, after dinner before I head out to my meeting I give him another passionate kiss/hug and tell him I love him. I do the same Wed, Thur, Friday…with Friday, my finding more opportunities to demonstrate my intent (a slow build, so to speak)…

By going out of my way to be especially demonstrative with our usual displays of affection I am focusing on the unitive aspect of our marriage until we can get to the procreative part. If I did not take the time to show him my interest along the way we risked some real tension and distance by Saturday to the point where had I been in the mood then, he could easily have dismissed me by saying “he’s” too tired.

So in that sense I see the dance beginning on Tuesday, coming to fruition on Saturday, and the passionate acts in between not being morally disordered.

 

[Dmitri451]

YinYangMom:

So in that sense I see the dance beginning on Tuesday, coming to fruition on Saturday, and the passionate acts in between not being morally disordered.

Bravo! That’s what I’ve been saying all along, but you’ve really hit it spot on.

 

[rayne89]

My husband and I use NFP. We use the most conservative standard because it would deadly for me to pregnant. If you think I would go 10 to 14 days without kissing and hugging my hubby that’s insane.

Yea we kiss, sometimes even makeout like teenagers. My husband was told in confession a very orthodox priest that married couples need to show physical affection to each other. Yeah hubby gets aroused, I though men did when ya breathed on them. I asked him before if it makes waiting worse because I certainly wouldn’t do it then. Like Ying Yang Mom said, he said he’d feel rejected if I did’t do these things even though he knows we have to wait.

Most of what we do is completely spontaneous, just having fun in the moment. It’s not like we’re planning “lets have a 10 minute make out session at 10 o’clock.” I adore my hubby and it just comes naturally.

Sheesh people if ya’ll are married enjoy each other for crying out loud. Just know your limits.

 

[lifeisbeautiful]

I really hope this does not get hairy like I have seen it get in other threads on this topic (not by you YingYangMom). This is kind of why I usually steer away from this topic…

Ok, my question was if it is ok to engage in foreplay Monday if you are going to culminate Saturday and your answer was “Sure, why not” and then you gave an example. Like I said previously, each couple is different so I cannot really comment on the example, but I do know I disagree with the idea that foreplay is ok several days before the actual act. If this was true, then foreplay would be permissible in the days of abstaining of a couple practicing NFP to avoid children, and this is not true. Oral sex is foreplay (if it culminates in intercourse) yet it cannot be done unless the act is following it (if you are doing NFP you cannot do it while you are abstaining). Following your logic, marriage is a constant foreplay, because eventually you will probably have intercourse again. If this was true, then why is it that the Church teaches that some things in marriage are only allowed as part of the marital act? If everything we do is part of the marital act (we are in constant foreplay) then anything goes in marriage, as long as the male climax is not reached outside of intercourse (and the woman could reach climax anytime she wanted, because it is always foreplay). Do you see what I am saying? The only thing I am hoping is that your view of foreplay includes any act of affection between spouses, and that you are saying that not all foreplay is ok. From reading other posts here it seems to me like people are confusing foreplay with any act of affection. Sheesh, if we couldn’t show affection to our spouses we would be in deep trouble. The important thing is that different couples have different levels of affection (for lack of better words) that they can reach outside of the marital embrace. It would be plain silly to try to tell anyone what they can or cannot do since each couple is different and it is up to them to recognize how far is ok for them.

Let me see if I can present an analogy (warning: my analogies tend to be a bit off the wall). I was once in a class and learned something I thought was pretty neat. God in his infinite wisdom put pleasure into some things us humans have to do in order to survive. For example, both eating and sex cause pleasure and are needed for humans to survive (eating-nutrition/energy and sex-reproduction). If this pleasure wasn’t there, we’d probably have a lot less humans in this world. Trying to divorce this pleasure from these functions is disordered. This is why, for example, bulimia can be considered a disorder. We cannot eat for the pleasure and then throw it up. Trying to divorce sexual pleasure from the procreative aspect is also a disorder.
Lets go back to eating. Here’s my analogy. Lets say you have a nice yummy chocolate you want to eat (and you will be eating it Saturday). You can smell it all you want (actions of affection towards your husband) but you don’t really start chewing/savoring it (enjoying the taste of it/ sexual pleasure) until Saturday. On Saturday, you can take as long as you like to savor it before you finish eating it (foreplay can last as long as you like). Like oreo cookies, people have different ways of eating chocolate, but in the end you do end up swallowing and digesting it. You cannot start chewing the chocolate on Monday if you are not going to swallow it until Saturday.

