marriage question

[WhiteLeather]

We’re taught that God is everywhere. Apparently God is everywhere, but he is especially where there is stained glass and pews.

Having the wedding in the Church is partially a control issue. If the sacraments are so important, why don’t they occur when the community is gathered (i.e. at Sunday Mass)? How can we welcome a new baby thru baptism or a new family thru matrimony when they insist on having a private sacrament?

If sacraments are allowed to be celebrated “privately” on Saturday or other days, what difference can it possibly make whether it’s in the church or somewhere else on God’s green earth?

By the way, I agree with the post about the expense of a “destination” wedding. But if it’s not asking a lot of people who can afford it, why not, instead of gifts, have everyone make donations to help feed the poor in Jamaica? There are certainly a lot that would benefit from such a gesture.

 

[joanofarc2008]

We’re taught that God is everywhere. Apparently God is everywhere, but he is especially where there is stained glass and pews.

Having the wedding in the Church is partially a control issue. If the sacraments are so important, why don’t they occur when the community is gathered (i.e. at Sunday Mass)? How can we welcome a new baby thru baptism or a new family thru matrimony when they insist on having a private sacrament?

If sacraments are allowed to be celebrated “privately” on Saturday or other days, what difference can it possibly make whether it’s in the church or somewhere else on God’s green earth?

By the way, I agree with the post about the expense of a “destination” wedding. But if it’s not asking a lot of people who can afford it, why not, instead of gifts, have everyone make donations to help feed the poor in Jamaica? There are certainly a lot that would benefit from such a gesture.

It has to do with the Real Presence of Christ in the Tabernacle. I don’t think we will be taking that out to the beach in Jamaica.

 

[joshrp]

hi everyone.

my girlfriend and i just got engaged and are planning a destination wedding. we both want to get married on a beach in jamaica, but we also want the church to recognize the marriage. we are both catholic. i have been baptized and so has she. i have had my first communion, but she has not.

i have 2 questions:

• regarding the church to recognize our marriage, can we simply get married on the beach in jamaica and then have the marriage blessed (convalidated) when we return?
• will the fact that she has not had her first communion cause us any issues?

any insight would be very helpful. thank you very much.

scott

I’d say just get married in a Church. Beeches are silly places to have weddings. Are you going swimming in your tuxedo or something?

Jeanne D’Arc is one of my favorite saints in history, if not my actual favorite saint. I’m torn between her and St. Anne. Usually I pray to both of them at the same time as if they are best friends to each other.

I will pray for you and your girlfriend. Just make sure you aren’t committing any sins, and if you do that you go to confession. Does your girlfriend have any objection to going through the process of First Communion and Confirmation? Check out your church’s RCIA (Rite of Christian Initiation for Adults).

God bless you, and I pray that your marriage goes well, and in accordance with Catholic Church teachings.
Joshua

 

[agapewolf]

We’re taught that God is everywhere. Apparently God is everywhere, but he is especially where there is stained glass and pews.

Having the wedding in the Church is partially a control issue. If the sacraments are so important, why don’t they occur when the community is gathered (i.e. at Sunday Mass)? How can we welcome a new baby thru baptism or a new family thru matrimony when they insist on having a private sacrament?

If sacraments are allowed to be celebrated “privately” on Saturday or other days, what difference can it possibly make whether it’s in the church or somewhere else on God’s green earth?

.

It is NOT a control issue. The walls of the church are symbolic of the church community. We do do baptisms at Sunday mass. Having a wedding at a Sunday mass causes logistical concerns of amount of people fitting in the church. It isn’t “private” anyway. Anyone can come to a wedding at catholic church.

 

[PatriceA]

We’re taught that God is everywhere. Apparently God is everywhere, but he is especially where there is stained glass and pews.

Having the wedding in the Church is partially a control issue. If the sacraments are so important, why don’t they occur when the community is gathered (i.e. at Sunday Mass)? How can we welcome a new baby thru baptism or a new family thru matrimony when they insist on having a private sacrament?

If sacraments are allowed to be celebrated “privately” on Saturday or other days, what difference can it possibly make whether it’s in the church or somewhere else on God’s green earth?

