Parent Trap? No, Cohabitation Trap!

And here I thought people were wising up to the fact that living together in sin before marriage wasn't leading to human fulfillment and bliss, and then to come across Mr. Johnston'e piece:

The Co-Habitation Trap

GEORGE SIM JOHNSTON

There's no such thing as a trial marriage.

Recently, a college classmate told me that her 25-year-old son has a girlfriend about whom he can't make up his mind. The couple have been going together for two years. He is serious about the girl, thinks she'd make a good wife, but tells his mother that he's not sure about taking the plunge. Should he propose? Should he take more time to think about it? Maybe date other girls to gain perspective? The son is at a loss.

My friend is generally a sensible person, and she gave her son what she thinks is good advice: why not move in with her and see how it goes? In other words, do a trial marriage. If the sharing of bed and board goes smoothly, then tie the knot. If it doesn't, you can go your separate ways and will have been spared what nobody wants: a broken marriage.

My friend unfortunately was steering her son into what might be called the "co-habitation trap." It so happens — contrary to widespread belief — that the divorce rate among couples who live together before marriage is notably higher than the normal divorce rate — up to 40 percent higher, depending on which study you look at.

There are variations within this disquieting statistic. Couples who get engaged before moving in together do better than couples who don't. If it's the woman's first and only live-in situation, the divorce rate is lower. Brief cohabitators are more likely to stay married than longer-term ones. Whatever the nuances, however, all these categories produce higher divorce rates than that for couples who don't live together before marriage.

Why is this? It seems counter-intuitive. A young woman might say to her friends, "I wouldn't dream of marrying a man until first living with him for a couple of years." And her friends would nod sagely. It makes a certain kind of sense: take a test drive before committing to a model.

But this scenario doesn't always work in real life. Years ago, a friend of mine moved in with his girlfriend. They shared a loft in SoHo and seemed to have a marvelous time being a young Manhattan couple. After two years, they married. A year later, the marriage cracked up bitterly. I said to him one day, "What happened? The two of you seemed great together." "I don't know," he replied. "It's as though all of a sudden all the wrong buttons were pushed."

The point is that there's no such thing as a trial marriage. As Barbara Dafoe Whitehead puts it, "Living together is not to marriage as spring training is to the baseball season."

Here are some problems with cohabitation:

When a couple move in together, they seldom ask the sort of questions one ought to ask about a partner with whom one is going to spend the rest of one's life. Do I really share this person's values? Do I want my children to have this person's values? The worst scenario is sliding into cohabitation and then sliding into marriage. Decide, don't slide, as the saying goes.
It has been well observed that in a good marriage, whenever a wife or husband uses the pronoun "I" he or she also means "we." But when a cohabiting person uses the pronoun "I", he or she often means "I." The couple have separate names, separate bank accounts; there's an implicit agreement that either can back out of the relationship. In brief, they are rehearsing a low-intensity commitment. But marriage involves a high-intensity commitment.

Besides, no happily married couple have ever looked at one another, slapped their foreheads, and exclaimed, "If only we had started having sex six months earlier!"

Sex can get in the way of the prudential judgments one should make about the person one is going to marry. Sex and lucid judgment don't always go together, to say the least. Sex releases hormones like oxytocin, which, among other things, act like a bonding agent, even when the couple in reality may not be suited to one another. It is much harder to break up a bad relationship when sex is going on. Abstaining couples, on the other hand, tend to look at one another with greater clarity. The emotional growth of their relationship is not short-circuited by an act that presumes more commitment than is the case.
Men and women go into cohabitation with very different assumptions and expectations. A woman will tend to regard living together as a dress rehearsal for marriage, while her partner has much looser ideas about the arrangement. She will typically take less time than he does deciding in favor of marriage. In fact, he's happy to postpone the decision for as long as possible. This can lead to scenes. She doesn't even have to utter the word "marriage" to make him defensive. All she has to say is something like, "I don't see where this relationship is going," to set him off. "You're putting pressure on me!" "Things are fine the way they are!" "I don't want to be pushed into anything!" And so forth.

"We suspect, rightly," James Q. Wilson writes in The Marriage Problem, "that marriage differs from cohabitation. Cohabitation means that two people agree to live together, sharing rooms, meals, and sex. Marriage means that two people promise to live together until they die, sharing rooms, meals, sex, and a permanent obligation to care for one's spouse. The promise is at the heart of the matter."

