Should Co-habitation be an impediment to marriage?

[Delphinus85]

I see where you are coming from. In my family, the man would have been put up on the couch with some extended family member, or, failing that, on my couch. I’m glad he was okay! You are right that this could leave someone open to malicious gossip. I saw that type during high school, that’s for sure.

Thank you. I have the opposite experience. I have been involved with a few different churches (I ‘grew up’ protestant too) and they all made it their business to know who was doing what with who. I asked for prayer about temptation once, then next thing I knew I had an old lady come up to me and telling me just howe much I was going to burn for doing this thing that I was only “tempted” to do. When it comes to the scandal to kids, the benifit here is that it gives you a chance to talk to them about it. Explain that it’s necessary and only temporary. I am not talking about people living together for years and staying in the same bed, I am talking about a few months and separate rooms. There is romance there and that does introduce a problem, but…if there is no other option, they kind of have to to make ends meet. It seems to easy to say “That’s wrong no matter what” but I honestly feel every situation is different. I feel that it’s not our place to judge. I feel that we have to trust our brothers and sisters in christ that they are doing what they feel is necessary for them by the guidance of the Holy Spirit. It may be the difference between a woman sleeping on her fiancees couch or her sleeping in the streets. We just don’t know.

 

[Pug]

It may be the difference between a woman sleeping on her fiancees couch or her sleeping in the streets. We just don’t know.

You’re right, we don’t know. Also, we ought not shirk our duty to offer aid if we can offer help. I don’t just mean before marriage, but through the years that follow.

 

[agapewolf]

Joab,

PLEASE please read my past posts…I DID give the examples there. It isn’t nothing…there are plenty of problems with it. Please go back and read.

 

[crenfro]

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).

I don’t quite understand your question. That phrase “should not be an impediment” misleads me. Do you mean that co-habitation is helpful before marriage? Or do you mean that by co-habitating before marriage makes one’s subsequent marriage weak?

 

[palmas85]

Actually, I disagree. Now, I understand the Church’s stance on cohabitation, and I’m not arguing it from a moral standpoint, but from a practical. My husband & I lived together for a little while before we were married and it was wonderful. It afforded us some time to really get to know each other and get to know what we were “in for” as far as our quirks and such. It certainly didn’t hurt our marriage at all.

That said, I am not suggesting people need to do this. That was 15 years ago, and I was only a Christian in name only. But from a practical standpoint, yeah, it worked for us, and I have no regrets.

And of course there was no pre marital sex involved, correct?

 

[childofmary1143]

I don’t quite understand your question. That phrase “should not be an impediment” misleads me. Do you mean that co-habitation is helpful before marriage? Or do you mean that by co-habitating before marriage makes one’s subsequent marriage weak?

I apologise for the lack of clarity. Right now co-habitation before marriage is NOT an impediment. I think it should be. If you think I am wrong, please tell me. As I said in the OP I define co-habitation as the couple having pre-marital sex.

 

[boppaid]

And of course there was no pre marital sex involved, correct?

Yes, there was. I’m not arguing it from a moral standpoint, though. I’m just arguing that it was not damaging to my marraige as some have claimed it is. From a practical standpoint, it was great. And, I believe, it helped us in our marriage.

Like I said, though, that was a long time ago. (Oh, so long ago!)

 

[agapewolf]

Yes, there was. I’m not arguing it from a moral standpoint, though. I’m just arguing that it was not damaging to my marraige as some have claimed it is. From a practical standpoint, it was great. And, I believe, it helped us in our marriage.

Like I said, though, that was a long time ago. (Oh, so long ago!)

I’m sorry, but this is impossible. You may perceive that it was good and helped your marriage, but nothing that is intrinsically morally wrong and against church teaching (pre-marital sex) can in its own essence be good.

God may have made some good come out of it, but it is impossible that the sin itself caused good.

