T
Tolkien13
Guest
Is it inherently sinful to live with your significant other before you’re married, even if you aren’t having sex?
- Status
N
Nixbits
Guest
No.
T
thistle
Guest
Sin of scandal if everyone knows that you live together.
T
Tolkien13
Guest
So, let’s say, your significant other (who are going to marry) is moving to be with you from a far off country, it would not be sinful for them to live with until you find the funds for a wedding?
H
Hoosier_Daddy
Guest
It is a bad idea, possible sin, and temptation.
- Lies and sin often disguises themselves with seeming logical and innocent motives. However, this is usually a lie and a lie we tell to ourselves.
- There is a possible sin of scandal, which is a serious sin. I would encourage you to research exactly what that sin is.
- I cannot imagine being a young and about to be married couple and living in the same house with my fiancee and not engaging in sexual activity. Newlyweds are famous for having fun often. So, it would seem like the type of people who have the self control to keep this from happening pre cana, would have also had the self control to save money for the wedding.
- If you have to shack up to save money for a wedding then perhaps you either need to rethink the timing of your marriage because children could be right around the corner, or rethink what a wedding is, if it is worth it to the Brides reputation to throw an elaborate wedding that you had to place yourself in a dire situation to prepare for.
- Would you ACTUALLY sleep in separate rooms? That would be highly doubtful…
J
Jon_S_1
Guest
You don’t need funds for a wedding…just ask the priest to marry you. Have the party later.
If your fiancé is living alone with you, you will sin 99% guaranteed.
Better to find a female friend or family member she could live with.
B
Beryllos
Guest
Living arrangements are not inherently sinful. However, there are two areas of concern:
First, it may be an “occasion of sin,” which means it tempts you or your intended spouse to sin.
The second is what thistle called “scandal,” a word which here means “behavior which leads another to do evil.” (CCC 2284) This might be the case if others assume you are having sex before marriage, and young people in particular may be led to think that such behavior is desirable or even acceptable.
For the sake of discussion, it is not impossible that a man and woman who are attracted to each other could, if they are very pure of heart, live together without sin in either mind or body, but I think that is an ideal that most of us could not live up to.
Similarly, it is not impossible that neighbors, friends, and families would all be able to see and understand that the couple living together are not sinning either in body or mind, and they would not speculate or gossip about it, but again I think in our society, that ideal understanding is very unlikely.
That is why I would urge you, if you are in fact facing this decision, to seek other living arrangements for your intended spouse who is coming from afar.
First, it may be an “occasion of sin,” which means it tempts you or your intended spouse to sin.
The second is what thistle called “scandal,” a word which here means “behavior which leads another to do evil.” (CCC 2284) This might be the case if others assume you are having sex before marriage, and young people in particular may be led to think that such behavior is desirable or even acceptable.
For the sake of discussion, it is not impossible that a man and woman who are attracted to each other could, if they are very pure of heart, live together without sin in either mind or body, but I think that is an ideal that most of us could not live up to.
Similarly, it is not impossible that neighbors, friends, and families would all be able to see and understand that the couple living together are not sinning either in body or mind, and they would not speculate or gossip about it, but again I think in our society, that ideal understanding is very unlikely.
That is why I would urge you, if you are in fact facing this decision, to seek other living arrangements for your intended spouse who is coming from afar.
S
St_Francis
Guest
An act’s being *inherently *sinful means that the act itself is sinful; there is something *in *the act itself which is by its nature sinful.
Living with people is not sinful. If one of them is one’s fiancé(e), it is not simply the proximity of the living that makes it sinful—it is the occasion of sin, the very high potential for scandal, etc., that makes it sinful.
Thus, if there were a good *enough *reason or situation for the two to be living together, it would not be sinful: if a tornado destroyed all the houses in a town and everyone was living together in the only building left standing, for example, or, as used to be done, the child princess would live in the same palace with her fiancé until the marriage, so as to learn the language and ways of the nation over which she would be queen.
But in most societies today there is not a good enough reason. A fiancée from another country can live with relatives or in a group situation. Weddings do not have to be so expensive that living with one’s fiancé is necessary to save money for one and thus in no way justifes running the risks of temptation and scandal.
T
truetofaith
Guest
I agree with a few posters who said it is an “occasion of sin” & a source of “scandal” to those who assume you’re also having sex.
H
Hoosier_Daddy
Guest
The correct way to do this is to make sure the significant other has a self supporting job and education when coming over here. A network of people to support them and a place to stay. To do otherwise is to invite an unequal and unfair marriage. This couple should plan, and save, so that they may do things correctly wisely and morally. They should work together perhaps over long distances and lengths of time to ensure that this is a free and healthly choice. Or it becomes a really really bad idea.
In some cases with women, this can be a form of abuse and enslavement. I am sure that is not happening here, but steps need to be taken to ensure this is a fair and equal partnership based on love and family.There are quite a few red flags that perhaps the OP could clarify.
I
Iron_Donkey
Guest
Altogether a bad idea. Possibly not inherently sinful, but very, very likely to lead to sin. Note though, that it is a sin to place oneself in an occasion of sin without sufficient cause. Since this is a large occasion of sin, there would have to be pretty grave circumstances for it to be acceptable, and I’m having a hard time figuring out what they would be.
It would certainly be better than living together before marriage, and having the ability to be self supporting is good guard against abuse, but I don’t think this option must be realized to avoid that concern. If she was just coming over for a short amount of time before the wedding, for example, living with the husband’s parents or other relatives for a week or so would be fine, I think.
But yes, living with a future husband for months on end until such time as he can “afford” a wedding (presumably, this means afford a big party to accompany the wedding, and some frills like piles of flowers and an expensive dress for the ceremony) is problematic. If there were some reason why she had to come over a reasonable amouny of time before the wedding, viable alternatives would be a) staying with relatives (particular if we’re talking about a week or two), b) being self supporting if it’s going to be a while before the wedding (there’s nothing wrong with wanting a special wedding that might cost a reasonable amount of money, but if they wait until they can afford it, then they should wait properly), or c) getting married sooner in a less elaborate fashion.
I’m not sure that I’d agree that being self supporting financially is a requirement for an equal marriage. If the couple met in another country, got engaged there, then the man moved here to get a job, and the woman is planning on being a stay at home mom, for example, then getting a self supporting job is not necessary.The correct way to do this is to make sure the significant other has a self supporting job and education when coming over here. A network of people to support them and a place to stay. To do otherwise is to invite an unequal and unfair marriage. This couple should plan, and save, so that they may do things correctly wisely and morally. They should work together perhaps over long distances and lengths of time to ensure that this is a free and healthly choice. Or it becomes a really really bad idea.
There are quite a few red flags that perhaps the OP could clarify.
It would certainly be better than living together before marriage, and having the ability to be self supporting is good guard against abuse, but I don’t think this option must be realized to avoid that concern. If she was just coming over for a short amount of time before the wedding, for example, living with the husband’s parents or other relatives for a week or so would be fine, I think.
But yes, living with a future husband for months on end until such time as he can “afford” a wedding (presumably, this means afford a big party to accompany the wedding, and some frills like piles of flowers and an expensive dress for the ceremony) is problematic. If there were some reason why she had to come over a reasonable amouny of time before the wedding, viable alternatives would be a) staying with relatives (particular if we’re talking about a week or two), b) being self supporting if it’s going to be a while before the wedding (there’s nothing wrong with wanting a special wedding that might cost a reasonable amount of money, but if they wait until they can afford it, then they should wait properly), or c) getting married sooner in a less elaborate fashion.
- Status