Dumping your 'near occasion of sin'

[Neil_Anthony]

Some priests will tell you in confession that if you have pre-marital sex, you have to end the relationship with your gf (or bf). But it seems to me like that would be another sin, … you know how some guys are known for sleeping with a woman then dumping her. The old “he only wants what he can’t have” thing. Is breaking up with the person really the correct thing to do if you sinned together? That could be really hurtful to the other person. It might mean you would go through life starting relationships and having to end them when you slip. What do you think?

 

[rpp]

While I think that, in general, if you are unable to remain chaste with someone, you should end the relationship, I think there are some exceptions.

If you have been dating for a long time and had a “slip up”, you **both deeply **regret it then, after a (probably short) period of separation, I think you can resume your relationship.

Another situation would be a sort of “conversion experience” where the unmarried couple realizes, more or less at the same time, the real need for chastity. Presuming that the previous unchaste behavior was not habitual, I think it is possible for the relationship to continue. In fact, I know a very nice couple who went through this very process during the 5 years they dated while in college.

I will add, however, that I think the above situation represent the minority, not the majority, of relationships.

 

[Neil_Anthony]

While I think that, in general, if you are unable to remain chaste with someone, you should end the relationship, I think there are some exceptions.

If you have been dating for a long time and had a “slip up”, you **both deeply **regret it then, after a (probably short) period of separation, I think you can resume your relationship.

Another situation would be a sort of “conversion experience” where the unmarried couple realizes, more or less at the same time, the real need for chastity. Presuming that the previous unchaste behavior was not habitual, I think it is possible for the relationship to continue. In fact, I know a very nice couple who went through this very process during the 5 years they dated while in college.

I will add, however, that I think the above situation represent the minority, not the majority, of relationships.

Thanks. In the situation I’m thinking of, only one partner had the ‘conversion’ and this left the other partner really angry and talking about how the relationship was ‘going backwards’ and that this was like being advised to ‘divorce’ someone you had made a commitment to, etc.

 

[Sr_Sally]

If the relationship is so far along emotionally that one member talked about ‘divorce’ when the other suggested breaking up, than maybe they should start their pre-cana and get married asap.

If they slipped up early on in a relationship, then perhaps the ‘near occasions’ can be controlled through less alone time and more group or public activities instead of stay home dates.

But if only one person in the couple is Catholic, or only one of them is having this epiphany, than brealking up is probably the best thing. The Catholic person should be doing their best to find another committed Catholic to date and marry.

 

[Volodymyr_988]

Unless you are already engaged to be married, dump him/her.

I know, I had a really “freaky” girlfriend and we couldn’t stop. I had to give her the ax, otherwise we would still have committed the sins.

And, now that I’m married (for almost 7 years and with 4 children ) I’m glad that I dumped her and regret the sins we committed.

 

[GraceDK]

I would suggest dumping someone to whom you have comitted yourself through love and a strong language of love, whether bodily or only verbally, would be a wrong.
Is the law of God’s Love not about faithfulness and about unconditional love?
what if you fight with your spouse? should you then get separated? no…it does not make sense.
Problemsolving is a part of human life… so is sins and faults.
What if you both get into a situation where you lie to one another … would this be a reason why people should definately break up?
Tell me… why is it that sex is such a bad sin whereas other sins would not lead to having to leave the other person?
I dont follow that logic.
Yes… if you are tempted and fall when you are together then you gotta work on that, talk to a priest, talk seriously about marriage, talk about your limits, make limits and rules and take a few days apart in order to pray… but how can leaving the other person be a solution…? adding misery to misery. I would suspect that most serious catholics who are in a serious relationship are moving towards marriage. Being intimate and then being dumped is not charity… and for the dumping part it is not very pious behaviour to think: “I have used you but I wont go through a restoration process with you”. being helped and taught the beauty of pure love is rather the way… the only way too if two human beings actually love one another.

 

[Huiou_Theou]

I agree very much with GraceDK, but there are a quite a few details to think of here –

In the first place, it is really fornication we are talking about here. In a situation of pre-matrimony/marriage, sexual generative action IS the way the marriage becomes permanent.

