Visitation from cohabitating nephew and his girlfriend

[Rence]

Not talking about controlling the actions of others.

But of having the right to say “not in my home”.

And that one may not approve etc of the wrongful actions of others.

It’s THEIR home, not her home. She doesn’t live there alone. She didn’t approve, he overruled it. Relenting to his wishes in no way diminishes her disapproval.

 

[Bookcat]

I’m glad to hear your respiratory processes are working well.

I don’t think the situation is as black and white as you’d like.

But it’s the OP’s situation to handle and she can certainly handle in the way you wish. I think that the potential negative fallout will far out weigh the perceived positives of scrupulously enforcing a morality that isn’t shared by anyone else in the household.

The “sin” is not hers. She voiced her opinion, the husband declined, and other options will be seen as an insult.

Sometimes “insult” (not really insult …but they may feel that way …though they ought to think how they are shaming her etc as another noted) will happen in life and cannot be avoided.

It is black and white. Do good, avoid evil.

She is coming here for advice. So saying “But it’s the OP’s situation to handle and she can certainly handle in the way you wish.” is not fitted to the occasion here.

One may not approve or praise etc the evil of others (see CCC).

It is in no way “scrupulously enforcing mortality” -by definition.

It may be that a Spouse may not be able to prevent wrongful things from happening in their home -but they ought to seek -lovingly and calmly and with truth to prevent such and they are not to cooperate in any wrongful way (see CCC above) in the objective sin of others.

Yes things might happen against our wills that we are not able to prevent. And we then need to deal lovingly and truthfully with such. Making the right choices of what to do next. It may be a prudential fine line one must then walk. Avoiding as one can the various potential fall outs. A good confessor can guide one.

Yes it must be handled delicately as possible -with great love, truth, and great gentleness. And it may not be possible for her to change their minds or what will happen - but the choices she makes and the actions she does - must be Christian. In truth and love and gentleness.

 

[Rence]

Sometimes “insult” (not really insult …but they may feel that way …though they ought to think how they are shaming her etc as another noted) will happen in life and cannot be avoided.

It is black and white. Do good, avoid evil.

She is coming here for advice. So saying “But it’s the OP’s situation to handle and she can certainly handle in the way you wish.” is not fitted to the occasion here.

One may not approve or praise etc the evil of others.

It is in no way “scrupulously enforcing mortality” -by definition.

It may be that a Spouse may not be able to prevent wrongful things from happening in their home -but they ought to seek -lovingly and calmly and with truth to prevent such and they are not to cooperate in any wrongful way (see CCC above) in the objective sin of others.

Yes it must be handled delicately as possible -with love, truth, and gentleness. And it may not be possible for her to change their minds or what will happen - but the choices she makes and the actions she does - must be Christian. In truth and love and gentleness.

The OP is certainly doing good, and avoiding evil by arguing with her husband over this issue. She has never approved the arrangement, and voiced her objection to the arrangement. She is not able to prevent this from happening because her husband has overruled her in this matter. They share the home, it’s not only her home, it’s his too - and she can’t forbid this visit because he has overruled her. That in no way implies her approval. She has done well to handle it with love, truth and gentleness. At this point, there is nothing she can do but pray for her husband’s conversion. In the end, she can’t choose or change the actions of her spouse. He is accountable for his own actions and so is she. She did all she can do. If she values her marriage (and her religion, as they go hand in hand) she will rise above this and move on with dignity and look for opportunities to bring him towards God. That means she will lose some and she will win some…as with any other marriage.

 

[Bookcat]

The OP is certainly doing good, and avoiding evil by arguing with her husband over this issue. .

We do not know what the outcome will be - she may still have time to discuss further.

In any case I have noted the text from the Catechism and noted various other aspects.

Not praising or approving etc of objective evil ways of living and in all – Truth, love and gentleness.

 

[Rence]

What I noted above remains.

We do not know what the outcome will be - she may still have time to discuss further.

In any case I have noted the text from the Catechism and noted various other aspects.

Truth, love and gentleness and not praising or approving etc of objective evil ways of living.

What you noted above can remain, and it speaks for itself. The OP is compliant with what you noted above. There is no where in the Catechism or any other material from the Vatican that states that actions to prevent someone else from sinning should be taken to the detriment of one’s marriage. In fact, you’re supposed to work towards harmony in a marriage. In instances where Catholics are married to non-Catholics, you can’t bully the other into submission. She is responsible for her own actions, as well as educating her husband about the teachings of the Church. However, she is not responsible for his actions. Where they don’t agree, she should pray for him. She can continue to speak with him about it and try to get him to change his mind. But there’s nothing more she can do about it without damaging her marriage. And she is still responsible for the health of her marriage. That doesn’t go away just because they are in conflict in this matter.

