Ok, I'm sure this will turn into a doozey here, but, this has been on my mind lately. Personally, I didn't do it, but, don't really care if someone else does. Just don't pull the "I'm $%^&*( - insert any religion you like here)" and then you're living "in sin" with someone. Seems hypocritical to me.

And, what is the big deal of getting married when you're already living with someone???

__________________
Doing the right thing isn't always the same as doing the easy thing.

I do not care one bit if people want to live together or not. As for the religion thing......we ar all sinners in some way or another, and living with someone is no worse sin than any other.

My grandmother had a boyfriend since I was a kid(over 40 years ago) that she refused to marry. They did not live together either. That was her reason for not marrying him. She liked her space. I am quite certain that they ummmm......"sinned" during all those years, but whatever!

__________________
"When you're drowning, you don't say 'I would be incredibly pleased if someone would have the foresight to notice me drowning and come and help me,' you just scream."

John Lennon

I'm all for living in sin. I hate when a few relatives use their religion (like I'm better than you kind of thing) yet live in sin. If you are such a good (insert religion), then you wouldn't be living together before getting married. (and doing the deed)

__________________
I've never lied to you. I've always told you some version the of truth.

I think with us it was we had so many issues about our growing ups we were scared to take the big plunge. Once you find the right person and make that commitment to do the hard work it takes it's great. I think people are afraid of making a mistake and I also think people are getting together way too quickly for the wrong reasons.
I also think people give up too easily thinking it's the wrong person because their expectations are unrealistic.

I don't consider it a sin. Not a religious sin anyway but it is a "sin" the way some young women continue to allow men to use them for sex with no love, respect, or sense of even who they are as people.

If only I could go back with what I know now I certainly would not have made the same mistakes. Sigh if only the daughters could learn from the mothers!

__________________
The political system is broke and it's a joke.

unless you live in a state that recognizes common-law "marriage" then you may not be afforded the same rights, privileges and responsibilities if you are not legally married.

I did live with mine before we got married--kind of wishing I had lived w/ him longer before I got married so I'd have seen the "real" person.

__________________
Mental that one, I'm telling you. ---Ron Weasley, "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets"

So, living together before marriage is a worse sin than your own sins? I mean, are you saying that one can't state what religion they are and then sin? We all do that, if we are of any religion.

__________________
"When you're drowning, you don't say 'I would be incredibly pleased if someone would have the foresight to notice me drowning and come and help me,' you just scream."

John Lennon

I don't have an issue with it. Heck, I wish that more people would do it. I feel that if you live with someone and get to know them in a 24 hrs kind of way that it could cut down on some quick marriages and divorces.

I do think that society as a whole is changing its thoughts on living together before marriage. It doesn't seem like that big of a deal these days.

__________________
Sell crazy some place else, we are all stocked up here.

I have no problem with it. In fact, I think many bad marriages could be prevented if it happened more. You can love someone with all your heart but if you can't stand how a person lives...it's not going to work at all. If you aren't sexually compatible, it's going to be a rough road ahead. Living together gives you a chance to see if you should get married. I personally didn't do it but only because it would have been HIGHLY frowned upon by my parents, grandparents and my now in-laws. Their opinions meant something to us. So, we did some pre-marriage counciling (everyone should do it) and spent lots of time together and with both families and then got married 8 months after our first date

__________________
Proud to say I haven't shopped at a Wal-Mart since Sept 2003

I have no problem with it. I did it before I got married. No biggie. We are still married after being together 21 yrs.

Jen

__________________
Mom to Jake, Zach & Meghan
SJCC STREAKS FOOTBALL!!
CLEVELAND BROWNS FOOTBALL!

I have no problems with it. Personally, me and DH didn't do it before we got married. Like Sexysmurf said, it was frowned upon by both sets of parents and what they thought meant something to us. We also went to pre-marriage classes before we got married. We weren't goody goodies before we got married but we still respected our parents wishes.

__________________
~~just open your eyes and see that life if beautiful~~

I don't have a problem with it, in fact I sometimes wonder if it is actually a good idea. I lived with my dh for almost two years before we married. We have been married almost 27 years, so it worked for us!

Great point. I never really thought of it that way. I understand Heatherr's point. I have a few relatives that throw their religion around and are breaking many of the "rules" of their religion. It's complicated to explain on a message board, but, it does irk me

__________________
Doing the right thing isn't always the same as doing the easy thing.

"unless you live in a state that recognizes common-law "marriage" then you may not be afforded the same rights, privileges and responsibilities if you are not legally married." This is SO true. DH and I lived together for a few years before getting married.
There were alot of 'Legal" reasons to get married. However I knew that it was something that the two of us really wanted to do.

