Is there a such thing as sexually venile sins?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Shameless
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
Toni:
As I have been corrected on the french kiss. don’t touch…Maybe a hug.🙂 (but not a holding hug)
Click to expand...
40.png
Alterum:
Is this really so? I should think that the very fact that this is a serious occasion of grave sin makes it a mortal sin. How can a couple engage in such intimate, sexual, licentious behavior and not place themselves in grave spiritual peril? Even if they do think that they can “handle it,” they are deliberately leaning over the edge of the cliff.

I think deliberately coming this close to mortal sin is itself mortal sin. French kissing is never appropriate, pure, chaste, or God-centered outside of the context of a married relationship. Frankly, I don’t think kissing in general is either.)
Click to expand...
Thank you but I have been corrected by this one. ANd stand in error. I was simply saying the book I have on examination of conscience lists this sin as venial. But if I am wrong in making that statement so be it. Mea Cupa.
 
40.png
cynic:
if it’s defined as a sexual act, and all such acts must be based around intercourse… based on that you could make a convincing argument that a couple indulging in these things outside of the time of intercourse is pleasure seeking.
Click to expand...
No kidding. I wonder if we might be erring on the side of scrupulosity here. From some of the discussion in this thread, I’m beginning to wonder if it isn’t sinful for me–a heterosexual man–to have any kind of sexual attraction to a woman at all!

Cynic’s argument, if followed, leads to the following exchange:

Wife: Why is it that whenever we have a romantic, tender moment and you kiss me, that it always leads to sex?
Husband: Well, honey, if it doesn’t culminate in sex, then it was pleasure-seeking for its own sake and therefore sinful. You don’t want us to go to Hell, do you?

Some of you married men have no doubt found a new argument for more sex in your marriage! :D;)

But I mean really, here! I refuse to believe that it could possibly be sinful at all for a husband to be deeply in love with and sexually attracted to his own wife, and to ‘deep kiss’ his own wife to express that love and sexual attraction.

And we wonder why the mainstream media has a field day when it comes to sex scandals among Catholics. We can’t really be this hung up on it, can we?

(ranting over)
 
40.png
cynic:
if it’s defined as a sexual act, and all such acts must be based around intercourse… based on that you could make a convincing argument that a couple indulging in these things outside of the time of intercourse is pleasure seeking.
Click to expand...
There is nothing wrong with seeking pleasure. What is wrong is seeking in it in the wrong context or making it the focus of one’s life.
 
Doesn’t your church that seeking pleasure in and of itself is a sin? The goal of this sort of thing is supposed to be procreation and some sort of spiritual unity. When this doesn’t happen then the couple are indulging in something for its own sake, not the ultimate goal, and catholic religiouse theology seems to say that nothing can be done for its own sake. You cannot experience pleasure with your spouse unless it is acompanied by the responsibilty of the possibility of new life.

It follows then that if you desire to hug or kiss your husband/wife simply out of the desire for the associated pleasure or gratification, then it is a sin, as affections and intimacies are only justfied as the neccessary means of arousal directly prior to intercourse.
 
40.png
cynic:
Doesn’t your church that seeking pleasure in and of itself is a sin? The goal of this sort of thing is supposed to be procreation and some sort of spiritual unity. When this doesn’t happen then the couple are indulging in something for its own sake, not the ultimate goal, and catholic religiouse theology seems to say that nothing can be done for its own sake. You cannot experience pleasure with your spouse unless it is acompanied by the responsibilty of the possibility of new life.

It follows then that if you desire to hug or kiss your husband/wife simply out of the desire for the associated pleasure or gratification, then it is a sin, as affections and intimacies are only justfied as the neccessary means of arousal directly prior to intercourse.
Click to expand...
No. My Church teaches that all things are inherantly good when used in their proper context. Food is good, sex is good, pleasure is good. They must simply be treated according to their nature. We say that God made sex pleasurable so that married couples would have. Pleasure is a great motivating factor. It gets us to eat, exercise, sleep, have sex, etc. All things that God wants us to do. And in fact, the most pleasurable experience of all is heaven and God does want us to enjoy it. It is not the Catholic Church that teaches that pleasure is evil, but Catholics with Gnostic tendancies. Such Gnosticism is condemned by the Church as heresey.
 
40.png
Shameless:
Are there a such thing as sexually venile sins? If so what would be examples of such? Thanks.
Click to expand...

I had to look “French Kissing” up - it sounds disgusting 😦​

AFAIK, all sexual sins are mortal, because sexual.

This seems odd, since sexual sins were less severely rebuked by Christ than spiritual - and therefore, more dangerous - sins, such as pride, hypocrisy, and hardness of heart.

IMHO, all lying should be a mortal sin - but only some lies are mortal, though all are sinful: so why are all sexual sins mortal ? I have no idea. I think that is what comes of having celibate men, and no one else, decide what is moral or not. ##
 
40.png
sanctareparata:
French kissing is mortally sinful if done knowing that it is - it stirs up the passions and is never appropriate between two unmarried people.

