Son moving in with girlfriend

[styrgwillidar]

I was a lapsed Catholic that recently re-discovered my faith with my fiance.

He and I are starting RCIA classes this week and have already made arrangements to have our wedding in the Church after we have received all of our sacraments.

Here is the deal. We have been cohabiting for the better part of two years and I’m pregnant. We have discussed this with our priest and of course…I’m not receiving communion. Do I realize that it was wrong to co-habitate? Of course I do, every single day since I’ve come back to my faith. I pray about it often and have asked my priest for guidance. Our priest has said that while the church does not agree with our arrangement, it would be impractical for me to move out as I would have no where to go and am currently being supported by my Fiance while I’m pregnant and working my way through school.

While we are trying to rectify the situation by practicing celibacy and attending weekly Mass it is difficult to stomach other people telling me my marriage is destined to fail because I did co-habitate and am currently in a situation that would do me more harm then good if I move out before our Marriage, especially since our marriage is happening in about 4 months.

I was exactly the same age as the OP’s son when I moved in with my then boyfriend and now, current fiance. He is the only man I’ve ever co-habitated with. I wasn’t discouraged to move in with him. I was actually encouraged since I was living with my parents at the time and they were selling their house. It was a simple solution to the problem at the time.

You can’t rewrite the past, you can only go forward as you are doing. My sincere congratulations, prayers and best wishes. And plenty of marriages fail where the couples didn’t co-habitate, mine included.

At it’s heart legal marriage truly is about committment, and perhaps I’m old fashioned but co-habitation leaves me with the impression there is a lack of committment, an unwillingness to ‘take that final step’. Of course, as you’re aware the center of marriage in the Catholic church is that it is a sacrament which unbreakably binds two people in a covenant with God, the ultimate committment for two people to take together.

 

[anp1215]

Well, when I’ve seen this the kids aren’t the couples’, but one or the other’s from a prior shack-up.

Hmm, I see both.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

Wow, so many things have been said on this thread that made me go . For starters, this girl is not a “concubine” as one person put it, nor is she living as one. Furthermore, despite what so many people on here seem to think they probably did not move in together for sex. If it was just about that they wouldn’t combine homes, they would just spend a few nights a week together. My guess is that they were spending so much time together and spending so much on two apartments that it just made sense to combine them. Yes, I know that Catholics consider it sinful regardless. But I am positive they didn’t think “Gee, if we moved in together sex would be so much easier.” Trust me, they are already having as much or as little (or no) sex as they want.

And despite what a lot of people think he is not disrespecting her, nor is she lowering herself. Granted, if you are a person that highly values marriage and wants that for yourself then someone asking to just live with you would be a slap in the face. But for two people who genuinely don’t value marriage all that much it is not disrespectful to give them what they want. I would actually consider it very disrespectful if my fiance told me that he wouldn’t live with me because we aren’t married and that would be reducing me. In doing so he would be telling me that my values (actually, our values) come after what other people think, and that is degrading to me.

As for what you can do. Nothing. He’s a grown man. You can pray, but that’s about it. Of course you can tell him how you feel, but if you overdo it they will just end up talking and laughing behind your back about your “quaint” outlook. Trust me, he knows how you and the church feel, and he’s made this choice anyway.

 

[styrgwillidar]

And despite what a lot of people think he is not disrespecting her, nor is she lowering herself.

Agree with much of what you’ve written from an atheist perspective. They’re adults, they’ll establish their own values- and she isn’t lowering herself since she’s simply set very low standards and values. His/her risks to assess and accept.

There are practical and legal considerations which would make me adamantly advise my children from ever getting into this kind of a set-up. If they’re roommates, who’s on the lease? Just one? Both? Let’s say just one and the relationship breaks up, if it’s not amicable it gets ugly really quickly as room-mates. Whoever ain’t on the lease can find themselves homeless very quickly. And whoever is on the lease is on the hook- rent/utilities/damages/conduct etc. etc.

Both on the lease? I saw this happen, each room-mate trying to torment the other by bringing home one-night stands etc. No one has the right to toss the other out, you’re stuck with them or you move. Both meeting their financial obligations as room-mates, but neither wanting to lose their home.

Either way, You lose your job, you’re just a room-mate, there’s no committment, you can’t expect your uncommitted room-mate to pick up your slack. Pay your half or get out.

