Cohabitating Vs Living Together

[CrossCuT]

Well thats not a problem with cohabitation, thats just the jerk syndrome. If you have no real intentions in the first place nothing really will amount to much. 

[Anastasia13]

I think cohabitation is fine as long as the relationship is mature enough to take that step in a healthy way. If they already have existing problems and strains, then it might not be the best choice. Its very subjective.

What does that look like?

 

Are all occasions of committed relationships living together ok or only some?

 

What do you believe are good reasons for a couple to do this?

Edited August 9, 2014 by Light and Truth

[Maggyie]

I think cohabitating (as opposed to having sex) is only a moral issue insofar as it could cause scandal or present a temptation to sin.

Like it or not cohabitating with or without sex is no longer very scandalous.

The temptation to sin is a bit trickier but not in the way people usually mean. Unfortunately cohabitation is used by some men as a tool for manipulation and control. I had a good friend once who gradually had her values and beliefs subsumed by her boyfriend who was coming from a very different place. It got to the point where he wanted to move in with her (it's not like we will be doing it, he said). She agreed - and within months they were sleeping together too. What gradually happened in their relationship accelerated under the daily pressure and exposure of living together. In this and other areas, she lost track of herself.

She insisted at first that this was a genuine change of heart (she no longer considered premarital sex wrong). She was "growing." After the relationship ended she talked about how she no longer recognized herself anymore - comparing herself to the woman she was before the relationship and after he was done "fixing" her.

It wasn't growth, it was regression. She was devastated and experienced an identity crisis.

This happens fairly often and to all kinds of educated, psychologically whole women. Our programming is to want to be wanted - to please, to be desired. It can happen to experienced women or first time girlfriends, religious or non religious, young or old.

Having a separate residence - laying in your own bed alone, waking up alone, having a place where you can close the door and the blinds if you feel like it - these to me are critical when a couple is dating to help maintain appropriate independence. You will think more clearly about your relationship in the quiet of your own home vs knowing your partner is across the hall, or across the bed, that you've GOT to face him in the morning. Personal space is space to grow and room to breathe freely. It is much more lacking when you live with someone you are emotionally entangled with.

To me cohabitating is as much a sin against yourself as anything else. Now is one of the partners going to be homeless otherwise? Can you bring a 3rd roommate into the house to provide accountability? Are you getting married in 2 weeks and your lease is up and you can't afford a hotel and have no relatives to stay with? There are lots of other factors BUT I wouldn't use "good intentions of the couple" as a barometer. The nicest, most feminist guys in the world with the best intentions have been known to cause these issues. Everyone has good intentions.

Edited August 9, 2014 by Maggie

[Maggyie]

Sorry fir all the long posts lately phatmass!!!!

[CrossCuT]

I think cohabitating (as opposed to having sex) is only a moral issue insofar as it could cause scandal or present a temptation to sin.

Like it or not cohabitating with or without sex is no longer very scandalous.

The temptation to sin is a bit trickier but not in the way people usually mean. Unfortunately cohabitation is used by some men as a tool for manipulation and control. I had a good friend once who gradually had her values and beliefs subsumed by her boyfriend who was coming from a very different place. It got to the point where he wanted to move in with her (it's not like we will be doing it, he said). She agreed - and within months they were sleeping together too. What gradually happened in their relationship accelerated under the daily pressure and exposure of living together. In this and other areas, she lost track of herself.

She insisted at first that this was a genuine change of heart (she no longer considered premarital sex wrong). She was "growing." After the relationship ended she talked about how she no longer recognized herself anymore - comparing herself to the woman she was before the relationship and after he was done "fixing" her.

It wasn't growth, it was regression. She was devastated and experienced an identity crisis.

This happens fairly often and to all kinds of educated, psychologically whole women. Our programming is to want to be wanted - to please, to be desired. It can happen to experienced women or first time girlfriends, religious or non religious, young or old.

Having a separate residence - laying in your own bed alone, waking up alone, having a place where you can close the door and the blinds if you feel like it - these to me are critical when a couple is dating to help maintain appropriate independence. You will think more clearly about your relationship in the quiet of your own home vs knowing your partner is across the hall, or across the bed, that you've GOT to face him in the morning. Personal space is space to grow and room to breathe freely. It is much more lacking when you live with someone you are emotionally entangled with.

To me cohabitating is as much a sin against yourself as anything else. Now is one of the partners going to be homeless otherwise? Can you bring a 3rd person into the arrangement to provide accountability? Are you getting married in 2 weeks and your lease is up and you can't afford a hotel and have no relatives to stay with? There are lots of other factors BUT I wouldn't use "good intentions of the couple" as a barometer. The nicest, most feminist guys in the world with the best intentions have been known to cause these issues. Everyone has good intentions.

 

Thanks Maggie!

I think its ultimately up to the couple, where they are at in their relationship, what their goals are, and what they think they can handle etc. Apart from that, i think its hard to attribute any sort of all encompassing moral evil to the situation. Cohabition (without sex) is not inherently wrong imo. 

 

If someone uses it as a means to harm, that is not the fault of cohabitation, that is the fault of bad and sinful intentions on the side of whoever is trying to do the harm. 

[Maggyie]

Thanks Maggie!
I think its ultimately up to the couple, where they are at in their relationship, what their goals are, and what they think they can handle etc. Apart from that, i think its hard to attribute any sort of all encompassing moral evil to the situation. Cohabition (without sex) is not inherently wrong imo.

If someone uses it as a means to harm, that is not the fault of cohabitation, that is the fault of bad and sinful intentions on the side of whoever is trying to do the harm.

Right, if it was living together that causes these issues how would married people get on with their lives? What I'm trying to say is that living with someone increases a host of risks to women (and men too I suppose) and it's not worth it for "just" a dating relationship.