It's not easy to abstain from sex prior to marriage. Especially when a couple are already engaged. But to reserve sex for marriage is to affirm its meaning and ultimately strengthen the bond of marriage. Sex is the consummation of a solemn promise; it doesn't work so well without it.

Besides, no happily married couple have ever looked at one another, slapped their foreheads, and exclaimed, "If only we had started having sex six months earlier!" Instead, they can share a fond memory of waiting for the starting gun to go off.

Acknowledgement

George Sim Johnston. "The Co-Habitation Trap." The Catholic Thing (August 1, 2015).

Reprinted by permission of The Catholic Thing.

The Author

George Sim Johnston is a writer living in New York City. He graduated from Harvard with a B. A. in English literature and was an investment banker with Salomon Brothers in the seventies and early eighties. Since then he has been a free-lance writer, publishing with The Wall Street Journal, Harper's, Commentary, Harvard Business Review, National Catholic Register, World Catholic Report, and other publications. He is a three-time winner of the Journalism Award from the Catholic Press Association. He teaches marriage preparation and CCD for the Archdiocese of New York and is the author of Did Darwin Get it Right?: Catholics and the Theory of Evolution.

Comments

This video of a young boy twerking at Pride has homophobes outraged | Gay Star News

DANCING WITH MR. D: This video of a young boy twerking at Pride has homophobes outraged | Gay Star News : 'via Blog this'

On the Smoke of Modernism

A S is well known to all but those who choose not to see, the broken or irregular home has gone from being the exception to the rule. The family is the building block upon which all secular and Christian civilization is built. Marriage is a divine and natural institution perfectly portrayed by Christ the bridegroom and His Church, the bride. Though the world has been trying to change both, we find ourselves with a gap between how the world sees family and marriage and what the Church knows about them. The Fourteenth General Assembly of the Synod of Bishops took place from October 4 to October 25, 2015, in Vatican City. While it is inspiring that the Church fathers are attempting to develop pastoral solutions to the overwhelming problems we face as a global society concerning marriage and family, it is rewarding to know the roots of the problems that we face. If we untangle the modernism on both topics we will discover that the problem lies in the contraceptive mindset. ...

Our Lord Refuses to Dance With Mr. D

During his weekly Angelus address on Sunday, Pope Francis spoke about the day’s Gospel reading, which focused on the temptation of Jesus in the desert. Satan, the Pope said, tried “to divert Jesus from the Father’s plan” by tempting Him “to take an easy path,” a path “of success and power.” Jesus definitively rejects these temptations, reaffirming His “firm intention to follow the path established by the Father, without any compromise with sin or with the logic of the world.” This commitment to follow the plan of the Father is realized in Jesus actions; “His absolute fidelity to the Father's plan of love will lead Him, after about three years, to the final confrontation with the “prince of this world” (Jn 16:11), in the hour of the Passion and of the Cross, and there Jesus will achieve His final victory, the victory of love!” The Holy Father encouraged all of us to take the opportunity afforded by Lent to renew our Baptismal promises, renouncing Satan and his seductions, “i...

On Marriage

Marriage comes to us from nature. In Catholic teaching Jesus sanctifies marriage as a sacrament for the baptized, giving it significance beyond its natural reality. Traditionally the state has safeguarded marriage because it is indispensable to family and thus to the common good of society. But neither Church nor State instituted marriage, and neither can change its nature. God created two mutually complementary sexes, able to transmit life through marital union. Consummated sexual intercourse between a man and a woman is ideally based on mutual love and must always be based on mutual consent, if they are genuinely human actions. No matter how strong a friendship or deep a love between persons of the same sex might be, it is physically impossible for two men, or two women, to consummate a marital union. (In civil law, non-consummation of a marriage constitutes grounds for annulment). It is easy to see that sexual intercourse between a man and a w...

Signs of These Times, or "Life Under the Relativist Dictatorship"

While reading Ralph Martin’s A Church in Crisis I encontered an endnote reference to a blog post by Fr. Longenecker, which sheds light on the roots of contemporary secular befuddlement: RELATIVISM, IRRATIONAL RAGE AND REVOLUTION One of the most disturbing aspects of the troubles of 2020 has been the confusion and bewilderment caused by so much uncertainty. When it comes to the COVID-19 pandemic every other news report or social media link or comment has been contradictory. “Masks are useless. Everybody must wear a mask! Only sick old people will get this disease. My friend knows a guy in his forties who is an athlete and very fit and he nearly died! You can get it just from touching your groceries. The virus doesn’t transmit that way. The threat is global. Only New York City is being hit. Not us.” We’ve seen the most amazing contradictions over the last week with the massive demonstrations. We’re supposed to observe social distancing, but thousands are encouraged ...