To give you examples: My employers allows "domestic partners" on life/health insurance but ONLY IF you are the same sex. It would NOT allow someone of the opposite sex.

His children hardly speak to him yet if somethign happened to him, they could have came into our home and literally taken what they wanted.

If he were incapaciatated in any way, even though I was the one living with him, I would not be the one to make the decisions.

We had both been married before and we knew that we did it for all the wrong reasons last time. We knew that we wanted to be married and share a joint life together.

__________________
Be careful what you wish for.....

First marriage. 5 yrs of hell. didnt live with him ,wish i had.would have ran!!!!!!!!
second marriage. 25 worderful yrs. lived with him before I married him.

__________________
·´`·.(*·.¸(`·.¸ ¸.·´)¸.·*).·´`·
«·´¨*·.¸¸. Jo ¸¸.·*¨`·»
«·´`·.(¸.·´(¸.·* *·.¸)`·.¸).·´`·»


Please leave feedback for me here.
http://www.mycoupons.com/boards/g-l/...-littlejo.html



gretchengirl@gmail.com

http://lifewithlittlejo.blogspot.com/

I know what you mean. My ex is catholic and he brags about not eating meat on Friday, yes he lies, and has comitted adultery more than once...

I just think that if we look really hard, we all break at least one rule of our religion, and one is no worse than another.

__________________
"When you're drowning, you don't say 'I would be incredibly pleased if someone would have the foresight to notice me drowning and come and help me,' you just scream."

John Lennon

Is that your rationale? One shouldn't bother maintaining ANY standards/morals upheld by their religions, since we all break rules?

I don't understand. Is that like saying "Don't bother drinking that Diet Coke, since you've been known to put sugar in your tea..."

I guess I don't understand your logic. Everyone is imperfect. We're human. That shouldn't surprise anyone. But does that mean we shouldn't strive to be better?

FWIW - I did not live with DH before we were married. I don't care if others choose to.

__________________
"The errors of faith are better than the best thoughts of unbelief." - Thomas Russell

There must be studies that show whether people who chose to live together before marriage have lower / higher / equal incidence of divorce. I'd be interested in that.

I know many couples who lived together before they were married. About half of the ones I know are divorced now. My closest friend who got divorced after living together said that she sincerely thought that once she married her dh, he would change certain things...didn't happen. I imagine anyone who did live together should have expected more of the same (good or bad) after they were married, if they were being realistic. But, like I said, I chose not to do it, so I can't speak from experience.

__________________
"The errors of faith are better than the best thoughts of unbelief." - Thomas Russell

I could be wrong, but I think that GG was saying it's wrong to compare sins--a sin is a sin is a sin. I know that there are, according to some religions, mortal sins which are worse--however, I don't know all about the religions that believe in mortal sins.
I think, and I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong-GG meant that people shouldn't excuse a sin because they uphold another "law" or dictate of their chosen faith. Kind of like "I don't drink because my religion says it's a sin"--coming from a 350 lb, 5'2" woman (hello? Glutton anyone?). Yes, we all sin. And we should all strive to do better, but in doing so, we shouldn't forget that we all sin and should be striving to do better.
Does that make sense? It's a Monday and I've had one of those days where nothing has made sense!

__________________
Mental that one, I'm telling you. ---Ron Weasley, "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets"

I agree with what you said here.

I just don't think it's our place to judge the sinner. As you said, we should all strive to do better, and we shouldn't forget that we all sin.

__________________
"The errors of faith are better than the best thoughts of unbelief." - Thomas Russell

Thank you. That is perfect. I was too tired to reply and explain, so I was thrilled to see that you had done it for me. My kids at school are on full speed this week!(last week).

__________________
"When you're drowning, you don't say 'I would be incredibly pleased if someone would have the foresight to notice me drowning and come and help me,' you just scream."

John Lennon

BTW...I lived with a guy once, and thank God that I did. If I had married him first, I would have never known the side of him that prompted me to leave him, and I would have been divorced, and still a sinner.

__________________
"When you're drowning, you don't say 'I would be incredibly pleased if someone would have the foresight to notice me drowning and come and help me,' you just scream."

John Lennon

. Cohabiting couples without plans to marry tend to report poorer relationship quality than married couples. Compared to counterparts who were married, those in cohabiting unions reported having a poorer quality of relationship: They reported having more fights and violence, lower levels of fairness, and less happiness in their relationships. However, the quality of relationship of cohabitors who planned to marry did not differ from that of their married counterparts.


Brown, Susan L. 1996 full details

2. Cohabiting couples are more likely to separate and less likely to reconcile after a separation than married couples. Cohabiting couples were nearly eight times more likely to separate due to discord than married couples in the first year of a relationship. Cohabiting couples were nearly four times more likely to separate in the second year and three times more likely to separate in the third year. Cohabiting couples had a separation rate five times that of married couples, and following separation, cohabiting couples had a rate of reconciliation that was one-third that of married couples.


