Child shacking up

[otm]

katy:

As a matter of fact, this is almost a direct quote. He does, however, think he has profound understanding as he studied philosophy as well as his regular major in college. He is under the impression that he has outgrown Christianity, particularly Catholicism. Rigid, out of date, unsophisticated, out of touch, naive, uptight, ad nauseum.
Unfortunately, we have relatives who were “at Woodstock” who encourage and abet this kind of thinking. I look rather stodgy by comparison. At this point, that is all he seems to see. Nice Mommy, but irrelevant. The bunch at the coffeehouse knows sooo much more. Oy.

Yeah, I hear you. My undergraduate degree was in Philosophy too. Amazing how much longer it took me to actually learn something.

He needs to get over the navel gazing and get into the real world of people who have been damaged by the choices they persist in making; sadly, it may be that the only way he can do that is to become one of those statistics.

 

[johntkd]

setter:

If he is planning on having a Catholic wedding, hopefully he will be this honest with the priest in his pre-marriage meetings if he persists in his defiant behavior.

and this will accomplish???

I told my priest when i was living with my Fiance and his response was well the church does not condone that, gave us a book to read,
and asked us to possibly rethink our decision,which is all he can do,
and all the Church can do,they choose and rightfully so not to judge people,instead they present what is Church teaching and ask you to reconsider,

which as parents is all we also can do.
Juding them will not help,and bringing up statistics,quite frankly prove nothing as if they dig at even the ones the church uses there are tons of variables that are not disclosed to give such statistics, such as if one is an alcoholic, or if one comes from a broken home that one of the parents have been married more than twice,thats right the exact stat sheet used by the church needs certain other variables to get the percentages they claim…
the plain truth of the matter is there is no higher divorce rate for non Catholics as any other denomination, its actually pretty much 40% of married couples get a divorce,there are many reasons for this, our society in general is a major one,between how expensive everything is,to the fact that divorces are so easy play the biggest factors. US citizens are selfish by nature,and spoiled with an easy life. these are what makes divorce rates so high in the US,

Now I will say one other thing before I go, Our “pre marriage class”
which is designed to have the respecive couples get to know each other better and to list problems that are not thought of, and cover “major issues” that arise, lists installing the toilet paper roll properly and how to properly put away socks a full 2 chapters ahead of cohabitating as leading causes of divorce, think on that for a while, because of all the people i know and the ones that are divorced none were even close to those reasons which were important enough to be question #18 in Chapter 2 of 48 questions
chapter 1 had 17 total questions in it and were all religion questions…

talk,Pray , and do not judge are your best bets.
John

 

[OutinChgoburbs]

otm:

Yeah, I hear you. My undergraduate degree was in Philosophy too. Amazing how much longer it took me to actually learn something.

He needs to get over the navel gazing and get into the real world of people who have been damaged by the choices they persist in making; sadly, it may be that the only way he can do that is to become one of those statistics.

My husband teaches philosophy, and is probably one of the few free-market philosophers around; the only one I know anyway, who successfully markets it and makes a living at it without reaching into the dumpster of fallacy to promote a cause. It also leaves out such so-called philosophies which are really opinions, such “So-and-So’s Educational Philosophy” web sites that spring up on the Internet.

In any event- what passes for philosophy and what IS philosophy are often two different things. If the young man is using philosophy as an excuse for his behavior, he should tell his mama on what system he bases his choice to live with his intended. He should then be able to tell her using logic how his epistemology relates to his metaphysics, and therefore his ethics in the matter; and how his ethics effects the aesthetic of his family, his town and society-at-large. He might try to use “politics” in place of “logic” but that just won’t do in a discourse on traditional form.

There you go, Katy- when he gets on your nerves, throw all that at him in a calm voice. He may never recover.

 

[TridentineFan]

I have not seen this point brought up in this thread yet: Parents need to make a decision whether or not to set foot in the house of their shacking-up children (and, further, their children married civilly, but not in the Church). As Catholics, we are not to cause scandal by appearing to (or actually) condoning openly, objectively sinful behavior. An option you may want to consider telling your son, very nicely and calmly, that he and his fiance are welcome in your home during their engagement (sleeping in separate bedrooms if they stay over), but that you will not be entering their home until after the wedding. You should not be seen entering a “den of sin,” whether it be a couple shacking up or a house of prostitution. (Of course, we are not bound never to enter the homes of sinners because then we could go nowhere, including in our own homes! But we are not to appear to condone brazen, willful sin.) Jesus spent time with sinners, but he did not go into their homes or whorehouses while they were in the act.