Ergo, Joseph the just could have divorced Mary because they had never consummated, even in the stricter sense that Jesus holds us to. ( And I am sure he considered his mother and father before making the statement. Their permanency was unusual in anticipation of the resurrection. )

To look at a more pertinent extreme:
The church teaches that in cases of strong passion, it would be wiser to allow two people living together in fornication to remain. (That is not to say the church condones the sin or the situation, but that it recognizes historically the very dangerous results that can happen with people emotionally involved.)

Other strange situations are allowed for adultery during marriage, although the Church recognizes that it would be BETTER to forgive – and actively encourages it – they know that the violation is so deep that it would be dangerous to force them to remain together. Mose’s permission for divorce was on a similar basis, even though it always is accompanied by stubbornness of heart – a problem which easily leads to murder. ( Which is worse than divorce, even though St. Thomas says you can remarry after murder … )

So each situation is a combination of factors, knowledge, ignorance, passion, love, forgiveness, insecurity, self sacrifice.
Marriage law is extremely difficult to understand fully.

The primary reason fornication is not marriage is because it is done in violation of church law.

Jesus will not join what his church has forbidden to join together, for he has given us priests to be our guides and doctors. They have seen it all.

In the majority of cases a proper priest will guide the couple to separation, but not all priests or bishops see this as an absolute or permanent law – as St. Paul notes – it is better to marry than burn.

It is one thing for a person whose purity is intact to heed well the advice given on chastity – where sex is said to be “stealing” from each other the fullness of what is to come in marriage. But once the loss has occurred, the fullness is forever lost.

It is the disposition of a person at the time of the commitment which makes the suitability of marriage. A portion of the “theft” can be repeated – but then what is left to steal after the loss of virginity is also returnable through confession and repentance.

If we are not talking of rape here, then we are talking about two people NEITHER of which is fit for anyone else momentarily – and both of whom must improve to be married, whether to each other or to someone else.

I would agree that in most cases a disproportionate amount of guilt may lie with one of the perpetrators (not always the man) who for reasons related to internal problems seduces the other. In this case, which is common, the predatory nature of one of the couple makes a true marriage impossible, which is why MOST couples ought to separate until the issue is resolved properly.

 

[otjm]

If you are young, the following may have no real impact on you at all. I say that not with any intent of disrespect, but simply the observation that it seems to take 30 to 40 years of lived experience before much true wisdom seesm to show, and the comments hereafter require a bit of wise meditation.

Daniel Lichter, professor of policy analysis at Cornell University was lead researcher on the question of cohabitiation (for the point, one may be having intercourse with one’s girlfriend/boyfriend and not officially cohabiting - but I strongly believe the results will parallel). The study was published in the journal Demography. Cohabitation ends up in separation (breaking up) 90% (yes, you read it right, ninety percent) of the time. With those odds, only a fool would say “But we’re different”.

Sexual intercourse is almost always entered into prior to marriage long, long before the couple have really had time to ascertain, without the emotional spike of “dating”, that they are really compatible, have similar goals and values, and actually have something more than the emotional high of “new emotional love”.

Nursing will release a hormone into the woman’s system; the same hormone is released in both the man and the woman during intercourse. It has a twofold effect; 1) it causes an emotional bonding, and 2) it causes a type of, or something similar to, amnesia, in that it tends to cloud over the obnoxious parts of the other; mother and baby release allows the mother to bond with a tiny child who is completely dependent on her for everything - food, diapers, cleaning up puke, getting up every 2 hours to feed and change, dealing with screaming forms of crying… the list goes on. With a couple, it tends to bind and cause each to ignore all of the issues that are obnoxious, troublesome, problematic, etc.

And it is the action of the hormone that keeps couples, who are light years apart (the kind where friends and family keeps saying “What do you ever see in them?”) coming back to each other and falling into bed like a dog returns to its vomit.

Yeah, that was not a pretty image; but having watched untold numbers of people continue in relationships where they have repeated intercourse and where that is about the only thing they have in common, I can’t find a much more telling image.

And then there is the issue of psychology - what makes us tick - and the fact that most people really don’t know themselves very well, and are extremely poor at discerning why they make the choices they make.

Added to the effects of oxytocin is the inability to determine what one’s motivations are in the process of choosing and bonding to someone of the opposite sex, and you are left with a guy or gal who is 1) not capable, without the effects of oxytocin, of determining why they are making the choices they are; and 2) the brain addling effects of the hormone, and you end up with someone making lousy choices of a spouse, and sticking with that lousy choice because they don’t know their own motivations.

