Can't get married outside?

[1ke]

Two of my daughters married non-catholics (one non-baptised) with extremely anti-catholic parents, both requested permission (through their parish priests) for out of door weddings, one in Vermont and one in NH, both were told that “other dioceses may give permission but we NEVER do.”

In which case your daughters could have requested a dispensation from canonical form and could have been married however their fiances wanted, which they didn’t. Instead the violated Church law. Wow, impressive.

 

[achmafooma]

Well, no. Baptisms are generally done in Church but baptisms in other places are still valid. Reconciliation is typically not celebrated within the nave and certainly doesn’t need to be “in church.” Sacrament of the Sick is almost never given in Church. Eucharist is celebrated in all kinds of non-Church settings, from parks to stadiums to battlefields. Confirmation is usually celebrated in the Church building but I know of no prohibition on it being done elsewhere if the bishop so chose. So that leaves Marriage and Holy Orders being formally tethered to the building. . . .

I said ‘normally done,’ not ‘required to be done.’ I hear what you’re saying though (and you’re spot-on about the Anointing of the Sick; I concede that point 100%). Reconciliation, Baptism, Eucharist, Confirmation, and Holy Orders might not ‘need’ to be celebrated in the Church, but usually are…or at least in the building.

My fundamental point is we’re talking about one of the Seven key ‘actions’ or ‘events’ of our Faith, and it’s a ‘one time’ event not something you can or should do often, so it is especially fitting that Holy Matrimony be celebrated in a sacred space like a Church.

God bless you.

 

[EricFilmer]

Just to add another aspect to this discussion, whereas Catholic weddings normally take place within church buildings, a couple is free to have the wedding reception anywhere they would like, including outdoors.
Therefore, being outdoors can still be incorporated within the entire ceremony as a whole (just not part of the sacramental ritual of the exchange of vows).

 

[lizaanne]

Many Catholic brides are married inside a Church and then go elsewhere for additional photos. Nothing says they can’t take their shoes off AFTER they are married for a romp on the beach with a photographer - or whatever suits their fancy. But for making a life long vow in front of Christ and witnesses, that needs to happen properly in front of the altar. We are CATHOLICS, not Hollywood actors on the set of Baywatch. How and why we do things matters.

I question those who do not see the importance of this - I have to wonder if they really truly get the significance and importance of what they are really doing when they say “I do”.

~Liza

 

[estesbob]

My sister is getting married later this year. She and her fiance want an outdoor wedding. My mom was told by 2 priests separately that The Church does not allow that; they are only allowed to preform marriages inside the church. One of them also told my mom that this is due to a large number of changes that were instituted in the late 80s. Anybody know about this?

I live in a mountain community and our pastor is inundated with requests from people who want to get married outisde in “front of the mountains”. His standard reply:

“Why would you want to get married in front of the Mountains when you can get married in front of he who made them?”

My niece got married outside and the highlight of her wedding was the dog that wandered through the congregation during their vows.

 

[PatriceA]

Many Catholic brides are married inside a Church and then go elsewhere for additional photos. Nothing says they can’t take their shoes off AFTER they are married for a romp on the beach with a photographer - or whatever suits their fancy. But for making a life long vow in front of Christ and witnesses, that needs to happen properly in front of the altar. We are CATHOLICS, not Hollywood actors on the set of Baywatch. How and why we do things matters.

I question those who do not see the importance of this - I have to wonder if they really truly get the significance and importance of what they are really doing when they say “I do”.

~Liza

I have that very same question. Why would you ever want to exclude Jesus from the ceremony, if you truly understand the Eucharist?

 

[Rence]

Yep. It can be frustrating.

If Jesus wanted to get married at Gethsemane, the church would say no.

To the OP, I don’t know of anyone who isn’t married civily as well as Sacramentally, because the two are entirely different. Usually, the priest marrying the couple signs the marriage license, but many get the civil ceremony done separately, even if they just go to the justice of the peace to sign it. So anyone who wants an outdoor wedding can simply have the Sacramental part in a small setting in a small church or chapel, and have the civil ceremony elsewhere. That is totally acceptable because the Sacrament was still done in Church

 

[Rence]

I question those who do not see the importance of this - I have to wonder if they really truly get the significance and importance of what they are really doing when they say “I do”.~Liza

Well, I do not see the importance of the requirement to have the ceremony in a Church, and I know very well the significance and importance of the Sacrament. I guess I just don’t feel God is limited to a building and I feel the Church is more than just a building. Where do you suppose Catholics got married before the first “Church” was built? If we were still in caves and catacomes and members’ houses, would canon still require us to be married in a “Church”? Somehow I doubt it.