And, of course, all monetary support for their wedding is gone. If they want to play like grown-up married people before they are married by the Church, then they can have all the responsibility of grown-up married people. You might want to avoid speaking like this is a punishment, as he is a grown man, but speak as if you are fully respecting his choice to be independent. You would never want to impinge on his adult, informed decision to be independent, and with independence comes the blessing of responsibility . . .

 

[OutinChgoburbs]

TridentineFan:

I have not seen this point brought up in this thread yet: Parents need to make a decision whether or not to set foot in the house of their shacking-up children (and, further, their children married civilly, but not in the Church). . .

The young man in question claims to no longer be Catholic. Granted, once you’re baptized, you’re in, whether you want to admit it or not. But as he has renounced the Church, or thinks he has, a civil wedding is entirely up to him and his intended (provided that she, too, has decided she is no longer Catholic). We’ve all covered this topic in the CA Forums with apologists before this. If he has decided he is not Catholic, and if she is not Catholic, and if finances are to the point as they claim where they must co-habit without benefit of marriage- well, that is no excuse at all. Vegas and the Elvis Chapel await!!!

Reading over my posts, I hope you did not think I suggested that Katy cough up for this civil marriage of the non-Catholics (Provided the nice girl has decided she is non-Catholic, too), or any of the trappings. No, no, no. Even though some people in our area mentally acquaint Lee n Eddie’s with a lot of Catholic functions, they are a buffet place that charges by the head, complete with all the paper plates, etc., at a really reasonable rate. leeandeddies.com/
(I recommend the 3-entree buffet). What I was suggesting was that the excuse of living together to save money was a fallacy, and if they didn’t need the Church but wanted a wedding, well then, they could certainly afford a judge and a cut-rate caterer on their own dime in their apartment or backyard.

 

[DreadVandal]

mikew262:

I understand your point and in theory I have no argument against it. While living together is against what the church teaches, like it or not, it’s not as taboo (society wise) as it used to be. One has to weigh what you may gain versus what you may lose, if you stubbornly refuse to give your daughter a wedding if she has been living with the person she loves. You may win the battle on “sticking to your guns” concerning what the church officially teaches; however what harm have you done in your relationship with your daughter. Not to mention, what you as a parent have missed out on. Those moments are lost forever.

You have a daughter, so you have some perspective. It’s easy to pontificate and take the moral high ground when you have nothing to lose like some folks tend to do.

If your child is a full blown adult, they can make whatever decision they want, all you can do is advise. It may be the wrong one, but as parents we should love our kids no matter what decisions they make. Refusing to be an active part of one of the most important events of their lives, isn’t showing much love to me.

Remember that Jesus said, “unless you hate mother, father, son, and daughter…you are not worthy of me.”

There are more important things than one’s relationship with one’s son or daughter. Those relationships, as important as they are, are not absolute. Fidelity to Christ trumps pleasant relations with one’s spouse even. It is hard, but not as hard as being nailed to a cross and taking the sins of the world into one’s being for their salvation.

 

[DreadVandal]

And one more thing: I’ve heard (and hear it frequently) that it is not good to hurt other’s feelings. Of course we shouldn’t do it intentionally. However, people are responsible for their own feelings and maybe, on some occasions, hurt feelings is actually a good thing. If their feelings weren’t hurt, it would mean they didn’t care. That their feelings do get hurt might prompt them to think more seriously. Their consciences might be pricked. No amount of so-called damage due to “hurt feelings” is irreparable and no finite good (even relational good) is worth not doing all that we can to aid in the salvation of our children’s souls.

My kids may get hurt feelings from some of the things I say. But I would rather have them having hurt feelings now, then have to spend eternity in the eternal torments of hellfire due to unrepented mortal sin.

 

[DreadVandal]

In line with what others have said, I say too: Never believe a child who says we just want to live together for convenience or finance. The truth is always, “we really want to live together to get our freak on.”

 

[DreadVandal]

OutinChgoburbs:

The young man in question claims to no longer be Catholic. Granted, once you’re baptized, you’re in, whether you want to admit it or not. But as he has renounced the Church, or thinks he has, a civil wedding is entirely up to him and his intended (provided that she, too, has decided she is no longer Catholic). We’ve all covered this topic in the CA Forums with apologists before this. If he has decided he is not Catholic, and if she is not Catholic, and if finances are to the point as they claim where they must co-habit without benefit of marriage- well, that is no excuse at all. Vegas and the Elvis Chapel await!!!

