Child not getting married in the church

[Elf01]

This whole situation makes me incredibly sad. I think it’s an example of religion dividing, not uniting.

Jesus warned us about that.

 

[sunrise]

I don’t think this is what God wants. I’m sure if we asked Jesus, he would say 1) Don’t shatter your relationship with you daughter ,

This is an evil accusation to make of anyone simply refraining from one ceremony (of which is an offense against Jesus’ own Church)!

But it’s not just refraining from a single ceremony, it’s saying that the wedding is invalid and the couple is living in sin. That is an ongoing rejection of the couple. I happen to believe that’s a very big deal, you don’t seem to. And, I really do think Jesus would want Mom to celebrate the daughter’s joy on her big day and leave the arguments and conflicts to another (more private) time. Ruining the wedding will only push the daughter further away from a return to the church. Agree to disagree.

Is the wedding only a secular, justice of the peace situation, or is it a religious ceremony?

Does it matter? If it’s not catholic, it’s invalid, right?

Mom may rarely, if ever see her daughter again. Same for the future grandchildren.

For God’s sake, why???

See first answer. Rejecting the marriage is a big deal.

 

[Ammi]

But it’s not just refraining from a single ceremony, it’s saying that the wedding is invalid and the couple is living in sin.

Actually, it’s Jesus’ Church who established this.

That is an ongoing rejection of the couple.

This is your chosen belief. Its judging other’s intentions and perspective unjustly.

And, I really do think Jesus would want Mom to celebrate the daughter’s joy on her big day

You are envisioning Jesus celebrating a rejection of His own Church.

…and leave the arguments and conflicts to another (more private) time. Ruining the wedding will only push the daughter further away from a return to the church. Agree to disagree.

Heart to heart discussion must happen to have a relationship. That should be done before the wedding. The relationship can be respected, appreciated, and maintained without attending a wedding against someone’s faith. No need to censure a parent for refraining from what the Church calls invalid.

Does it matter? If it’s not catholic, it’s invalid, right?

Because you said to celebrate the “civil” marriage. If it’s a Christian wedding, but invalid to Jesus, then it’s also sacrilegious.

See first answer. Rejecting the marriage is a big deal.

The Church rejects the marriage! Because it’s a big deal to reject the Church.

 

[TC3033]

This is your chosen belief. Its judging other’s intentions and perspective unjustly.

Like everyone is saying. That is, most likely, how the couple will perceive it. Whether unjust or not, the person deciding to skip the wedding needs to be prepared for that possible consequence and a serious strain on the relationship, or break.

Heart to heart discussion must happen to have a relationship. That should be done before the wedding.

Sure

The relationship can be respected, appreciated, and maintained without attending a wedding against someone’s faith.

Or it can be lost all together.

No need to censure a parent for refraining from what the Church calls invalid.

Even though the Church says that the parent doesn’t have to skip it. They’re doing so on their own accord.

If I was the child in this I’d ask: Since you won’t attend the wedding, I expect you won’t attend the reception…so we won’t need to worry about a Mother/Son dance. You won’t be at the gift opening the next day, etc…

How are you going to address or introduce my spouse? As your invalid daughter in-law? The lady my son lives with?

Are you going to skip anything to do with our church? Child’s baptizm…, 1st Communion, Confirmation (if this Church celebrates these sacraments), Christmas pageants, etc… If you can’t be at our wedding, surely you don’t want to attend these?

Those are the perceptions and questions that will, more than likely, come up.

 

[Ammi]

Like everyone is saying. That is, most likely, how the couple will perceive it. Whether unjust or not, the person deciding to skip the wedding needs to be prepared for that possible consequence and a serious strain on the relationship, or break.

If the couple believe this, its gonna be because the relationship is already poor. I would certainly demonstrate the clear distinction in refraining from the ceremony and loving them as a son or daughter. If they refuse to see that, then they certainly wont understand my intentions for attending while not supporting the ceremony. And the relationship will be superficial.

If I was the child in this I’d ask: Since you won’t attend the wedding, I expect you won’t attend the reception…so we won’t need to worry about a Mother/Son dance. You won’t be at the gift opening the next day, etc…

Right. A reception is the congratulations to the bride and groom. Gifts and dances are not necessary to coerce supporting something wrong.

