The "Living as brother and sister" arrangement

[I_Believe]

Does the “living as brother and sister” arrangement pre-date VII ?

 

[THurifer2]

I doubt it. Before Vatican II a man and woman living together regardless of “arrangement” would have been considered scandalous. In fact I think it still does in most cases

 

[1ke]

Can you be a little more specific in what you are wanting to know?

The “living as brother and sister arrangement” goes back at least to Mary and Joseph. And, there is plenty of evidence from the early church of married men who became priests living with their wife in continence.

So, I’m not sure what you are asking.

 

[I_Believe]

I doubt it. Before Vatican II a man and woman living together regardless of “arrangement” would have been considered scandalous. In fact I think it still does in most cases

Ok, the reason I asked is that many traditional groups have spoken out against the liberal attitudes of todays
Bishops regarding divorce and annullments.

But on another forum, with mostly traditional minded Catholic members, the concensus was that the SSPX and other independent Clergy find it acceptable in certain cases. That surprised me, which led to my question of how far back it went.

I expected a harsher reaction to this arrangement from traditionalists. I tend to frown on it myself, but I know little about it’s history.

 

[I_Believe]

Can you be a little more specific in what you are wanting to know?

The “living as brother and sister arrangement” goes back at least to Mary and Joseph. And, there is plenty of evidence from the early church of married men who became priests living with their wife in continence.

So, I’m not sure what you are asking.

Hi 1ke, I’m asking for a simple answer to the question, “Does the “living as brother and sister” arrangement pre-date VII ?”, from someone who KNOWS for sure whether it did or not.

I’ve been told by a diocese priest that is an option under certain circumstances for those with marriage issues. So, was this an option before VII ? I didn’t think to ask the priest at the time.

Your examples are interesting, I would not have connected Mary and Joseph to the question, but it’s a good point.

But, I’m asking the question as it pertains to modern times

 

[1ke]

Hi 1ke, I’m asking for a simple answer to the question, “Does the “living as brother and sister” arrangement pre-date VII ?”, from someone who KNOWS for sure whether it did or not.

I’ve been told by a diocese priest that is an option under certain circumstances for those with marriage issues. So, was this an option before VII ? I didn’t think to ask the priest at the time.

Your examples are interesting, I would not have connected Mary and Joseph to the question, but it’s a good point.

But, I’m asking the question as it pertains to modern times

So, what you are asking is whether or not someone in an irregular marriage situation can continue to live under the same roof until their situation is resolved, if they do so in a chaste manner.

You are trying to frame it as whether or not it was “allowed” before Vatican II, but I don’t think that is the right question.

There is nothing in canon law now that prohibits it, and I doubt there was anything in the code of canon law prior to 1983 either. So, in that regard it would be “allowed”.

Therefore, it falls in the realm of the moral law. It does not violate the Sixth Commandment.
With regard to scandal, it would be situational as is the case yesterday, today, and tomorrow – is the irregular marriage well known, are there children involved, is the impediment/prior marriage under investigation, etc.

There is no black and white answer, each situation would be unique.

What has changed is the environment in which we live-- people no longer live in their hometowns, know everyone’s business and history, etc. In the past, a divorcee or divorced man had a big, red “D” on their forehead and everyone in town knew their business. Divorce was very uncommon b/c the laws were much different.

If a couple moved to your parish how would you ever know their marriage was irregular? You wouldnt. There would be no scandal as they privately worked out their situation with their pastor.

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

Just to be clear, 1ke, you’ve mentioned direct violation of the 6th commandment and scandal, but you’ve forgotten to mention the near occasion of sin, which is also a serious issue. In a further cluttering of the matter, in modern times we’re not just talking about people adopting the arrangement while waiting to hear back on an anulment, but people who have heard in the negative are often told, “Now you’ll have to live as brother and sister.” Many people, myself included, would actually say that, ceteris paribus, you now need to seek out separate living arrangements.

 

[1ke]

Just to be clear, 1ke, you’ve mentioned direct violation of the 6th commandment and scandal, but you’ve forgotten to mention the near occasion of sin, which is also a serious issue.

Again, that would be an issue best discerned through prayer with their priest. In a one bedroom apartment, probably an issue. In a 4 bedroom house, probably not.

In a further cluttering of the matter, in modern times we’re not just talking about people adopting the arrangement while waiting to hear back on an anulment, but people who have heard in the negative are often told, “Now you’ll have to live as brother and sister.”

And again, this would be individual. Yes for some separation, legal & physical, would be best and for others not. If there are children, “brother and sister” may be a better solution than breaking apart the household. This is not something to undertake lightly, or without the counsel of a priest, by any means.

And, still others would ignore the Church and continue to live as spouses. But, we aren’t talking about them. We are talking about those who sincerely want to live out the Church’s teaching.

However, again, there is NO one answer.

Many people, myself included, would actually say that, ceteris paribus, you now need to seek out separate living arrangements.

And, I would not make a blanket statement.

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

Note the “ceteris paribus” - conditions might exist in which we could nearly all agree there is a reason to live under the same roof, and yet, on the other hand, can anyone honestly say that they typically recommend unmarried people live together in the absence of some compelling reason?

 

[Sarabande]

This is interesting. I don’t know the answer either and I think the previous posters have given a lot of info. I do know that in the past, especially in early America, people of more humble means used bundling boards for people of the opposite sex. It usually was done for couples who were “dating” or “courting” or friends who needed a place to stay. This was due to small spaces and to save money on firewood and candles. It was also usually done in the winter or when a young man courting a young woman stayed the night at the girl’s home. It was supposed to bring out intimacy for them to talk in private without engaging in sexual practices (although the bundling board was sometimes breached).

Whether or not that practice was condoned by the Church is another sotry.