On Prideful, Utopian Thought

( Continued from September 13 ) T he Church believes that we can change. She teachs that all sacraments, but most importantly the Eucharist, can and do change our lives. This belief in the power of the Eucharist is manifest in Thomas Merton, the great twentieth-century Catholic mystic: “the grace of the Eucharist is not confined to the moments of thanksgiving after Mass and communion, but reaches out into our whole day and into all the affairs of our life, in order to sanctify and transform them in Christ.” Change, conversion through the Eucharist does not happen overnight. But the Church believes at her core that Her sacramental life, over time, leads us towards holiness, the call of Vatican II. At the same time, we as Catholics scrap the idea that as a society we will ever arrive at a Morean utopia. To cite only one example, Jesus said: “you always will have the poor with you” (Mark 14:7). Pope Paul VI, about whom I wrote my book, stated in his 1971 en...

Divide et Impera

Mr. Patrick Boyden has penned a reflection worth noting. In 2013 I wrote: Lest we forget, there were indeed reform-minded Council Fathers who responded to Pope John’s vision of the Church growing in spiritual riches as a fruit of the Council under the guidance of the Holy Spirit in the hope that the faithful might through grace be aided in turning hearts and minds toward heavenly things. Given what has been said thus far, it should not surprise the reader that many “liberal Catholics” view the pontificate of John Paul II as too “conservative,” and out of touch with the modern world, while the traditionalists view the writings and teachings of the Holy Father as modernist! Thus the schema of “liberal” (progressive, left) vs. conservative (traditional, right) which followed upon the close of Vatican II is wholly inadequate for explaining the present-day crisis of faith within the Church of Jesus Christ, though it is most unfortunate that usage of these terms persist...

Homosexual Marriage

The urgency of the issue of gay marriage at this time and the compelling arguments raised against it here, make this paper an important resource: Answering Advocates of Gay Marriage KATHERINE YOUNG AND PAUL NATHANSON Claim 1 : Marriage is an institution designed to foster the love between two people. Gay people can love each other just as straight people can. Ergo, marriage should be open to gay people. Claim 2 : Not all straight couples have children, but no one argues that their marriages are unacceptable Claim 3 : Some gay couples do have children and therefore need marriage to provide the appropriate context. Claim 4 : Marriage and the family are always changing anyway, so why not allow this change? Claim 5 : Marriage and the family have already changed, so why not acknowledge the reality? Claim 6 : Children would be no worse off with happily married gay parents than they are with unhappily married straight ones. Claim 7 : Given global overpopulation, why w...

A Good Shepherd....

Bottom of Form Indianapolis archbishop revokes Jesuit prep school's Catholic identity 7.4K1313 Top of Form Bottom of Form Indianapolis, Ind., Jun 20, 2019 / 01:49 pm ( CNA ).- The Archdiocese of Indianapolis announced Thursday that a local Jesuit high school will no longer be recognized as a Catholic school, due to a disagreement about the employment of a teacher who attempted to contract a same-sex marriage. “All those who minister in Catholic educational institutions carry out an important ministry in communicating the fullness of Catholic teaching to students both by word and action inside and outside the classroom,” the archdiocese said in a statement Thursday. “In the Archdiocese of Indianapolis, every archdiocesan Catholic school and private Catholic school has been instructed to clearly state in its contracts and ministerial job descriptions that all ministers must convey and be supportive of all teachings of the Catholic Church.” Teachers, the ar...

Dancing With Mr. D: Grooming the Little Children

A former pro-transgender activist said she regretted her previous work in pro-transgender activism, adding she felt she was "indoctrinated" on gender ideology in an interview with Fox News Digital. "I started to realize that what I had been doing at my job at the LGBT Center, it was grooming," Kay Yang, a former employee of a location in New York, said. Grooming in this context means "to get into readiness for a specific objective." Kay works as a 'deprogrammer' to help parents and children who have been 'indoctrinated' by the 'cult-like' transgender agenda. Yang herself previously went by they/them and worked as a 'trans educator' in schools for years. Listen to her testimony.

Search This Blog