Reading over my posts, I hope you did not think I suggested that Katy cough up for this civil marriage of the non-Catholics (Provided the nice girl has decided she is non-Catholic, too), or any of the trappings. No, no, no. Even though some people in our area mentally acquaint Lee n Eddie’s with a lot of Catholic functions, they are a buffet place that charges by the head, complete with all the paper plates, etc., at a really reasonable rate. leeandeddies.com/
(I recommend the 3-entree buffet). What I was suggesting was that the excuse of living together to save money was a fallacy, and if they didn’t need the Church but wanted a wedding, well then, they could certainly afford a judge and a cut-rate caterer on their own dime in their apartment or backyard.

Hey do they have a Midget Elvis that marries people? I was thinking of renewing my vows with my wife but I want a Midget Elvis to do it.

 

[EtienneGilson]

otm:

Ignorant my eye. I am the one that said it, and I will stand by what I have said.

Since you have such an extensive background in philosophy you should enjoy this:

The Definition of Morality
The term “morality” can be used either

descriptively to refer to a code of conduct put forward by a society or,
some other group, such as a religion, or
accepted by an individual for her own behavior or
normatively to refer to a code of conduct that, given specified conditions, would be put forward by all rational persons.
seop.leeds.ac.uk/entries/morality-definition/

We have no impression that her son knowes it is wrong but is going to do it anyways. By being an agnostic he has regected the moral system which considers the particular act immoral. I don’t run around saying Catholics are immoral because they don’t observe the Sabbath or Jewish dietary laws because Catholics don’t accept that moral system.

What I said was essentially what OutinChgoBurbs said…ask some questions about what he really does believe to get him to think about the nature of marriage. But this must not be done too confrontationally.

I am not so certain that he will have adequate answers but neither am I certain that he is willing to accept a Catholic view of marriage as an agnostic. If you have such a good BS indicator I would think that you are overcome by the smell of your own arguments. I highly doubt that he is living a celibate life now, prior to cohabitaiton. Living together is not likely an excuse to commence sexual relations, there are likely other reasons such as a willingness to become more serious in the commitment, experience spending more time together etc. I would even go so far as to think that he likely thinks his decision is the mature and moral one.

If you go up to your 26 year old son and say: “You are lazy and immoral (both words which have been used in this thread) and I will not support you in your wedding or even set foot into your house (den of evil as someone put it).” Than you can be certain that you just severed your relationship with your son and that you were such a wonderful sign of Christian charity that he will likely never set foot into a Catholic Church again until it is your funeral.

All the evidence of divorce etc. is a symptom of the new view of marriage, not of people living together. Pre-marital cohabitation is a symptom of this new view, not a cause of divorce.

Ignorant? No, I happen to have studied it a bit deeper than you seem to have bothered with. The more I see, and the more I hear, and the more I read - not from the Church but from the world - the more I am convinced of the wisdom of the Church, which is also known as the wisdom of the Holy Spirit.

Now sociology calls it hazardous, and the Church all along has called it immoral. and you think I’m ignorant?

If you have studied it so much I would expect something intelligent in your post; instead I am bombarded by the same old tired statistics which are not proof against the behaviour but a symptom of a view of marriage which does not accurately reflect the nature of man.

The dam is cracked and leaking, you cannot stop its course by calling it immoral and lazy. Start plugging those holes with a new mortar or sit by, watch it break and help in the reconstruction. Standing ontop of the dam shouting at it will only hurt it and you.

 

[contemplative]

EtienneGilson:

If you go up to your 26 year old son and say: “You are lazy and immoral (both words which have been used in this thread) and I will not support you in your wedding or even set foot into your house (den of evil as someone put it).” .

Certainly there are unspoken ways for a parent to relay their feelings about this sort of situation. No words need to ever be spoken…" You are lazy and immoral"…actions speak much louder than words. I say “hooray” if a parent doesn’t suck up to a child who is living a blatantly immoral life. The OP’s son sounds like he knows the right thing to do.

Than you can be certain that you just severed your relationship with your son and that you were such a wonderful sign of Christian charity that he will likely never set foot into a Catholic Church again until it is your funeral

I think you are assuming to much here…maybe he won’t go to his own parent’s funeral…oh well.