 

[boppaid]

I’m sorry, but this is impossible. You may perceive that it was good and helped your marriage, but nothing that is intrinsically morally wrong and against church teaching (pre-marital sex) can in its own essence be good.

God may have made some good come out of it, but it is impossible that the sin itself caused good.

I understand what you’re saying. And I am truly looking to see what bad came out of it. Thankfully, I cannot. We’re married over 11 years now, have a family, are extremely close with God now (as I said, at the time we were Christians in name only). I can see good that has happened from our experiences living together: we started our marriage on firm ground, knowing our strengths & weaknesses living together, our good AND bad habits. All the kinks were ironed out before we were married, and we begun our married life together with a smooth start, in those particular aspects.

 

[Delphinus85]

You’re right, we don’t know. Also, we ought not shirk our duty to offer aid if we can offer help. I don’t just mean before marriage, but through the years that follow.

I completely agree with you!! I had some great christian friends of mine that let me stay with them so my fiancee and I didn’t have to live together for the 3 months before our wedding. I hope to one day “pass it forwards” asit were

 

[ASimpleSinner]

One of the ramifications would most likely be that individuals would finally be forced to treat marriage and sexuality with the reverence both deserve.

I don’t know that anyone can be forced to do that.

What we REALLY need is some honsest-to-goodness Catholic pre-marriage counseling. Not just some vague weekend retreats where Oprah-like talks on how to not argue are given.

Catholic couples who have a strong and full appreciation of what Catholic family life is, approach the vocation with all the tenacity of a Holy priest or religous. They take it VERY seriously.

 

[palmas85]

Yes, there was. I’m not arguing it from a moral standpoint, though. I’m just arguing that it was not damaging to my marraige as some have claimed it is. From a practical standpoint, it was great. And, I believe, it helped us in our marriage.

Like I said, though, that was a long time ago. (Oh, so long ago!)

I thank you for your honesty. Not a few people would have howled indignantly about something this personal and heartily deny that such things happen.

I am glad that things worked out in your case, but in any event, while co habitating, you did as I would guess most do in engage improper sexual relations and that I feel is what is detrimental about the entire situation. I find it quite difficult to believe that the vast, heck , the overwhelming majority of people could live together and not have something happen of a sexual nature, human nature being what it is.

That being the case, both living in and committing mortal sins, pre marital sex is I believe still a mortal sin even in these enlightened times,and so behaving would certainly be an impediment to sacramental marriage.

Civil marriage would certainly be possible and probably advisable but not a sacramental union, unless of course they stop their illicit behavior, make a good confession and get themselves straight.

 

[Joab_Anias]

I’d like to approach this subject from a different angle…springboarding off of this post…

I think that cohabitation and pre-marital sex are huge in factors of consent.

Wouldn’t that depend on the reasons its done for?

Co-habitation… when a couple already owns a couch/dog/house, kitchen utensils together,…how free are they to trully discern marriage? When they have their daily habits down…how free are they? the questions are endless…

What if they feel they have already discerned that they want to be married and are facing other circumstances that will mandate that they wait for up to a year but can’t bear the seperation any longer?

Pre-marital sex- the bonding that God designed for married couples to have…being misused without the grace of the sacrament… how free are they?
using sex as a cover up of bigger issues…how free are they?

They are not. Sex cannot be confused with the initial bonds of marriage which mandate a building of a communal life prior to a sacramental marriage. This building of a communal life must take place before tying the knot, sharing a bed cannot.

Not being able to say no to sex or living together…justifying it in some way? That isn’t freedom…thats enslavement to sin. (and to each other).

You are not seperating living together with fornication. They are and can be seperate while one is sin and the other is NOT.

I don’t know what official “impediments” are… but I know for sure that all of these elements could seriously play into someone feeling trapped subconsciously… not being able to say no.

That is true and would come down to the individuals level of maturity in Christ now wouldn’t it? Do you believe Jesus was un-able to live in a community with women without remaining chaste. Of course not. He did not sin because He did not fornicate. We are called to do the same in His immage.