Binstock, Georgina 2003 full details

3. Cohabiting couples are more likely to experience infidelity than married couples. Among those surveyed, cohabiting couples were twice as likely as to have experienced an act of infidelity in the 12 months prior to the survey than married couples.


Treas, Judith 2000 full details

4. Compared to women who did not cohabit before marriage, those who did are more likely to experience divorce or separation. Women who cohabited before marriage were 33 percent more likely to have a marriage that ended in divorce or separation than women who did not cohabit before marriage.


Teachman, Jay 2003 full details

5. Among individuals in their fifties, those who are cohabiting tend to have accumulated less wealth than their married peers. Among a sample of pre-retirement respondents, compared to those who were continuously married, cohabiting respondents who had never married had, on average, 78 percent less total wealth (“net worth”) and those who were cohabiting and had been divorced or widowed once had 68 percent less wealth. Cohabitors who had been divorced or widowed twice were not significantly different from the continuously married group in their net worth.


Wilmoth, Janet 2002 full details

6. Among mothers with infants, those in cohabiting relationships tend to fare worse economically than married mothers. When the babies were six months old, married mothers reported, on average, the highest income-to-needs ratio (4.26), followed by cohabiting mothers (2.3) and then single mothers (1.17). Income-to-needs ratio (total family income divided by poverty threshold) is an indicator of financial resources for per person in each household; higher ratios suggest greater financial resources.


Aronson, Stacy R. 2004 full details

7. Men in cohabiting households tend to have lower earnings than married men with families. Based on the 1990 census, the average income of males in married-couple families ($34,533) was twice that of males in co-habiting couple families ($17,889).


Manning, Wendy D. 1996 full details

8. Compared to their married peers, women who are cohabiting tend to have higher earnings relative to their partners’ earnings. Women who were married and those who were cohabiting differed in their relative earnings to their partners’ earnings. On average, women who were cohabiting earned nearly 90 percent of her partner's salary, whereas a wife earned just over 60 percent of the husband's income. Women in cohabiting unions tended to spend more time in paid employment than married women and were also more likely than married women to earn more than the partner.


Brines, Julie 1999 full details

9. Compared to married individuals, those are cohabiting tend to report higher levels of depression. Compared with married peers of the same gender, age and race, individuals who were cohabiting reported depression levels that were about 2.8 points higher that those reported by married individuals. Couple’s total earnings, duration of the relationship, relationship instability were a mediating factors correlated with depression

I do know many couples who lived together first, married and are still happily married. As far as sin goes-condoning living together is condoning an ongoing sin. It's not the same as someone doing something wrong (ie lying, etc...), asking for forgiveness and trying not to do it again. There are differences in sin-ie is it ongoing with no sense of shame or doing something wrong? Or doing something wrong with no intent of changing it? Etc...

Absolutely no problem, life is too short, to each his own and again as I have always said life is all about choices, the choices each one of us make are the choices we have to live with and no one else can do that unless they wear our shoes so to speak. While I did not live with my dh before we were married we slept at each others house all the time, our parents knew we were in love and honestly they had no problem. Again its all about your choice, if it makes you happy then so be, if it is not right for you then so be as well, just be happy and in love cause life is too short... Peace. CAtherine

Sin=purposely doing something with evil intents i.e. I don't think it would be sin to hit someone with your car on accident in circumstances beyond your control however if you purposely hit someone that is a sin.

Sex with someone you care deeply for and have created a bond with sometimes a spiritual bond is not a sin in my opinion. God has bigger things to worry about, so to speak, with man's inhumanity to man than to worry about two bodies slapping in the night (or the day for that matter).

__________________
The political system is broke and it's a joke.

My post seems to have disappeared........
Sin doesn't necessarily have evil intent-you may not think you are seriously sinning or you might think it's only something minor, etc... Fornication is mentioned as a "no no" in the Bible I believe. I think it's these 'fly under the radar" type sins that hurt the moral fabric of a society. PS God doesn't have anything to worry about-he's God! lol

And God directly told you these things? Because the Bible was written thousands of years ago and to be honest with you some people cannot understand things written in the 1950s or 1970s because language changes words literally don't have the same meaning.

And for those of us who speak more than one language I can tell you it is very difficult to literally translate ideas or stories because some ideas are incapable of being conveyed the same way in another language.

Also the historical fact is that some books were removed and edited by The Council of Nicea. So until Jesus actually comes back or God comes down from the mountain I stick by my belief on sin. Also when people truly regret their actions God forgives them in my opinion because that is our purpose-to learn to grow to do things better. It's not our job to be perfect what can a person learn that way?