 

[setter]

We have no impression that her son knowes it is wrong but is going to do it anyways. By being an agnostic he has regected the moral system which considers the particular act immoral.

There is every indication that the son knows exactly that what he is doing is immoral. It would appear that he is not so untypical of so many yound adults in simply choosing to turn a blind eye to ignore and likely at some level to deny or rationalize his sin. Perhaps more of a shift/exchange of belief system to secular humanism that is God is irrelevent rather than true agnosticism.

Originally Posted by katy

However, he has decided he no longer wants to deal with God and “Catholic stuff” and is planning to have the girl move in with him to save on expenses until they arrange to get married.
I was devastated by the agnostic shift, since he was the most spiritual one as a child, …

I am not so certain that he will have adequate answers but neither am I certain that he is willing to accept a Catholic view of marriage as an agnostic.If you have such a good BS indicator I would think that you are overcome by the smell of your own arguments.

The odor that I detect and typical of cohabitating self-sufficent young adult fallen away believers is a “I want my cake and eat it too” seduction by worldly values of self-seeking and sense of entitlement values, IMO.

I highly doubt that he is living a celibate life now, prior to cohabitaiton. Living together is not likely an excuse to commence sexual relations, there are likely other reasons such as a willingness to become more serious in the commitment, experience spending more time together etc. I would even go so far as to think that he likely thinks his decision is the mature and moral one.

Extending your benefit of doubt to the point that now sin choices become moral choices for this fallen away Catholic seems quite a stretch beyond plausibility. Morality involves an intellectual encompass and willful embrace, and by all indications this is a bright young man who chose to turn away from what he knows is right. I will grant that there is always the remote possibility that he is truly self-deluding himself beyond a conscious recognition of turning from his moral conscience, but I doubt it.

If you go up to your 26 year old son and say: “You are lazy and immoral (both words which have been used in this thread) and I will not support you in your wedding or even set foot into your house (den of evil as someone put it).” Than you can be certain that you just severed your relationship with your son and that you were such a wonderful sign of Christian charity that he will likely never set foot into a Catholic Church again until it is your funeral.

Agreed. A better aprroach would be for the parents in a non-judgemental way to simply reiterate their personal values, how the values demonstrated by their son’s lifestyle choice conflicts with their heldfast values, and their Christian charity does not extend to enabling or giving the appearance of condoning one’s sinful choices, i.e., love the sinner, hate the sin.

All the evidence of divorce etc. is a symptom of the new view of marriage

, not of people living together. Pre-marital cohabitation is a symptom of this new view, not a cause of divorce.
What “new view” of marriage could this possibly be where divorce and shacking-up is a “symtom” of such? Since when has marriage stopped being marriage? Divorce and cohabitation are more often a symptom of being confused/immature/self-serving/ungrounded in absolute values, falling/breaking away from the faith, moral relativism, …

If you have studied it so much I would expect something intelligent in your post; instead I am bombarded by the same old tired statistics which are not proof against the behaviour but a symptom of a view of marriage which does not accurately reflect the nature of man

.
It is not the statistics that are tired, but the moral relativism of this culture and the reaping the consequences of sin that are growing weary and becoming more symptomatic of excluding God from the “new view” of marriage that denies and offends the true nature of man made in the image of God.

 

[setter]

The dam is cracked and leaking, you cannot stop its course by calling it immoral and lazy. Start plugging those holes with a new mortar or sit by, watch it break and help in the reconstruction. Standing ontop of the dam shouting at it will only hurt it and you

I am curious as to exactly what this “new mortal” is that you suggest to plug the spiritual holes evidenced by the statistics. I do believe that in your “new view” for marriages you are fully ignoring and neglecting to gather and lay the sure foundation . Let’s not forget that conviction for sin and conversion is ultimately the work of the Holy Spirit.

“Every one then who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise man who built his house upon the rock; and the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat upon that house, but it did not fall, because it had been founded on the rock. And every one who hears these words of mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house upon the sand; and the rain fell, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat against that house, and it fell; and great was the fall of it.” **Matt. 7:24-27 **

 

[mikew262]

contemplative:

There is no law requiring parents to cough up money to pay for a wedding…under any circumstance. A wedding party may be ( not must be ) a gift parents give… No parent should feel obligated.

No, a parent is not obligated to give their daughter a nice wedding, but shouldn’t you want too?

 

[mikew262]

contemplative:

There is no law requiring parents to cough up money to pay for a wedding…under any circumstance. A wedding party may be ( not must be ) a gift parents give… No parent should feel obligated.