I think this idea should be a serious consideration…in guarding the sacraments. Not necessarily an official impediment, but having Priests be more strict so that the sacrament is guarded.

I think our priests do exactly that. If you were to be married in the church you would see that process for yourself. There is a process to ensure that the couple isn’t making a mistake. Some may be failed by the process because they change over time or aren’t honest or fail to recognize flags they should identify in that process. Cohabitation isn’t of itself a flag. This is why cohabitation isn’t an impediment subjecting God loving and (if chaste) abiding couples from the sacrament of matrimony regardless of what overly scrupulous individuals who should be focusing on themselves may think.

 

[agapewolf]

Wouldn’t that depend on the reasons its done for?

NOPE

What if they feel they have already discerned that they want to be married and are facing other circumstances that will mandate that they wait for up to a year but can’t bear the seperation any longer?

*Because playing house is for MARRIED people. Discernment continues until the vows are made. Every day living together is less freedom to make that choice trully free.Can’t bear the seperation? What a joke. Sacraments require preparation. RCIA folks have to wait to go through a process before receiving the sacraments. THere is a purpose to the journey in a certain way. For engaged folks, this is the same. The discernment and prep for the sacrament needs seperation…in living circumstances for complete freedom. The ins and outs of living together is something that is dealt with GRACE from the sacrament and the marital act of renewing the vows that allow the grace to flow. Without that grace, things get screwy and disordered. Couples don’t look at the big factors in their relationship, but are distracted by small issues, which are not issues that should be dealt with at all, becuase they shouldn’t be living together. *

They are not. Sex cannot be confused with the initial bonds of marriage which mandate a building of a communal life prior to a sacramental marriage. This building of a communal life must take place before tying the knot, sharing a bed cannot.

*Communal life should not include living together. Intimacy (spiritual and emotional) can take place in other ways. The living together is a false intimacy that does not need to take place. One shouldn’t be relying on the “intimacy” created by living together as an avenue for building communal life. Couples should be concentrating on other forms. *

You are not seperating living together with fornication. They are and can be seperate while one is sin and the other is NOT.

*When the church asks that folks do not cohabit and couples go against the wishes of the church…I think that is sinful… the Holy Mother Church is to help lead us to heaven, and they are turning away from that guidence. Also, it is very scandalous. *

That is true and would come down to the individuals level of maturity in Christ now wouldn’t it? Do you believe Jesus was un-able to live in a community with women without remaining chaste. Of course not. He did not sin because He did not fornicate. We are called to do the same in His immage.

*We’ve already established and agree that cohabitation leads to temptation. I’m not discussing the issue about Jesus and fornication…Jesus was no ordinary human anyway. *

I think our priests do exactly that. If you were to be married in the church you would see that process for yourself. There is a process to ensure that the couple isn’t making a mistake. Some may be failed by the process because they change over time or aren’t honest or fail to recognize flags they should identify in that process. Cohabitation isn’t of itself a flag. This is why cohabitation isn’t an impediment subjecting God loving and (if chaste) abiding couples from the sacrament of matrimony regardless of what overly scrupulous individuals who should be focusing on themselves may think.

*Some priests do NOT do it in the least bit.This process does NOT ensure anything. I know this first hand…I work for the church, I help with marriage prep, I play music for weddings. There are so many issues skipped over and ignored.

Cohabitation IS indeed a flag. When the church asks that it not happen, and there is sooo many reasons not too, and people still go ahead and do it (see above). That’s a huge flag*

 

[Joab_Anias]

Wouldn’t that depend on the reasons its done for?

NOPE

Ah but it does. Just because those reasons are beyond your understanding doesn’t mean they are below everyone in every case.

