rwoehmke:
But the “meat” of the sacrament is the exchange of vows made in front of God and the congregation present. The presence of a priest or deacon is required for validity in a Catholic ceremony, but even that can be dispensed with with the permission of the bishop if the ceremony takes place in a protestant church. The priest, deacon, or minister do not “marry” the couple. They marry each other. The priest or deacon may say," I now pronounce you man and wife" but that is formally recognizing what has already taken place. The blessing is a nice thing to have, but is not an essential part of the sacrament. Five of my six children have been married, four of them had a wedding Mass, one did not. A Catholic Wedding with a Mass is so beautiful compared to the shorter protestant version of the Sacrament.
Yes, all of that is understood (though I wouldn’t exactly call the shorter rite “protestant”. It is validly Catholic, and can be very beautiful). I was just trying to figure out what you meant by “That is why Deacons can officiate…”. It seemed odd phrasing to say that this is **why, **when the deacon is an ordinary minister in this context - I mean that there is not an exception to say that “now, the Deacon may preside.”
Now, I think I understand. You meant that Priests or Deacons can be the presider and official witness at the shorter rite. And, actually, either a priest or deacon can be the church’s official witness during a Nuptial Mass, too (I’ve done it several times for relatives, friends, families in the parish with whom I am close, or for couples with whom I have been working to prepare them for the Sacrament).
And, yes, I prefer the Nuptial Mass to the shorter rite. In fact, all celebrations of the Sacraments are more fully expressed in the context of the Mass. It is not, however, always the best option, for pastoral reasons, for the couple or for the families involved. I don’t counsel against the Nuptial Mass, in fact, the other way around, but I will offer the shorter rite as an option in certain circumstances.
And, yes, Confiteor, the Nuptial Mass requires a priest, as any does any Mass. Yes, you could have a Communion Service and have the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony within that context, if necessary, but, again, the more full expression of the reality of the Sacrament is within the Nuptial Mass.
And, finally, to get back to the original question, no, I can’t see a reason for the couple to be facing the assembly at this point, either. The couple faces the priest or deacon, who is, usually, facing toward the assembly (with his back to the altar), and they face each other in proclaiming their vows.
This seems like an odd innovation, which, I don’t think, really is expressing what -whoever thought this up- meant it to.
I just wish we could celebrate the rite the way it is written (now, doesn’t that sound familiar)!
Dn. Jim.
