How to deal with cohabiting children

  • Thread starter Thread starter fannytemper
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
CoffeeHound said:
Two people can fornicate just as easily in two separate apartments than one. So no, I wouldn’t say that fornication is the “whole point of cohabitation” or that cohabitation leads to fornication - fornicators are going to fornicate no matter where they live (even if they live with you, unless you escort them everywhere, they’ll find a way if they are so inclined). So you have to decouple fornication (an explicit sin) from cohabitation (which I have never seen called a sin explicitly).

Does cohabitation generally imply fornication to most people? Yes. So therefore cohabitation is a sin because it creates scandal. Should someone avoid cohabitation because it creates scandal? Absolutely. Is it sinful to create scandal? You betcha.

Why is it important to make the distinction? Consider the case of a male and female roommate (not dating). If cohabitation is a sin, they wouldn’t be able to live together. However, if it’s clear to all that they aren’t involved, then it is not creating scandal for them to live together (because fornication wouldn’t be assumed) and thus it is fine for them to live together.
Click to expand...
Wait, wait, wait…is it now being said that God will judge me for sins I haven’t even committed, but in fact judge me on something I’ve not actually done but some nosey person assumes that I’ve done? LOL That’s just bonkers. I’m not going to carry the shame of other people with dirty minds who assume something is happening when it’s actually not. LOL No thanks. There’s enough actual sins to worry about, without worrying about being judged for something I’m actually innocent of.

Good job democratic justice systems tend not to work that way…LOL
 
MichaelR said:
No, its definitely the phrase I find distasteful, not the action.

First, in the scenario, the man is still a person while the woman is likened to an animal. This harks back to times when wives could pretty much be bartered for as property, and so not treated as people in their own right, with their own minds and bodies and choices.

Second, this in itself infers that men are still have the control when it comes to women.

Third, it also infers the only worth that a woman has is in sex. It’s saying why stay with a woman once you’ve had sex with her. Well…because you love her? Because she is intelligent and witty and generous and kind? Because she’s worth a hundred more things than sex? Surely that should be the message, not ‘well why would you want to bother to stay with her if you’ve already had your fun?’.
Click to expand...
Ah, well then. If she’s intelligent and witty and generous and kind, then maybe she’s the kind of girl a guy might want to marry rather than shack up with. The kind of girl he might want to promise to sacrifice for and cherish till death. He might want to make those vows in front of her and family and friends and God just to show he’s serious.
Fourth, I actually don’t agree with the premise of the phrase anyway. Let’s twist it around a bit, shall we? ‘Why buy the cow if you don’t know whether you’ll like its milk yet?’ that makes just as much sense. I wouldn’t use that phrase either, but it serves the point.
Click to expand...
I haven’t heard the obverse of the phrase used, but the action it implies is pretty much given as justification by those who do wish to shack up.

And no, men don’t have control over women. Not usually. When it comes to pre-marital sex, in any case, unless we are talking about rape, it’s women who are in control. When they choose badly, they can mess up their own life and their children’s lives. Actions do have consequences; and they can’t always be fixed.
 
JimG said:
Ah, well then. If she’s intelligent and witty and generous and kind, then maybe she’s the kind of girl a guy might want to marry rather than shack up with. The kind of girl he might want to promise to sacrifice for and cherish till death. He might want to make those vows in front of her and family and friends and God just to show he’s serious. I haven’t heard the obverse of the phrase used, but the action it implies is pretty much given as justification by those who do wish to shack up.

And no, men don’t have control over women. Not usually. When it comes to pre-marital sex, in any case, unless we are talking about rape, it’s women who are in control. When they choose badly, they can mess up their own life and their children’s lives. Actions do have consequences; and they can’t always be fixed.
Click to expand...
LOL Oh I see…so it’s women’s fault…poor men just don’t stand a chance when led astray by a woman…
 
MichaelR said:
Wait, wait, wait…is it now being said that God will judge me for sins I haven’t even committed, but in fact judge me on something I’ve not actually done but some nosey person assumes that I’ve done? LOL That’s just bonkers. I’m not going to carry the shame of other people with dirty minds who assume something is happening when it’s actually not. LOL No thanks. There’s enough actual sins to worry about, without worrying about being judged for something I’m actually innocent of.
Click to expand...
Here’s how scandal work:
  • You move in with your girlfriend.
  • I assume the two of your are sleeping together.
  • I say “Hmm… Michael is a good Catholic and he’s sleeping with his girlfriend. Therefore the Church must now approve of premarital relations.”
My belief about Divine Law is now corrupted because of your actions.

Can you control what other people think? Not really. However, you should do your best to always portray God’s will. Cohabitation causes the inherent assumption of fornication which is contrary to the that.
 
I understand the concept of scandal, I just don’t agree with it LOL I believe that people are responsible for their own behaviour, I don’t think that their assumption of something I might not even be doing can be blamed for their own short-sightedness, that’s all down to them. That’s my view anyways. As I said, life is difficult enough to navigate without taking on responsibilities for how other people think and act LOL
 
MichaelR said:
LOL Oh I see…so it’s women’s fault…poor men just don’t stand a chance when led astray by a woman…
Click to expand...
I didn’t say all sin between couples is the woman’s fault. I said it’s usually women who have the control. Men are responsible for their own actions. We men are pretty simple creatures. We’ll usually live up to, or down to, women’s expectations of us.