No, a parent is not obligated to give their daughter a nice wedding, but shouldn’t you want too?

 

[mikew262]

otm:

Ignorant my eye. I am the one that said it, and I will stand by what I have said.

Within 10 years of the start of “no fault” divorce, divorces started to shoot through the roof. That was about the same timing for the “sexual revolution” that took place. Given that the large majority of first divorces occur between the 5 and 10 year period, there certainly is evidence that a lot of people who went through (and applied the tennats of) the sexual revolution were getting divorced in droves; and the statistics haven’t varied much since then. There is a large and growing body of evidence in the area of sociology that is pointing to pre marital sexual activity as a clear indicator of future problems in marriage.

Further, I have a very good BS indicator (I can smell a pile of it for what it is). He believes he is doing the moral thing? Give me a break! He is thinking with his hormones and looking for any excuse for the fact that he wants to get free sex.

The only “moral” system that permits such activity is one that is based on relativism, which in its most simple terms says that “I can do anything I want as long as I don’t “hurt” anyone. We “love” each other. It’s ok because we are consenting adults.”

The only problem with that is that it always comes before the carnage. And then what do they say? “We weren’t “meant” for each other”.

It is not immoral? Then do a little research and tell me why you find so many women non-virgins who are hurt not once, but by a series of men; why they have become so cynical about men and marriage; and why they keep repeating the same behavior hoping the next one really will follow up with that promise of marriage.

Then do a little more research of the couples who slept together before marriage and get a divorce, and ask them if they had the chance to do it all over, if they would have forgone foreknowledge.

Then do a little more research and ask the ones that have been able to survive the 10 year period, and ask them the same question.

With the pain, the build up of cynicism, the high rate of divorce, the unhappy marriages, the women who have been conned into the Pill because that is how they are supposed to take care of any “accidents” (we call them children); the abortions, the women in marriage that have anything but a happy sex life, feeling that they are to be on call sexually for a person they are not convinced respects them, and tell me that the Church has no wisdom in calling that a sin.

Ignorant? No, I happen to have studied it a bit deeper than you seem to have bothered with. The more I see, and the more I hear, and the more I read - not from the Church but from the world - the more I am convinced of the wisdom of the Church, which is also known as the wisdom of the Holy Spirit.

Now sociology calls it hazardous, and the Church all along has called it immoral. and you think I’m ignorant?

Do I sense some deep seated anger here?

 

[mikew262]

DreadVandal:

Remember that Jesus said, “unless you hate mother, father, son, and daughter…you are not worthy of me.”

There are more important things than one’s relationship with one’s son or daughter. Those relationships, as important as they are, are not absolute. Fidelity to Christ trumps pleasant relations with one’s spouse even. It is hard, but not as hard as being nailed to a cross and taking the sins of the world into one’s being for their salvation.

Yes, I know what scripture says, but it takes a pretty stern parent to turn their back on their children, because in your mind they have sinned.

 

[setter]

Yes, I know what scripture says, but it takes a pretty stern parent to turn their back on their children,

Not so much a stern parent as a faithful and decisive disciple of Jesus Christ to stand fast with what is right and moral. Often the unpleasant and forsaking personal needs and wants is the cross and cost of discipleship demanded by Jesus for His would be followers.

"Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s foes will be those of his own household. He who loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he who loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; and he who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. He who finds his life will lose it, and he who loses his life for my sake will find it.” Matt. 10:34-39

because in your mind they have sinned.

Sin is an objective reality.Your above wording casts a subjective personal determination as to whether or not a cohabitating couple is commiting sin or not – “…**in your mind ** they have sinned”. Is it not a sin in your mind?

 

[lovemylife]

I was brought up Catholic and at 18 I basically left the church to do my own thing. I recently started attending church again and my husband is going through RCIA. My Catholic faith is stronger than ever…I am 31 now.

You have done the best for your son, and that is giving him a foundation. One day when he returns to the church (most likely he will), it will be because of the foundation you have given him. I think praying for him is the best thing you can do right now

 

[redtech]

DreadVandal:

One thing I would do is make it clear that when they stay over, that they are to sleep in seperate bedrooms. I think that is a good way of reinforcing the morality of your home.

My parents did this to my 37 year old brother and 38 year old fiance last year. It was hilarious but they did sleep in different rooms. They got married this past October so now they’re ok to sleep in the same room.