Not everyone cohabitating is “Playing house”. Cohabitation in that juvenile manner would be detrimental. There are real logistical concerns sometimes involved with cohabitation that ARE big issues in a relationship. There are always exceptions to the rule if you are free to acknowlege them or not. What big issues do you refer to that you think aren’t being dealt with just because of cohabitation? The grace of marriage doesn’t come by the sacrament alone. Sacramental marriage is a fairly new institution in the church. Are you to say that everyone before the Sacrament was instituted didn’t have grace in their marriage? That makes no sense to me and I think you are confused in what creates a real marriage. A piece of paper and a ceremony only seals the deal. A marriage is built on comittment, self giving love, trust, and obedience to and centering on God. All things that needent be subverted by cohabitation.

Sex cannot be confused with the initial bonds of marriage which mandate a building of a communal life prior to a sacramental marriage. This building of a communal life must take place before tying the knot, sharing a bed cannot.

Communal life should not include living together.

What do you suggest communal life is then? Perhaps seperate bedrooms should be the norm for married couples. Lol.

Intimacy (spiritual and emotional) can take place in other ways. The living together is a false intimacy that does not need to take place. One shouldn’t be relying on the “intimacy” created by living together as an avenue for building communal life. Couples should be concentrating on other forms.

Self deception is a danger in any engagement. I am not arguing that living together NEED to take place and I would discourage it, but there are instances where it has occurred and the couples marriage still has been successful. There are other more practical reasons for living together that ARE conducive to a true marriage that aren’t relying on cohabitation for intimacy. Temptations and intimacy are still the same and not changed because of the sacrament. What will change is the communal life built together. In a marriage a communal life is as important as anything else.

You are not seperating living together with fornication. They are and can be seperate while one is sin and the other is NOT.

When the church asks that folks do not cohabit and couples go against the wishes of the church…I think that is sinful… the Holy Mother Church is to help lead us to heaven, and they are turning away from that guidence. Also, it is very scandalous.

Can you show me where exactly the church asks any such thing? I cannot find it? Sure its good sense and logical for most to NOT cohabitate I would agree but the church doesn’t forbid it. Sounds to me you would never do such a thing because someone else does. How are you scandalized? Are you sure its scandalous or just that your judging others?

We’ve already established and agree that cohabitation leads to temptation. I’m not discussing the issue about Jesus and fornication…Jesus was no ordinary human anyway.

Human nature is at odds with virtue, temptation is hardly eliminated by not cohabitating. Imagine the strength of the couple who can cohabitate prior to sacramental marriage and control thier desires. Wouldn’t these folks be commited to Jesus if they do so? Jesus WAS fully human. Any dialogue about sin without Christs example is fruitless. The fact of the matter is Mary Magdalen probably slept under the same roof as Jesus without sin.

Some priests do NOT do it in the least bit.This process does NOT ensure anything. I know this first hand…I work for the church, I help with marriage prep, I play music for weddings. There are so many issues skipped over and ignored.

Thats right, there are faults and failings but is the marriage up to the Church? No. Its up to the commitment of the individuals involved. There will always be things that are missed or come up later. The church is a helper and part of the communal life. The church doesn’t tell anyone they cannot cohabitate. We all have free will and can make choices. I agree that cohabitation traditionally should not happen. However we also must be sensitive and merciful to those who fail to refrain for whatever reason. Their marriage may turn out just as good as anyone elses.

 

[agapewolf]

Ah but it does. Just because those reasons are beyond your understanding doesn’t mean they are below everyone in every case.

Not everyone cohabitating is “Playing house”. Cohabitation in that juvenile manner would be detrimental. There are real logistical concerns sometimes involved with cohabitation that ARE big issues in a relationship. There are always exceptions to the rule if you are free to acknowlege them or not. What big issues do you refer to that you think aren’t being dealt with just because of cohabitation? The grace of marriage doesn’t come by the sacrament alone. Sacramental marriage is a fairly new institution in the church. Are you to say that everyone before the Sacrament was instituted didn’t have grace in their marriage? That makes no sense to me and I think you are confused in what creates a real marriage. A piece of paper and a ceremony only seals the deal. A marriage is built on comittment, self giving love, trust, and obedience to and centering on God. All things that needent be subverted by cohabitation.

