Making out

[Evania]

Thank you for this response. I know you didn’t want to get pulled into a conversation, but I am going to give my thoughts on this anyway, I understand if you choose not to respond, I’m just one of those people who likes to discuss things.

In your post you made a distinction between sexual pleasure and sexual arousal which I agree with. I think this is why any genital contact or stimulation would be clearly wrong before marriage as that clearly involves sexual pleasure rather than just arousal. I guess the question that is left is how do we define sexual pleasure as opposed to sexual arousal? We end up coming full circle to another unclear distinction that is left for us to determine. Personally, I don’t really think that kissing of any kind involves sexual pleasure, but rather often involves sexual arousal. This is why I think that even passionate, open mouthed, french kissing etc is not inherently sinful. It can become sinful because of circumstances, such as being a near occasion of sin or being done for the sake of arousal, but is not always and everywhere sinful. I think thats why making out has such debate about it, some people see that it is not connected to sexual pleasure so see that it is not inherently wrong, whereas others see that this kind of kissing, because it leads more often and to a greater extent to arousal, is much more likely to be a sin, than, say, holding hands, and so tell people to leave it until marriage.

Whatever the reason is, the teachings of the Church are not clear enough on this particular issue for us to be able to point to a specific Church teaching which will answer this question for us, so, honestly, I think the best way to deal with this question is to, first, try to understand the Church’s teachings on purity, chastity, and sexuality. Read TOB, Love and Responsibility, and what the catechism has to say about it. Then, pray about it and follow your conscience. The better you understand and appreciate the Church’s understanding of sexuality and purity the more you can trust your own conscience and judgement on the issue and you should not feel any guilt for doing so.

Excellent post!

 

[Bookcat]

This is why I think that even passionate, open mouthed, french kissing etc is not inherently sinful. It can become sinful because of circumstances, such as being a near occasion of sin or being done for the sake of arousal, but is not always and everywhere sinful. I think thats why making out has such debate about it, some people see that it is not connected to sexual pleasure so see that it is not inherently wrong, whereas others see that this kind of kissing, because it leads more often and to a greater extent to arousal, is much more likely to be a sin, than, say, holding hands, and so tell people to leave it until marriage.

As noted above – sexual arousal is not something to be sought or wanted etc.

The reason why it can be said that “passionate kissing” and “french kissing” belongs to marriage is that such acts are rather ordered to enflaming sexual arousal. Such can be called part of “foreplay” for the marital act. (And one can note too that it can be said that one engages in such for the sexual delight associated with such)

PS: And I do not use the term “Inherently sinful” --for such can be a part of marriage!

I will note here what I noted above:

1. Here is what a Catholic Answers Apologist noted:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=316171&highlight=passionate+kissing

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=37374&highlight=kissing

1. Hence one will find the question-- from the Examination of Conscience in the Handbook of Prayers 2011 pg 285. Midwest Theological Forum Edited by Fr. Jim Socias

“Did I engage in acts such as…“necking,” passionate kisses, or prolonged embraces?”

(3. Also helpful and expanded into other things: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=10403092&postcount=68)

Now of course one could ask - what is meant by “passionate kissing” there? --well that may need more particular assistance from ones confessor etc in judging ones particular case. He can advise in one applying the principles of moral theology and in living a chaste and modest life as heads in the direction of the Sacrament of marriage.

 

[Evania]

Although sexual desire and arousal are indeed natural, it shouldn’t be purposefully stirred up by persons before marriage. Yes, it is true that each person has an individual threshold to what the “near occasion of sin” is for them personally, that doesn’t mean that that same threshold holds true for the other person in the relationship. It is best to not lead your loved one into temptation. That’s my opinion.

 

[Bookcat]

Revised

This is why I think that even passionate, open mouthed, french kissing etc is not inherently sinful. It can become sinful because of circumstances, such as being a near occasion of sin or being done for the sake of arousal, but is not always and everywhere sinful. I think thats why making out has such debate about it, some people see that it is not connected to sexual pleasure so see that it is not inherently wrong, whereas others see that this kind of kissing, because it leads more often and to a greater extent to arousal, is much more likely to be a sin, than, say, holding hands, and so tell people to leave it until marriage.