There is no such thing as infidelity as a shack up. Since there’s no committment, just because they’re living with someone doesn’t mean they can’t date other folks. Just as if they were living apart, they are free to explore other possible relationships if they think their current one isn’t working out. They are just bf/gf with no more expectation/right to exclusivity than if they were living apart. Completely up to their own personal ethical code as to whether they are above board about it or not. No protection of a marriage/legal partnership.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

There is no such thing as infidelity as a shack up. Since there’s no committment, just because they’re living with someone doesn’t mean they can’t date other folks. Just as if they were living apart, they are free to explore other possible relationships if they think their current one isn’t working out. They are just bf/gf with no more expectation/right to exclusivity than if they were living apart. Completely up to their own personal ethical code as to whether they are above board about it or not. No protection of a marriage/legal partnership.

Are you saying that you don’t believe in monogamy before marriage? When you have agreed to be exclusive with someone, whether your are married or dating, living together or doing a long-distance relationship you are not free to see other people. And frankly, if someone were to move in with someone and then decide to just start seeing other people too it’s probably a good thing that they didn’t get married. I would never marry someone to ensure that they would be faithful to me. I would expect them to show that quality long before the ‘I do’, and if they can’t, then no marriage.

I’m not morally against living together. However, I do think that people need to be way more careful about it than they are. Both people should absolutely be on the lease. Period. They also need to draft up an agreement about what will happen if they break up, and take it to an attorney or just get it notarized depending on the laws of the state. No, that doesn’t provide perfect protection, but its a good start.

 

[styrgwillidar]

I’m saying committment is committment. I put in a way to make an extreme point (there are plenty of married folks who violate their committments). Living together is not the same as marriage because there is no binding committment, it’s a way to get some of the benefits of marriage without fully taking on the obligations/responsibilities. In most cases, folks don’t take the steps to provide for legal redress because part of the reason they are living together vice marrying is to avoid legal entanglements/responsibilities/obligations.

What I personaly believe is irrelevant. I’m pointing out that without a legal agreement of some sort, there are very limited options if one person opts out. Yeah, the same can happen in marriage/legal partnerships but that provides for courses of action for compensation etc.

As you pointed out, even leaving morality/religious beliefs out of it, at a personal level it’s wise to get some of the legal protections of a marriage/legal partnership for folks living together.

 

[anp1215]

Agree with much of what you’ve written from an atheist perspective. They’re adults, they’ll establish their own values- and she isn’t lowering herself since she’s simply set very low standards and values. His/her risks to assess and accept.

There are practical and legal considerations which would make me adamantly advise my children from ever getting into this kind of a set-up. If they’re roommates, who’s on the lease? Just one? Both? Let’s say just one and the relationship breaks up, if it’s not amicable it gets ugly really quickly as room-mates. Whoever ain’t on the lease can find themselves homeless very quickly. And whoever is on the lease is on the hook- rent/utilities/damages/conduct etc. etc…

This is exactly what happened to my good friend. She and her boyfriend moved in together, she was the only one on the lease because he had terrible credit. When they broke up, she kicked him out, and she had to find a roommate to share a one bedroom apartment with her. No fun and she learned her lesson.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

This is exactly what happened to my good friend. She and her boyfriend moved in together, she was the only one on the lease because he had terrible credit. When they broke up, she kicked him out, and she had to find a roommate to share a one bedroom apartment with her. No fun and she learned her lesson.

Honestly I will never understand people who do this. I have worked at a number of rental properties and none of them allow anyone to live in an apartment without being on the lease. That even includes adult children of tenets. The reason for that is they want to be able to run a criminal background check on everyone. Every place I have ever worked has a clause saying that allowing someone not on the lease to live with you is a terminable offense.

Both people need to be on the lease, that way both are responsible for rent. They also need to draft up a document outlining what will happen if they break up. (Example, live as roommates for the remainder of the lease, no romantic/sexual guests, still jointly responsible for bills, etc)

 

[anp1215]

Honestly I will never understand people who do this. I have worked at a number of rental properties and none of them allow anyone to live in an apartment without being on the lease. That even includes adult children of tenets. The reason for that is they want to be able to run a criminal background check on everyone. Every place I have ever worked has a clause saying that allowing someone not on the lease to live with you is a terminable offense.

Both people need to be on the lease, that way both are responsible for rent. They also need to draft up a document outlining what will happen if they break up. (Example, live as roommates for the remainder of the lease, no romantic/sexual guests, still jointly responsible for bills, etc)

Yes it is quite ridiculous. When she signed the lease they basically told her “You technically live alone, wink wink, we’ll look the other way about your boyfriend.” They just wanted a paying tenant. He even went to the office to complain about problems (roaches, yuck, they kept their apt. so clean but always had roaches, it was disgusting), so they definitely knew he was living there. I mean, what if he was a convicted sex offender? Makes me wonder who else was living around me (I lived in the same complex). What if they let a sex offender live there and he hurt a child? The complex could be rightfully sued since the parents could not see the offender on the registry.