How are you going to address or introduce my spouse? As your invalid daughter in-law? The lady my son lives with?

In many situations, the titles recognized by the civil marriage are necessary. It impossible, and inappropriate to explain to strangers the immorality and invalidity of the relationship

Are you going to skip anything to do with our church? Child’s baptizm…, 1st Communion, Confirmation (if this Church celebrates these sacraments), Christmas pageants, etc… If you can’t be at our wedding, surely you don’t want to attend these?

If the grandchildren are not Catholic, they wouldnt be controversial to attend.

Those are the perceptions and questions that will, more than likely, come up.

I wouldnt fear them. I’d actually welcome the discussion.

 

[Elf01]

If I was the child in this I’d ask: Since you won’t attend the wedding, I expect you won’t attend the reception…so we won’t need to worry about a Mother/Son dance. You won’t be at the gift opening the next day, etc…

That’s correct.

How are you going to address or introduce my spouse? As your invalid daughter in-law? The lady my son lives with?

Probably sons wife.

Are you going to skip anything to do with our church? Child’s baptizm…, 1st Communion, Confirmation (if this Church celebrates these sacraments), Christmas pageants, etc… If you can’t be at our wedding, surely you don’t want to attend these?

If the Catholic Church wouldn’t see them as valid, yes. Assuming non Catholic, non Orthodox I’d attend a baptism but not a First Holy Communion or Confirmation.

 

[TC3033]

If the couple believe this, its gonna be because the relationship is already poor. I would certainly demonstrate the clear distinction in refraining from the ceremony and loving them as a son or daughter. If they refuse to see that, then they certainly wont understand my intentions for attending while not supporting the ceremony. And the relationship will be superficial.

Then take the chance and don’t show…

Right. A reception is the congratulations to the bride and groom. Gifts and dances are not necessary to coerce supporting something wrong.

Sounds good. I’m of the belief that if you can’t make it to the wedding, then don’t show at the reception (which I have seen on here: That some clergy recommend going to the reception…who’s right?).

In many situations, the titles recognized by the civil marriage are necessary. It impossible, and inappropriate to explain to strangers the immorality and invalidity of the relationship

Doesn’t answer my question. Who are they. Daughter-in-law or lady my son shacks up with?

If the grandchildren are not Catholic, they wouldnt be controversial to attend.

And if you don’t get invited because you couldn’t be bothered to attend the wedding?

I wouldnt fear them. I’d actually welcome the discussion.

Even if it doesn’t go your way?

Probably sons wife.

So you accept that they are indeed married?

If the Catholic Church wouldn’t see them as valid, yes. Assuming non Catholic, non Orthodox I’d attend a baptism but not a First Holy Communion or Confirmation.

Then I would be prepared not to attend/be invited to other things. School plays, graduations, etc… If you can’t make it to First Communion or Confirmation, there’s no need to bother with other invitations.

My parents have been all of our kids’ 1st Communion, even though they aren’t Catholic. They are going to be there for their Grandkids.

 

[Elf01]

So you accept that they are indeed married?

Legally, yes.

Then I would be prepared not to attend/be invited to other things. School plays, graduations, etc… If you can’t make it to First Communion or Confirmation, there’s no need to bother with other invitations.

I’m prepared to take that risk.

 

[TC3033]

I’m prepared to take that risk.

Then there you go, your call. At least you do accept that risk is a real thing.

 

[Ammi]

Then take the chance and don’t show…

It’s not a gamble. It’s a prudent decision, based on hope in the Truth. I have hope and confidence my children know me, my intentions, my faith, and my unconditional love for them. If they dont see it, then attending wont help anything.

Sounds good. I’m of the belief that if you can’t make it to the wedding, then don’t show at the reception (which I have seen on here: That some clergy recommend going to the reception…who’s right?).

I agree with you. It’s a silly notion.

Doesn’t answer my question. Who are they. Daughter-in-law or lady my son shacks up with?

They are spouses according to the State. They are cohabitating girlfriend and boyfriend according the the Church. It is wrong to disclose other’s sins, without proportionate reason to avoid scandal.

And if you don’t get invited because you couldn’t be bothered to attend the wedding?

“Couldnt be bothered”? What do you mean by that? Sounds rather rude.

Even if it doesn’t go your way?