As noted above – sexual arousal is not something to be sought or wanted etc.

The reason why it can be said that “passionate kissing” and “french kissing” belongs to marriage is that such acts are* rather ordered to enflaming sexual arousal*. Such can be called part of “foreplay” for the marital act.

It really is not for the unmarried…despite what our culture and movies say…

And one can note too that it can be said that unmarried couples tend to engage in such kissing for the sexual delight associated with such…it is just too tied up with such.

PS: And I do not use the term “Inherently sinful” --for such can be a part of marriage!

I will note here what I noted above:

1. Here is what a Catholic Answers Apologist noted:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=316171&highlight=passionate+kissing

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=37374&highlight=kissing

1. Hence one will find the question-- from the Examination of Conscience in the Handbook of Prayers 2011 pg 285. Midwest Theological Forum Edited by Fr. Jim Socias

“Did I engage in acts such as…“necking,” passionate kisses, or prolonged embraces?”

(3. Also helpful and expanded into other things: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=10403092&postcount=68)

Now of course one could ask - what is meant by “passionate kissing” there? --well that may need more particular assistance from ones confessor etc in judging ones particular case. He can advise in one applying the principles of moral theology and in living a chaste and modest life as heads in the direction of the Sacrament of marriage.

 

[Debora123]

Thank you for this response. I know you didn’t want to get pulled into a conversation, but I am going to give my thoughts on this anyway, I understand if you choose not to respond, I’m just one of those people who likes to discuss things.

In your post you made a distinction between sexual pleasure and sexual arousal which I agree with. I think this is why any genital contact or stimulation would be clearly wrong before marriage as that clearly involves sexual pleasure rather than just arousal. I guess the question that is left is how do we define sexual pleasure as opposed to sexual arousal? We end up coming full circle to another unclear distinction that is left for us to determine. Personally, I don’t really think that kissing of any kind involves sexual pleasure, but rather often involves sexual arousal. This is why I think that even passionate, open mouthed, french kissing etc is not inherently sinful. It can become sinful because of circumstances, such as being a near occasion of sin or being done for the sake of arousal, but is not always and everywhere sinful. I think thats why making out has such debate about it, some people see that it is not connected to sexual pleasure so see that it is not inherently wrong, whereas others see that this kind of kissing, because it leads more often and to a greater extent to arousal, is much more likely to be a sin, than, say, holding hands, and so tell people to leave it until marriage.

Whatever the reason is, the teachings of the Church are not clear enough on this particular issue for us to be able to point to a specific Church teaching which will answer this question for us, so, honestly, I think the best way to deal with this question is to, first, try to understand the Church’s teachings on purity, chastity, and sexuality. Read TOB, Love and Responsibility, and what the catechism has to say about it. Then, pray about it and follow your conscience. The better you understand and appreciate the Church’s understanding of sexuality and purity the more you can trust your own conscience and judgement on the issue and you should not feel any guilt for doing so.

agreed 100%

 

[Debora123]

As noted above – sexual arousal is not something to be sought or wanted etc.

The reason why it can be said that “passionate kissing” and “french kissing” belongs to marriage is that such acts are rather ordered to enflaming sexual arousal. Such can be called part of “foreplay” for the marital act. (And one can note too that it can be said that one engages in such for the sexual delight associated with such)

I think the problem here is that you’re making this universal claim that the automatic intent behind deep kissing is to sexually arouse yourself and the other person.

Sure, it can be sometimes with some people, but to make the bold claim that it always and everywhere is intended specifically for sexual arousal, is just false. (perhaps this is how you personally feel when it comes to deep kissing your wife, and so you assume everyone feels that way?)

With that being said, there is nothing wrong with sexual arousal in and of itself. Whether you are married to the person, or not. It’s completely natural and a lot of times, completely involuntary.

