Making out

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tradcat89
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A great quote from the Catechism for the Engaged readers out there:

2350 Those who are engaged to marry are called to live chastity in continence. They should see in this time of testing a discovery of mutual respect, an apprenticeship in fidelity, and the hope of receiving one another from God. They should reserve for marriage the expressions of affection that belong to married love. They will help each other grow in chastity.

scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s2c2a6.htm#II

And of course analogously it is good for other couples who are various stages of relationship.
 
This covers various Moral Principles involved with unmarried couples and makes important and helpful distinctions:

ewtn.com/expert/answers/dating.htm from a writer at the EWTN theology dept.

(One note though on this reading…I would note that when they say “as soon as he begins to enjoy…” under “pure intent”… it would mean before knowing consent… and note too that when it says: “Is this then sinful?” such is referring there to the “Indirectly Stimulating Actions”)
 
Of course it does. It was stated above that making out with your girlfriend is wrong because it will arouse the genitals. So, it is part of the discussion, and a refusal to discuss it is a refusal to discuss the topic at hand. If kissing is wrong because it might arouse the genitals, then it is wrong for a woman to wear anything but a burka with a fat suit underneath.

I think you actually mean st. Benedict rather than francis, unless Francis immitated Benedict on this.
So what if walking by or sitting by a woman arouses your genitals? That action can very easily be attributed to physiological design and is in NO WAY sinful. I’ll say it again… arousal is not sinful. Lust is. Lust is defined as an inordinate craving for the pleasures of the body. In other words… Lust is a distorted version of arousal on steroids. Arousal is completely natural and part of God’s design… There is no shame in how God designed us.

So back to making out… kissing is intimate. It is a non-verbal way to express affection. It is a form of communication that you can not participate in with words. I would recommend that anyone considering devoting their life in marriage to another, place a very affectionate and passionate kiss on their significant other well before the sacrament. Compatibility in this department is important. It is certainly not the end-all-be-all, unfortunately it is sometimes painted to be, but it should be considered.

Do I recommend passionate kissing with every joe or jill so&so that walks by… absolutely not. I do however believe that you should get to know your significant other a little in this area and further believe that it is not sinful in the least.
 
This covers various Moral Principles involved with unmarried couples and makes important and helpful distinctions:

ewtn.com/expert/answers/dating.htm from a writer at the EWTN theology dept.

(One note though on this reading…I would note that when they say “as soon as he begins to enjoy…” under “pure intent”… it would mean before knowing consent… and note too that when it says: “Is this then sinful?” such is referring there to the “Indirectly Stimulating Actions”)
Your quote from the catechism is vague. It doesn’t answer anything. It doesn’t mention kissing.

The article is problematic from the first para under direct stimulation. The fact that mentions things ‘associated’ with sexual desire destroys its credibility. As I have continually mentioned, as soon as I look at a woman because she is attractive I am expressing sexual desire. It only affirms what I have been saying about this thread. It is inhuman, because it is an attempt to deny our sexuality and humanity.

Are we to be neuter until we get married? Once I say I do, I’ve become a man?
 
Your quote from the catechism is vague. It doesn’t answer anything. It doesn’t mention kissing.
It is not vague.

But sure it does not answer everything --that is what good orthodox catechesis and moral theology is for…

If a form of kissing is a kind of affection for marriage --then is to be reserved for such.
 
The article is problematic from the first para under direct stimulation. The fact that mentions things ‘associated’ with sexual desire destroys its credibility. As I have continually mentioned, as soon as I look at a woman because she is attractive I am expressing sexual desire. It only affirms what I have been saying about this thread. It is inhuman, because it is an attempt to deny our sexuality and humanity.

Are we to be neuter until we get married? Once I say I do, I’ve become a man?
Actually it is a pretty good summary of the moral principles in moral theology in this area.

Nor is it in any way denying sexuality and humanity but rather points towards the authentic living of such in chastity and modesty.
 
Jimmy,

I never said that kissing should be avoided on the basis it could arouse the genitals. I said it shouldn’t be done with that as the focus. I said it several times, but this time I’m making it short and sweet.

God Bless!
 
II. THE VOCATION TO CHASTITY

2337 Chastity means the successful integration of sexuality within the person and thus the inner unity of man in his bodily and spiritual being. Sexuality, in which man’s belonging to the bodily and biological world is expressed, becomes personal and truly human when it is integrated into the relationship of one person to another, in the complete and lifelong mutual gift of a man and a woman.