Anything that is done with the intent to stir up the flames and arouse the other person (or oneself) is mortally sinful. French kissing, fondling, impure talk, etc.

ewtn.com/expert/answers/dating.htm

check out the above link
Click to expand...
You must be joking right. Since when is french kissing a mortal sin or even a venial sin in any relationship. I mean, what in the world is appropiate then. People rationalize all the time and I guess I shall too. I don’t see any sin in frech kissing if it is a meaningful relationship, especialy among the younger people. Yes it does lead to desires for other things which are definitely not allowed for unmarried people but even so, there has to be something that is allowed for relationships and if you can avoid the certain things you aren’t supposed to do then why is French Kissing so bad? Now I have only been in one meaningful realtionshp where I could have justified such a cause and I probably did take it a little too far since I relaly tried to look into this topic and find any loopholes and bend the rules as much as possible while in that realationship. Since I want to be a lawyer I love loopholes and arguments. But anyways I am kind of offended since I have always been under the imprsson that I ndid nothing morally worng and still get to be a good Catholic whenever I do meet someone and get married.

I know this is long but I have two questions if what you say is true which it may or may not be and I will aruge in my defense for a long time over it.
  1. Are there really Catholic girls out there who want to follow the rules that stricty sicne I surely don’t know of any. The best part about being Catholic in that regard is it siwithes everything and makes it so the girl has to be the one bugging me to take things to the next level although I only went as far as what I believe to be morally acceptable. So basically, if I find one who really is that strict in that ragrd to the rules, if in fact it is as strigent as you describe then fine with me.
  2. All the impure things youg people do. Are they really mortal sins? As in are you really not supposed to receive communion. By that regard young people commit mortal sins every day and knowing know they are going to do it again even when they confess it. What do you do about those situations.
 
by the way, I am just bored and then my freind stumbled upon this site and told me there are all kinds of controcercies and stuff about Catholicism on it and since I like to argue and stuff it is a way to pass time. But are all of you on here form the older generations. If so then I really have legitmacy in arguing my points. If some of you are younger then it takes some of my arguemts about stuff being outdatyed for the time away if people still believe it so I am jsut curious.
 
Amor:

Thanks for your post.

If I may, I think your closing sentence could be somewhat simplistic. However, some thoughts I have had on this.

Courtesy: dictionary.com (bold mine):

Main Entry: li·bi·do
Pronunciation: l&-'bEd-(")O also 'lib-&-“dO or l&-'bI-(”)dO
Function: noun
Inflected Form: plural -dos
1 : emotional or psychic energy that in psychoanalytic theory is derived from primitive biological urges and that is usually goal-directed

Is libido an arousal if so how can I control it? Why should I simply have the option of controlling it, why not of not having it at all, by God giving us that option in accordance with (Mat 5,29)? Is a lustful thought not the sum accumulation of all physical and psychological factors that occur at that instant? Is culpability judged on the amount of resistance grace bestowed, the use of that grace, along with the proportions of testosterone or estrogen one has in his system.?

I know in my particular case, every part of arousal doesn’t have it’s origins at the thought door. One can almost say they are unpredictable and are on automatic pilot some of the times,Ha!!. :o

If all facets of sexual expression are driven by either hormonal and physical factors, and, some others that are controllable, how are we to determine at onset which is which.?

It would seem that to be 100% accurate in all instances, every individual at onset would have to meet it with the skill of psychoanalysis and psychiatry to tell the difference.

Also, one assumes there is no grey zone between the two, or factors attributal to both to further muddy the waters. If so, then in due charity, I think most would agree that would be in favor of the individual.

We touched on time, and what about timelines.? In thought timelines we are dealing with micro/nano seconds. So, I think your trying to say, from the time a thought presents itself for judgement, to the point one has finalized scrutiny, a segment of time as elapsed. By the suggested rule presented here, a proportional progression from venial to mortal also takes place, and one would assume culpable by degree to the amount of time one takes to reflect on it. What of “on hold” handling. Can I have a thought withheld for scrutiny, and still think it. In other words a lust thought just presented itself, but I’ll analize it later for acceptance.

How long does a sinful thought from the instant it presents itself to the end of the reflection period does it take before it comes wholly mortal.?

So you see, it’s not all that simple a problem and the demands on mature man to tow the line are huge.

Andy
 
Question: Do people then get sent to hell for french kissing if it is a mortal sin ?

I
 
I would think not since that would damn us all to hell. It is already going to be hard enough for me to avoid certain things before marriage. If anyone was able to avoid everything including french kissing, then I really congradualate them for having such strong faith and beliefs. However, I really think it is a matter of choice since I would be willing to bet anything that I could find jsut ans amny priest if not more who would say french kissing is not bad as those that wouls say it is.
 
I’ve been able to avoid it.

Then again I’ve never been able to get a date in my life. 😦

On the bright side, I am seriously considering the priesthood, so it doest really matter all that much. :cool:
 
Servus Pio XII:
I’ve been able to avoid it.

Then again I’ve never been able to get a date in my life. 😦

On the bright side, I am seriously considering the priesthood, so it doest really matter all that much. :cool:
Click to expand...
good for you. How does this sound. I was able to aovidf it for the same reasons as you for 20 years, (althought I did go on a few dates just not a realtionship). Then after 20 years I prayed and jsut wanted to know what it was like to experience what everyone else has before and finaly expereinced a wonderful although breif relationship while studying abroad in another country, ironicaly, thougth the cathoic church, I first committed these suppsoeldy mortal sins since I met the girl thought ther church. I never quite did understand why we had to hide from her parents even if we were going to kiss and such. I sincerelty thought I was in perfect teaching eith the church. She obviously knew otherwise and I guess I know now too. However, there are stil certian things I won’t do before marriage even if I do sin again with anoter girl now that I know the truth.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top