On the other hand, it can be hard for a woman. Because if everyone is shacking up, it’s harder for her to say no.
 
MichaelR said:
I understand the concept of scandal, I just don’t agree with it LOL I believe that people are responsible for their own behaviour, I don’t think that their assumption of something I might not even be doing can be blamed for their own short-sightedness, that’s all down to them. That’s my view anyways. As I said, life is difficult enough to navigate without taking on responsibilities for how other people think and act LOL
Click to expand...
The Catholic Church teaches this concept of scandal that you are disagreeing with. Therefore, for us Catholics, we have a responsibility to consider how our actions affect others.
 
Yep, I understand that too. However, it was explained to me in a less…absolute way. That it’s only bad if there is an irresponsible motive for it. If, however, it is someone deliberately sticking their nose in someone elses business, then that’s their problem, quite frankly.
 
MichaelR said:
Yep, I understand that too. However, it was explained to me in a less…absolute way. That it’s only bad if there is an irresponsible motive for it. If, however, it is someone deliberately sticking their nose in someone elses business, then that’s their problem, quite frankly.
Click to expand...
Matters of scandal are usually a question of personal judgment. When I am deciding whether a certain action is moral, one of the factors to consider is its likely effect on other people. Being conscious of the sort of example we set is important but could be outweighed by other factors. So we can’t say that we must always base moral decision on the possibility of scandal but neither can we say that we should never do so. It depends on what else is involved. But it is contrary to Catholic teaching to simply dismiss it as an issue.
 
In our humbleness,

I am also a parent of a similar child; my daughter was raised by me (Catholic) and my ex-spouse (Jewish) who divorced me, and intimates my daughter into much ‘parent-hating’ etc. Despite this, my daughter and I have the best relationship, we are very loving to each other and communicate well (never enough for me though).

I have always been forced into the token parent relationship by my ex-spouse and much too, though unconsciously, by my daughter so I am particularly gentle with her and trying to be the best parent in all ways that I can. Love and God are foremost with me and everything in our relationship; this is the only way it possibly can stay as strongest a parent-child relationship as possible. I also never bad-mouth or say anything negative of the ex-spouse do no matter what word/action is done or what my daughter does. I do comment on words and actions as they come up or when talking with my daughter and she brings them up.

I just surrender the such large difficulties as the cohabitation of my daughter (over now; thank God literally) and being the ‘token’ parent (I was primary parent before the divorce) as part of God’s cross for us to bear (so, so painful sometimes).

I am in the situation where I do not feel I can respond argumentatively, strongly, with my daughter about anything without the strong repercussions of literally hurting our relationship. I gently and however I could told her that it is the worse living relationship to live with someone without being married to them; period; it is almost usury of the two people in the situation no matter how much they ‘think’ they love each other. "Think’ they love?; love is ultimately a gift directly from God, it is God; and such a situation can never be loving in any true sense. I.e.,** your daughter and her friend are lying to each other about any love they think they have for each other**; love has to be holy, good, and that of God; God made it clear that they need to marry first before living together.

The lying to you as parents is so wrong, but a fall-out of the lying each have for each other.

As a parent, you have the responsibility of voicing the truth in these matters out of your love for both of them; it is the loving thing to do. Kids live in such a state of lack-of-knowledge or wisdom or knowing of the truth (as we all do at times) that it is important to be as loving as possible with them.

Parents can provide their kids with love as no one else in many respects. But, it is important to be consistent, know the Bible, attend Mass and the Sacraments and put these ahead in your lives for your kids also to see; example and word.

Then, as so much fails with our good efforts, pray and be patient.

my $0.02 for anything its worth.
 
defenderoftruth said:
No offense but I’ve seen some really bad advice from you on this and the masturbation thread. You seem to be coming from the Lutheran view that some things aren’t sinful or that somehow one should not confront their spouse/child when they are doing something morally, and spiritually harmful to themselves. I’m not Catholic (YET) either but you must understand the Catholic teaching on these issues to appreciate how a Catholic feels and what advice is best for them. Clearly the Lutheran way isn’t it…(not to be rude or anything) really… :o

I love my kids and no matter the age or that they move out I’m going to confront them for lying and fornicating. A parent should ALWAYS tell their child what they think on these damning issues. Standing idly by while they lie to me and then fornicate after I raised them that that is sinful they are going to get an earful just as if they say “I’m homosexual” or whatever.

This kid should get the “I will always love you no matter what…but I disapprove and am hurt by your lying and other choices” speech. That’s my advice. Is the boyfriend Catholic?
Click to expand...
I agree. One problem for Lutherans is they come at the human condition and the work Christ did on the cross from a wrong standpoint. They believe that humans are cow dung in there cores. And even after baptism or “being saved” you are still cow dung, clothed in white robes of Christ.

Talk about a depressing outlook. No hope. My mother inlaw is Lutheran and is so negative and doesn’t see good in anything. It is depressing and contageous in this world where pain and sin abound.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top