Why is church lenient to fornicators than to cohabitators in respect to communion

  • Thread starter Thread starter vio_dsa
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
greenrangerx said:
Of course the church is strict with those who fornicate. It is a mortal sin, and thus a person who does so should not receive communion without first going to Reconciliation. What would you like to happen? Have priests ask everyday before giving them the Eucharist, “Have you fornicated recently?”
Click to expand...
I would also add that I am not sure why a lot of people think fornication is morally worse than any other mortal sin.
 
People who are fornicating are probably committing a mortal sin and should not go (not that it stops them, of course).

Cohabitation is a state of living and that would require spiritual direction.
QwertyGirl said:
I would also add that I am not sure why a lot of people think fornication is morally worse than any other mortal sin.
Click to expand...
The only time I would make comparisons like this is when it comes to theft.
 
Last edited:
vio_dsa said:
The Church is very clear on not giving holy communion to cohabitators, I guess its mainly because they are living like married couples (having sex outside the bond of marriage). Fornicators do the same thing, they have sex before marriage and surprisingly the church are not strict with them.
Click to expand...
Sex outside of marital covenant is by matter, will, and knowledge - a mortal sin. Both person’s who have not confessed their sins, and do not repent, cannot therefore receive Holy Communion.

But, let’s suppose we take one person, a fornicator. And then another,who co-habitates. Generally, The fornicator, if he or she goes to Confession, declares their sins, and repents, and therefore receives Absolution. He or she can then receive Holy Communion.

When someone who co-habitates, goes to Confession, declares all their sins, repents, and receives Absolution. They also can receive Holy Communion.

I don’t think the process is different. However, I think the perception is much harder for someone who co-habitates can see their sins, as apart from a person who fornicates. For, the co-habitant considers his or her state like it were marriage. Because, they love each other. Wherefore, the fornicator - which is quite obvious - generally sleeps for a hookup/one night stand. And so it is easier/more obvious to tell someone who is fornicating what they’re doing is wrong. But with someone who co-habitates, it is much harder to convince them that what they are are doing (if and only if they are sleeping with this person as opposed to a morally chaste life), then it is much harder to tell them they are in mortal sin.

The Church puts harsher rules, maybe (because I haven’t really read much, but only from what your post says) to make the co-habitants fully aware they are in mortal sin. And the measure of penance for them to be reconciled is much greater a burden because they lack the eye site of their souls to realize they are in mortal sin. Whereas a fornicator, it’s much quite easier as they don’t really believe they love the person they are having a one night stand with.
 
Last edited:
QwertyGirl said:
I would also add that I am not sure why a lot of people think fornication is morally worse than any other mortal sin.
Click to expand...
It would be worse than an unconsummated mortal sin of impurity, for instance.
 
Last edited:
Cohabitators are in a state of sin/scandal

A fornicator is not to receive Communion until Confession under normal circumstances.
Likewise, a cohabitator can receive Communion after repenting and going to Confession.
 
Arwing said:
It would be worse than an unconsummated mortal sin of impurity, for instance.
Click to expand...
How so? I was always taught that sin isn’t a black and white issue. To many variables for any given person in any given situation.
 
How many cohabitating fornicators are at Mass on Sunday morning anyhow?

If they aren’t at mass, the communion issue for them is sort of moot.
 
Sorry, I thought you were talking only about the object. Didn’t read the context properly I guess. You’re right then that it is not our place to judge a specific person’s sins against another’s, or make any pronouncement as to their personal culpability.
 
Last edited:
^ To add, just for clarity, it should be noted that not permitting cohabitators and such to Communion is only doing what is logical given the state of continuous, objective sin, not making a personal judgment.

But yeah, when it comes to “mere” fornication (i.e. without the scandal of cohabitation and whatnot), if what you were saying is that it would be treated like any mortal sin with regards to Communion, then I see what you mean.
 
Last edited:
Sin precludes us from receiving communion. If a fornicator or cohabitor go to Confession and are sorry and contrite, they could go to communion. But they must repent. So, they cannot continue in the sin. If they chose to continue onMonday, they technically should not receive communion. If the priest knows cohabitors are continuing, he will not give them Communion.
Priests are to hold communion from politicians who vote for abortion. I don’t think this is followed.
IF YOU LOVE ME, KEEP MY COMMANDMENTS.
God is watching us from a distance.
In Christ’s love
Tweedlealice
 
tweedlealice said:
If they chose to continue onMonday, they technically should not receive communion.
Click to expand...
Indeed, choosing to continue would invalidate their confession (if they had said in their heart that they meant to do it again). Purpose of amendment is required.
 
Blessings
It’s a sad society in which we dwell. Modesty and Chasity are gone mostly. If we were to die this minute,and presented ourselves dressed in xxxx,
What would God say to us? String bikinis and thongs???
In Christ’s Love
Tweedlealice
 
I think if both parties are unmarried, and both are having sex with each other, then both are fornicating.

If one party is married, and is having sex with an unmarried person, then the one who is married is committing adultery, and the unmarried party is fornicating.

If both parties are married to other people, but are having sex with each other, then both of them are committing adultery.

There is NO excuse to have sex with someone you are not married to–even if the other party tells you their marriage is “dead” or they are in the process of divorcing their spouse. Many looking for a thrill will lie just to get sex. Then the unmarried party is strung along with false hope. If this person is willing to cheat on their spouse–WHY on earth would you think that they would be faithful to YOU should you marry them?

The Catholic Church sees this kind of heartache and that is why She only supports intercourse (the marital embrace) between one man and his one wife till death do they part.

One thing I read and hear all the time is when a boyfriend or girlfriend gets mad because their significant other is “cheating” on them. They’re not supposed to be having sex in the first place! Therefore, it’s not “cheating!”
 
MichelleP12 said:
If one party is married, and is having sex with an unmarried person, then the one who is married is committing adultery, and the unmarried party is fornicating.
Click to expand...
Both are committing adultery in this case as both are complicit in breaking the bonds of marriage. The unmarried party is usually called an “adulterer” or “adulteress”.
 
Yep. Whether it is a single fornication (by the OP, a “fornicator”), someone serially fornicating but not shacking up (per the OP, a “fornicator”), either with the same partner or different partners, or the cohabitors; they are all fornicating.

Unless, of course, one of them is married in the eyes of the Church, at which point they become adulterers.
 
In the Gospels, the story of the woman caught in adultery never identified her as being married.

From the CCC: Paragraph 2353: Fornication is the carnal union between an unmarried man and an unmarried woman.

So no, adultery is between a married person and and someone who is not their marriage partner - the other may be married also, or not married, but the carnal act is adultery for both.
 
Because cohabitors live in a situation in which they are are more likely to continue fornication.
 
DignumEtJustum said:
Because cohabitors live in a situation in which they are are more likely to continue fornication.
Click to expand...
Fair enough.

But what I don’t understand is this. Are there really multitudes of fornicators and cohabiters attending masses and presenting themselves for communion? I don’t quite see this as very widespread.
 
vio_dsa said:
How will the church know if they are living together as couples (sexually active) or just like brother/sister. The church still insists that they should live separately otherwise its considered a sin.
Click to expand...
The Church may well allow them to live together in continence for the sake of children involved. This happens quite a lot for people waiting for annulments.

For the rest, I think those who confess sex outside of marriage in a dating relationship must also the way in which they see each other to avoid temptation. I have only had one person “confess” to me for the sake of apology and advice. I had them set up an accountability system for their whereabouts and travel time, similar to what I use at work when male officers transport a female in custody.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top