So where am I going? The odds at the local casino are way more in one’s favor than the odds of this person and their girlfriend/boyfriend actually being in a well grounded, healthy relationship that can lead to a lifeong marriage. 90% failure rate.

Maybe, just maybe, there is a slight chance the confessor has a bit more wisdom than the fornicator. And maybe, just maybe, breaking off will allow both of both of them to not only stop sinning in fornication, but also to be able to pick up their lives and start off on the right track with a future spouse.

Or they can be the proverbial dog returning to its vomit.

But of course, I don’t understand, and I just don’t get it, and these two people are really different than all the rest, and…

Yeah. Right.

 

[rpp]

I agree very much with GraceDK, but there are a quite a few details to think of here –

In the first place, it is really fornication we are talking about here. In a situation of pre-matrimony/marriage, sexual generative action IS the way the marriage becomes permanent.

Ergo, Joseph the just could have divorced Mary because they had never consummated, even in the stricter sense that Jesus holds us to. ( And I am sure he considered his mother and father before making the statement. Their permanency was unusual in anticipation of the resurrection. )

To look at a more pertinent extreme:
The church teaches that in cases of strong passion, it would be wiser to allow two people living together in fornication to remain. (That is not to say the church condones the sin or the situation, but that it recognizes historically the very dangerous results that can happen with people emotionally involved.)

Other strange situations are allowed for adultery during marriage, although the Church recognizes that it would be BETTER to forgive – and actively encourages it – they know that the violation is so deep that it would be dangerous to force them to remain together. Mose’s permission for divorce was on a similar basis, even though it always is accompanied by stubbornness of heart – a problem which easily leads to murder. ( Which is worse than divorce, even though St. Thomas says you can remarry after murder … )

So each situation is a combination of factors, knowledge, ignorance, passion, love, forgiveness, insecurity, self sacrifice.
Marriage law is extremely difficult to understand fully.

The primary reason fornication is not marriage is because it is done in violation of church law.

Jesus will not join what his church has forbidden to join together, for he has given us priests to be our guides and doctors. They have seen it all.

In the majority of cases a proper priest will guide the couple to separation, but not all priests or bishops see this as an absolute or permanent law – as St. Paul notes – it is better to marry than burn.

It is one thing for a person whose purity is intact to heed well the advice given on chastity – where sex is said to be “stealing” from each other the fullness of what is to come in marriage. But once the loss has occurred, the fullness is forever lost.

It is the disposition of a person at the time of the commitment which makes the suitability of marriage. A portion of the “theft” can be repeated – but then what is left to steal after the loss of virginity is also returnable through confession and repentance.

If we are not talking of rape here, then we are talking about two people NEITHER of which is fit for anyone else momentarily – and both of whom must improve to be married, whether to each other or to someone else.

I would agree that in most cases a disproportionate amount of guilt may lie with one of the perpetrators (not always the man) who for reasons related to internal problems seduces the other. In this case, which is common, the predatory nature of one of the couple makes a true marriage impossible, which is why MOST couples ought to separate until the issue is resolved properly.

You refer to “church” teachings often here in your post. Can you please tell me which church you are referring to? I ask that because it is very clear that you are not talking about the Catholic Church.

 

[sdeco]

I think it depends on the situation.

If you’re having premarital sex, you should definitely stop having premarital sex and repent.

If your boyfriend/girlfriend is still pressuring you into having sex, or won’t take “no” for an answer, then you should definitely dump them.

On the other hand, if they are repentant, also, then I see no need to break up as long as the relationship is otherwise healthy. I do think couples who have had premarital sex and then repented need to be extra-careful about the situations they put themselves in so as not to fall again. They should probably only hang out in public places until they get married.

It’s not the person who’s the “occasion of sin,” it’s the situation (i.e. watching a movie together in the dark).