I know my husband said that for the first year of our relationship he would become aroused by simply saying hello to me at the door, or just being around me. Was that wrong? Should we have refrained ourselves from being in each other’s physical presence in an attempt to not feel a sexual attraction? Of course not! Likewise, should we have refrained ourselves from french kissing in an attempt to not feel sexual arousal? Same thing, no. I can see how refraining from this action would be a good idea for people who would have a hard time controlling their temptations, but to say it is inherently wrong before marriage simply because it may cause arousal is just silly, IMHO.

Deep kissing can be an expression of affection and commitment, with the side effect of sexual arousal. But not necessarily the purpose of it.

PS: And I do not use the term “Inherently sinful” --for such can be a part of marriage!

Don’t be silly, of course Wanderer knows you don’t think it’s inherently sinful in marriage. She was obviously referring to inherently sinful OUTSIDE of marriage… which is what this thread is about - deep kissing outside of marriage.

 

[thewanderer]

I was not seeking to make any strong distinction between sexual pleasure and sexual arousal. The later being I think one can say the beginnings or part of the former. Outside of marriage one cannot seek either or want either.

But rather between that which is direct and that which is indirect.

well, if you want to make that distinction and you think it would change things can you please help me understand how you determine whether something is direct or indirect? Because, to be perfectly honest, if you just tell me to divide actions up into those that are directly vs indirectly stimulating without any further explanation I would divide them the exact same way I did above, genital contact/stimulation as direct because it is directly affecting the sexual organs, kissing, of any sort, as indirect.

Revised

As noted above – sexual arousal is not something to be sought or wanted etc.

The reason why it can be said that “passionate kissing” and “french kissing” belongs to marriage is** that such acts are* rather ordered to enflaming sexual arousal***. Such can be called part of “foreplay” for the marital act.

And it is this claim that I absolutely 100% disagree with. This is the claim that I always hear whenever people say that such acts are sinful, and, honestly, it just isn’t true, at least, not always. Seriously, it really is possible to engage in such acts without ordering it towards sex or sexual arousal. I know you don’t believe it, but it is true, multiple people on this thread have given their own personal experience as evidence for this, and I guess I will go add my own to theirs. I know that this is not always true and so I cannot accept it as a reason for passionate kissing etc to be always sinful outside of marriage. I, of course, accept that it can be sinful outside of marriage, and even that it often is, but I just don’t see why it would be always sinful outside of marriage.

It really is not for the unmarried…despite what our culture and movies say…

Just so you know, I really don’t take either romantic or moral advice from movies…

And one can note too that it can be said that unmarried couples tend to engage in such kissing for the sexual delight associated with such…it is just too tied up with such.

I absolutely agree with this. The key phrase here being “tend to”. And for those that do so they should take a step back (or maybe two, who knows ) Again, that doesn’t mean that it is wrong for all unmarried people, it just means that it is so for many, and that it is an action to be cautious about.

.
PS: And I do not use the term “Inherently sinful” --for such can be a part of marriage!

Thanks for catching that, I meant inherently sinful among unmarried people, sorry I wasn’t clearer.

I will note here what I noted above:

1. Here is what a Catholic Answers Apologist noted:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=316171&highlight=passionate+kissing

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=37374&highlight=kissing

1. Hence one will find the question-- from the Examination of Conscience in the Handbook of Prayers 2011 pg 285. Midwest Theological Forum Edited by Fr. Jim Socias

“Did I engage in acts such as…“necking,” passionate kisses, or prolonged embraces?”

(3. Also helpful and expanded into other things: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=10403092&postcount=68)

Now of course one could ask - what is meant by “passionate kissing” there? --well that may need more particular assistance from ones confessor etc in judging ones particular case. He can advise in one applying the principles of moral theology and in living a chaste and modest life as heads in the direction of the Sacrament of marriage.

