Cohabitation

  • Thread starter Thread starter Coder
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
So, for example, a person who receives communion in a state of mortal sin still receives the Body and Blood of Christ.
You are saying that the graces of marriage are later received upon repentance however this not true of the Eucharist (as far as I know). Why are not both sacraments similar in this regard?
 
You are saying that the graces of marriage are later received upon repentance however this not true of the Eucharist (as far as I know). Why are not both sacraments similar in this regard?
The Eucharist remains the Body and Blood of Christ for as long as it retains the appearance of bread. When it’s digested it is no longer a sacrament and no longer gives grace. If a person receives communion in a state of mortal sin, he misses out on that communion’s grace entirely because by the time he has reconciled, it is no longer the Body and Blood of Christ.

The matrimonial sacrament, however, creates a bond that is permanent and indissoluable. It doesn’t disappear when a couple commits a mortal sin. It doesn’t disappear ever. The catechism says that Christ gives grace given to couples by reason of their state of life. Thus, married couples receive the grace of their state of life once they are able to receive it (i.e., once they are reconciled with God). If they married in a state of mortal sin, they “miss out” on the grace that would have been supplied at the start of their marriage, but are able to receive the grace that Christ continues to supply.
 
To: the post that includes the story of the priest preparing a couple for marriage and instructs the couple (at least I pray he instructed both parties) to receive the Sacrament of Reconciliation. The woman spoke up that she did not think she needed to receive Reconciliatin. This seems a very arrogant response. After all it was she who sought the priest (as part of the couple) for preparation and then behaves as though she can pick and choose which things she wants to participate in with regards to the preparation. I say “right on” to the priest who then walked away from the wedding in which the spirit was not (seemingly) present at least with any respect for the institution of Marriage from the bride-to-be’s point of view.

To: the idea/concept of this thread, my opinion, as a general topic, is that it is absolutely NONE of our business. When we get into these types of righteousness discussions and exclusions we become like the Pharisees that Jesus tried to get through to. Stop the separation!

Teach, remind and then leave it to God; I am not in any position to throw the first, middle, or even last stone in this or any discussion that causes someone to be an outcast from any part of the church that Jesus gave so much to found. I’ll never truly understand the price He paid and without such knowledge, I am not in a position (nor have I been given the authority) to judge.
I’m unclear about how it is possible to declare on one hand that this hypothetical bride was arrogant and that a hypothetical priest would therefore be “right on” in denying her what the Church has decreed is her right, and yet to say on the other hand that the topic of discussion for the thread is none of our business, inherently pharisaical, and stonethrowing of its very nature. After all, canon law required the bride to seek out the priest in order to exercise her right to marry. Marriage is not a treat, something that is the priest’s perogative to give to whom he pleases.

:confused:

I see the thread as an honest inquiry into why the Church seems to say that her members have a right to commit sacrilege, even amid some amount of public scandal, even as she strenuously warns them away from it. I think it is a really good question, and the problem that leads to it is one worthy of Solomon’s consideration.
 
The Eucharist remains the Body and Blood of Christ for as long as it retains the appearance of bread. When it’s digested it is no longer a sacrament and no longer gives grace. If a person receives communion in a state of mortal sin, he misses out on that communion’s grace entirely because by the time he has reconciled, it is no longer the Body and Blood of Christ.
I still give you A+ for outstanding effort and staying with the question. 🙂 I wonder if the effects of the grace of the Eucharist are a strengthening in the Holy Spirit and therefore can be lifelong. For example if someone were to receive the Eucharist (properly disposed) and later sin seriously and then confess, I could see their receptions of the Eucharist as possibly part of their spiritual growth along the path.

Also, it seems that you are saying that if the graces received (which I think may be the case) from the Eucharist were lifelong then it would not be a sin to receive Him in a state of sin. This doesn’t make sense to me (but again I am grateful for some aspects to consider).
 
At the same time, today many people still assume you are having sex just because you are together in general.
That’s actually a very interesting concept although consider the audience for “scandal”. For people who are not followers of Jesus, if they assume this they are not scandalized. However, I think that people of faith who know you and that you are serious about your faith would not be scandalized or at least they might consider other possibilities.
 
…it seems that you are saying that if the graces received (which I think may be the case) from the Eucharist were lifelong then it would not be a sin to receive Him in a state of sin. This doesn’t make sense to me (but again I am grateful for some aspects to consider).
“Oh happy fault, oh necessary sin of Adam, which gained for us so great a Redeemer!”
(from the Easter Vigil liturgy)

Just because God can bring something good out of an action doesn’t mean the action itself was not sinful. It just means that God remains good, and seeks us out even in our sinfulness.

