Celeb wedding: 8 bishops+pro-abortion sponsors

[katolikos247]

hello everyone.

i just wanted to know how this massive celeb wedding in the philippines has been allowed to be officiated by 8 catholic bishops and how the pro-reproductive health sponsors were accepted gmanetwork.com/news/story/397095/showbiz/chikaminute/dingdong-dantes-and-marian-rivera-are-now-married

is this allowed? under what circumstances can the bishops conference allow 8 bishops to be in one place just to officiate a celebrity wedding. is it just because it was a celebrity wedding?

what about the sponsors? a lot of the sponsors of the couple are known to be lobbyists of reproductive health, including the best man, who is the president of that country. aren’t the sponsors supposed to be screened?

would appreciate your help on this issue.

God bless us all.

 

[Joe_5859]

I know nothing of this specific wedding, but it’s not uncommon for multiple bishops to celebrate a high profile liturgy. I don’t know that I’ve ever known of such a high profile liturgy that was a celebrity wedding. But if they are Catholics in good standing, then why not?

The Sacrament of Marriage does not include “sponsors” in the way that Baptism and Confirmation do, but “witnesses”. For validity, a Catholic marriage needs at least two witnesses. There are no stipulations in Canon Law (that I can find) that these witnesses be Catholics in good standing. That is the requirement for sponsors for Baptism and Confirmation, but that doesn’t apply to marriage.

 

[Hodegetria]

One story I read said that the sponsors paid for less than 5% of the wedding and the groom paid for the rest.

I don’t know about the bishops, were they actually officiating or just guests?

I never heard of these people before today, but it looked like most of the “news” stories were a lot of rumor and speculation.

 

[1ke]

under what circumstances can the bishops conference allow 8 bishops to be in one place just to officiate a celebrity wedding.

The other parts of your question have been answered, so I will focus on this one.

The bishops’ conference has **no authority **over a bishop at all.

The bishops’ conference doesn’t allow or disallow the movement of bishops, where and when they celebrate or concelebrate Mass, or whose weddings they attend.

 

[1ke]

The Sacrament of Marriage does not include “sponsors” in the way that Baptism and Confirmation do, but “witnesses”. For validity, a Catholic marriage needs at least two witnesses. There are no stipulations in Canon Law (that I can find) that these witnesses be Catholics in good standing. That is the requirement for sponsors for Baptism and Confirmation, but that doesn’t apply to marriage.

Indeed. Culturally, Filipinos have “sponsors” at their wedding. Sponsors pay for the wedding or parts of the wedding.

This is a cultural tradition, and NOT in any way a Catholic or canonical role. The Church does not have anything to do with this tradition of “sponsors”.

 

[Joe_5859]

Indeed. Culturally, Filipinos have “sponsors” at their wedding. Sponsors pay for the wedding or parts of the wedding.

This is a cultural tradition, and NOT in any way a Catholic or canonical role. The Church does not have anything to do with this tradition of “sponsors”.

Interesting. I did not know that. Since the majority of Filipinos are Catholic, I can see how it would be easy for a cultural tradition such as this to be perceived as the Catholic way of doing things.

 

[JackVk]

Who gives a rip? Maybe the presence of the bishops will cause the sponsors to reconsider their views. That’s why the Church exists. We’re not a club for the ideologically perfect.

 

[GoGoDiego]

It is customary to appoint sponsors for a wedding. The church has no power over that. Regarding the bishops who concelebrated, why not? Even the couple chose Bishop Bacani (the celebrant was Bishop Ongtioco, bishop of the diocese) the homilist.