Also if a guy or girl ever claims "but our relationship is not "just" dating", run far far away. Until there is a betrothal that's exactly the type of relationship it is.

[CrossCuT]

Yeah sure. If there was a nasty dude who wanted to take advantage of a women and could do so easier by living together, that would be bad.

[Benedictus]

Well thats not a problem with cohabitation, thats just the jerk syndrome. If you have no real intentions in the first place nothing really will amount to much. 

 

But there should be caution against putting the cart before the horse. If a couple are cohabitating without boundaries and without a set plan to marry then how long are they planning to be chaste for? I doubt it'd be very long, and isn't for most people. I think if the intentions are blurry at this stage then it's a relationship setting off without the best safeguards, resources and advice to help it work out (and to protect both parties spiritually, legally and financially).

Dating and getting to know eachother is fine. But if this steps up a gear then clear intentions need to be known. If marriage isn't on the cards then it's really wasting time. The person isn't serious enough to move forward at this point with the person they are dating. If marriage is agreed upon as a course of action then they should ideally move towards that goal by declaring their engagement and planning a wedding, involving and gaining spiritual and family support along the way. If someone wants to be casual about entering into a relationship and not really being focused on things then I'd not be overly surprised when it doesn't work out or either of them gets hurt (or left with debts, children and little recourse to legal challenges; at least not as easy compared to if they were married).

Anecdote alert > I have a close friend who had a boyfriend years ago and he talked her out of everything she expected and believed so she'd move in with him. He downplayed every single caution raised, actually saying she was making excuses to hold back.  It was the old chestnuts: love is all we need, marriage is just a piece of paper, your family will come around, we're mature adults, lets see if we get along for a couple of years before marrying, we can hold off children until we're married etc etc.
She followed what he said and got an apartment, despite knowing her family, moderate Muslims, wouldn't approve and that all her friends didn't think it was the best idea. He ended up throwing it all up in her face and he ended up walking out on her about nine months later for another woman (With whom he now has a child and has since split).  He refused to help pay off anything and he wouldn't accept any responsibility.  He actually told her that he wasn't her busband and that these debts were simply hers to deal with. She lost that apartment and stayed with a few of us for a while as we helped her out. She knows now that she made a big mistake in the first place getting that far into a sticky situation. It took a while for her to find herself again but she has since married a really nice guy and they have two small children.

 

Edited August 10, 2014 by Benedictus

[fides' Jack]

I found a source that said cohabitation is when two unmarried peoples living together engaging in the tango. The church is obviously against this since any unmarried tangoing is tisk tisk. But what about just living together without doing the tango? Does that still purchase you a one way ticket to Sheol? 

 

I guess I never realized that cohabitation was a very specific term, I thought it was just living together in general. What is the objection to living together in a chaste way besides increasing the possibility of the tango?

Is it just that people are afraid youll do that? Or is it because, as the link states, there is no benefits?

 

So is marriage a magical switch that makes your fiances get better and make you a more stable couple? I guess Im having a hard time understanding the justification...seems more like a "Dont you dare have sex!" sort of thing. 

 

Thoughts? comments? Concerns? 

 

 

Yeah sure. If there was a nasty dude who wanted to take advantage of a women and could do so easier by living together, that would be bad.

 

The potential exists in every "dude" to be a "nasty dude".  We all have those inclinations that turn us into bad men - the difference is in those who pray and fight that inclination and desire to be godly men, and those who don't.

 

Case in point with the topic here.  The guys who do live together with their girl before marriage by definition are the same guys who don't fight that bad inclination.  That's just another way that they're allowing themselves to be selfish and sinful, and as already stated - cowardly.

 

Yes, it is absolutely an inherently mortal sin to live with your significant other before marriage, even if no actual sex is involved.  There are a number of reasons why this is the case.  Several of those reasons have already been stated in this thread.

 

There has been a lot of push-back against legitimate regurgitating of Church teaching on this forum in the name of "judging".  So many people have been accused of judging, myself included, when that hasn't been the case.  For those who understand what a mortal sin is, it's only natural to say, "yes, if so-and-so is doing this, then they are committing a mortal sin".  Really, what we're saying is that the action being discussed is mortally sinful.  We reserve the judgement of someone's soul for God, because we know that there are 3 conditions necessary for a person to actually commit a mortal sin, and we cannot possibly know if all 3 conditions have been met.  So when we do this, we're claiming serious matter.  That is, we know for a fact that certain things are mortally sinful and should not be done.  We're not deciding whether or not the person who committed the act is actually guilty of a mortal sin, but just that the act committed was mortal.  Does that make sense?  

[CrossCuT]

But there should be caution against putting the cart before the horse. If a couple are cohabitating without boundaries and without a set plan to marry then how long are they planning to be chaste for? I doubt it'd be very long, and isn't for most people. I think if the intentions are blurry at this stage then it's a relationship setting off without the best safeguards, resources and advice to help it work out (and to protect both parties spiritually, legally and financially).

Dating and getting to know eachother is fine. But if this steps up a gear then clear intentions need to be known. If marriage isn't on the cards then it's really wasting time. The person isn't serious enough to move forward at this point with the person they are dating. If marriage is agreed upon as a course of action then they should ideally move towards that goal by declaring their engagement and planning a wedding, involving and gaining spiritual and family support along the way. If someone wants to be casual about entering into a relationship and not really being focused on things then I'd not be overly surprised when it doesn't work out or either of them gets hurt (or left with debts, children and little recourse to legal challenges; at least not as easy compared to if they were married).

Everything you have said I agree with!

 

However I do not believe that you can judge someones situation in general with an all encompassing rule. Its very subjective. If people are cohabitation with no plans, no good reasons, and without properly discussing it between the two of them...it will likely end poorly.