By the way, I agree with the post about the expense of a “destination” wedding. But if it’s not asking a lot of people who can afford it, why not, instead of gifts, have everyone make donations to help feed the poor in Jamaica? There are certainly a lot that would benefit from such a gesture.

There is no such thing as a “private” wedding mass in the Catholic Church. I don’t know about your parish, but mine publishes any nuptial mass that takes place in the bulletin outside of the scheduled masses during the week. Anyone can attend, no one can be barred.

In many parishes, baptisms are scheduled during a regularly scheduled mass as well.

 

[WhiteLeather]

It has to do with the Real Presence of Christ in the Tabernacle. I don’t think we will be taking that out to the beach in Jamaica.

The tabernacle is about reserved hosts first and foremost, for viaticum. It is absolutely unnecessary for Mass, for sacraments, for anything except Communion Services or viaticum. And a few weeks ago, at a diocesan family event in Toledo, there was a monstrance/host and tabernacle in the middle of an athletic field for an all day family event. So the tabernacle can travel, although most of them are far too heavy for frequent movement.

Christ’s presence is in us first, not the tabernacle. If every church in the world were without tabernacles, we would still have the sacraments. If churches planned better, we’d never have to go to the tabernacle for hosts for Communion (and follow GIRM instructions in doing so).

Tabernacles are for viaticum, and not really even for adoration (shouldn’t the Eucharist be exposed for adoration, after all?).

 

[thomasmasty]

I was married on the beach and had a lovely wedding and only later realized it did not meet the requirements for the sacrament. Had I known to get permission from the Bishop I would have gone that route.

My solution was to have a simple wedding at the church several years later (as soon as I realized my mistake).

Now I have two wedding anniversaries to celebrate… the beach and the church.

Remember, marriage is not done by a priest but is one of the sacraments actually done by those being married (the priest serves as the witness). So I am sure God knows what is in your hearts.

If I were you, I would go ahead with the beach wedding and also have a small family gathering at the chapel of your local church just to cover all your bases.

Best wishes,
Tom

 

[Warrior1979]

If I were you, I would go ahead with the beach wedding and also have a small family gathering at the chapel of your local church just to cover all your bases.

Having gone through a convalidation, I can tell you that it is not as easy as you make it sound…and my convalidation was as easy as it gets.

At the bare minimum, the civilly married couple will have to fill out all the usual paperwork, be evaluated by the Church, go through pre-Cana, and abstain from marital relations until they receive their convalidation.

 

[SonCatcher]

We’re taught that God is everywhere. Apparently God is everywhere, but he is especially where there is stained glass and pews.

Having the wedding in the Church is partially a control issue. If the sacraments are so important, why don’t they occur when the community is gathered (i.e. at Sunday Mass)? How can we welcome a new baby thru baptism or a new family thru matrimony when they insist on having a private sacrament?

If sacraments are allowed to be celebrated “privately” on Saturday or other days, what difference can it possibly make whether it’s in the church or somewhere else on God’s green earth?

By the way, I agree with the post about the expense of a “destination” wedding. But if it’s not asking a lot of people who can afford it, why not, instead of gifts, have everyone make donations to help feed the poor in Jamaica? There are certainly a lot that would benefit from such a gesture.

Actually, the requirement to celebrate weddings in the Church is in part so that marriages are public to the church community. Remember that part of preparation for a church wedding is the publication of banns. This is specifically to announce the pending marriage to the community. In sequestering their marriage to a remote or undisclosed location, the couple makes it private (even if it’s on a beach).

The tabernacle is about reserved hosts first and foremost, for viaticum. It is absolutely unnecessary for Mass, for sacraments, for anything except Communion Services or viaticum. And a few weeks ago, at a diocesan family event in Toledo, there was a monstrance/host and tabernacle in the middle of an athletic field for an all day family event. So the tabernacle can travel, although most of them are far too heavy for frequent movement.

Christ’s presence is in us first, not the tabernacle. If every church in the world were without tabernacles, we would still have the sacraments. If churches planned better, we’d never have to go to the tabernacle for hosts for Communion (and follow GIRM instructions in doing so).