Sin is in the eye of the beholder. (in my opinion based on what I feel spiritually and what I have observed in life)

__________________
The political system is broke and it's a joke.

What is the source of this info?

EDIT: Never mind, found it

http://www.familyfacts.org/topten/topten_0702.cfm

__________________
@@@
l/ l/ l/
Dont go through life,
GROW through life

Real eyes...realize...real lies.

Wow, then I guess the 10 Commandments are out for you too! So is turn the other check, etc...

I happily lived in sin. Got married to get health insurance. A piece of paper does not make a successful marriage.

__________________
"Today is your day! Your mountain is waiting. So... get on your way."
Theodor Seuss Geisel (Dr. Seuss)

Tap, tap......is this thing on?
Hi my name is Cindi and I live in SIN.

They must have a twelve step program to cure this right?

Seriously, my sweetie and I have lived together for 19 years and have at different times considered getting married but it wasn't a high priority for either of us. I feel we have a good relationship and have been told by other people that they envy our ease with each other.
To be honest it's not something I give a lot of thought. I really don't think a marriage license can make people treat one another better any more than a restraining order can save someones life.
But then again I'm not real big on organized religion. I have done some studying and can pull a verse of scripture out of my hat like everyone else when it suits my needs. I guess today I will just go with Matt. 7:1 "Do not judge, or you too will be judged."

__________________

Life isn't about waiting for the storm to pass
It's about learning to dance in the rain.

Don't forget, there's a difference between judging a person and their behavior which happened many times in the Bible.

How is it different?

__________________
"When you're drowning, you don't say 'I would be incredibly pleased if someone would have the foresight to notice me drowning and come and help me,' you just scream."

John Lennon

AHHHHH!!! I hate when people misquote scripture. I don't like the "new" versions, because they really take away from the "true" meaning of the bible.

Here's a link for my quotes, so I am not taking this as my own. We HAVE to judge others. It's rediculous to say we aren't supposed to, BUT we are supposed to judge carefully and check to our own weaknesses before we judge others too harshly.
I'm not for living together before marriage,... I don't really see the difference, besides a piece of paper that says you are divorced. In both cases you are living with someone, and then you break it off.

Matthew 7:1 (King James Version) :: Forerunner Commentary :: Bible Tools

Some cite Matthew 7:1 as proof that we should do no judging whatsoever: "Judge not, that you be not judged." Here, the Greek word for "judge" is krino, meaning to condemn, avenge, damn, sentence, or levy a punishment. Christ plainly says that if we condemn others, we will be condemned ourselves. Dangerous territory indeed!

Though it is certainly hazardous to evaluate the problems or sins of others, the context answers the question of whether we are to do so. We are to judge and in every aspect of life, as other scriptures show. Christ continues His thought, in context, by showing that we are to evaluate the deeds of others, but to be very careful with our judgments. We should consider our weaknesses and sins very carefully, to the point of overcoming them, before we make harsh judgments on others.

Seriously? My son and future daughter in law are basically living together at her moms house. He's almost 25 and she's 24. I don't condone their behavior but I love them. They are good people. They are however "living in sin".

__________________
I was walking home one night and a guy hammering on a roof called me a paranoid little weirdo. In morse code. -Emo Phillips

I am serious, of course. I still see no difference. You are judging their behavior, which, to me, is the same as judging them.

__________________
"When you're drowning, you don't say 'I would be incredibly pleased if someone would have the foresight to notice me drowning and come and help me,' you just scream."

John Lennon

Well it's certainly not the same. Maybe that's why we disagree on so many things! If your toddler keeps doing something wrong you know you judge their behavior as wrong but you don't label the child bad do you?

This is for kathytheshopper or any other Catholic who can explain the doctrine to me. It is not meant as a poke on the Catholic faith. As I have said, I was raised Catholic. I have a lot of respect for certain aspects of the religion, and value the understanding of the faith that being raised in it has brought me, although I have profound disagreements with other aspects.

This is just something that I don't know the answer to from the standpoint of doctrine and would like to know.

We previously had a thread that talked about the annulment of a marriage in the Catholic faith. An annulment means that the marriage never occurred. So, for purposes of the faith, the sacrament of marriage was never entered into.

For those persons whose marriage was annulled, does that mean that they were "fornicating" or "living in sin" during those years that they were married, but not really? For example, I marry X. X never intended to be faithful, and cheats throughout the marriage. I obtain a civil divorce and also an annulment in the Church on the grounds that X never intended to be faithful and thus the marriage isn't valid in the eyes of the Church.

