Sexual Morality for Engaged Couples

  • Thread starter Thread starter stjohnberchmans
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

stjohnberchmans

Guest
I didnt see a thread on here that really discussed this in full.

Obviously engaged couples cannot have full sexual intercourse which is reserved for marriage alone. Though certainly the case has been made that engaged couples are devoted to each other at least partially (not fully committed as in marriage).

Christopher West in Good News About Sex and Marriage briefly discusses that engaged couples are allowed to enjoy each other more fully than dating couples to the point of prolonged kissing and embracing.

Does anyone know what this “prolonged kissing and embracing” means?

Thanks for any help

(Also I know some if not many of you will write either: “why do you want to know? you just want to see how far you can get away with something. you heart isnt in the right place.” or “anything other than a hug and a holding hands is always wrong for non-married couples.” I think there is enough writing by John Paul II to discount the latter topic and as for the first, no in fact I am curious because I want to love and serve God the best that I can as well as grow in my relationship with my future wife as best and fully as I can)
 
ewtn.com/expert/answers/dating.htm from a writer at EWTN theology department.

(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…)
 
Catechism of the Catholic Church:

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.
 
stjohnberchmans said:
I didnt see a thread on here that really discussed this in full.

Obviously engaged couples cannot have full sexual intercourse which is reserved for marriage alone. Though certainly the case has been made that engaged couples are devoted to each other at least partially (not fully committed as in marriage).

Christopher West in Good News About Sex and Marriage briefly discusses that engaged couples are allowed to enjoy each other more fully than dating couples to the point of prolonged kissing and embracing.

Does anyone know what this “prolonged kissing and embracing” means?

Thanks for any help

(Also I know some if not many of you will write either: “why do you want to know? you just want to see how far you can get away with something. you heart isnt in the right place.” or “anything other than a hug and a holding hands is always wrong for non-married couples.” I think there is enough writing by John Paul II to discount the latter topic and as for the first, no in fact I am curious because I want to love and serve God the best that I can as well as grow in my relationship with my future wife as best and fully as I can)
Click to expand...
Prolonged kissing and embracing is prolonged kissing and hugging - making out. If hands and lips start to wander to regions they should not, then you have a problem and it’s time to call it quits. There is nothing wrong or sinful with a lot of passionate kissing.
 
While an engaged couple will not look like a first date…they still need to be very chaste. And in away they need to take even greater precautions due to their being now engaged…
 
But what are the specifics? In other words is it different for people or the same? Is it the act or the desire?

For instance, could one do more than just kissing but have no desire to posses with lust? Bc we can certainly lust even with the smallest acts of affection.
 
Bookcat said:
Such is not the case per se…please read links above.
Click to expand...
I did. It is an EWTN link.

Where in the CCC does it state that prolonged kissing is a grave sin and nothing good can come of it? Are we going to stick a meter on everyone to deterrmine that?

And people wonder why Catholics have hangups about sex. Now it is kissing, too. OK, it *has been *kissing, too. Really? This is determined by tthe church or EWTN?

At what point do couples get to determine this? Better yet, *who *gets to determine this? If the kissing is going to get out of control, then it makes sense. To be told you are sinning gravely because of passionate kissing with your girlfriend or fiance, even though both understand and know the boundaries? Couples are not supposed to enjoy kissing each other? Where are the guidelines for that? Time frames? Limits? What kind of kissing?
 
Bookcat said:
While an engaged couple will not look like a first date…they still need to be very chaste. And in away they need to take even greater precautions due to their being now engaged…
Click to expand...
Your raise a good point. Hands shouldn’t even hold until you’ve been married for over 3 years. Kissing that involves anything more than a quick peck on the cheek, is frowned up, but is allowable after 5 years. Sex is allowed only if you’ve been married for 10 years, and even so-feel bad doing it and immediately go to confession and beg for forgiveness.

😉

Precautions? It’s simple-don’t have sex. There. Those are the precautions. Other than that, relax. Don’t take it an engagement too seriously-laugh, flirt, hold hands, kiss- but more importantly, HAVE FUN.
 
searching04 said:
I did. It is an EWTN link.

Where in the CCC does it state that prolonged kissing is a grave sin and nothing good can come of it? Are we going to stick a meter on everyone to deterrmine that?

And people wonder why Catholics have hangups about sex. Now it is kissing, too. OK, it *has been *kissing, too. Really? This is determined by tthe church or EWTN?

At what point do couples get to determine this? Better yet, *who *gets to determine this? If the kissing is going to get out of control, then it makes sense. To be told you are sinning gravely because of passionate kissing with your girlfriend or fiance, even though both understand and know the boundaries? Couples are not supposed to enjoy kissing each other? Where are the guidelines for that? Time frames? Limits? What kind of kissing?
Click to expand...
This is Catholic Moral Theology. Found too in examines of conscience.

The engaged couple need to form their conscience and live by the teachings of the Church, guided by orthodox Catholic moral theology, and of course the virtues of prudence, chastity, temperance in general and modesty.

One can kiss within reason.

The article linked does a pretty good job of explaining the moral principles involved.

One helpful line from the CCC is:

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.

another is:

Catechism of the Catholic Church:

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.
 