I know and am fully aware that there are Catholics who disagree with me, very intelligent Catholics who know the faith extremely well. And trust me, I do not just toss aside (name removed by moderator)ut from such people, but I must say that after study, prayer, and soul searching I must respectfully disagree with the above. Since this is not something which the Church has a clear definitive teaching on such disagreement is allowed. What is important is that each person carefully read and accept Church teaching, honestly seek the truth of the matter, and be willing to submit to the Church’s authority should the Church one day definitively disagree.

 

[thewanderer]

I think the problem here is that you’re making this universal claim that the automatic intent behind deep kissing is to sexually arouse yourself and the other person.

Sure, it can be sometimes with some people, but to make the bold claim that it always and everywhere is intended specifically for sexual arousal, is just false. (perhaps this is how you personally feel when it comes to deep kissing your wife, and so you assume everyone feels that way?)

lol, great minds think alike?

With that being said, there is nothing wrong with sexual arousal in and of itself. Whether you are married to the person, or not. It’s completely natural and a lot of times, completely involuntary.

I know my husband said that for the first year of our relationship he would become aroused by simply saying hello to me at the door, or just being around me. Was that wrong? Should we have refrained ourselves from being in each other’s physical presence in an attempt to not feel a sexual attraction? Of course not! Likewise, should we have refrained ourselves from french kissing in an attempt to not feel sexual arousal? Same thing, no. I can see how refraining from this action would be a good idea for people who would have a hard time controlling their temptations, but to say it is inherently wrong before marriage simply because it may cause arousal is just silly, IMHO.

Deep kissing can be an expression of affection and commitment, with the side effect of sexual arousal. But not necessarily the purpose of it.

To be fair, Bookcat isn’t saying that arousal itself is wrong, but rather that acting in order to become aroused is wrong, which, honestly, I agree with him (her?) about.

Don’t be silly, of course Wanderer knows you don’t think it’s inherently sinful in marriage. She was obviously referring to inherently sinful OUTSIDE of marriage… which is what this thread is about - deep kissing outside of marriage.

Thanks

 

[Bookcat]

I think the problem here is that you’re making this universal claim that the automatic intent behind deep kissing is to sexually arouse yourself and the other person.

Actually I am not.

 

[Debora123]

To be fair, Bookcat isn’t saying that arousal itself is wrong, but rather that acting in order to become aroused is wrong, which, honestly, I agree with him (her?) about.

Oh ok. Well good!

 

[Debora123]

Actually I am not.

Ok, if that’s the case then perhaps we are on the same page without even having known it?

 

[Bookcat]

I absolutely agree with this. The key phrase here being “tend to”. And for those that do so they should take a step back (or maybe two, who knows ) Again, that doesn’t mean that it is wrong for all unmarried people, it just means that it is so for many, and that it is an action to be cautious about.

The reasoning is that the nature of such kissing is well – * highly ordered to sexual arousal.* Hence the term “passionate” inferring the enflaming of the passions…

And I have to interject here regarding “tongue kissing” or “deep kissing” – how is such really a form of “affection” outside of marriage? It rather can be said to be by nature ordered to stirring up the sexual passions. Not to showing chaste affection outside of marriage.

Hence one finds these responses to the question when it is asked:forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=10415261&postcount=135

What is important is that each person carefully read and accept Church teaching, honestly seek the truth of the matter, and be willing to submit to the Church’s authority should the Church one day definitively disagree.

Yes that is of highest importance.

 

[Bookcat]

with him (her?).

Thanks

Him.

 

[Bookcat]

Ok, if that’s the case then perhaps we are on the same page without even having known it?

Point being that many can have “good intent”

…but a good intend does not render an act necessarily good.

scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s1c1a4.htm

I am not saying all who engage in these acts are intending consciously to cause sexual arousal etc…

 

[einna]

Got a quick question -
Is passionate kissing before marriage a sin? French kissing and necking? I have heard a lot of different opinions about this and it seems like the Church leaves it to the people involved. Is there a black and white line?