 

[Bookcat]

What you noted above can remain, and it speaks for itself. The OP is compliant with what you noted above. There is no where in the Catechism or any other material from the Vatican that states that actions to prevent someone else from sinning should be taken to the detriment of one’s marriage. In fact, you’re supposed to work towards harmony in a marriage. In instances where Catholics are married to non-Catholics, you can’t bully the other into submission. She is responsible for her own actions, as well as educating her husband about the teachings of the Church. However, she is not responsible for his actions. Where they don’t agree, she should pray for him. She can continue to speak with him about it and try to get him to change his mind. But there’s nothing more she can do about it without damaging her marriage. And she is still responsible for the health of her marriage. That doesn’t go away just because they are in conflict in this matter.

Please read again my posts. I think you missed some things

 

[BettyBoop416]

But realize ya’ll would be singing a different tune if the there was a role reversal and the one with the “new” religion in the relationship was Muslim or Jewish, etc, or even no religion. Her re-connection to Catholicism is new to the marriage and changed the dynamics between them. Right or wrong, she’s the one who turned everything upside down, not him. If she wants her marriage to survive it, or if she wants her husband’s conversion, she’s going to have to tread lightly and that’s the way it is. You know that’s true. Over time, she will win some arguments and she will lose some. She lost this one.

Yes. Someone finally got to the heart of the matter.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

That’s of course an option, that will cause turmoil between the OP and her husband (and his family). Good luck with that.

Good luck with that one too

A couple rounds of being blatantly rude to her husband’s family, and her husband directly, and the OP will be at major odds with her husband. Not a smart thing for any wife to do if she values her marriage

I think at this point, the best advice is to have the OP speak with her priest. I guarantee, one with a lick of common sense won’t recommend she do something to endanger her relationship with her husband with how seriously the Church regards the Sacrament of Marriage.

I don’t know what you mean my luck. I doubt any of my suggestions would change the husbands mind or educate the nephew on morality. The husband has said what he thinks is final.
Honestly we are talking about sin here. And no person should be put in that position by a spouse. I think a little moral relativism has crept into your thinking. And that is fine we live in a world that affects us that way. Sin is sin, and mortal sin is mortal sin. And here we are talking not only about the nephews sin, but the OP’s as well as it can involve scandal. Your answer would probably be different if you applied many other sins to the nephew’s visit. If the Nephew laundered money and did so while he was in the house, did drugs, or continued running a child porn website while there, you would not be so quick to keep the peace. Perhaps if the nephew was gay and his lover was to also spend the night in his bed in her house with children in it you would find yourself on the other side of the argument.

As to strife within the marriage if she dare put her foot down on a moral issue, I can only point out that the imposition on the marriage here is coming from the HUSBAND who is insisting on introducing the wife not only to sin but to sin despite protest. It is the husband who is causing family, moral and marital strife because he is not man enough or strong enough to defend his wife over the nephew.
No matter the relative if my wife made clear her uncomfortableness with a relative visiting, especially one that is not really close, I would take the side of my wife every time. The nephew need never know about it. But if the husband does not share his wife’s values or have enough respect for her or her faith to see that this is important enough to her that she is posting on a website for help and advice. Then I think it is quite acceptable and maybe even called for, for her to stand up in her home for her faith. And against sin.

The marital strife is already there. If you think the husband is so blind that he would escalate that and it would further damage the marriage, then I would submit that it is already damaged.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

It’s THEIR home, not her home. She doesn’t live there alone. She didn’t approve, he overruled it. Relenting to his wishes in no way diminishes her disapproval.

It looks like it is HIS home actually. Not theirs. If it was theirs then compromise would be had.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Yeah, something to think about when one marries another of a different faith.

Whatever faith he is, does not look kindly on cohabitation. And if of no faith or luke warm faith, the society the husband is from accepts cohabitation and a much LOWER rate than the west.
It isn’t even about Catholicism really, it is about where your spouse should rank in your life and a spouses right to be free from sin in her own house.

If the husband was saying that in his faith this is taught as correct or that it is a social norm and responsibility to accept this in his culture then you might have a point. But he isn’t, he is just saying, I would rather make my wife uncomfortable than my nephew.

 

[Rence]

I don’t know what you mean my luck. I doubt any of my suggestions would change the husbands mind or educate the nephew on morality. The husband has said what he thinks is final.
Honestly we are talking about sin here.

And no person should be put in that position by a spouse. I think a little moral relativism has crept into your thinking. And that is fine we live in a world that affects us that way. Sin is sin, and mortal sin is mortal sin.