All this talk about chocolate is making me hungry!!!

Here are two quotes from the Catechism that talk about sexual pleasure:
2351 Lust is disordered desire for or inordinate enjoyment of sexual pleasure. **Sexual pleasure is morally disordered when sought for itself, isolated from its procreative and unitive purposes. **

2362 …
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. 146
2363 The **spouses’ union ** achieves the twofold end of marriage: the good of the spouses themselves and the transmission of life. These two meanings or values of marriage **cannot be separated ** without altering the couple’s spiritual life and compromising the goods of marriage and the future of the family.

 

[YinYangMom]

lifeisbeautiful:

I really hope this does not get hairy like I have seen it get in other threads on this topic (not by you YingYangMom). This is kind of why I usually steer away from this topic…

If this was true, then foreplay would be permissible in the days of abstaining of a couple practicing NFP to avoid children, and this is not true. Oral sex is foreplay (if it culminates in intercourse) yet it cannot be done unless the act is following it (if you are doing NFP you cannot do it while you are abstaining). Following your logic, marriage is a constant foreplay, because eventually you will probably have intercourse again.

Ok, here’s the thing…passionate displays of affection are not foreplay in my mind. Foreplay, as you duly noted are those acts which are part of **the **marital embrace itself. Foreplay would occur on Saturday but certainly would have no place Tues, Wed, Thur or Friday.

By my example the intent matters…on a daily basis how many married couples really take the time to offer ‘real’ kisses expressing their true love for the other? Most of us settle into the endearing peck and hug we extend to most relatives when they come over for a visit. That’s why when we do take the time to get more demonstrative with hugs and kisses it usually means something - and that something is ‘let’s get together as soon as we can’. That could be minutes, days, weeks…but the message is sent and that’s why I consider it the beginning of the dance.

The OP is asking about hugging/kissing. Oral sex is not hugging and kissing. Hugging and kissing us not Foreplay if you really think about it. Foreplay is a more intense and intentional sharing of one’s entire body. Hugging and kissing are ways we demonstrate our love and desire for each other outside the marital embrace. In that way, it helps to fulfill the unitive aspect of our sexual union, but certainly it does not fulfill it in and of itself. It’s part of the process.

Following your logic deep passionate kisses and flirtatious caressing of our spouses’ bottoms while leaving for the office or returning home from work would be considered morally disordered. Is that what you’re suggesting?

I agree they could be if the giver of the kiss and caress was only doing it to get a rise for him/herself and there was no intent at all to do so for the benefit of the other, but that’s not what I or the OP have been talking about.

 

[Dmitri451]

lifeisbeautiful,

Are you saying that I can’t take pleasure in seeing my wife’s naked body as we get dressed in the morning? May I gently caress her breast as we fall asleep at night?

 

[YinYangMom]

lifeisbeautiful:

I really hope this does not get hairy like I have seen it get in other threads on this topic (not by you YingYangMom). This is kind of why I usually steer away from this topic…

If this was true, then foreplay would be permissible in the days of abstaining of a couple practicing NFP to avoid children, and this is not true. Oral sex is foreplay (if it culminates in intercourse) yet it cannot be done unless the act is following it (if you are doing NFP you cannot do it while you are abstaining). Following your logic, marriage is a constant foreplay, because eventually you will probably have intercourse again.

Ok, here’s the thing…passionate displays of affection are not foreplay in my mind. Foreplay, as you duly noted are those acts which are part of **the **marital embrace itself. Foreplay would occur on Saturday but certainly would have no place Tues, Wed, Thur or Friday.

By my example the intent matters…on a daily basis how many married couples really take the time to offer ‘real’ kisses expressing their true love for the other? Most of us settle into the endearing peck and hug we extend to most relatives when they come over for a visit. That’s why when we do take the time to get more demonstrative with hugs and kisses it usually means something - and that something is ‘let’s get together as soon as we can’. That could be minutes, days, weeks…but the message is sent and that’s why I consider it the beginning of the dance.