The Eucharist, of course, wipes away venial sin. If we approach in mortal sin, then our actions will condemn us. If only we hear the condemnation, though, soften our hearts and return in repentance, we will be forgiven.

When God corrects, it is always for our good, always in the interest of our redemption. Only our hardheartedness keeps us from His goodness and unrelenting love. God’s correction is nothing other than the reality of our choices making themselves felt.

A marriage entered into in a state of mortal sin (or else marred by mortal sin after vows are exchanged) is an opportunity for grace that God leaves open, if we only open ourselves to the grace offered. This lifelong relationship between the one man and the one woman is really life long. In the case of Eucharist that you mention, it is the single opportunity for communion with Christ that is lost…irreplaceable, but not unrepeatable. At each Mass (and within each marriage in which grace has been rejected, for that matter, whether before or after vows), Christ waits in longing for our return to Him, for us to hear his invitation and approach, having been turned from pavement and into soil again by His call to the Sacrament of Penance. (This could get into a discussion about the one eternal Sacrifice that each Mass returns to…in that sense, the door is always open. Only the particular opportunities are temporary. That’s not where I’m going.)

What I mean to say is that it is our hardheartedness alone that closes the doors of grace. The door of God’s love is always open. The reality of what it means to turn towards Him or away is natural, though, and not arbitrary. God’s justice is nothing other than the truth. We cannot reject Him and turn to Him at the same time. We cannot both choose love and reject its demands, as they are all necessary to love’s nature. We cannot choose life and reject love. It is impossible, because by God’s great gift, our choices matter.
 
*"*A marriage entered into in a state of mortal sin (or else marred by mortal sin after vows are exchanged) is an opportunity for grace that God leaves open, … In the case of Eucharist that you mention, it is the single opportunity for communion with Christ that is lost…
This is interesting. You are saying that the nature of these sacraments (in relation to my question) is by the will of God? You are saying that Jesus allows (does not desire or approve of course) that marriage can be received in a state of sin? Is there a Church document or writing of a saint that might provide further insight?

Thank you.
 
This is interesting. You are saying that the nature of these sacraments (in relation to my question) is by the will of God? You are saying that Jesus allows (does not desire or approve of course) that marriage can be received in a state of sin? Is there a Church document or writing of a saint that might provide further insight?

Thank you.
I’m not sure what you’re looking for? Yes, marriage can be received in mortal sin…that is, some mortal sins are impediments to marriage, but not all.

The Lord gave the Church the authority to bind and loose. The Church expresses her decrees of how she will bind and loose in canon law, which are most certainly Church documents. Since the authority of the Church to impose canon law on the faithful comes from the Lord, to that extent the Lord allows what the Church allows. Therefore, the Lord does allow marriage to be received in a state of sin, although, as you point out, neither the Lord nor the Church desires or approves of it. I know of no time at which marriage before cohabitation was not the accepted norm of the Church, regardless of what might have been the local practice.

This is not to say that the canon law on this is immutable. The Church has the authority to define what is and is not an impediment. As far as I know, the Church could make active cohabitation an impediment to marriage. I don’t see that happening, for pastoral reasons, any more than I see the Church going back to making the Sacrament of Penance a matter of public confession before an entire congregation. Nevertheless, if the discovery of cohabitation by one’s family or the police or whatever commonly resulted in a choice between death and marriage, then it would be a new ballgame. The Church might need to protect the reasonable expectation that free mutual choice was given. For reasons such as that, it could decree that couples under the duress of cohabitation could not validly marry.

(No, I’m not saying “the Church could do whatever it wanted.” The leadership of the Holy Spirit must be taken as a given, or the discussion becomes worse than pointless.)
 
She should have listened to the advice of The Priest, to go to confession. If she doesnt believe that cohabitation is a sin, what else doesnt she believe, why would she even want a Catholic Marriage, I dont get it, I dont blame the Priest for walking out., in disgust.Some of these people who the Priest has to put up with is enuff to make a priest throw his hands up. No wonder some of them stray, it`s a thankless job that they do in a lot of cases.
 