You’re right, your suggesions are not going to change the husband’s mind or the nephew’s mind. The OP’s husband is not Catholic. Nor is the OP’s husband’s relatives. You’re talking about sin in the eyes of the Catholic Church, which the OP’s husband and his relatives don’t recognize. What the Catholic Church calls sinful is the way of life the nephew and his girlfriend lead…and they are not Catholic. And the OP has little to do with “sin” since it is her husband who is insisting on the visiting arrangement. Unless she can convince him to change his mind, there is nothing that she can do to change things. So he is in no way causing her to sin.

As to strife within the marriage if she dare put her foot down on a moral issue, I can only point out that the imposition on the marriage here is coming from the HUSBAND

The imposition is actually coming from the wife because: Her re-connection to Catholicism is new to the marriage and changed the dynamics between them. Right or wrong, she’s the one who turned everything upside down, not him. He was not/is not Catholic at the time of marital vows. She was not a practicing Catholic at the time of vows. They were cohabitating before the vows, and had sex before the vows. One can easily see what is being imposed and by whom. They’ve been married, I think she said 13 years. She reconnected with Catholicism 3 years ago. These are all new “rules” she is imposing on her husband and the marriage, not the other way around.

The marital strife is already there. If you think the husband is so blind that he would escalate that and it would further damage the marriage, then I would submit that it is already damaged.

According to the OP, the husband has been very supportive of the OP’s reconnection to the Catholic faith. What he is not going to do, is himself live by Church rules and laws…which incidently is not required of him to begin with.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

The OP is risking alienating her husband and his family for the sake of enforcing her own moral laws. I don’t find that a wise course.

I’m sure you must see the logical problem with this thinking. At some point, everyone enforces others to moral laws. Be it rape, murder, stealing, or public nudity. This is not moral law unique to Catholics. It is also observed in the OP husbands culture and faiths of that culture and in most places for most of human history.

You certainly have some line that you would draw and say that the OP could enforce her morals on others right? The nephew cannot just come in and perform any number of immoral acts just because he does not share the same worldview as the OP. right?

The only people enforcing their own moral laws on someone are the OPs husband and nephew.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

You’re right, your suggesions are not going to change the husband’s mind or the nephew’s mind. The OP’s husband is not Catholic. Nor is the OP’s husband’s relatives. You’re talking about sin in the eyes of the Catholic Church, which the OP’s husband and his relatives don’t recognize. What the Catholic Church calls sinful is the way of life the nephew and his girlfriend lead…and they are not Catholic. And the OP has little to do with “sin” since it is her husband who is insisting on the visiting arrangement. Unless she can convince him to change his mind, there is nothing that she can do to change things. So he is in no way causing her to sin.

The imposition is actually coming from the wife because: Her re-connection to Catholicism is new to the marriage and changed the dynamics between them. Right or wrong, she’s the one who turned everything upside down, not him. He was not/is not Catholic at the time of marital vows. She was not a practicing Catholic at the time of vows. They were cohabitating before the vows, and had sex before the vows. One can easily see what is being imposed and by whom. They’ve been married, I think she said 13 years. She reconnected with Catholicism 3 years ago. These are all new “rules” she is imposing on her husband and the marriage, not the other way around.

According to the OP, the husband has been very supportive of the OP’s reconnection to the Catholic faith. What he is not going to do, is himself live by Church rules and laws…which incidently is not required of him to begin with.

Wait, so if you revert and discover the Truth, you have less moral standing than if you did not?

The OP is Catholic and is bound by that no matter when she reverted or what she did before. The OP’s husband likely does not come from a religious background that teachings that cohabitation is not sinful. Not only that but his own culture shames it. Though it is becoming more accepted. If the situation were reversed and a person and his chippie were visiting Nepal, they would most likely be made separate rooms by the relatives they were staying with.

You can argue all you want, ultimately the husband is choosing the nephew over the wife. Catholic or not, he is in the wrong.

 

[Rence]

Whatever faith he is, does not look kindly on cohabitation. And if of no faith or luke warm faith, the society the husband is from accepts cohabitation and a much LOWER rate than the west.
It isn’t even about Catholicism really, it is about where your spouse should rank in your life and a spouses right to be free from sin in her own house.

If the husband was saying that in his faith this is taught as correct or that it is a social norm and responsibility to accept this in his culture then you might have a point. But he isn’t, he is just saying, I would rather make my wife uncomfortable than my nephew.

Whatever his faith or lack of faith, he came with it to the marriage, and so did she. She knew this and so did he. What he didn’t count on was her changing the rules after years, and he shouldn’t have to.

Of course a spouse should rank higher in your life than anyone else, but that doesn’t mean your spouse can dictate your every move, right down to the circumstances of how your relatives are “allowed” to visit your own home.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Whatever his faith or lack of faith, he came with it to the marriage, and so did she. She knew this and so did he. What he didn’t count on was her changing the rules after years, and he shouldn’t have to.