 

[sdeco]

otjm, I don’t think I completely agree with your post. Yes, premarital sex can give couples “blurry vision” and cause them to overlook faults in their boyfriend/girlfriend. It certainly hinders their ability to choose a good spouse. But let’s say a couple had premarital sex, then stopped and repented, and was chaste for six months to a year before they got married? I would say that if they are able to stay chaste for that long and still have a strong relationship, then there’s no reason they can’t get married. If they don’t have a strong relationship and problems come out that they previously “sexed over,” then they should break up. I would recommend that any repentant couple who has had premarital sex not rush into marriage but rather prove that they can live chastely first.

 

[Margarite]

I have not had any experience with sex because I am 18 and I hope I will not experience it until or if I am married. But I can say what I have seen.

In high school most people were sleeping with their bf or gf. Most people broke up many times with bf or gf with whom they had slept. I heard many girls say “I can’t believe I let him in bed with me!” I mean these girls would fall in “love” with a boy and then sleep with them only a night or two later. Then they would break up! These two young people gave themselves completely to one another and then through the other away sometimes because of that night, but more often than not because they would realize that the “love” was not real.

My mom always says that the marriage between a man and woman who have saved themselves just for each other will be especially blessed by God. One of my aunts did not do this she accidentally had sex with her boyfriend and became pregnant. Her parents rushed her into a marriage and then for 12 years he beat her. Instead of saving herself or making a mistake, taking the consequences, and trying to make it right. She made everything wrong by refusing to deal with the consequences of her mistake. Now she has 5 children and an ex-husband who keeps trying to take the kids from her. She herself is messed up from so many beatings and from the psychological damage he did to her during all those years.

This is the type of stuff that premarital sex gets people into and when people do make a mistake they need to make sure that they do not make another wrong decision because of that mistake.

I pray that I will never make this mistake which causes so many problems in our society.

 

[water]

Thanks. In the situation I’m thinking of, only one partner had the ‘conversion’ and this left the other partner really angry and talking about how the relationship was ‘going backwards’ and that this was like being advised to ‘divorce’ someone you had made a commitment to, etc.

If this is the case, and the other person keeps giving hard time and/or tempting the converted one to have sexual relationship, then this converted one should leave the relationship for his own shake.

 

[Holly3278]

Don’t necessarily end the relationship with your boyfriend or girlfriend if you have premarital sex with them. If you can’t remain chaste then by all means, end the relationship. Otherwise, keep the relationship alive provided that it is a good relationship to begin with.

 

[CarrieH]

I’m with sdeco on this – it depends on the situation. The persons involved need to stop with the sex and repent, and if one party is pressuring the other to keep having sex, they should break up. If the couple agrees to stop, they need to stay out of situations where they might end up falling back into sin, but they don’t necessarily have to break up as long as they can control themselves. However, if the relationship doesn’t appear to be headed toward marriage, there is no sense in staying together and possibly putting themselves at risk of further sin. They should go their separate ways and set each other free to find another more suitable partner.

 

[Huiou_Theou]

You refer to “church” teachings often here in your post. Can you please tell me which church you are referring to? I ask that because it is very clear that you are not talking about the Catholic Church.

Rpp, you have 3000+ posts and have been here less time than me, are familiar with the annulment process by first hand knowledge, but although I mention only a single church pastoral teaching (one paragraph) you don’t know it? Go to www.vatican.va, under canon law – and spend some time reading it, even if you don’t fully understand it. (I don’t claim to).

There you will find some very odd law regarding the validity of marriage – which attempts to take into account everything from Abram and Sarah’s sterility, through Joe Blow’s deceptive practices, and – The church HAS SEEN IT ALL.

As my profile says, I am Catholic under the pope. A LATIN rite catholic – who loves the Latin rite mass (Dominican style), and occasionally goes to the Maronite mass (A beautiful mass in communion with the Catholic church), and occasionally the English mass. Fr. Vincent Serpa of Catholic Answers himself has actually presided at mass at MY PARISH, and I had the pleasure of Lectoring that weekend.

If there is something specific you disagree with, PM me – and we’ll sort it out. I have always made corrections where corrections are due – You may check my past postings to see what I am like.

I really don’t mean to be abrasive, nor brag – but I do want to know what there is to know about the Catholic church, and especially scripture – which means more than just remaining inexpert in my fallible comments.

God grant you his wisdom, understanding, counsel, fortitude, knowledge, piety, and fear of the lord.