 

[PatriceA]

To the OP, I don’t know of anyone who isn’t married civily as well as Sacramentally, because the two are entirely different. Usually, the priest marrying the couple signs the marriage license, but many get the civil ceremony done separately, even if they just go to the justice of the peace to sign it. So anyone who wants an outdoor wedding can simply have the Sacramental part in a small setting in a small church or chapel, and have the civil ceremony elsewhere. That is totally acceptable because the Sacrament was still done in Church

Where do you live? I have never heard of a Catholic couple having two separate ceremonies. Its not the norm in my experience.

 

[Rence]

Where do you live? I have never heard of a Catholic couple having two separate ceremonies. Its not the norm in my experience.

I used to live in Chicago…my parents and grandparents both went to civil hall to get married (and of course, continued to live separately because they weren’t married in the eyes of the Church), and then they got married in Church some time later. I don’t know why they did it that way, because they both didn’t consider the civil marriage to be the important one, but that’s how they did it. My mom’s second marriage was done in Church and the priest signed the marriage license, so they only did it once and at the same time.

 

[PatriceA]

Well, I do not see the importance of the requirement to have the ceremony in a Church, and I know very well the significance and importance of the Sacrament. I guess I just don’t feel God is limited to a building and I feel the Church is more than just a building. Where do you suppose Catholics got married before the first “Church” was built? If we were still in caves and catacomes and members’ houses, would canon still require us to be married in a “Church”? Somehow I doubt it.

Can’t cart Jesus in the tabernacle to an outside wedding though. That’s the point, you’ve excluded the most important guest at your wedding when you choose NOT to have it in a Catholic Church with Jesus present in the tabernacle.

 

[vsedriver]

Where do you suppose Catholics got married before the first “Church” was built? If we were still in caves and catacomes and members’ houses, would canon still require us to be married in a “Church”? Somehow I doubt it.

the early church did use the catacombs and members homes because it was an outlaw religion. Once the religion was made legal churches sprang up overnight.

So you don’t feel the sacrament of marriage is important enough to be held in front of a sacred altar and the tabernacle of Our Lord?

 

[Rence]

Can’t cart Jesus in the tabernacle to an outside wedding though. That’s the point, you’ve excluded the most important guest at your wedding when you choose NOT to have it in a Catholic Church with Jesus present in the tabernacle.

If they can have communion in parks and stadiums and battlefields, they can have Jesus at an outside location for a wedding. So yeah, they can “cart Jesus” to an outside wedding, and some Bishops will allow it. So obviously it can be done, at the whim of the Bishop and his mood at the time you ask him. That’s why, if someone wants an outside wedding, they can have a small church/chapel wedding, and then have the civil ceremony wherever they want and it’s all good.

Anyway, to the OP, you’ve gotten a lot of answers and suggestions. If a couple wants an outside wedding, first contact the bishop and ask. If he says no, they’ll have to have the Sacramental part in the required location, and then take the rest of the ceremony to the location of their choosing. Don’t get all caught up in Church “rules” so that outsiders view the Church negatively. Just meet the requirements and be compliant. It won’t be that much trouble and everyone is happy.

 

[Rence]

the early church did use the catacombs and members homes because it was an outlaw religion. Once the religion was made legal churches sprang up overnight.

So you don’t feel the sacrament of marriage is important enough to be held in front of a sacred altar and the tabernacle of Our Lord?

That’s not what I said I said: “I do not see the importance of the requirement to have the ceremony in a Church”. Please do not change my words, they’re right there in front of you and as written speak say exactly what I mean. The Sacrament of marriage is very important to me. The importance of the requirement to have the ceremony in a Church is not important to me. And it obviously wasn’t of paramount importance to the early Church either, for obvious reasons. Otherwise, they would have either not gotten married, or found a way to do it in a Church.