She should have listened to the advice of The Priest, to go to confession. If she doesnt believe that cohabitation is a sin, what else doesnt she believe, why would she even want a Catholic Marriage, I dont get it, I dont blame the Priest for walking out., in disgust.Some of these people who the Priest has to put up with is enuff to make a priest throw his hands up. No wonder some of them stray, it`s a thankless job that they do in a lot of cases.
I know a few priests personally and what is unfortunate is that almost all of them have said that weddings are their least favorite sacrament to impart. Mainly it’s because of the couples involved. So many don’t understand what the Sacrament of Marriage is about. It’s all about their wedding and not the marriage. Many of these priests have become somewhat negative and jaded over it which is so sad. Our priest who married us and is a friend of ours said at our mass that ours was one of the few marriages he was overjoyed and proud to be a part of, saying there are some couples he wouldn’t want them to be so close to the altar.
 
That’s actually a very interesting concept although consider the audience for “scandal”. For people who are not followers of Jesus, if they assume this they are not scandalized. However, I think that people of faith who know you and that you are serious about your faith would not be scandalized or at least they might consider other possibilities.
This is true, but also consider that there are people who are “religious” and are church-going people, but are quick to assume and judge. They are the kind who can spread scandal that isn’t even true very quickly. My uncle and his son who made that obnoxious comment about making an honest woman out of me are “devout” Christians - born agains.

And even if they aren’t religious people, look at the damage they can cause. My parents know me very well and knew where I stood with sex and marriage, etc. They are also spiritual people. Yet, because my dad’s brothers planted that seed in their minds, it made them worried for a little bit. Luckily, we have a good enough relationship for them to approach me. But think about other people who may not have felt as comfortable asking me and thus assuming we were having premarital sex.

People will always look to find a downfall in someone who is trying their best to live right - even religious ones, since they are human as well.
 
I know a few priests personally and what is unfortunate is that almost all of them have said that weddings are their least favorite sacrament to impart. Mainly it’s because of the couples involved. So many don’t understand what the Sacrament of Marriage is about. It’s all about their wedding and not the marriage. Many of these priests have become somewhat negative and jaded over it which is so sad. Our priest who married us and is a friend of ours said at our mass that ours was one of the few marriages he was overjoyed and proud to be a part of, saying there are some couples he wouldn’t want them to be so close to the altar.
There You Go! Amen! God Bless!
Like I say, I just dont get it, why want a Catholic Marriage at all with her attitudeWhen I Got married, I complied with everything we had to do, even my wife did, who is not into the Religion as much as I am , even tho she is a good person. I dont get it, that as Catholics , some dont recognize sin for what it is
 
…it made them worried for a little bit.
In today’'s society one can understand the concern of parents for the souls of their children. For those who do strive to please the Lord, I do understand that it doesn’t help when you are doubted and this could even be a bit discouraging. I encourage and support you as you are a good example.
 
I’m not sure what you’re looking for?
I did read an article in the Catholic Encylopedia that concurs to some extent with what you and nodito have been saying. Apparently, Petrus de Palude (a bishop and theologian) indicated that it may not be a sin to marry in a state of sin. He use the term “it seems”. I think that part of the explanation is that a key part of marriage is the consent so as long as the couple maintains their consent then upon repentance Jesus will bless them without them having to restate their vows.
Here’s the article: newadvent.org/cathen/09707a.htm

Apparently, these are deep waters though and this may be somewhat of an open question in theology but the Church in practice seems to follow the conceot that marriage in sin can be valid (provided no impediment). As you know I was having trouble undertstanding this and I thank both you and nodito for helping me.

I think that as the Church we really need to improve our education situation with young people and couples and should probably address this well before engagements take place. I took this as a lesson and already mentioned this to my son who is in his teens so that he is already aware that cohabitation should not be in his mindset (which I don’t think it is anyway but just to help guide him on the right path for the future).
 
that used to mean…used to …lowly white trash types living to gether like animals…shacking up it was called…the lowest of the low…now as you obviously believe…it is ok and even praise worthy…no its not…not in the real RCC or anywhere else…try again at another site…evil is evil…sin is sin…and dont hand us the garbage that yu did…
 
now as you obviously believe…it is ok
:eek:
Apparently you are misunderstanding my previous post. We were discussing whether a state of sin in general effects the validity of marriage. The current practice of the Church and theological discourse on this subject seems to indicate that it doesn’t as long as there are not other impediments. Also cohabitation could indicate that the couple does not properly understand what they are entering into when they marry and may very well be a reason for an invalid marriage. I certainly do not promote cohabitation and stand firmly with the Church that a couple should indeed live morally and live separately until marriage.
 