Does the fact that I had sex with X during the period of the pseudo marriage constitute a sin, even though I didn't think it was one at the time, believing that X entered into the marriage with the necessary commitment? Since the Church believes that the marriage never occurred, because X wasn't committed to it, does that mean our sex was fornication?

If it isn't a sin, is it because I didn't believe it to be one? If it is a sin, is it something that I would have to confess and do penance for before I could go to communion?

Before posting, I did look at the Catechism regarding the 6th Commandment and didn't find an answer. For example, although rape is regarded as a sin by the rapist, the Catechism doesn't talk about the status of the raped person. I'm assuming, however, that it isn't regarded as a sin by the person raped because it wasn't voluntary. The Catechism describes fornication only as the "carnal union between an unmarried man and an unmarried woman," which on its face that would cover persons whose marriage was annulled.

Is there a "good faith" exception here that applies?

Again, just wondering. To be upfront, I don't expect your answer to convince me of the "trueness" of the Catholic position on this. I know the Church's position on masturbation, but I don't accept it. I know that it regards natural family planning as OK, but regards use of contraceptives as wrong, but I don't comprehend the distinction. And that is the tip of the iceberg of the things that lead me to now say that I was raised Catholic, but do not regard myself as currently one.

But just as an effort to understand the Church's reasoning on things such as premarital sex and the status of persons whose marriage was annulled, I would like to know whether the unoffending person is regarded as having engaged in fornication or not, and whether they have to confess to the sin of fornication before receiving communion. I promise to respect what you say, even if I profoundly disagree.

Thanks in advance. And apologies to anyone who believes that this is hijacking the thread. On topic, I regard it as a good thing to live together before marriage, and I think that more persons breaking up when living together is a better thing than more persons marrying first and breaking up later. I do have a harder time with persons having kids while in committed relationships without getting married. But that is another topic.

Personally, for me, I was not judging anyone based on if they lived together before marriage, with the "benefits" of marriage i.e. SEX. I don't care for people who claim to be holier-than-thou, basically, and look down their nose at others, and here they are having pre-marital sex. I could equate it to me drinking like a fish until I'm drop dead drunk, yet espousing to you what an upstanding person I am, and how you are NOT, and that things you do are so wrong, and how could you???

Personally, I say to each their own, for the most part.

__________________
Doing the right thing isn't always the same as doing the easy thing.

ahhhh....and who's to say that the King James Version is the "true" version of the Bible?

As to the "living in sin": What do you say to two widowers who depend on their social security or deceased spouse's benefits, and would lose those benefits if they married? So, they live together and are able to keep their benefits. Are they living in sin?

I think this is one of those topics that has to be dealt with on a case by case basis. If we're talking a couple of 19 y/o who just want to live together so they can do what they want, when they want and have no real intention to commit a lifetime to each other--then yeah, I'd classify that as "living in sin". If we're talking a widower who, if she married would lose her medical/health or income benefits so she lives w/ her second love--then I wouldn't classify that as living in sin.
I really think that some people see black or white. However, there are so many areas of gray.

__________________
Mental that one, I'm telling you. ---Ron Weasley, "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets"

Your last sentence doesn't exactly seem to ring true...

Ironically, I think you are sounding a little "Holier Than Thou" yourself on this one. At least the people who you claim feel superior to others (the holier than thou crowd) don't actually claim to "not care" for those who don't hold their personal beliefs. Strong statement.

Why so judgemental regarding those who felt strongly about getting married without first living together? Are you judging all people who feel strongly about this, or only people who had pre-marital sex, first?

In looking through this thread, it doesn't seem like anyone here is fitting your description of "holier than thou" You mentioned in your original post that it was on your mind lately. What caused that?

__________________
"The errors of faith are better than the best thoughts of unbelief." - Thomas Russell

I wont bother to show the error of ways to all the atheist on this forum, but answer me this:

If he can get the milk for free, why on earth would he buy the farm?.............

Oh good grief....just because a person doesn't believe the exact same as you doesn't mean they are atheist.

Furthermore, the saying is "Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free."

__________________
Mental that one, I'm telling you. ---Ron Weasley, "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets"

If they are having sex then the answer would be yes, they are living in sin. If they are living as brother and sister then no. It's not that gray actually.

Marilyn, that is a really good question and I really don't know the answer to that one! This might have to be referred to a priest!