So would you say that giving your fiancé a back massage would be morally wrong? Or does only becoming morally wrong when coupled with passationate kissing? Or is either act only morally wrong when one has the disposition to posses or lustful desire?
 
stjohnberchmans said:
So would you say that giving your fiancé a back massage would be morally wrong? Or does only becoming morally wrong when coupled with passationate kissing? Or is either act only morally wrong when one has the disposition to posses or lustful desire?
Click to expand...
Read the link I posted at the top of the thread. It will be helpful.
 
Bookcat said:
This is Catholic Moral Theology. Found too in examines of conscience.

The engaged couple need to form their conscience and live by the teachings of the Church, guided by orthodox Catholic moral theology, and of course the virtues of prudence, chastity, temperance in general and modesty.

One can kiss within reason.

The article linked does a pretty good job of explaining the moral principles involved.

One helpful line from the CCC is:

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.

another is:

Catechism of the Catholic Church:

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.
Click to expand...
But *you *are the one who has just determined that “once can kiss within reason”, not the church. *You *are the one expanding this to include something that maybe you have an issue with or is your personal opinion. There is absolutely nothing in either portions of the CCC you presented that tell a couple that they are sinning gravely because of passionate kissing.

What did the other senior member just post - “above all, have fun”? Oh, and “lighten up”.
 
searching04 said:
What did the other senior member just post - “above all, have fun”? Oh, and “lighten up”.
Click to expand...
The “lighten up” part is my signature-it’s on every post I have.

What I said was :: pun intended, since were talking about kissing :: tongue in cheek, but also partially serious.

On this site, you’ll see people who think that you shouldn’t even hold hands or peck on the cheek until your married. I find that comical and sort of sad.

Just my opinions.
 
searching04 said:
But *you *are the one who has just determined that “once can kiss within reason”, not the church. *You *are the one expanding this to include something that maybe you have an issue with or is your personal opinion. There is absolutely nothing in either portions of the CCC you presented that tell a couple that they are sinning gravely because of passionate kissing.
Click to expand...
Yes one can kiss within reason.

The Catechism is not meant to be an extensive work of moral theology. Though the two lines I quoted are certainly instructive for those who are engaged.

Not all kissing is “passionate” kissing. There is certainly “chaste” forms of kissing.

I am not presenting just my personal opinion here…

Lust is gravely sinful. Such can lead readily to lust.

Passionate kissing is something that is rather suited for marriage not prior to marriage.

See links above.

By the way…I did not tell a couple they are gravely sinning if they passionately kiss…though such can certainly happen.
 
Some of the modesty rules are super puritanical.

Although in early America there was a tradition called “boarding” where they’d put the couple in the same bed, tie them in sacks up to their neck, put a board between them and let stay together for the night. I’m sure they figured out they could kiss. How did we desced even farther down the purtian ladder than that?

I sometimes feel as if some on this site would suggest my boyfreind and I sit on opposite ends of the couch with my surly great uncle makign sure we don’t let our pinki’s touch. This is incredibly unhealthy.

I can touch my boyfriend without getting in his pants. Infact, we can even be on the couch together with only my dog and fish supervising. If you’re seriously that hot for eachother that you can’t resist sex, I’d suggest therepy. The whole idea of making a commitment to something has gone out the window. Sex is not the end all-be-all.

Basically, if you have a strange turn on, and that (especally for the guys) will cause you pain, then let your fiancee know. Keep your clothes on and enjoy eachother.

I actually am very wary of the implications that not kissing (and not havign some passioniate kissing) before marriage means. This means that you have held hands (maybe while engaged) and now you’re expected to kiss, have sex and figure out how to live together all in one night? Kissing eachother is a skill, you develop with the other. To disregard kissing as the same between any two people. It’s not. Kissing is a magic between two people. The kiss my boyfirend and I share is a unique thing. I’m glad we’re going to have kissing down before we get to the alter. It’s a way of getting to know about a person in the most subtle way.
 
Bookcat said:
Yes one can kiss within reason.

The Catechism is not meant to be an extensive work of moral theology. Though the two lines I quoted are certainly instructive for those who are engaged.

Not all kissing is “passionate” kissing. There is certainly “chaste” forms of kissing.

I am not presenting just my personal opinion here…

Lust is gravely sinful. Such can lead readily to lust.

Passionate kissing is something that is rather suited for marriage not prior to marriage.

See links above.

By the way…I did not tell a couple they are gravely sinning if they passionately kiss…though such can certainly happen.
Click to expand...
No, but your link to EWTN did say that…
 
Bookcat said:
Catechism of the Catholic Church:

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.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

I am not aware that West recommends that prolonged kissing and embracing is OK for those who are not married. I would be surpriesed to see that in his work, with which I am familiar, though I have not read the “Good News About Sex and Marriage” book. Such a position is onconsistent with what I read in his work, “Theology of the Body Explained” and the actual catechesis upon which it is based. Kissing and hugging - making out - at a minimum, places oneself in proximate danger of very grave sin.

Again, such a position is wildly inconsistent with what I have read by West and TOB. If this is indeed his position, then I have lost much respect for his work.

-Tim-
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top