She should have listened to the advice of The Priest, to go to confession. If she doesnt believe that cohabitation is a sin, what else doesnt she believe, why would she even want a Catholic Marriage, I dont get it, I dont blame the Priest for walking out., in disgust.Some of these people who the Priest has to put up with is enuff to make a priest throw his hands up. No wonder some of them stray, it`s a thankless job that they do in a lot of cases.
Of course she should have listened! And of course the stubbornness and blindness of sin, even among the faithful, is a heavy cross for the clergy. It isn’t a new one, but it is a heavy one. We’d all like to have more power over that than we have. We have to remain faithful, all the same.
I did read an article in the Catholic Encylopedia that concurs to some extent with what you and nodito have been saying. Apparently, Petrus de Palude (a bishop and theologian) indicated that it may not be a sin to marry in a state of sin. He use the term “it seems”. I think that part of the explanation is that a key part of marriage is the consent so as long as the couple maintains their consent then upon repentance Jesus will bless them without them having to restate their vows.
Here’s the article: newadvent.org/cathen/09707a.htm

Apparently, these are deep waters though and this may be somewhat of an open question in theology but the Church in practice seems to follow the conceot that marriage in sin can be valid (provided no impediment). As you know I was having trouble undertstanding this and I thank both you and nodito for helping me.

I think that as the Church we really need to improve our education situation with young people and couples and should probably address this well before engagements take place. I took this as a lesson and already mentioned this to my son who is in his teens so that he is already aware that cohabitation should not be in his mindset (which I don’t think it is anyway but just to help guide him on the right path for the future).
I’m not saying that it is not a sin to marry in a state of sin, particularly when you have been strongly advised to avail yourself of the Sacrament of Penance. I have every reason to believe that it is.

I’m only saying that the Church recognizes that people have a right to marry, when there isn’t an impediment, and that the Church has decided that cohabitation prior to marriage is not an impediment, per se. (Mind you, there are going to be cases where the cohabitation constitutes undue pressure to marry, and would be an impediment.)

Sometimes, the Church has duties that, if fulfilled faithfully, will allow sins to be committed by others. The Church must tell the faithful what is sinful, but the Church cannot control every occasion of sin. One only has to consider the practical fallout in the sects that have tried to do that. The religion gets very sick, and very quickly. The God who gave mankind free will is not a control freak. There is suffering in the world because God allows us to exercise our free will. The Church is sometimes in the same bind.

The other thing I’m saying is that priests are bound to respect the Church’s stand on this issue. They have to listen to their bishops’ policies on marriage. Bishops rely on priests to use their judgement about whether a valid marriage is reasonably likely, but they do not take kindly to priests who invent impediments where an impediment does not exist.
 
At many universities there are no single-sex residence halls at all. I recall a stir last year or perhaps the year before because Durham was closing their last all-women’s dorm, and some of their women Muslim students were possibly going to have to leave school. (I found it interesting that is apparently not a problem for male students to live in mixed accommodation).

Also, one of my daughters graduated university in England (I’m guessing from the reference to “flats” this is also the case here) and this mother, at least, found the mixed gender home to be much more family-like than most dormatory or student apartments my other kids have lived in - not at all salacious but very much like renting a house with your siblings. And a great comfort to know that there was a “man in the house” much of the time, as student flats are typically not in the nicest parts of a city.

I think we need to equip our young people to live moral and chaste lives in the world they actually live in, not the one we wish for or recall from fifty years ago.
This is sadly true. Where my husband and I attended university, there were no single sex buildings, although they did have single sex floors. The university, though, did not permit mixed genders living in the same dorm room, suite or apartment unless they were married and in that case that was usually in graduate housing. I also attended university for a semester in London where I lived in a flat shared by three other young women. We were able to choose if we wanted to live in a mixed gender flat, though. The other flats in our building also had men living in them, but where we were was an apartment building, so you’d have that in the real world anyway.

I do know that if parents raise their children right, most of the time their children will make the right decisions when confronted with situations like this. I had plenty of opportunities to make the wrong decisions while in college here in the States and especially when I lived across the pond totally alone and away from my parents. It actually gave me more of an excuse at 20 to make my parents proud of me rather than to go wild.
 
I’m not saying that it is not a sin to marry in a state of sin,
I was trying to reach agreement with you - don’t blow it now. 🙂 I think theologically that the thinking may be that unlike the Eucharist marrying in the state of sin may not be a further sin. Also, it may be that (as you have said) the state of sin itself is not an impediment. Certainly, we agree that people should seek to marry in a state of grace.
The Church must tell the faithful what is sinful, but the Church cannot control every occasion of sin. One only has to consider the practical fallout in the sects that have tried to do that. The religion gets very sick, and very quickly… There is suffering in the world because God allows us to exercise our free will.
That’s a good point to keep in mind. There must be balance. At the same time we don’t want to imply to cohabitating couples that this is OK or not seriously wrong and I am concerned that we may in some cases be a bit lax in this area.
 