The OP is asking about hugging/kissing. Oral sex is not hugging and kissing. Hugging and kissing us not Foreplay if you really think about it. Foreplay is a more intense and intentional sharing of one’s entire body. Hugging and kissing are ways we demonstrate our love and desire for each other outside the marital embrace. In that way, it helps to fulfill the unitive aspect of our sexual union, but certainly it does not fulfill it in and of itself. It’s part of the process.

I see, however, why you are intent on drawing the distinctions you made, given that each person’s idea of passionate displays of affection are most likely different. And I think you and I agree that foreplay is not the same as passionate displays of affection, but it was good to make that clear for other readers of the thread.

 

[YinYangMom]

Dmitri451:

lifeisbeautiful,

Are you saying that I can’t take pleasure in seeing my wife’s naked body as we get dressed in the morning? May I gently caress her breast as we fall asleep at night?

No, she said:

Sheesh, if we couldn’t show affection to our spouses we would be in deep trouble. The important thing is that different couples have different levels of affection (for lack of better words) that they can reach outside of the marital embrace. It would be plain silly to try to tell anyone what they can or cannot do since each couple is different and it is up to them to recognize how far is ok for them.

 

[vluvski]

Dmitri451:

By “the sex act”, do you mean only sexual intercourse?

Would this mean that actions like briefly and gently caressing each other’s private parts, without significantly arousing each other, would be licit? I don’t know how they could be considered anything but sexual.

Lets get back to a G rating here.
The Church leaves much of the decision over licit and illicit sensual and sexual contact to the couple. If it is not significantly arousing and neither party feels cheated or frustrated because of it, then you (specifically) can probably enjoy such contact with a clear conscience.

 

[Dmitri451]

vluvski:

Lets get back to a G rating here.

I’m trying to be as discreet as I can be, but I think it’s more important to be clear. But I’'ll try even harder.

 

[lifeisbeautiful]

Excellent!

Ok, going back to the OP question. Answer: It depends.

Let me use an example another poster presented. She suggested that they as a couple may make out “like teenagers” for a period of time. That may work out for them, but may not work out for other people. This is why this is something so personal to each couple. It kind of reminds me of an episode of the show “Everybody Loves Raymond” (I am not promoting it as an ideal show, as it has some warped views on some things, but anyways) where he asks her why she kissed him like that and activated the “launch mechanism” when they weren’t going to be able to have sex because it was Christmas morning I think and his family was going to come over, and the kids were up, etc. If a TV show can understand that, we should be able to also. When asked about passionate kisses outside of the marital embrace one good priest said they should be loving but not extensive. That is a pretty vague answer (whats the line between loving and extensive?), and I believe he did that purposely. I think that the problem may lie in trying to get the maximum amount of pleasure without crossing the line, rather than trying to do it to demonstrate affection without seeking pleasure.

JPII (when he was still Karol Wojtyla) said “Marital continence is so much more difficult than continence outside marriage” I think that really makes sense.

In general, the Church is not going to make a list of acts that couples can or cannot do apart from the marital embrace. It would not make sense at all.

We are just called to form our conscience and inform ourselves with the Church’s teachings. We can seek insight from reliable sources (eg books written by people like JPII etc) also, or consult our spiritual director or priests that we know are reliable.

After all, when we die, we are the ones who will be responsible for what we did with the gifts etc. that God gave us, including whether we used or misused them, and our sexuality and the sexual pleasures that are part of the sexual act were given to us by God.

 

[BlindSheep]

cynic:

that’s all fine and good, but from what I know catholics are allowed unity/intimacy- and the satisfaction therein - only in the process of being open to life. They aren’t to be separated. So it would seem that intimate acts of affection, whether sexual or not, should be limited to when they will serve this function.

What you know is wrong. Consider this; infertile catholic couples can have sex. Married couples can still have sex after menopause. It is not that affection, intimacy and the unitive aspect are not allowed unless they are connected with procreation; rather, the procreative aspect must not be deliberately frustrated. If or when it simply doesn’t exist, there is nothing wrong with sexual activity that is unitive only. Kissing and hugging aren’t even sexual activity. If you’re talking about married couples getting aroused, there is nothing wrong with it when it is unitive;
that is, if it is not masturbation; and when they do not deliberately inhibit whatever potiential for procreation is in the act. Again, if the potential isn’t there (as it isn’t when no orgasm is involved) then it isn’t being frustrated.