giving the bride away

[BLB_Oregon]

We also were counseled in our pre-marital classes, that the wife could never refuse marital relations to our husband for any reason, even if it meant death to the wife. Makes me wonder why any of us girls were brave enough to walk down the aisle, on the arm of our father, who handed us over to our new husband.

Death? Are you serious?

And people wonder why we needed Vatican II.

 

[kim3260]

BLB Oregon…

To answer your question…“Do you promise to love, honor and obey, until death do you part”. I talked to my sisters, they said this was also in their vows. All of us were married 40 or more years ago, in the Catholic Church. I don’t know who to go to to “prove” this, other than those of us who said our vows like this. We didn’t like the “obey” thing, but it was there. We also were counseled in our pre-marital classes, that the wife could never refuse marital relations to our husband for any reason, even if it meant death to the wife. Makes me wonder why any of us girls were brave enough to walk down the aisle, on the arm of our father, who handed us over to our new husband.

Love and peace, Mom of 5

Gee that’s nice, does he bear the sin of Murder? I mean if a man knows it would kill her, and he still demands it and she dies. Didn’t he commit a Sin. If the reason behind this is because of procreation aren’t we allowed to practice NFP especially in a case like this?

 

[Mom_of_5]

Death? Are you serious?

And people wonder why we needed Vatican II.

Yes, I am serious. The priest who married us quit the priesthood and got married. He must have figured it was too good to pass up!!

The rythm method was the only method of family planning that was acceptable, different than NFP by a long shot. My husband was not as “Catholic” as I thought. He didn’t agree with much and decided going to church was not necessary as long as he “tipped his hat”, out of respect, when he passed the church. The ONE thing he agreed upon was that I could not refuse him for any reason. We really did need Vatican ll.

Sometimes I do find myself a bit bitter about the church before Vatican ll. Too many memories of abuse.

Love and peace, Mom of 5

 

[kim3260]

Yes, I am serious. The priest who married us quit the priesthood and got married. He must have figured it was too good to pass up!!

The rythm method was the only method of family planning that was acceptable, different than NFP by a long shot. My husband was not as “Catholic” as I thought. He didn’t agree with much and decided going to church was not necessary as long as he “tipped his hat”, out of respect, when he passed the church. The ONE thing he agreed upon was that I could not refuse him for any reason. We really did need Vatican ll.

Sometimes I do find myself a bit bitter about the church before Vatican ll. Too many memories of abuse.

Love and peace, Mom of 5

Isn’t the rythm method a form of NFP? Not trying to be fresh just I really thought it is.

 

[Mom_of_5]

A primitive form, not nearly as effective as NFP couples use today. Only the wife was involved, men had no part in it, other than no sex for a few days in the middle of the month. Now, husband is greatly involved, it brings the couple closer together. My children are knowledgable in this.

Love and peace,
Mom of 5

 

[kim3260]

A primitive form, not nearly as effective as NFP couples use today. Only the wife was involved, men had no part in it, other than no sex for a few days in the middle of the month. Now, husband is greatly involved, it brings the couple closer together. My children are knowledgable in this.

Love and peace,
Mom of 5

So my question is a sickly woman who could die, who begged her husband to not have relations, in Pre-Vatican II was a sinner. Yet the man had no Sin if he demanded relations that led to her death when he had full knowledge of what it would do.

All I can say if this is true thankfully I was born in 1960

 

[OutinChgoburbs]

So my question is a sickly woman who could die, who begged her husband to not have relations, in Pre-Vatican II was a sinner. Yet the man had no Sin if he demanded relations that led to her death when he had full knowledge of what it would do.

All I can say if this is true thankfully I was born in 1960

Here’s what I THINK happened instead of what is being suggested.

I THINK priests were not as well educated on certain matters as they should have been back then. I also THINK some priests, esp. those who lived far from the control of their bishops, interpreted things their way. This resulted in priests saying things that never were true, based on either wanting what was said to be correct; or wanting to control a situation.

This “obey” was not in the sacramental rite as far back as the 19th century ( at least as far back as I can tell through using old missals, some archival material, and the Internet). And here is a priest who added it. Catholic brides were never “given away” and yet there is a priest who used to insist on it. And the “marriage debt” was always, on paper, on both sides, husband and wife. But a priest, for whatever reason, stretched the point to stereotype women as the ones who would be guilty of turning down the “marriage debt” on alleged pain of mortal sin.

It’s the same thing as limbo: Limbo was never a doctrine, but a theory. Yet, there are priests who promulgated it as such. There were other priests who pronounced the souls of unbaptized babies in Hell, and guilted parents, even those wiht no opporunity to baptize their babies.

:twocents: So, while it might have happened that cetain priests guilted women into “intercourse no matter what or when”, and might have fiddled with the vows to add “obey” it wasn’t necessarily supposed to be there.

 

[Louly]

Being raised in catholic faith and educated In catholic private schools I found a Presbyterian church that used their bibles in church and had one in each seat,for all to read, I was moved.
The church my daughter is marrying has a rule that No walking down the aisle by the bride and her father because they don’t believe in giving the bride away. I think the canon law is misinterpreted because most Protestants just see it as a social convention and tradition; these days, no one gives the bride away, they choose to marry whom they marry.
Basically it just gives a loving touch and great photo opportunity of smiling bride and her dad.
Also by escorting the bride, we can all see her and when their eyes meet,groom,not in the middle of the aisles. Where it looks like a clumsy exchange and no one sees the bride in all her lovely gown!!! Queen of heaven alb,nm misinterprets cannon law and makes it their own personal choice and not working with families of other faiths, a simple social convention that really should be up to each bride and her photographer. This is one reason why my husband and I left the catholic faith because misinterpretation of cannon law and their abuse by provincial minded lay people who think in a box and aren’t paying for anything, and use their position to exert control and misguided interpretation. Any wonder why educated, wealthy Catholics leave the Catholic Church?