 

[rwoehmke]

If the couple are too young to be married, are for some other reasons unable to be married in short order, say six months, have only just met (It is amazing to me, being an old timer, that some have sex whether the usual or oral on a first date.), I would say the priest has good reason to order a break-up. The whole idea that dating or going together is for entertainment is of fairly recent origin; less than 50 years. Life as its lived today would make the Dominicans and IHM’s, who taught in my schools, spin in their graves.

 

[Huiou_Theou]

ps. with respect to abuna Decker, that ought to read Holy Mysteries.

 

[rpp]

Rpp, you have 3000+ posts and have been here less time than me, are familiar with the annulment process by first hand knowledge, but although I mention only a single church pastoral teaching (one paragraph) you don’t know it? Go to www.vatican.va, under canon law – and spend some time reading it, even if you don’t fully understand it. (I don’t claim to).

There you will find some very odd law regarding the validity of marriage – which attempts to take into account everything from Abram and Sarah’s sterility, through Joe Blow’s deceptive practices, and – The church HAS SEEN IT ALL.

As my profile says, I am Catholic under the pope. A LATIN rite catholic – who loves the Latin rite mass (Dominican style), and occasionally goes to the Maronite mass (A beautiful mass in communion with the Catholic church), and occasionally the English mass. Fr. Vincent Serpa of Catholic Answers himself has actually presided at mass at MY PARISH, and I had the pleasure of Lectoring that weekend.

If there is something specific you disagree with, PM me – and we’ll sort it out. I have always made corrections where corrections are due – You may check my past postings to see what I am like.

I really don’t mean to be abrasive, nor brag – but I do want to know what there is to know about the Catholic church, and especially scripture – which means more than just remaining inexpert in my fallible comments.

God grant you his wisdom, understanding, counsel, fortitude, knowledge, piety, and fear of the lord.

Okay, I was not very kind in my initial response. Nor was I even specific. Please forgive me. The next post I will review your first message more specifically and explain my reservations. Perhaps then you can respond.

By the way, I LOVE Father Abuna!

 

[rpp]

Okay here are the problems I see with this post. Because of length, I will break it up into two.

I agree very much with GraceDK, but there are a quite a few details to think of here –

In the first place, it is really fornication we are talking about here. In a situation of pre-matrimony/marriage, sexual generative action IS the way the marriage becomes permanent.

In this paragraph, I get the impression that you condoning sexual activity between people who are engaged byt not yet married. This is counter to Church teachings.

Ergo, Joseph the just could have divorced Mary because they had never consummated, even in the stricter sense that Jesus holds us to. ( And I am sure he considered his mother and father before making the statement. Their permanency was unusual in anticipation of the resurrection. )

Yes, and Joseph nearly did “put her away quietly.” But the Angel of the Lord came to him and told him that Mary had conceived of the Holy Spirit. So St. Joseph may have been just as well informed as Mary was.

To look at a more pertinent extreme:
The church teaches that in cases of strong passion, it would be wiser to allow two people living together in fornication to remain. (That is not to say the church condones the sin or the situation, but that it recognizes historically the very dangerous results that can happen with people emotionally involved.)

I do not believe the Church EVER claims that committing a sin is permissible. The Church DOES teach that one can never do evil, even if the intent is for a “greater good.” If you want to assert that the Church teaches that unmarried co-habitating couples can engage in fornication, please cite an authoritative (i.e. Magisterial) source and include links to it.

Other strange situations are allowed for adultery during marriage, although the Church recognizes that it would be BETTER to forgive – and actively encourages it – they know that the violation is so deep that it would be dangerous to force them to remain together. Mose’s permission for divorce was on a similar basis, even though it always is accompanied by stubbornness of heart – a problem which easily leads to murder. ( Which is worse than divorce, even though St. Thomas says you can remarry after murder … )

Again the same objections I previously stated. The Church NEVER condones grave sin. Ever! If you want to claim it does, then provide citations (and links) to authoritative magisterial teachings. The opinions of one bishop or priest somewhere is not sufficient. The source must be authoritative.

In addition to this, you must be able to explain how either of these situations is consistant with the authoritative teachings of Pope Paul VI in Humanae Vitae.

So each situation is a combination of factors, knowledge, ignorance, passion, love, forgiveness, insecurity, self sacrifice.

While true, one can never condone or “permit” grave sin.

[concluded in next post]