 

[KostyaJMJ]

So anyone who wants an outdoor wedding can simply have the Sacramental part in a small setting in a small church or chapel, and have the civil ceremony elsewhere. That is totally acceptable because the Sacrament was still done in Church

That seems to be a rather simple loophole. Almost too simple… I can’t imagine that it would be allowed.

 

[FCEGM]

I live in a mountain community and our pastor is inundated with requests from people who want to get married outisde in “front of the mountains”. His standard reply:

“Why would you want to get married in front of the Mountains when you can get married in front of he who made them?”

My niece got married outside and the highlight of her wedding was the dog that wandered through the congregation during their vows.

I can top that: my cousin’s dog was the ringbearer at his outdoor wedding.

 

[Rence]

Originally Posted by Rence
So anyone who wants an outdoor wedding can simply have the Sacramental part in a small setting in a small church or chapel, and have the civil ceremony elsewhere. That is totally acceptable because the Sacrament was still done in Church

What loophole? Of course it’s allowed. The only requirement the Church has is that the Sacrament of Marriage be in a Church, unless special permission is obtained from the bishop. There is nothing that forbids one from having a civil ceremony outside because a civil ceremony has nothing to do with the sacrament marriage. They are completely different. That would be like saying that the Church forbids civil marriages, which is false. You have to be married civily in order the obtain the civil recognition that one is married, that’s why the priest will sign the marriage certificate, but that is NOT a requirment of the Church. That’s a requirment of the state. The Church has no requirements regarding civil marriage except the requirment to be married sacramentally as well.

 

[PatriceA]

If they can have communion in parks and stadiums and battlefields, they can have Jesus at an outside location for a wedding. So yeah, they can “cart Jesus” to an outside wedding, and some Bishops will allow it. So obviously it can be done, at the whim of the Bishop and his mood at the time you ask him. That’s why, if someone wants an outside wedding, they can have a small church/chapel wedding, and then have the civil ceremony wherever they want and it’s all good.

Anyway, to the OP, you’ve gotten a lot of answers and suggestions. If a couple wants an outside wedding, first contact the bishop and ask. If he says no, they’ll have to have the Sacramental part in the required location, and then take the rest of the ceremony to the location of their choosing. Don’t get all caught up in Church “rules” so that outsiders view the Church negatively. Just meet the requirements and be compliant. It won’t be that much trouble and everyone is happy.

That line of reasoning is weak. They have communion in parks, stadiums and battlefields when its infeasible to have a large crowd gather in a physical Church building and under exceptional conditions. Not when two people want to enter into the vocation of marriage in the Sacrament of Matrimony in the Catholic Church. It is rare that any of the Sacraments are admisintered outside of the physical Church building, with the exception of the Anointing of the Sick because many times it is impossible for the person in need to be moved. Wanting to have a pretty setting for a wedding is a flimsy excuse at best for wanting to NOT be married in front of the tabernacle. Why would you ever think you are more important that Jesus that He should come to you, instead of you going to Jesus in the tabernacle?

 

[1ke]

Usually, the priest marrying the couple signs the marriage license, but many get the civil ceremony done separately, even if they just go to the justice of the peace to sign it.

Not in the United States. Because in the US the officiant witnesses for the state. The person can only be legally married once.

If they legally wed via the civil ceremony first, then they would have to have their marriage convalidated.

So anyone who wants an outdoor wedding can simply have the Sacramental part in a small setting in a small church or chapel, and have the civil ceremony elsewhere. That is totally acceptable because the Sacrament was still done in Church

No, this is not correct in the United States.

 

[1ke]

What loophole? Of course it’s allowed. The only requirement the Church has is that the Sacrament of Marriage be in a Church, unless special permission is obtained from the bishop. There is nothing that forbids one from having a civil ceremony outside because a civil ceremony has nothing to do with the sacrament marriage. They are completely different. That would be like saying that the Church forbids civil marriages, which is false. You have to be married civily in order the obtain the civil recognition that one is married, that’s why the priest will sign the marriage certificate, but that is NOT a requirment of the Church. That’s a requirment of the state. The Church has no requirements regarding civil marriage except the requirment to be married sacramentally as well.

In the United States, the witness for the Church and state are the same person.

One cannot have “only” a church wedding and have someone else perform the “civil” marriage.