Tuesday, January 17, 2012
"Like a bomb exploding our hypocrisy" [UPDATED]
By [one in] his or her right mind I mean vital, interested, questing, conflicted, on to one's own myriad defects and myriad gifts, preferably with a secret incendiary devotion to some doomed love/project/cause that promises to bear absolutely no fruit, compromises your physical/emotional health, and makes you look like a fool, loser and/or psychotic in the eyes of the world . . . .
The reason to save your first kiss till the altar, in other words, is not because you are so listless and etiolated and body-despising and intent on being a straight-A Catholic that you’ll suppress and deny your own God-given erotic urge, but because you are so vital, so juiced, so wild with longing, so crazy about your spouse-to-be that you want to make your wedding night a work of art. You want to offer your wedding night to the whole world.
Read Heather King's recent post at Shirt of Flame. Above is the first movement, Allegro con brio, of the Beethoven Sonata op. 22, no. 11 in B-flat major, which she references (the moment I believe she is alluding to is at around 5:28, the return to the home key of B-flat -- not E-flat, as she has it -- after the exposition), played by Claudio Arrau.
UPDATE: Kissing before marriage is not a sin for Catholics, as Mrs. Darwin reminds us. The priest Heather referred to in her original post seems to have been working instead from a list of ultra-Orthodox Jewish dating conventions. Maybe someone should send him this brief article from New York Magazine. An excerpt:
[On] this moonlit Saturday night, standing on the outdoor esplanade of the Winter Garden [at the World Financial Center in downtown Manhattan], Chaim Singer, a 24-year-old yeshiva student from Kew Gardens Hills, proposes to [Chavie] Moskowitz, who, bouncing on her toes, gleefully accepts. Instead of embracing her fiancé, she blows him a kiss. "It's pretty tough not touching," she admits. "That's one of the reasons why we get married so soon." Soon means after three to twelve dates.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
12 comments:
"The reason to save your first kiss till the altar, in other words, is not because you are so listless and etiolated and body-despising and intent on being a straight-A Catholic that you’ll suppress and deny your own God-given erotic urge..."
As though anyone were actually thinking that.
Of course you're right, Paul, and no one is thinking that. I suppose Heather King is suggesting that etiolated, rule-bound body-despising means that you're gonna miss something.
What a peculiar coincidence. For the past week I've been listening on my drive to and from work to the 3rd disk in Andras Schiff's Beethoven sonatas, which includes #11, and have been sort of fascinated by that first movement. I've been meaning to look for some info on it, because I'm not musician enough to know what's going on technically, but it seems interesting. I think I'll listen to it at home tonight--my car is pretty noisy and the quiet passages tend to disappear.
Mac, I would love to hear your thoughts about the piece and the movement. I think Heather mentioned it as an example of a build-up of tension (sexual, harmonic . . . ) that is released in the return to the home key. There are thousands of examples of this in the repertoire, though, and I wasn't sure tell why she chose this one. I personally think there are better examples, but those are just the ones, probably, that speak to me. I don't know what she would say about Wagner in this context . . . : )
Thanks for the link, Pentimento!
Paul, I agree that people who won't kiss before marriage are more likely to be vibrating with suppressed passion rather than listless, but I do think that decision is a form of suppressing and denying one's God-given erotic urge, as Heather puts it -- as if it were a bad thing to feel desire.
Mrs. Darwin, I just corrected the link -- sorry for my typo leaving out your honorific. It was before coffee.
Of course, as with any application of Catholic moral theology, a lot is going to depend on subjective factors. But I don't think anyone could credibly argue that intended (not incidental, obviously) sexual arousal has any place outside of the marital sphere. I would say that french kissing (especially for chaste singles) falls into this category, and, furthermore, at the very least, constitutes a near-occasion of sin, which the Church has always exhorted its faithful to avoid. Obviously, there is no dogmatic Church teaching regarding kissing before marriage, but I think there are many more Church teachings to support this brave priest's teaching, than there are to undermine it. Catholic sexual moral precepts are never to be prudish, but must always be prudent. The idea of confining physical intimacy to marriage has been historically commonplace in Christian society. It is only relatively recent changes in sexual mores that make it appear so highly counter-cultural to our modern minds. I would also second the points brought up by Barbara C. (in the comments at DarwinCatholic), which nobody seems to have addressed.
(Pentimento, I hope you don't mind my cross-posting my comment from over at DarwinCatholic. For some reason, I haven't been able to get it published anyway... Thanks.)
No problem, J.C. Can you give some examples of church teachings that support the priest's statements?
I was thinking of generally reaffirmed teachings of the Doctors of the Church and writings of the Saints that teach us to value and pursue purity and fight carnal temptation, subjugating the passions, salvation of one's spouse as the highest end of marriage, avoiding near occasion of sin...things of this nature that together with logic and reason might bring us to the conclusion that french kissing before marriage is not prudent at the least and probably unchaste. I'm not claiming that french kissing outside of marriage is always gravely sinful. My only quibble here is with the absolute statement that what this priest was teaching is wrong or contrary to Catholic teaching. I think the onus to claim so is one those who defend french kissing before marriage. Is random french kissing with someone whom you've no intention of marrying the same as doing so with someone to whom you are formally betrothed? There are mitigating and subjective factors in any moral act--that is between you and your confessor. I just have not come across any persuasive arguments why it would ever be considered a moral good except something along the lines of it is a way to show "tenderness" with "certain outward actions." (I do find it interesting the Pope JPII refers to "certain forms of kissing" in the passage quoted by Mrs. Darwin, as though there are other forms that might not be purely expressions of tenderness, though I can't say with any certainty not having the whole text or translations...) Anyway, I'm sure everyone is tiring of this tangent...so sorry!
I was thinking of generally reaffirmed teachings of the Doctors of the Church and writings of the Saints that teach us to value and pursue purity and fight carnal temptation, subjugating the passions, salvation of one's spouse as the highest end of marriage, avoiding near occasion of sin...things of this nature that together with logic and reason might bring us to the conclusion that french kissing before marriage is not prudent at the least and probably unchaste. I'm not claiming that french kissing outside of marriage is always gravely sinful. My only quibble here is with the absolute statement that what this priest was teaching is wrong or contrary to Catholic teaching. I think the onus to claim so is one those who defend french kissing before marriage. Is random french kissing with someone whom you've no intention of marrying the same as doing so with someone to whom you are formally betrothed? There are mitigating and subjective factors in any moral act--that is between you and your confessor. I just have not come across any persuasive arguments why it would ever be considered a moral good except something along the lines of it is a way to show "tenderness" with "certain outward actions." (I do find it interesting the Pope JPII refers to "certain forms of kissing" in the passage quoted by Mrs. Darwin, as though there are other forms that might not be purely expressions of tenderness, though I can't say with any certainty not having the whole text or translations...) Anyway, I'm sure everyone is tiring of this tangent...so sorry!
Just wanted to apologize for my comment. I think it was unnecessary. I appreciate much of what Heather writes.
Post a Comment