Odd impediment to marriage - need clarification

[DL82]

I was reading through Christopher West’s Good News about Sex and Marriage and he lists all of the different things that can be an impediment to marriage (crime, consanguinity, religious vows, etc.)

There was one really odd one though:
You can’t marry anyone in the direct line of a member of the opposite sex who you’re cohabiting with.

I guess this all turns on the meaning of ‘cohabiting’. Does it mean sleeping together as if married, or does it just mean living in the same house?

For example, if I was renting a room from an older landlady and fell in love with her daughter, would we be unable to marry?

Or if an older person is living in a retirement home and falls in love with the mother of one of the live-in nurses?

I can understand why it would be a problem if I married someone in order to carry on sleeping with her mother, but if two people just live in the same household, does that count as ‘cohabiting’ with regard to this impediment.

I have to say, it’s the only bit of Catholic teaching on sex and marriage that has ever made go “What? Where’d that come from!”

 

[chevalier]

It only concerns concubinage. In some older sources, it was any intercourse, including rape.

 

[LovingHim]

Cohabitation is NOT an impediment to marriage.

Cohabitation IS a grave/mortal sin in most circumstances. It is either so due to pre-marital sexual relations, and/or the scandal caused by two persons living together outside of marriage (most persons would presume them to be having sexual relations, and this would cause persons to think it was “okay” cause a Christian/Catholic was doing this.)

There are very few (but there are a few) circumstances where cohabitation is permitted, with permission of a priest. So long as the two live perfectly chaste (as would a brother and sister), do not share a bed, and have absolutely NO form of marital relations whatsoever, etc. These usually have to do with situations involving children. Also, health care is excluded, so long as the rules of chastity and living as brother and sister are still observed.

Cohabitation is an impediment only in that a person who knowingly and willingly received the sacrament of matrimony in the state of any grave/mortal sin, commits a second mortal sin of sacrilege, and does not receive the graces of that sacrament, until they have confessed and received absolution.

 

[1ke]

It means cohabiting in a sexual relationship.

Can. 1093 The impediment of public propriety arises from an invalid marriage after the establishment of common life or from notorious or public concubinage. It nullifies marriage in the first degree of the direct line between the man and the blood relatives of the woman, and vice versa.

 

[1ke]

Cohabitation is NOT an impediment to marriage.

That wasn’t the question.

The question pertains to the impediment of marrying a relative in the direct line of someone with whom you previously cohabited.

 

[LovingHim]

That wasn’t the question.

The question pertains to the impediment of marrying a relative in the direct line of someone with whom you previously cohabited.

Thanks! Sorry I misunderstood. I was trying my best.

 

[LovingHim]

Hmm…so what about cases where two unmarried (or engaged) persons live in one or the other parent’s home. I would think that might be pretty common today, not right, but common.

 

[pumpkinbeast]

That wasn’t the question.

The question pertains to the impediment of marrying a relative in the direct line of someone with whom you previously cohabited.

So you couldn’t marry the sister of a sister you previously had a sexual-cohabitational relationship with, for example? Trying to wrap my head around this one, it’s not something one usually comes across, I think.

 

[1ke]

So you couldn’t marry the sister of a sister you previously had a sexual-cohabitational relationship with, for example? Trying to wrap my head around this one, it’s not something one usually comes across, I think.

No. Siblings are in the collateral line. The direct line includes parent/child. Therefore the impediment of public propriety would not apply.

 

[1ke]

Hmm…so what about cases where two unmarried (or engaged) persons live in one or the other parent’s home. I would think that might be pretty common today, not right, but common.

I don’t understand what your question is here. Can you elaborate?

 

[pumpkinbeast]

No. Siblings are in the collateral line. The direct line includes parent/child. Therefore the impediment of public propriety would not apply.

Ah, I see… so marrying the mother of the daughter which you had a cohabitating relationship is out?

 

[Just_Lurking]

Note that it is possible to request a dispensation from this impediment.

 

[LovingHim]

Ah, I see… so marrying the mother of the daughter which you had a cohabitating relationship is out?

Yikes!

To 1ke: I was talking about those boyfriend/girlfriends who live together, but in one of their parents home. So, say the boyfriend was living with the girlfriend in the girlfriend’s parent’s basement, could they then marry?

 

[Belloc_Fan]

Yikes!

To 1ke: I was talking about those boyfriend/girlfriends who live together, but in one of their parents home. So, say the boyfriend was living with the girlfriend in the girlfriend’s parent’s basement, could they then marry?

He could marry the girlfriend, but not the girlfriend’s mom.

 

[LovingHim]

He could marry the girlfriend, but not the girlfriend’s mom.

Thanks so much for the clarifications. I was really having trouble getting this for some reason, probably cause I could never imagine doing such a thing. I’m glad that what I suspected wasn’t the case, or there would be a lot more invalid marriages out there.

 

[Corki]

I always thought this meant cohabitating in the literal rather than sexual sense. It would seem to cover, for example, step siblings. They aren’t technically covered as incest but would be by the cohabitation restriction.

Note that many of these impediments can be dispensed. Having them on the list mainly means that such relationships need the priest to do some extra investigating before approving a marriage.

 

[1ke]

I always thought this meant cohabitating in the literal rather than sexual sense.

Re-read the Canon regarding public propriety. It’s not referring to living in the same house.

It would seem to cover, for example, step siblings. They aren’t technically covered as incest but would be by the cohabitation restriction.

The relationships of step-siblings is known as affinity. The impediment of relationship by affinity under the current code of canon law applies to the direct line. This means step-parent/step-child, not the collateral line of siblings/cousins, etc.

Can. 1092 Affinity in the direct line in any degree invalidates a marriage.

In the case where a step-parent adopted the children, then this canon applies:

Can. 1094 Those who are related in the direct line or in the second degree of the collateral line by a legal relationship arising from adoption cannot contract marriage together validly.

Note that many of these impediments can be dispensed. Having them on the list mainly means that such relationships need the priest to do some extra investigating before approving a marriage.

Depends on the impediment.

 

[DL82]

Thanks for the clarifications folks.

I guess this impediment comes from the passage in 1 Corinthians about a man living with his father’s wife. Makes sense.