Tabernacles are for viaticum, and not really even for adoration (shouldn’t the Eucharist be exposed for adoration, after all?).

The underlined statement is heretical, as-is. I’m sure you don’t mean to deny the Real Presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist. Please choose your words more carefully.

 

[StarFireKK]

It’s not something that will prevent you from being married but Canon Law says
Grave inconvenience is in the eyes of the beholder. If the wedding is planned for June and the Bishop is not coming to town until next December, then the couple may marry but the non-confirmed spouse should be taking steps to be confirmed at the first opportunity. No Catholic should remain unconfirmed if he/she can avoid it.

The impression on the thread prior to my comment was the being Confirmed was a hard, fast rule. Do not pass Go and do not collect $200. I was merely letting the OP know that you don’t have to be confirmed in all circumstances. Like you said “it won’t prevent you from being married.”

It is up to their priest if he feels that confirmation can wait until after the wedding or not.

 

[joanofarc2008]

The tabernacle is about reserved hosts first and foremost, for viaticum. It is absolutely unnecessary for Mass, for sacraments, for anything except Communion Services or viaticum. And a few weeks ago, at a diocesan family event in Toledo, there was a monstrance/host and tabernacle in the middle of an athletic field for an all day family event. So the tabernacle can travel, although most of them are far too heavy for frequent movement.

Christ’s presence is in us first, not the tabernacle. If every church in the world were without tabernacles, we would still have the sacraments. If churches planned better, we’d never have to go to the tabernacle for hosts for Communion (and follow GIRM instructions in doing so).

Tabernacles are for viaticum, and not really even for adoration (shouldn’t the Eucharist be exposed for adoration, after all?).

Actually you are very wrong. It has nothing to do with planning. You will notice the red light that is always lit in Catholic Churches due to the fact that the Real Presence of Christ is there or maybe you have taken the time to do so. As far as Christ being present in each of us - the Lord is present in each of us in the Form of the Holy Spirit - we Receive Christ when we receive the Eucharist - I will not call you heretical but I will say that you are confused.

 

[WhiteLeather]

I’m not confused, heretical, nor did I choose my words less than carefully. But thanks for your concern. I’m well aware of the red light and why it’s there. Consider this: at a previous parish where I worked as a music/liturgy director, a leader of extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist once remarked that Mass wasn’t Mass unless she saw the hosts come from the tabernacle for Communion. In 20 years of full time work in parishes, I’ve seen much confusion and misconception about the role of the tabernacle. When I remarked that Christ is present in “us first, not the tabernacle”, I wasn’t denying Christ in the tabernacle. Read the sentence, put the phrases together, read the whole sentence. Christ present in the tabernacle is not necessary for anything other than viaticum and adoration.

If every church in the world had no tabernacle, we’d still have the Eucharist through the Mass, we’d still have the presence of Christ in us, and we’d still be children of God. But sometimes I wonder if we put too much emphasis on the tabernacle, to the detriment of other important sacramentals. Adoration shouldn’t occur during Mass, but must be encouraged outside of Mass. Mass is our communal prayer, even if held outdoors in a stadium with the Pope or even on a beach in the tropics.

And if the wedding must be held inside the church building so that the community “celebrates” the sacrament, why is it so often done when most of the community isn’t there (Saturday morning or afternoon)? Most parishes I’ve worked in can handle the extra people for most weddings.

As to the planning remark, I refer to churches planning better for host consumption so that everyone receives hosts that are consecrated at the Mass they’re attending, not taking viaticum from the tabernacle.

Now a final question for further discussion, since I’m being taken to task. Does your church bring the bride and groom in together to a gathering song or does daddy give precious away like a piece of property? The former is what’s described in the Rite of Marriage - since we’re being picky.

Enjoy your weekend!