Here's a question/answer I found when googling:
My wife and I were born and raised Catholic; she got married in the Catholic Church to her first husband. After a few years of marriage they got divorced because of his infidelity. After this happened she decided to start going to a Protestant church. I met her and we eventually got married in that Protestant church. We have come back to the Catholic Church and she is currently going through an annulment of that first marriage so that we can have ours approved in the Catholic Church. My question is this: When my wife was meeting with our Pastor and they went over her annulment paperwork that she had to write up, he felt that this annulment was going to most likely happen because of the many circumstances and he told her that while this process was going on that we could go to confession and then receive communion. Is this a correct statement? Does he have the right to tell us this if the annulment isn’t complete and our marriage isn’t approved fully yet?
Hi,

Your marriage will be considered null when the marriage tribunal declares it null and not a moment sooner. You may go to Confession and receive Holy Communion only if you live as brother and sister until you are validly married in the Catholic Church. If you do this, I suggest that you receive Holy Communion in a parish where you are not known so that you will not give scandal.

Since the Church does not currenlty recognize you marriage as valid, every time you have marrital relations you commit a mortal sin. Nothing is worth a mortal sin. The Lord will give you the strength to remain in the state of grace. I will be praying for that.

Fr. Vincent Serpa, O.P.

I ask this in all sincerity, and not meant in any snarky or bitchy way:
Do you see any areas of gray? Do you see everything as black or white?

If so, then that explains a lot.
That's probably why your posts tend to stir others to anger. A lot of people see things in varying degrees. If you think and see things in solely black or white then of course it's going to be hard to get others to see your perspective.

I don't agree with you. I do however think I have a better understanding of how your mind works---which helps me understand that you aren't intentionally being obstinate or snarky.

__________________
Mental that one, I'm telling you. ---Ron Weasley, "Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets"

Can I still attend mass & receive communion if I'm divorced or wasn’t remarried in the church?

A. Every baptized Catholic —no matter what their situation or standing—is always free to attend Mass. Please don’t let questions of divorce or marital validity interfere with your regular attendance. If you are divorced and have not remarried, you may receive the Eucharist (if you are not burdened by a grave sin that requires sacramental Confession). The same applies for other sacraments. If you have remarried, you would need to have your current marriage convalidated before receiving Communion, which may involve having your first marriage declared null. If you are still in your first marriage but it took place outside the Church, should have it convalidated. Your pastor or another parish staff member can help you begin this process; please contact your parish office for more information.

Q. Can I still be a part of the Church if I am remarried without a declaration of nullity?

A. You are still a member of the Catholic faith community. You can register in your parish and raise your children Catholic. However, the choice to remarry without having received a declaration of nullity concerning one's prior marital bond sets a person apart from the Church with regard to full sacramental participation. One cannot receive Holy Communion when one's lifestyle is not in communion with the teachings of the Catholic faith. Still, there is grace to be gained through participation in Sunday worship, particularly in the nourishment that comes from God's Word, the Homily, the Church's devotional piety, coty fellowship, and other aspects of Catholic life.

Q. I am planning on re-marring my ex, we were married in a Catholic Church, how do we go about having a Christian remarriage?

A. We assume from your question that you did not receive an annulment in the Church, but only sought a civil divorce. Since the Church does not recognize the effect of civil divorce, you are still sacramentally married in the eyes of the Church . Therefore, you do not need to do anything with the Church, though civilly you must be remarried; the Church would view this period merely as a separation. However, you may want to discuss the matter with your parish priest and consider having a renewal of your vows within the Church after the civil ceremony.

I did it, (but sssssssh! 15 years later, and my parents still don't know!). We moved into together after we got engaged.

I don't necessarily care if other people live together. I would prefer my kids not. But both my sisters lived with their husbands before they got married.

__________________
Forgiveness is love in its most noble form. -Anonymous

In the case of fairness to women and that old double standard, I prefer, "Why buy the pig when you can get the sausage for free!"

Lisa

__________________
"It's not having what you want,
It's wanting what you've got"

KTS, I actually asked the question regarding the status of persons whose marriages were annulled, not Marilyn. I don't want Marilyn to take the blame for my inquiring mind.

The Q & As that you have posted are interesting, but they don't answer my question. I'm actually pretty clear on the Church's position on persons who haven't gone through annulment and are looking to enter into a new relationship. I'm not so clear on whether persons who were in a marriage ultimately annulled by the Church should regard their sexual relationship during the annulled marriage as "fornication," since that is carnal knowledge between unmarried persons. Fornication is, of course, a sin in the Catholic faith. And, since the marriage was annulled, and for purposes of the Church, never existed, isn't any sex that they had a "carnal union between an unmarried man and an unmarried woman." Or in other words, fornication?

I googled this too before I posted, and found no answer. It surprised me. I know enough persons who have gone through, or have refused to go through, annullment proceedings that I would think this would be an easy answer.

I'm stumped though.

Didn't you say that your prior marriage was annulled? Or someone else here did, right? Was there any discussion about this?