This has been bothering me since reading the entire thread today. There were a few instances where the situation of people cohabitating do it because of financial reasons, using it as no other choice, was brought up.

Now for anyone who knows me, they all know that I am one of the last people to judge another by their actions. I’ve always been the friend and even the stranger or acquaintance where others would approach me to tell me what they did, ask for advice and thank me for never judging them, but also helping them find the way.

So with that said, I do have to disagree with this idea that one has no other way to handle living apart financially. To me, if you trust in God all things will work together and you will be blessed in the end.

My own situation prior to our marriage was very similar to others. Our engagement, which originally was supposed to be just a little over a year, ended up having to be about two years due to certain circumstances. I’m a musician, so I don’t make much money in the first place. My husband is a geochemist and was just starting out - their salaries aren’t much either (like most people just starting out in their jobs). I could have lived with my parents, but I chose to live on my own because I wanted to be independent at least during my engagement. As tempting and financially helpful it would have been, living with my fiance was not an option. I lived in a major metropolitan city, so rent was not cheap, but I figured out a way to live. I worked 3 jobs, 7 days a week. The first year I rented a room from a woman I knew. The next year, my sister decided to take a year off from school to decide what she wanted to do and we shared a little one-bedroom apartment. During that time, my husband bought a one-bedroom condo for the two of us once we got married. I could have gone in and helped him pay for it, but I was an old-fashioned girl and didn’t believe in pooling anything with my fiance until I was married. I will admit it was very difficult for him to handle the mortgage on his own, but he did it by taking a teaching position after work hours.

Was this hard for the two of us financially? You bet it was. It was extremely difficult for me emotionally as well, because I might have had a total of 6-8 days off during those two years, but I didn’t have the time to even think about it until after I was married and didn’t have to work like that anymore. My parents had plenty of money to help me out, but I did not ask them for financial help. I wanted to do it on my own as an adult. I actually suffered a nervous breakdown after the wedding/honeymoon because I was so overworked and had the chance to actually take in what I had been doing for the past two years. I was in such hyper mode before then with planning a wedding, working three jobs and also performing in my first opera that there literally wasn’t any time to think about how I was affected.

The thing is, if you have the will and the faith, you can get through situations like this without putting yourself in major temptation. There was always a light at the end of the tunnel for me because I knew I would not have to work like that once I was married. My husband knew this as well for himself, so we sacrificed. This is how I feel with any engaged couple. The engagement is usually not that long - 2 years tops. The sacrifice and the reward at the end totally pays off. I know and understand how hard and confusing it is for most young people today. Everything is always a shade of gray in today’s world - so many different messages from everyone. Wrong messages - even from the people you trust and think are looking out for your best interests. I think this is happening, too, because they are becoming confused by the world as well. And not to criticize for the sake of criticizing because I do realize that they have a hard situation, but I believe more priests need to not be as afraid to just state things for what it is and try to educate these couples. I realize there is only so much they can do though. But these young people need some sort of stable voice in this sea of confusion. Some don’t get it from their parents and loved ones.

I do not regret what I did and had to suffer through. I couldn’t have lived with myself if I took the easy way. I also had a younger sister and younger cousins I had to think about in terms of setting a good example to them. It made me a stronger person in my faith, helped me understand better who I am as a person and has made my marriage so much stronger and blessed. One of the most beautiful things I received from a few of our spiritually strong friends was that they said they truly felt God there at the wedding. It wasn’t just a wedding, but a total blessing of our marriage by God. Having been a musician at many weddings, I knew what they meant. I’ve done some where you don’t sense God at all and others where you can really feel His presence.

Anyway, I am sharing this story to show young couples or young individuals who might be viewing this thread that if you feel like you won’t be able to handle living on your own due to financial difficulties and feel pressured to live with your fiance or bf/gf, please know it can be done without doing that. You just have to use some ingenuity, fortitude, sacrifice and especially faith. It might be extremely difficult, but always know there is light at the end. And trust me, you will be blessed 10-fold by the end. My almost 6 years of marriage have been the happiest and most blessed times of my life. I wouldn’t trade anything that I did for the world.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top