The virtue of chastity therefore involves the integrity of the person and the integrality of the gift.

The integrity of the person

2338 The chaste person maintains the integrity of the powers of life and love placed in him. This integrity ensures the unity of the person; it is opposed to any behavior that would impair it. It tolerates neither a double life nor duplicity in speech.125

2339 Chastity includes an apprenticeship in self-mastery which is a training in human freedom. The alternative is clear: either man governs his passions and finds peace, or he lets himself be dominated by them and becomes unhappy.126 "Man’s dignity therefore requires him to act out of conscious and free choice, as moved and drawn in a personal way from within, and not by blind impulses in himself or by mere external constraint. Man gains such dignity when, ridding himself of all slavery to the passions, he presses forward to his goal by freely choosing what is good and, by his diligence and skill, effectively secures for himself the means suited to this end."127

2340 Whoever wants to remain faithful to his baptismal promises and resist temptations will want to adopt the means for doing so: self-knowledge, practice of an ascesis adapted to the situations that confront him, obedience to God’s commandments, exercise of the moral virtues, and fidelity to prayer. "Indeed it is through chastity that we are gathered together and led back to the unity from which we were fragmented into multiplicity."128

2341 The virtue of chastity comes under the cardinal virtue of temperance, which seeks to permeate the passions and appetites of the senses with reason.

2342 Self-mastery is a long and exacting work. One can never consider it acquired once and for all. It presupposes renewed effort at all stages of life.129 The effort required can be more intense in certain periods, such as when the personality is being formed during childhood and adolescence.

2343 Chastity has laws of growth which progress through stages marked by imperfection and too often by sin. "Man . . . day by day builds himself up through his many free decisions; and so he knows, loves, and accomplishes moral good by stages of growth."130

2344 Chastity represents an eminently personal task; it also involves a cultural effort, for there is "an interdependence between personal betterment and the improvement of society."131 Chastity presupposes respect for the rights of the person, in particular the right to receive information and an education that respect the moral and spiritual dimensions of human life.

2345 Chastity is a moral virtue. It is also a gift from God, a grace, a fruit of spiritual effort.132 The Holy Spirit enables one whom the water of Baptism has regenerated to imitate the purity of Christ.133

The integrality of the gift of self

2346 Charity is the form of all the virtues. Under its influence, chastity appears as a school of the gift of the person. Self-mastery is ordered to the gift of self. Chastity leads him who practices it to become a witness to his neighbor of God’s fidelity and loving kindness.

2347 The virtue of chastity blossoms in friendship. It shows the disciple how to follow and imitate him who has chosen us as his friends,134 who has given himself totally to us and allows us to participate in his divine estate. Chastity is a promise of immortality.

Chastity is expressed notably in friendship with one’s neighbor. Whether it develops between persons of the same or opposite sex, friendship represents a great good for all. It leads to spiritual communion.

The various forms of chastity

2348 All the baptized are called to chastity. The Christian has "put on Christ,"135 the model for all chastity. All Christ’s faithful are called to lead a chaste life in keeping with their particular states of life. At the moment of his Baptism, the Christian is pledged to lead his affective life in chastity.

2349 "People should cultivate [chastity] in the way that is suited to their state of life. Some profess virginity or consecrated celibacy which enables them to give themselves to God alone with an undivided heart in a remarkable manner. Others live in the way prescribed for all by the moral law, whether they are married or single."136 Married people are called to live conjugal chastity; others practice chastity in continence:

There are three forms of the virtue of chastity: the first is that of spouses, the second that of widows, and the third that of virgins. We do not praise any one of them to the exclusion of the others. . . . This is what makes for the richness of the discipline of the Church.137
2350 Those who are engaged to marry are called to live chastity in continence. They should see in this time of testing a discovery of mutual respect, an apprenticeship in fidelity, and the hope of receiving one another from God. They should reserve for marriage the expressions of affection that belong to married love. They will help each other grow in chastity.

scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s2c2a6.htm#I
 
And Chastity is part of Temperance:

1809 Temperance is the moral virtue that moderates the attraction of pleasures and provides balance in the use of created goods. It ensures the will’s mastery over instincts and keeps desires within the limits of what is honorable. The temperate person directs the sensitive appetites toward what is good and maintains a healthy discretion: "Do not follow your inclination and strength, walking according to the desires of your heart."72 Temperance is often praised in the Old Testament: "Do not follow your base desires, but restrain your appetites."73 In the New Testament it is called “moderation” or “sobriety.” We ought "to live sober, upright, and godly lives in this world."74