I really am not in a position to ask a priest as I am no longer a practicing Catholic. Also, it doesn't seem like it should be a question about individual spiritulity that one would need to take to the priest. It really is a bigger question, and I am surprised that there is not a ready answer.

I'd appreciate any guidance on point that anyone can give. I'm only trying to piece the puzzle together. And I'm truly didn't set out to ask an impossible-to-answer question, although I'm wondering at this point whether it isn't.

But, like it or not, this is the faith that I most closely identify with, and I really want to understand it.

So, is sex during a marriage later annulled fornication?

Well I don't have a doctorate in Catholic theology! I really don't know the answer. It's a very good question though. I would tend to imagine that most people going through the annulment process would also go to Confession and if it's to the priest who's handling the annulment I would think that would be brought up or maybe the "sorry for all the sins of my past" part of the Confession would take care of it.

Ok. Fair enough. I don't know why a doctorate in Catholic theology is required, though. It seems a pretty straightforward question to me, and not one that requires a divinity or theology degree.

I remain a little perplexed why this is so unclear as a matter of doctrine, since annulment is really a very established procedure in the Church. I'm certain that I have read here about persons having prior marriages annulled through the Church, and I'm a bit surprised that this didn't come up before for them.

I really have to think that there is a better answer than that most persons go through confession, and their sins are absolved during the "sorry for all the sins of my past." At least when I was a practicing Catholic, there was a basic understanding that you had to recognize your sins before they were absolved. In other words, it had to be a true act of contrition, and not just some universal, "I'm really sorry for anything gone before, and thanks for any vanilla penance that absolves me." Under those standards, the most vile person, who has absolutely no conscience, could do a general "sorry for all the sins of my past," and skate on through with the blessing of the Church. That just can't be true. It's especially questionable when it is unclear why a particular act (sex with a person who you thought you were married, but later were determined that you weren't after annulment proceedings) would be regarded as a sin needing foregiveness. Can you really be considered as confessing a sin that you didn't even know was a sin?

That just can't be true. For heaven's sake, I don't regard mastrubation as a sin. I don't regard contraceptives as a sin. I don't regard homosexuality as a sin. I don't regard abortion as a sin. I don't regard divorce as a sin. Can I really go into confession and say, "I am sorry for all of the things of my past" and be in as firm of a standing as the true believer?

Catholicism a difficult faith. But, for better or worse, if one is going to hold up people to it who aren't practicing Catholics (like Obama at Notre Dame), these are questions that need to be asked and answered by practicing Catholics.

Yes, my last sentence does ring true.... I don't care if you live with someone before you get married, just don't act like you (general you) are such a "good" person, as in you live your life in such a morally correct (???) way to be above others. It is really very difficult to get this across in the typed word, but, I know what I mean....LOL.

I'm getting the impression that you think I am referring to specific posters in this thread??? I am not. When I posted this, I had a specific few in mind, people that I actually know IRL.

Why has it been on my mind lately??? Is that what you are asking?? That is #1 a rather intrusive and personal question, and IMO a rather non-sensical one. Why does anyone have anything on their mind??? And THAT would be a rhetorical question

Maybe this will help get my point across better. I have a friend, Betty, who lives with her BF. She is converting to Catholicism. Betty and her BF are Catholic, for all intents and purposes. I'm not a phone person, and therefore, don't call certain people very often. Betty feels a need to try and guilt me into calling and throws up how God would like us to behave. Well, exactly who in the Hell is Betty to tell anyone anything about how God would like us to behave??? KWIM???

__________________
Doing the right thing isn't always the same as doing the easy thing.

Betty needs a good conservative priest to explain a few things to her!!!

Honestly, do you expect any Catholic to be able to answer any and all questions concerning Catholicism? Isn't that asking quite a bit???? Priests study for years and years. I don't know what your profession is but if you have a degree in American history are you saying that you can answer ANY question brought up? And your ordinary Catholic, like me, does not have a degree in Catholicism.
I don't find Catholicism to be a difficult faith at all. The reason I was offended with the Obama/Notre Dame mess is because they gave him an honorary degree. That goes against the bishops statements as to who can be honored, etc... For all intent and purpose Notre Dame is really not much of a Catholic college anymore, which is sad.
If you really want answers to your questions you really need to ask a priest not a bunch of folks on an online board!

I don't think that I am asking a very hard question though. It is really only asking how two points of the Catholic faith piece together. The first is that fornication, which is sex outside of marriage, is a sin. The second is that a marriage which is annulled isn't a marriage in the eyes of the church, so participants in that union would be engaging in sex outside of marriage.

I honestly don't know why that is some deep theological problem. I asked the question initially only because I wanted to know the answer. Now, hearing that I should ask a priest, really does make me wonder.

