C
childofmary1143
Guest
Can anyone give me any good reason why co-habitation should not be an impediment to marriage? Before you reply I should make clear that I define co-habitation as sharing the same bed (sex before marriage).
- Status
O
Other_Eric
Guest
Likewise, why shouldn’t any premarital sexual activity be an impediment to marriage?
C
childofmary1143
Guest
How would find out if one has?
O
Other_Eric
Guest
Well, I’m not sure how one would find out about a man beyond interviews and such, but for a woman, it would simply be a matter of determining whether the hymen was intact.
R
rosebudsal
Guest
Sorry… but no one has a right to check to see if I’m intact or not. Besides, a hymen can break without having sex and sometimes they never tear.
O
Other_Eric
Guest
Some states require a blood test before a couple may obtain a marriage license. This would be only a mild extension of that practice.
J
Joab_Anias
Guest
Cohabitation is not fornication and adulterous in and of itself. They are two very different things.
Cohabitation is permissible while remaining chaste if that can be reasonably accomplished responsibly due to certain circumstances that may necessitate such an arrangement in a permanently committed relationship. To do so otherwise is to fool yourself that there is actually a permanently committed relationship present and to rationalize sin against yourself and God.
Cohabitation accompanied with permissive sexual union outside of an orderly and permanently committed relationship is emotionally dangerous. It is contrary to a self giving union because it’s selfish which sets a stage for psychological impediments and abusiveness which is hardly conducive to marital love. Pre-marital fornication can be dangerous in many other ways as well.
2391 Some today claim a “right to a trial marriage” where there is an intention of getting married later. However firm the purpose of those who engage in premature sexual relations may be, “the fact is that such liaisons can scarcely ensure mutual sincerity and fidelity in a relationship between a man and a woman, nor, especially, can they protect it from inconstancy of desires or whim.” Carnal union is morally legitimate only when a definitive community of life between a man and woman has been established. Human love does not tolerate “trial marriages.” It demands a total and definitive gift of persons to one another.
The Theory of Primitive Promiscuity
The Church is concerned with ones well being and though we may not always understand its wisdom there can be no doubt it is for our own best interest that will be proved out by our obedience.
Given the above there is good reason that cohabitation can be accomplished without impediment but not with fornication as the defining factor.
The issue for you is the damage that pre-marital sexual union will create and not the cohabitation.
O
Other_Eric
Guest
The OP specifically referred to cohabitation with a sexual element.
V
VAC
Guest
Yes, premarital sex is a sin, but marriage is a step toward righting the wrong.
I wonder how you would enforce this? Would anyone who had sex before marriage not be allowed to marry? Or does this mean they have to start over with another partner they haven’t slept with?
D
DJMarshall85
Guest
Somehow, I doubt most women would define that as a “minor extension”. But anyway…
As far as I know, the only real impediments to marriage are ability to reproduce (or lack of), relationship whether spiritual or blood (I.e. can’t marry a brother or godmother), and if there are previous marriages.
Of course, if one of the couple is not Catholic, that can be an issue as well.
Yes, cohabitation is sinful. Mortally so. Not only that, but it damages the relationship between a couple. Emotionally and spiritually, you aren’t really experiencing that true bond, that gift of God, which is present there when there is sacramental union. That total giving of oneself. Outside of the marital bond, a person can not possibly totally give themselves to their partner. Without that bond, there is no commitment. One bad argument and the relationship could possibly be over. And then both people are left with a deep pain, knowing that they gave themselves to each other, and will never be able to get that part of them back.
Anyway, what I am trying to say, is that while it should not be an impediment to marriage, if this has happened, the couple’s situation needs to be thoroughly looked at. And if they desire to remain in His grace, they should abstain, until that marital bond can be achieved.
Now as far as living together, while it can be done, both people have to live chastely before marriage. While this in not impossible, it would be extremely difficult for a young couple to do this without falling into sin. I seem to remember something in that big giant book we read about not tempting the Lord…
God Bless,
Dean
J
Joab_Anias
Guest
Understood and cohabitation is not defined with a sexual element.
The correct term would be fornicatioin or adultery which is really what is at question here.
Further in the letter of the definition of impediment I don’t believe it is listed by the church as such except for the possibility of it being included in the impediment of psychological imaturity.
Other things listed as impediments are desparity of cult and coersion for example.
Does fornication really need to be listed as an impediment?
Though it may join us to another it doesn’t create a marriage. If submitted to, as the scripture says, “joining to a harlot” there can there be no respect for the integrity of marriage in that there will be no honest ensurance of fidelity and constancy of comittment.
This is common sense that should go without saying.
The Church does speak though, I will repeat:
“Carnal union is morally legitimate only when a definitive community of life between a man and woman has been established. Human love does not tolerate “trial marriages.” It demands a total and definitive gift of persons to one another.”
I do not speak tounge in cheek here but from personal and tragic experience.
B
Br.Rich_SFO
Guest
You know if you are a virgin and you know that God knows!
T
tee_eff_em
Guest
Polls like this make me relieved that the Church is not a democracy.
:twocents:
tee
:twocents:
tee
D
DJMarshall85
Guest
Also, I think some posters might (although I have been known to be wrong) be misunderstanding the original question. The question is not whether cohabitation (in the sexual context) is a sin. I think we all know the answer to that one. But the question was whether or not it should be an impediment to marriage, a grave reason that the church should not allow a couple to be married. I do not see how this should stop a couple from being married, as marriage would allow them to come closer to God and perform the marital act in the appropriate context.
Mind you, if a couple has done this before marriage, if they want to be right with God, they MUST immediately start living a chaste life, and attempt to come back to His grace to the best of their ability…
God Bless,
Dean
PS: While cohabitation (non sexual context) is not a sin, it is a near occasion to sin, and should be avoided at all costs…
Mind you, if a couple has done this before marriage, if they want to be right with God, they MUST immediately start living a chaste life, and attempt to come back to His grace to the best of their ability…
God Bless,
Dean
PS: While cohabitation (non sexual context) is not a sin, it is a near occasion to sin, and should be avoided at all costs…
O
Other_Eric
Guest
Indeed, but this lacks objective verification.
1
1ke
Guest
child of mary…
I’m having a hard time understanding why you think it should be an impediment.
What do you believe the purpose of an impediment is?
I’m having a hard time understanding why you think it should be an impediment.
What do you believe the purpose of an impediment is?
J
Joab_Anias
Guest
Amen.
Plainly there is no way to know if a couple is chaste in cohabitation beyond what they say.
In personal opinion, I would ask if the Church did publically deny the sacrament of marriage to those who admit to pre-marital fornication then what would be the ramifications?
O
Other_Eric
Guest
One of the ramifications would most likely be that individuals would finally be forced to treat marriage and sexuality with the reverence both deserve.
C
childofmary1143
Guest
I’m having a hard time why people are nitpicking about how cohabitation is defined here. In my old parish my Pastor had a rule that he wouldn’t baptize any baby if the parents weren’t attending SUNDAY Mass on a regular basis. He had his reasons and I am sure they were lawful. Following that I just think why should the Church Sacramentally marry couples who have no intention to follow ALL the rules of the Church. A Sacrament isn’t an absolute right for any and all.
What is so wrong with that???
- Status