Ask them that, and they look at you as if you're from another planet.
If it were up to me, I'd require that they live apart for six months or so before they married.
But, it's not up to me. My wife and I do this to try to share some of what's made our marriage as wonderful as it is with these couples. Most of them are in their mid-twenties, some have been married once before.
We try to talk them through why they ought to take intense sex out of the equation during engagement because the sex won't always be that intense and what will they do after the intense sex? In addition, another good reason to put the sex on the shelf is to make sure it's not the sex that's keeping them together.
We had one couple do that, and break up before the wedding date.
If I had slammed them with "mortal sin" and "hell", the guy would have gotten defensive and gone through with the wedding just to prove something.
My wife and I are NFP instructors, and I can assure you we are just as "pastoral" with the engaged couples who come to us. You are using wisdom in your approach. Its fine to mull theoretical distinctions regarding "mortal sin" but when they're standing there in front of you, you're just trying to keep them inside the door. I always thought being "pastoral" was an excuse for being liberal. Sometimes it is. Sometimes it is just the reality of the situation, even for an "orthodox" priest or layperson.
I'll be darned ... you sound like dear Father White. (One of those crusty traditional types who wouldn't marry a couple if they still were living together at the time.)
Happy to hear that you and your wife are doing what you can to steer young men and women in the right direction.
Well if that's the case, shouldn't the people shepherding them through this process explains what it means to be Catholic, what their responsibilities as Catholics are, what the beliefs of Catholicism are. And if they still desire to desecrate the institution of Catholic marriage, kindly tell them to find some other parish that isn't willing to equivocate on Catholic teaching? I mean, in effect, by marrying such people, the diocese is a party to their mortal sin. As I see it, it's the Church's mission to evangelize, and part of that is revealing the truth to people.
Simply put, why not explain to them the beliefs and obligations of being Catholic? And if they don't like it, let them know that there are plenty of other Christian denominations out there to join that will not say a word about their mortal sin?
If it were up to me, I'd require that they live apart for six months or so before they married.
Since Catholic marriage preparation takes, at a normal minimum (as far as I'm aware) 6 months for most dioceses (some require a full year, I think), I would think that 6 months would be a bare minimum for evidence that the couple has shown a firm purpose of amendment to their mortal sin.
But, it's not up to me. My wife and I do this to try to share some of what's made our marriage as wonderful as it is with these couples. Most of them are in their mid-twenties, some have been married once before.
Since I don't know how orthodox your diocese is, I have to ask: Are these couples bothering to get anulments for previous marriages? Is the freedom to marry within the Catholic Church as a pre-requisite to prospective married couples still believed and practiced by your diocese?
We try to talk them through why they ought to take intense sex out of the equation during engagement because the sex won't always be that intense and what will they do after the intense sex? In addition, another good reason to put the sex on the shelf is to make sure it's not the sex that's keeping them together.
That's sound advice in my book. [...]
If I had slammed them with "mortal sin" and "hell", the guy would have gotten defensive and gone through with the wedding just to prove something.
I have never understood the fear in presenting the unabashed, unapolegetic truth of Catholicism to Catholics by modern Catholics in America. Mentioning the fact that a particular sin will send a person to hell for eternity is considered "slamming." It certainly doens't need to be a yelling match and finger pointing. It can be reasoned, articulate, loving and caring warning of the very real danger their souls are in. If a person were on a car hurtling towards a cliff, it wouldn't be considered "slamming" to let them know the repercussions of their actions if they don't hit the brakes. Why not tell the truth? Why hide the truth? What is the old addage: "Friends tell you the truth, even when you don't want to hear it."?