Just when I thought I heard every unbelievable question, someone surprises me. I have never heard any of the things you listed as being a sin if it doesn’t lead to sex. It is no wonder people are having problems with the Church. These kinds of answers really make me think I should convert.

 

[Debora123]

Point being that many can have “good intent”

…but a good intend does not render an act necessarily good.

I am not saying all who engage in these acts are intending consciously to cause sexual arousal etc…

So then what is your problem with the act? I don’t get it.

If you think deep kissing is wrong simply because it may lead to arousal, then, as I said before, should my husband and I been physically separated before marriage? Arousal can happen simply from being near someone. Arousal itself is not sinful.

 

[Debora123]

Just when I thought I heard every unbelievable question, someone surprises me.** I have never heard any of the things you listed as being a sin if it doesn’t lead to sex. **It is no wonder people are having problems with the Church. These kinds of answers really make me think I should convert.

That’s because they are not. Regardless of what some anonymous people say on the internet, the Church has not deemed these acts intrinsically sinful when done outside of marriage.

Please don’t convert. If CAF is not healthy for you, seek guidance elsewhere… like from a priest/spiritual director. I don’t think this site is a good place for guidance.

 

[Bookcat]

With that being said, there is nothing wrong with sexual arousal in and of itself. Whether you are married to the person, or not. It’s completely natural and a lot of times, completely involuntary.

As I noted there can be that which is direct and that which is indirect (and potentially accepted as a side effect of a good act…one must judge accordingly)

I know my husband said that for the first year of our relationship he would become aroused by simply saying hello to me at the door, or just being around me. Was that wrong? Should we have refrained ourselves from being in each other’s physical presence in an attempt to not feel a sexual attraction? Of course not!

Yes you should have sought to never see or talk to each other and let others arrange everything for you. Plenty of time to see and talk after marriage

Such could actually be a rather good example of a licit indirect occurrence.

Likewise, should we have refrained ourselves from french kissing in an attempt to not feel sexual arousal? Same thing, no. I can see how refraining from this action would be a good idea for people who would have a hard time controlling their temptations, but to say it is inherently wrong before marriage simply because it may cause arousal is just silly, IMHO.

Yes due to the nature of I say yes such should be avoided by the unmarried (as do others).

Deep kissing can be an expression of affection and commitment, with the side effect of sexual arousal. But not necessarily the purpose of it.

Someone could say that engaging in other actions …even up to fornication is simply an expression of commitment and affection.

I do not see such kissing as such outside of marriage due to his nature. And again due to the nature of it --would agree with the Catholic Answers apologist linked above that such is to be reserved for marriage

 

[Evania]

The reasoning is that the nature of such kissing is well – * highly ordered to sexual arousal.* Hence the term “passionate” inferring the enflaming of the passions…

And I have to interject here regarding “tongue kissing” or “deep kissing” – how is such really a form of “affection” outside of marriage? It rather can be said to be by nature ordered to stirring up the sexual passions. Not to showing chaste affection outside of marriage.

Hence one finds these responses to the question when it is asked:forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=10415261&postcount=135

Yes that is of highest importance.

Amen.

 

[Bookcat]

Just when I thought I heard every unbelievable question, someone surprises me. I have never heard any of the things you listed as being a sin if it doesn’t lead to sex…

See here:

1. Here is what a Catholic Answers Apologist noted:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=316171&highlight=passionate+kissing

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=37374&highlight=kissing

1. Hence one will find the question-- from the Examination of Conscience in the Handbook of Prayers 2011 pg 285. Midwest Theological Forum Edited by Fr. Jim Socias

“Did I engage in acts such as…“necking,” passionate kisses, or prolonged embraces?”

(3. Also helpful and expanded into other things: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=10403092&postcount=68)

Now of course one could ask - what is meant by “passionate kissing” there? --well that may need more particular assistance from ones confessor etc in judging ones particular case. He can advise in one applying the principles of moral theology and in living a chaste and modest life as heads in the direction of the Sacrament of marriage.