I can handle disappointment and still love and hope.

 

[TC3033]

It’s not a gamble.

Maybe in your specific senario, but I would hardly call that the norm.

my unconditional love for them

It would seem, I would think to most, skipping is putting a condition on it.

I agree with you. It’s a silly notion.

I’ve heard of priests recommending such an action. Are they wrong?

They are spouses according to the State. They are cohabitating girlfriend and boyfriend according the the Church. It is wrong to disclose other’s sins, without proportionate reason to avoid scandal.

You haven’t answered my question yet. It doesn’t take a two sentence response.

“Couldnt be bothered”? What do you mean by that? Sounds rather rude.

That’s how couples can see it. They can rudely perceive not showing up to their big day as they “couldn’t be bothered” to show up.

 

[sunrise]

Marriage is a beautiful institution ordained by God. It is universally recognized across cultures, religions, and time. It is even a strong secular institution.

All marriages are good. They form the basis for family, and all should be celebrated.

In this case, the daughter was baptized and raised Catholic, but she no longer professes the Catholic faith or maybe any faith at all. She is committing to marriage, the universal institution ordained by God, but not within the Catholic church. The marriage, on its own, is objectively good. And on that basis alone, it deserves to be celebrated.

I just think the rule that says Catholics should not celebrate this marriage because it isn’t Catholic, is wrong and divides more than it unites. Even it is purely secular, the couple is still committing to life together and raising a family. That is objectively good and transcends any particular faith tradition. (Although prudential judgement is allowed to relax the rule, the fact still remains that the rule is there and a source of unnecessary division).

Not celebrating the wedding, and more importantly not recognizing the marriage, is a very big deal. In many cases, I believe it will strain and even break the parent/child relationship, perhaps permanently. That’s a tragedy

 

[Ammi]

This same arguement could be made for homosexual marriages and marriages which one or both spouses were previously married, of which Jesus called adultery.

 

[Ammi]

Maybe in your specific senario, but I would hardly call that the norm.

Well I’m speaking from my own faith, relationship, and perspective. I cant speak for others. I encourage them to focus on their relationship. And dont try to make psychological compromises.

It would seem, I would think to most, skipping is putting a condition on it.

Then they have issues to work on. Attending wont fix those issues.

I’ve heard of priests recommending such an action. Are they wrong?

It’s not necessarily wrong to attend either, if the intention is expressed to not support the wedding, and not participate. What I see as wrong as to think the reception is any different than the ceremony. A reception is celebration of the wedding and congratulating them about it.

You haven’t answered my question yet. It doesn’t take a two sentence response.

I’m not entirely sure. Probably calling them married, in the secular, would be acceptable. The ceremony is quite a different situation. That entails perception of support.

That’s how couples can see it. They can rudely perceive not showing up to their big day as they “couldn’t be bothered” to show up.

And how do you perceive it, since I’ve discussed it so much with you?

 

[Psalm30]

This same arguement could be made for homosexual marriages and marriages which one or both spouses were previously married, of which Jesus called adultery.

Homosexual marriages are not a fair comparison here. I remember our priest EdwardGeorge specifically saying, in another thread, that homosexual marriages should not be compared to an invalid marriage involving a man and a woman. This is because an invalid marriage between a man and woman at least has the potential to become valid at some point and be recognized by the Church whereas, homosexual marriages will never be able to be recognized by the Church.

Divorce and remarriage is not what is going on with the OP’s friend. So, not a fair comparison, in this case.

 

[sunrise]

This same arguement could be made for homosexual marriages and marriages which one or both spouses were previously married, of which Jesus called adultery.

I’m not going there. That’s not what this thread is about. It’s irrelevant.

 

[TC3033]

Then they have issues to work on. Attending wont fix those issues.

Disagree.

It’s not necessarily wrong to attend either

Ok…we agree on that.

if the intention is expressed to not support the wedding, and not participate.

Where is this exception or law written?

Probably calling them married

So you wouldn’t go to the wedding, but would introduce the child’s spouse as your son/daughter in-law?

And how do you perceive it, since I’ve discussed it so much with you?

I’d percieve it as my parents not being there to support me on my big day, I’d also say they “couldn’t be bothered” to attend.