What do you suggest communal life is then? Perhaps seperate bedrooms should be the norm for married couples. Lol.

Human nature is at odds with virtue, temptation is hardly eliminated by not cohabitating. Imagine the strength of the couple who can cohabitate prior to sacramental marriage and control thier desires. Wouldn’t these folks be commited to Jesus if they do so? Jesus WAS fully human. Any dialogue about sin without Christs example is fruitless. The fact of the matter is Mary Magdalen probably slept under the same roof as Jesus without sin.

-just because someone resists strong temptations does not mean one should put themselves in that situation.

-the fact is, the church DOES tell couples to not cohabitate.

You take my statements out of context and turn them around.
I will no longer continue this discussion because of your patronizing,. It is not “beneath” my understanding, but apparently my reasons are beneath yours.

That doesn’t feel good does it? I’m done…I’ve got so many points to make, but you twisting and patronizing is not conducive to a rational conversation.

 

[Joab_Anias]

-just because someone resists strong temptations does not mean one should put themselves in that situation.

Of course not, I agree. Not every book can be judged by its cover though.

-the fact is, the church DOES tell couples to not cohabitate.

Where exactly? I agree it is hardly advisable in the majority of circumstances but I know of no official documentation to that regard. Is anyone reading this aware of such a statement from the church officially?

You take my statements out of context and turn them around.

My intention is to broaden your preception out of a sense of brotherly altruism. My point is that in my view your context is narrow. But thats ok, I have been around the block a few times and have expriences that few can relate to.

I will no longer continue this discussion because of your patronizing,. It is not “beneath” my understanding, but apparently my reasons are beneath yours.

I am sorry you feel that way. I intended no arrogance. My meaning there was that I am relating to personal experience that has to be lived to understand. Expriences most haven’t had. To each his own.

That doesn’t feel good does it? I’m done…I’ve got so many points to make, but you twisting and patronizing is not conducive to a rational conversation.

I’ve taken no offense to anything you have said. Though I may counter your points please feel free to make them. This is an open forum and your (name removed by moderator)ut is welcome and appreciated that could help answer many a question. I do not feel I was patronizing. For what its worth that was hardly my intent. My intent was to get you to see things from a differen’t perspective. If you do not wish to do so that is your perogative though I am disappointed. Especially since you claim to be a helper in marriage prep.

Please believe me when I tell you I am completely in practice in the church and lean much more toward the traditional side of moral theology than any sinful liberalism that degrades the virtue of purity. My tact is ideally and formost about mercy and humility regardless of scruples. I am not your enemy my friend and I apologize if I have insulted your pride.

May Christ’s blessings be upon you and yours.

 

[Delphinus85]

Has anyone noticed that there isn’t a conversation that goes on here without someone getting mad at and insulting someone else?

 

[RWMorris]

Co-habitation is a good reason to go ahead and get married. But it is a REALLY good reason to go to Confession.

 

[crenfro]

I apologise for the lack of clarity. Right now co-habitation before marriage is NOT an impediment. I think it should be. If you think I am wrong, please tell me. As I said in the OP I define co-habitation as the couple having pre-marital sex.

Sorry, I guess I’m dense.

Let me see if I can put what I think you’re saying into my own words:

You’re saying it should be a factor in NOT performing a marriage in the Catholic Church if the intended couple has lived together outside of marriage beforehand.

I do know that none of us should receive a sacrament if we are in mortal sin, and that includes receiving the sacrament of marriage.

I also know that just because I think or rationalize something in my mind that that doesn’t make it so.

So I think I agree with you, that if there’s co-habitating before marriage that that issue must be addressed and the intended couple needs to be in a state of grace before receiving the sacrament of marriage.

Never heard this idea put that way before. Thanks for stretching my brain muscles.