Of course a spouse should rank higher in your life than anyone else, but that doesn’t mean your spouse can dictate your every move, right down to the circumstances of how your relatives are “allowed” to visit your own home.

If the nephew was gay would you change your mind? If the 4 year old was 12? Would you change your mind? If it were some other sin would you change your mind?

 

[Rence]

Wait, so if you revert and discover the Truth, you have less moral standing than if you did not?

If one reverts and discovers the truth, one is responsible for his/her own actions in following the truth. However, you do not have the right to impose your reversion and re-discovery on anyone else.

The OP is Catholic and is bound by that no matter when she reverted or what she did before. The OP’s husband likely does not come from a religious background that teachings that cohabitation is not sinful. Not only that but his own culture shames it. Though it is becoming more accepted. If the situation were reversed and a person and his chippie were visiting Nepal, they would most likely be made separate rooms by the relatives they were staying with.

The OP’s husband is not Catholic and not bound by Catholic rules and laws, and until proven otherwise, his relatives are in good standing in their culture. You don’t know that ‘his own culture shames it’ because the cultural norms have changed and cohabitation is acceptable in many cultures today.

You can argue all you want, ultimately the husband is choosing the nephew over the wife. Catholic or not, he is in the wrong.

You can argue all you want, ultimately the husband is not allowing the wife to dictate to him. HIs extended family is important to him too, and what he’s not allowing, is his wife to blatantly insult his extended family and I can’t say I blame him. Hopefully the OP will take the high road, and receive her guests with dignity and show them a living example of Catholicism.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

If one reverts and discovers the truth, one is responsible for his/her own actions in following the truth. However, you do not have the right to impose your reversion and re-discovery on anyone else.

The OP’s husband is not Catholic and not bound by Catholic rules and laws, and until proven otherwise, his relatives are in good standing in their culture. You don’t know that ‘his own culture shames it’ because the cultural norms have changed and cohabitation is acceptable in many cultures today.

You can argue all you want, ultimately the husband is not allowing the wife to dictate to him. HIs extended family is important to him too, and what he’s not allowing, is his wife to blatantly insult his extended family and I can’t say I blame him. Hopefully the OP will take the high road, and receive her guests with dignity and show them a living example of Catholicism.

:banghead:

 

[Rence]

If the nephew was gay would you change your mind? If the 4 year old was 12? Would you change your mind? If it were some other sin would you change your mind?

The nephew that the husband wishes to have visit is an adult male, who has been cohabitating with an adult female for years. Again, these are the facts:

Her re-connection to Catholicism is new to the marriage and changed the dynamics between them. Right or wrong, she’s the one who turned everything upside down, not him. He was not/is not Catholic at the time of marital vows. She was not a practicing Catholic at the time of vows. They were cohabitating before the vows, and had sex before the vows. One can easily see what is being imposed and by whom. They’ve been married, I think she said 13 years. She reconnected with Catholicism 3 years ago. These are all new “rules” she is imposing on her husband and the marriage, not the other way around.

I’m sure it’s not easy for the OP’s husband to understand why it is not okay for hubby’s non-Catholic nephew and cohabitating girlfriend to visit, when the wife was cohabitating with hubby before they got married. Get real.

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

I am more concerned with the unilateral way in which your husband is dismissing you and your concerns. If things are as you relayed here, why is it that he is saying “yes” or “no” to you as if you are a child?

Are other decisions in the household made in such a way? Is there perhaps some passive aggressive behavior going on? Seems like there is more to this than just the nephew visiting.

I agree with this point of view. The logistics of the couple staying should have been discussed before the invitation was made.

 

[Millie123]

I just want to pipe up being how this is my thread. Everyone has given me a lot to think about.

Hoosier Daddy: I just wanted to clear up some misconceptions that you have about my husbands culture. Yes, in rural Nepali villages Cohabitation is still deeply frowned upon. However, in the larger City of Kathmandu. From what I’ve noticed of having Nepali friends, over the years is that they are becoming more Americanized, especially among the Nepali Youth. Many idolize America and are adopting more American ideals and lifestyles. No Cohabitation is not as deeply frowned upon…and no people are not “shamed” for living together. In my husbands family, the living arrangements between my nephew and his girlfriend are accepted. They are not shamed for their cohabitation…In fact my husbands family views them as being “nearly married.” Which has put me in a hard position trying to explain to my husband why their living arrangement is wrong, their living arrangement is accepted by everyone but me. In my husband’s family the girlfriend of my nephew is referred with love and affection as “Buari”… It’s an affectionate title for a married woman which loosely translates to “son’s wife”