72 Sir 5:2; cf. 37:27-31.
73 Sir 18:30.
74 Titus 2:12.

scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s1c1a7.htm#I
 
I agree completely. My main issue is with any ideas that repress human expression, which naturally includes sexuality. Reading some posts, you begin to think emotion and passion are to be repressed. One poster on another thread said that he was trying to learn to treat all women exactly the same, whether they were attractive or not. This was on a thread about flirting. His approach to relationships with women was essentially to deny sexuality. It is inhuman.

I see it on this thread as well. Kissing is bad, essentially because it is an expression of sexuality. The genitals might possibly get aroused, so it is bad. Some of them probably think the only proper way to give someone a hug is if there is six inches of space between you, one of those awkward hugs.
Yes

That is why it’s a good idea to learn about these things through other sources, such as TOB or Christopher West… and not rely on posters online. 👍
 
Your quote from the catechism is vague. It doesn’t answer anything. It doesn’t mention kissing.

The article is problematic from the first para under direct stimulation. The fact that mentions things ‘associated’ with sexual desire destroys its credibility. As I have continually mentioned, as soon as I look at a woman because she is attractive I am expressing sexual desire. It only affirms what I have been saying about this thread. It is inhuman, because it is an attempt to deny our sexuality and humanity.

Are we to be neuter until we get married? Once I say I do, I’ve become a man?
This is also what I mentioned before. You need more than just the quotes from the CCC to gain a good understanding of human sexuality.

If the CCC was all we needed, our late pope wouldn’t have written 2 books on the issue.
 
This is also what I mentioned before. You need more than just the quotes from the CCC to gain a good understanding of human sexuality.

If the CCC was all we needed, our late pope wouldn’t have written 2 books on the issue.
Yes there are other good sources in addition to assist one.

There are various other catechetical sources and orthodox works of moral theology (a good summary was given above) and sources that particularly address in a more lengthy way the nature of chastity and modesty.
 
Jimmy,

I never said that kissing should be avoided on the basis it could arouse the genitals. I said it shouldn’t be done with that as the focus. I said it several times, but this time I’m making it short and sweet.

God Bless!
Evania, there has been a misunderstanding. I wasn’t referring to you there, or earlier either. I was referring to another poster from earlier in the thread, who used that argument against kissing. The only way you might be part of the reference is if you agree with him.

Bookcat, I have a degree in theology as well. I know what the catechism says, and even if I don’t I can look it up myself. It would be much more constructive for you to put things in your own words and explain them yourself.
 
Bookcat, I have a degree in theology as well. I know what the catechism says, and even if I don’t I can look it up myself. It would be much more constructive for you to put things in your own words and explain them yourself.
I think you are not the only reader here 😉

As for my own words – why spend time reinventing the wheel? It has already been summarized well by the link I linked…
 
I think you are not the only reader here 😉

As for my own words – why spend time reinventing the wheel? It has already been well covered by the link I linked.
For a lot of ppl… myself included, it is a lot easier to gain a better understanding of things through an interactive discussion, rather than from reading doctrinal sources.
 
I know I would have very little understanding of the Church’s views on human sexuality if all I had ever done to learn about it is read the CCC.

That’s why people like Mary Beth Bonacci and Chris West become so popular… they are able to break it down into every day language and explain it to us in a more human, more applicable way.
 
Pope John Paul’s Theology of the Body is heavy reading, but Christopher West breaks it down pretty good. I don’t have the website handy, so I would just google it. I’m pretty sure he has some videos of his talks posted too. I hope that helps!🙂
 
Evania, there has been a misunderstanding. I wasn’t referring to you there, or earlier either. I was referring to another poster from earlier in the thread, who used that argument against kissing. The only way you might be part of the reference is if you agree with him.

Bookcat, I have a degree in theology as well. I know what the catechism says, and even if I don’t I can look it up myself. It would be much more constructive for you to put things in your own words and explain them yourself.
My apologies. I thought maybe you misunderstood what I was trying to say. Thanks for clarifying.👍
 
For a lot of ppl… myself included, it is a lot easier to gain a better understanding of things through an interactive discussion, rather than from reading doctrinal sources.
Sure.

And I have provided resources – not only doctrinal but very practical for living the virtues chastity and modesty.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top