The one thing that I have always admired about the Catholic faith is its consistency. Not that its adherents are consistent. They aren't. But the doctrine is. The death penalty is wrong; abortion is wrong. There is a consistency there.

Other things are harder. How can the Catholic faith come to grips with IVF and its opposition of stem cell research, for example.

I'm not even trying to ask that you explain to me that puzzler. My question is much more fundamental. It doesn't depend on scientific discovery or any method of birth control.

It's only asking whether you are considered to have engaged in fornication if your marriage is annulled.

Why is that so hard?

And yes, I expect that any Catholic who is prepared to tell me that 1) fornication is wrong, and 2) a marriage can be nullified because it isn't consistent with the sacrament of marriage in the Church, should be able to explain to me how: the two fit together. We are talking about some pretty common concepts. And if an observant Catholic can't tell me how the two fit together without a priest intervention means that they don't.

I'm a bit disappointed about that. But, so be it. I promised not to poke any observant Catholic who tried to answer this; I did think that there was an answer though. But, since it appears that there isn't a doctrinal one, I'll move on.

Except that, if anyone does ask their priest about this, tell me what he says. Because I really am interested.

You said you googled and you couldn't find an answer and neither can I. I think you are getting a bit excited here thinking any observant Catholic can answer that question. I can guess but I don't know for sure.The IVF question and embryonic stem cell research is extremely easy.
Catholic Church teaching
A human being comes into existence at the moment of fertilization of an oocyte (ovum) by a sperm. This fact has been recognized by the science of Human Embryology since 1883, and is still acknowledged today. The Church teaches that a human being must be respected-as a person-from the very first instant of his existence as a human being, and therefore, from that same moment, his rights as a person must be recognized among which in the first place, is the inviolable right of every innocent human being to life. The Church also teaches that from the moral point of view a truly responsible procreation vis-à-vis the unborn child, must be the fruit of marriage.

Pope Paul VI has taught that there is an "inseparable connection, willed by God, and unable to be broken by man on his own initiative, between the two meanings of the conjugal act: the unitive meaning and the procreative meaning."

IVF violates the rights of the child: it deprives him of his filial relationship with his parental origins and can hinder the maturing of his personality. It objectively deprives conjugal fruitfulness of its unity and integrity, it brings about and manifests a rupture between genetic parenthood, gestational parenthood, and responsibility for upbringing. This threat to the unity and stability of the family is a source of dissension, disorder, and injustice in the whole of social life.

What about research on a human embryo?
The Church teaches that medical research must refrain from operations on live embryos, unless there is moral certainty of not causing harm to the life or integrity of the unborn child and mother, and on condition that the parents have given free and informed consent to the procedure. Since stem cell research on human embryos, in practice, invariably causes the death of those embryos, it too stands condemned.

In summary, the Catholic Church condemns as gravely evil acts, both IVF in and of itself, and stem cell research performed on IVF embryos.

References:
1. Donum vitae (Respect for Human Life), Instruction on respect for human life in its origin, Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, 1987. (Available from Catholic Insight under the title "Vatican, High Tech"). Note: see also "Moratorium" in News in Brief, under Great Britain, p. ????

2. Encyclical letter Humanae vitae, No. 14, AAS 60 (1968), 488-489.

3. Donum vitae.



© Copyright 1997-2006 Catholic Insight
Updated: Dec 3rd, 2006 - 14:48:37

Actually, I had read all that before. I know the basic position of the Church on that point. Making sense of it is a little harder, but I do know the position of the Church.

I'm looking for an answer to a much, much, much more simple question.

Are you considered to have engaged in fornication if your marriage is annulled?

That's it. I'm not talking abortion, or stem cell research, or masturbation, or birth control, or anything else.

Just this.

Don't misunderstand me. I'm not "excited" about catching the Church out. On the contrary, I'm rather disappointed, and I'd much rather you tell me how everything fits together.

But if you can't, I'll just chalk this up as one more mystery of the Catholic faith.

Ok, I've been thinking about this. I don't think there's a clear cut yes or no on this question. Just as there are many reasons for an annulment I think each case would have to be looked at. For example, let's say Dirk and I get married. I marry in good fatih, etc... However Dirk was married in England and never got divorced before he came to the States and hid that fact from me, the Church, the law, etc... Obviously Dirk was fully aware that he was not being honest in his marriage vows whereas I was. So im my opinion, and that's just what is it, I would say that yes, he was fornicating but I wasn't. Does that make sense? I think just as there are many reasons for annulments and each annulment has to be looked at individually I think that would also apply to your question. There are not necessarily quick answers as to whether or not a marriage can be annuled, it has to go to a tribunal, etc...so it would follow that your question would have to be answered in accordance with the specifics of the actual annulment.