Like your link up-thread says, there’s no rule against it…I don’t think we really need to go past that…¯_(ツ)_/¯

 

[Ammi]

I agree they are greatly different. But the claim was that all marriages were good. Jesus and the Church definitely disagree. My point was the same arguement could be, and is, made for State marriages.

Also this comment was made in the post:

Not celebrating the wedding, and more importantly not recognizing the marriage, is a very big deal. In many cases, I believe it will strain and even break the parent/child relationship, perhaps permanently. That’s a tragedy

You have already told me and others that if we attend, it should not be to support or celebrate. And the Church does NOT recognize the marriage. So this post is not a very good arguement.

 

[Psalm30]

You have already told me and others that if we attend, it should not be to support or celebrate. And the Church does NOT recognize the marriage. So this post is not a very good arguement.

But you also said you would refer to your daughter’s invalid husband as your “son-in-law” in the civil sense, and that you recognize them as being married in the eyes of the law. I think the point I and possibly others are trying to make is that there’s a bit of a mismatch in your actions of not attending the wedding but still referring to the person as your “son-in-law” or “daughter’s husband” when your reason for not attending the wedding is that they aren’t really married. In other words, to be consistent, you need to either:

• Skip the wedding and acknowledge the husband as a “boyfriend” or “person your daughter lives with” since the reason you didn’t attend the wedding is that they aren’t really married, are living in sin, and the marriage can be dissolved

Or

• Attend the wedding to acknowledge the civil aspect of the marriage (Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s) while expressing that you don’t approve of not marrying in the Church and hope they will eventually reconcile and have the marriage convalidated (Give to God what is God’s).

But you are proposing not attending the wedding because the bride and groom won’t truly be married, and yet thereafter recognizing that they are married according to civil law and refer to your “daughter’s husband” or “son-in-law.” You can’t exactly have it both ways.

But the claim was that all marriages were good. Jesus and the Church definitely disagree.

I can’t speak for her, but I don’t think she meant homosexual marriages. She was most likely referring to the OP’s friend’s daughter, which—as far as we know—involves neither homosexuality nor adultery.

 

[Ammi]

But you also said you would refer to your daughter’s invalid husband as your “son-in-law” in the civil sense, and that you recognize them as being married in the eyes of the law. I think the point I and possibly others are trying to make is that there’s a bit of a mismatch in your actions of not attending the wedding but still referring to the person as your “son-in-law” or “daughter’s husband” when your reason for not attending the wedding is that they aren’t really married. In other words, to be consistent, you need to either:

I said I’m not entirely sure… but perhaps. That is a dilemma for sure. It wouldnt be right to commit detraction of their sin. Perhaps “partner” or girlfriend/boyfriend? Idk.

I also refer to remarriages, in my family, as husband and wife. Even though the Church considers them invalid, and a form of adultery.

- Skip the wedding and acknowledge the husband as a “boyfriend” or “person your daughter lives with” since the reason you didn’t attend the wedding is that they aren’t really married, are living in sin, and the marriage can be dissolved

The reason I wouldnt attend the wedding is because a conscious decision to support God or the State must be made. I cant support/celebrate the State laws without disrespecting God’s laws.

- Attend the wedding to acknowledge the civil aspect of the marriage (Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s) while expressing that you don’t approve of not marrying in the Church and hope they will eventually reconcile and have the marriage convalidated (Give to God what is God’s).

The State is not requiring anything of me, in that situation. God, on the other hand, requires admonishment and upholding valid marriage.

But you are proposing not attending the wedding because the bride and groom won’t truly be married, and yet thereafter recognizing that they are married according to civil law and refer to your “daughter’s husband” or “son-in-law.” You can’t exactly have it both ways.

Well, it is how it is. They would be married in the State law, while unmarried in the Church law. So in as much as I can support the Church’s law, i will, and only follow the State in as much as it does not offend God’s law. We cannot serve two masters. We have to take a side. Playing both is being Luke warm, and God may spit me out.

I can’t speak for her, but I don’t think she meant homosexual marriages. She was most likely referring to the OP’s friend’s daughter, which—as far as we know—involves neither homosexuality nor adultery.

I agree. But reality, is that a couple willfully marrying outside the Church, likely have more than one impediment going on. If they only wanted to marry somewhere else, they would seek a dispensation. But there are issues of not believing important things the Church believes.