 

[agapewolf]

I’m not confused, heretical, nor did I choose my words less than carefully. But thanks for your concern. I’m well aware of the red light and why it’s there. Consider this: at a previous parish where I worked as a music/liturgy director, a leader of extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist once remarked that Mass wasn’t Mass unless she saw the hosts come from the tabernacle for Communion. In 20 years of full time work in parishes, I’ve seen much confusion and misconception about the role of the tabernacle. When I remarked that Christ is present in “us first, not the tabernacle”, I wasn’t denying Christ in the tabernacle. Read the sentence, put the phrases together, read the whole sentence. Christ present in the tabernacle is not necessary for anything other than viaticum and adoration.

If every church in the world had no tabernacle, we’d still have the Eucharist through the Mass, we’d still have the presence of Christ in us, and we’d still be children of God. But sometimes I wonder if we put too much emphasis on the tabernacle, to the detriment of other important sacramentals. Adoration shouldn’t occur during Mass, but must be encouraged outside of Mass. Mass is our communal prayer, even if held outdoors in a stadium with the Pope or even on a beach in the tropics.

And if the wedding must be held inside the church building so that the community “celebrates” the sacrament, why is it so often done when most of the community isn’t there (Saturday morning or afternoon)? Most parishes I’ve worked in can handle the extra people for most weddings.

As to the planning remark, I refer to churches planning better for host consumption so that everyone receives hosts that are consecrated at the Mass they’re attending, not taking viaticum from the tabernacle.

Now a final question for further discussion, since I’m being taken to task. Does your church bring the bride and groom in together to a gathering song or does daddy give precious away like a piece of property? The former is what’s described in the Rite of Marriage - since we’re being picky.

Enjoy your weekend!

Your snarkiness is not necessary.

The church walls are the symbol of the community, and while the community is welcome, all of them need not attend because the church building supplies this.

And you are missing something in your description of the Rite of marriage. It suggests the couple walks together, but immediately after allows for other cultural customs. I have indeed played music for weddings that have used the first option.

 

[SonCatcher]

When I remarked that Christ is present in “us first, not the tabernacle”, I wasn’t denying Christ in the tabernacle. Read the sentence, put the phrases together, read the whole sentence.

WARNING: I can be a grammar nerd

understanding the whole sentence also requires breaking down the phrases. The clause “not the tabernacle” when combined with its connected elements in the same sentence yields “Christ’s presence is not in the tabernacle.” You could have written instead “Christ’s presence is primarily in us, then the tabernacle” to avoid the heretical appearance, though even this phrasing seems dogmatically problematic to me.

If every church in the world had no tabernacle, we’d still have the Eucharist through the Mass, we’d still have the presence of Christ in us, and we’d still be children of God. But sometimes I wonder if we put too much emphasis on the tabernacle, to the detriment of other important sacramentals. Adoration shouldn’t occur during Mass, but must be encouraged outside of Mass. Mass is our communal prayer, even if held outdoors in a stadium with the Pope or even on a beach in the tropics.

Certainly. Many times when Mass is said on a retreat or pilgrimage there is no tabernacle or even church building.

But the emphasis on the tabernacle is not for what it is but Who is inside. Without Him, we wouldn’t even have the Mass in the first place.

And if the wedding must be held inside the church building so that the community “celebrates” the sacrament, why is it so often done when most of the community isn’t there (Saturday morning or afternoon)? Most parishes I’ve worked in can handle the extra people for most weddings.

Usually nuptial Masses are scheduled in coordination with a reception and other wedding-related activities. Would you prefer to force the wedding into the Sunday liturgy? How about funerals? (many churches already conduct baptisms then so I’m not including that one)

Now a final question for further discussion, since I’m being taken to task. Does your church bring the bride and groom in together to a gathering song or does daddy give precious away like a piece of property? The former is what’s described in the Rite of Marriage - since we’re being picky.

My bride and I entered together.

Enjoy your weekend!

Thank you. And you enjoy yours.

