And declaring that anyone who holds a different position is guilty of heresy doesn’t qualify as deliberately seeking to bind the whole Church?
I don’t know if it’s a mortal sin or not, but I would definitely avoid it. I know from experience that kissing like that can lead to some temptations that are very hard to fight. Although I never gave in to those temptations, I now realize that it was crazy of me to dance alongside temptation like that. We are told to flee from temptation, not play chicken with it or dare it to come closer. If you know it could lead to temptations (like tempting a person to go further into sex), but still do it anyways, I’d argue that it is a mortal sin.
Eh you only live once. If God is gonna send me to hell over something so ridiculous so be it. That’s just dumb along with the other ridiculous rules the Church imposes on us. It should just be what the Jerusalem Council sent to the Church in Antioch on not eating any strangled animal or blood and avoiding sexual immorality. God knows where all of these rules came from and why. The Disciples were MARRIED men. The first Pope was a married man and actually if you believe the extra canonical Acts of Peter, he also had a daughter.
Passionate kissing is sexual immorality…
Really I think it’s just showing affection.
Agreed, the big term here is “passionate” and that has so so many different meanings to all. To be honest, when you fall in love the first time, just holding hands can lead to carnal thoughts. But if you are truly falling in love you want to express that love through kissing/making out./passionate kissing. So to call that a mortal sin in every case is a horrible idea in my opinion. Young love is a beautiful innocent pure thing.
I haven’t seen it anywhere either, and Chuck didn’t attach a link. This lack of citation leads me to doubt that Alexander VII actually said that.
If you talked to multiple priests about something, and they all gave similar advise, then I’d say it’s pretty safe to trust them. Their moral advice is more sound than that of armchair theologians whose claims are harder to verify.
That can happen holding hands!
Chunk. Not Chuck. Chunk.
He did write it. You might not like it (too bad) or you might not believe it anyway (again, too bad) but it was written.
There is nothing “innocent” about making out with someone who is not your spouse.
Sorry; my mistake. Chunk, not Chuck.
But if Pope Alexander did write it, then please provide evidence such as a link.
Denzinger 1140 40
Though I suppose this (the opinion that passionate kissing between the unmarried is merely venial) was probably condemned as an error and not necessarily heresy. In the interest of being honest, I should say this might have been an overreach on my part.
Nevertheless, it (the opinion outlined above) has been condemned and accordingly demands internal assent (Demzinger 2007 7) from the Faithful.
Either the priests the OP met with were ignorant of the truth, or were misrepresenting the truth, or were misunderstood by the OP. In no way would they be correct to say that “passionate kissing” is not gravely illicit. Hence, it is incumbent upon us to pray for them.
This type of overreaction really detracts from one’s credibility as it fails to take any circumstances into account (a bride and groom might kiss passionately one minute before they go down the aisle), misuses the terms infallibility and heresy, and you can’t even remember which Pope it was.
In that scenario, the rather foolish bride and groom would be engaging in a gravely illicit act and in all likelihood would be guilty of mortal sin. Their culpability could arguably even be greater as they would only have to wait mere moments to do all the kissing (and more) they want.
It was infallibly defined as an error. Whether it was heresy or mere error seems to be a complex theological question I am not qualified to answer, however, I admitted later the distinction and addressed it.
It was Pope Alexander VII in March of 1666.
While your criticism may have some weight, I believe I have shown more honesty than typical in internet discussions, and I am pretty sure I am the only one in this thread to provide citations of actual Church teaching in support of my position…
Wait I found one other poster who did so: hymin in response #7 also provided a citation of Church teaching but not necessarily on the topic at hand (passionate kissing being a mortal sin)
1666 was centuries ago. Mores change over time. In the 1800s it was morally shocking for a woman to show her legs. Please have some common sense.
It’s pretty clear that the problem with passionate kissing is it may lead to an occasion of sin if he couple gets carried away with their passion. The sinfulness of such an act depends on the circunstances. Whether it is mortal or not depends on whether the knowledge and intent requirements of mortal sin are met, which depends on all the facts and is best left to the priests in the confessional.
Wow…that’s very morally relativistic.
The simple fact is that while the circumstances do matter, at best, passionate kissing before marriage is a near occasion of sin and should be avoided by unmarried couples.
It’s common sense that passionate kissing is, in general, arousing. Perhaps it takes a bit more for women, but certainly for most red-blooded men, it doesn’t take much to get them aroused.
If you are engaging in activities that lead to arousal then you are playing with fire and it’s only a matter of time before it gets a bit out of control.
Still no citations of Church teaching I see…
30 AD was a long time ago too. I guess mores change… Maybe we should rethink this whole “God is immutable thing”
Passionate kissing is gravely illicit. To engage in such behavior is likely a mortal sin. We can stretch “knowledge and intent” far beyond the bounds of reason and say that the typical “make out sessions” of the modern-day unmarried don’t qualify but that’s pretty thin ice to dance with the Devil on.
unless both are asexuals and will not lust at all…
anyway I don’t see how one can not lust or feel sexual desire when kissing passionately?
I guess the guy who kissed the nurse on the front cover of the magazine at end of WWII is burning in hell now. Anyway, I’m done with this discussion as there is no point. The priests in the confessional, as I said, can and do deal with this stuff in a rational way, which I do not see evinced by blanket pronouncements on this board. Bye.
Pistions31, you do well to keep to your studies and develop friendships that affirm it - as well the spiritual and corporal acts of mercy. This will lead you to robust maturity. But this is just a principle. It becomes practical when you talk from time to time with a good priest.