 

[TheRealJuliane]

Being raised in catholic faith and educated In catholic private schools I found a Presbyterian church that used their bibles in church and had one in each seat,for all to read, I was moved.
The church my daughter is marrying has a rule that No walking down the aisle by the bride and her father because they don’t believe in giving the bride away. I think the canon law is misinterpreted because most Protestants just see it as a social convention and tradition; these days, no one gives the bride away, they choose to marry whom they marry.
Basically it just gives a loving touch and great photo opportunity of smiling bride and her dad.
Also by escorting the bride, we can all see her and when their eyes meet,groom,not in the middle of the aisles. Where it looks like a clumsy exchange and no one sees the bride in all her lovely gown!!! Queen of heaven alb,nm misinterprets cannon law and makes it their own personal choice and not working with families of other faiths, a simple social convention that really should be up to each bride and her photographer. This is one reason why my husband and I left the catholic faith because misinterpretation of cannon law and their abuse by provincial minded lay people who think in a box and aren’t paying for anything, and use their position to exert control and misguided interpretation. Any wonder why educated, wealthy Catholics leave the Catholic Church?

If you are wishing to continue your membership on this forum, then please change your tone about our faith. Non-Catholics are to be respectful of the Catholic faith. Since this is your first post, I will give you the link to the forum rules, and highlight the cogent passage for you.

Forum Rules

CONDUCT RULES

Messages posted to this board must be polite and free of personal attacks, threats, and crude or sexually-explicit language. See the Concierge Desk sub-forum for more information.
Inappropriate or offensive user names, profile entries, or pictures are not permitted.
Messages should be short. Do not post lengthy replies (including replies that consist largely of quotes from an earlier message).
Do not view the discussion area as a vehicle for single-mindedly promoting an agenda.
**Non-Catholics are welcome to participate but must be respectful of the faith of the Catholics participating on the board.**
Catholics must be charitable in their discussions about non-Catholic belief and practice.

As for your statement about why people leave the Church…I see why people who don’t understand their own faith would leave the fullness of truth that is the Catholic Church. I’m sorry that you chose to leave Jesus at the altar and walk away.

 

[Rob_in_Oregon]

Dear Louly:

You are welcome to post in these forums.

There is no shortage of fools in any major religion. There are plenty of sinners, too. It sounds to me like that is the reason you left, rather than any doctrinal or scriptural reason. By posting here and reading the replies of thoughtful Catholics (some here are not so thoughtful), you might end up taking another look at why you left.

My (limited) understanding of the Presbyterians is that they are basically Calvinist. Calvin’s teaching leads inexorably to the conclusions that we have no free will, that prayer is ultimately useless, and that we are predestined before birth to Hell or Heaven. If a person is not of the elect, he can do nothing to save himself, and is sent into damnation through no fault of his own.

Calvin’s TULIP:

Total depravity of the human soul
Unconditional election (you are chosen for Hell or Heaven regardless of your own will)
Limited atonement (Christ died only for the elect, not for everyone)
Irresistible grace (If God has chosen you, there is nothing you can do to resist it)
Predestination (You’re destined for Heaven or Hell before you’re even born)

Speaking just for myself, I would rather receive Jesus bodily in the Blessed Sacrament of the Altar while enduring a few idiots, than subscribe to a peculiar theology in a denomination of nice people. When we depart from the Catholic tradition of the apostles, all kinds of funny ideas creep in.

I’ve met some heretics, fools, and annoying people in various parishes, but that hasn’t been a sufficient reason to abandon the faith.

I will keep you in my prayers. I wish many blessings for you and those whom you love…

• Rob in Oregon

 

[Rob_in_Oregon]

Louly: A follow-up:

If the wedding coordinator in a Catholic parish told you that your daughter had to come up the aisle by herself, that is an abuse. I don’t blame you for being angry.

I was a wedding photographer for 35 years, and this is the first time I’ve heard of a Catholic parish doing that. It sounds like you encountered a goofy, modernist parish.

God bless… - Rob in Oregon

 

[1ke]

Louly: A follow-up:

If the wedding coordinator in a Catholic parish told you that your daughter had to come up the aisle by herself, that is an abuse. I don’t blame you for being angry.

I was a wedding photographer for 35 years, and this is the first time I’ve heard of a Catholic parish doing that. It sounds like you encountered a goofy, modernist parish.

God bless… - Rob in Oregon

Actually, it is not an abuse. It is what the Rite of Marriage actually calls for. That, or the bride and groom processing together.

The “abuse” is the procession you typically see.

ALSO, this is a 7 year old thread and I reported it to the Mods.

 

[TeachCatechism]

I asked my mom about this the other day and insists she said obey back in 1968 but from what I’ve read obey was never part of it. However while looking at the readings that are allowed for weddings there are two I believe that do mention a wife being submissive

Not getting married anytime soon but would not say obey nor “who gives this woman”. I also doubt I would want the priest to say “mr and mrs” because I’m not sure I would change my name. However I would have my dad walk me down the aisle only because he would be hurt if I didn’t. He’s even told me this. I wouldn’t do an unity candle either I doubt but would do if it’s allowed to give each mother a flower. Saw this at my brother and sister in law’s wedding (not Catholic)and thought it was sweet.

 

[marymary1975]

Yes my understanding is that the giving the bride away is not strictly part of the liturgy rather more of a cultural thing. Also there are some cultures in which not only they give the bride away but they “pay” for the bride by handing a set of gold coins which has been culturally incorporated into catholic weddings but I know that even in those places catholic priests stress that that is not part of the liturgy