 

[Phemie]

I’m not confused, heretical, nor did I choose my words less than carefully. But thanks for your concern. I’m well aware of the red light and why it’s there. Consider this: at a previous parish where I worked as a music/liturgy director, a leader of extraordinary ministers of the Eucharist once remarked that Mass wasn’t Mass unless she saw the hosts come from the tabernacle for Communion. In 20 years of full time work in parishes, I’ve seen much confusion and misconception about the role of the tabernacle. When I remarked that Christ is present in “us first, not the tabernacle”, I wasn’t denying Christ in the tabernacle. Read the sentence, put the phrases together, read the whole sentence. Christ present in the tabernacle is not necessary for anything other than viaticum and adoration.

Obviously that EMHC was very confused about what was happening at the altar.

Regardless of why we have reservation in the tabernacle (it’s true that a previous poster made it seem as though the tabernacle was necessary to the celebration of a marriage), Christ is present there in a very different way from the way he is present in us. In the tabernacle he is there body, blood, soul and divinity. That presence in us lasts only for a few minutes after we have received Communion. So to say that he is present in us first is not correct.

In fact, the CSL doesn’t say he is ‘in us’, it says that Jesus is present

1. 
   *]in the person of the priest,
   *]especially under the Eucharistic elements
   *]in his word,
   *]in the sacraments
   *]and, lastly, when the Church prays and sings, for he promised 'Where two or more are gathered together in my name, there I am in their midst." (That’s ‘among’ us, not ‘in’ us.)

 

[joanofarc2008]

Obviously that EMHC was very confused about what was happening at the altar.

Regardless of why we have reservation in the tabernacle (it’s true that a previous poster made it seem as though the tabernacle was necessary to the celebration of a marriage), Christ is present there in a very different way from the way he is present in us. In the tabernacle he is there body, blood, soul and divinity. That presence in us lasts only for a few minutes after we have received Communion. So to say that he is present in us first is not correct.

In fact, the CSL doesn’t say he is ‘in us’, it says that Jesus is present

1. 
   *]in the person of the priest,
   *]especially under the Eucharistic elements
   *]in his word,
   *]in the sacraments
   *]and, lastly, when the Church prays and sings, for he promised 'Where two or more are gathered together in my name, there I am in their midst." (That’s ‘among’ us, not ‘in’ us.)

1. 
   Very well put Phemie. To go one step further. I would submit to you that it simply is not a Catholic place of Mass without the Tabernacle whether the Tabernacle is brought out to build a a Chapel at an island retreat or whether it is in the Church. This would be the same with the Ethiopian Orthodox’s view of having the Scroll present in their Church.
   
   BTW - White Leather you say we are focusing on this at the detriment of other Sacramentals. Marriage and the Eucharist are not Sacramentals. They are Sacraments.

 

[Phemie]

Very well put Phemie. To go one step further. I would submit to you that **it simply is not a Catholic place of Mass without the Tabernacle **whether the Tabernacle is brought out to build a a Chapel at an island retreat or whether it is in the Church. This would be the same with the Ethiopian Orthodox’s view of having the Scroll present in their Church.

I disagree completely, the tabernacle is absolutely NOT necessary in that way. The important thing is that Christ is made present during the consecration and that is all we need for Mass. There are Churches where the Blessed Sacrament is never reserved and that does not make them any less Catholic, what matters is what happens on the altar.

 

[sedonaman]

hi everyone.

my girlfriend and i just got engaged and are planning a destination wedding. we both want to get married on a beach in jamaica,
…

The Catholic Church considers marriage a serious undertaking and that the ceremony should reflect that seriousness. “Gimmick” weddings, such as being married while sky-diving or water skiing, do not. Some priests even insist on no secular music during the ceremony. One priest actually had a couple show up to get married in two weeks! The bride-to-be insisted on a wedding date of July 11. He asked her why that day was so important, and she said because every time her husband drove by a 7-11, he would remember their wedding date! Why some people have to have a gimmick associated with what should be approached with seriousness is beyond me.

In the not-too-distant past, the Church would marry anyone as long as one was Catholic, but it wouldn’t surprise me one bit if there were priests who would marry two non-Catholics. Then the Church started to notice that too many couples would not show up again until they wanted their baby baptized. The next time they would appear [if the kid was lucky] was for first communion. The Church has since adopted a policy of committed Catholics, and to accomplish that, it has required a pre-Cana Conference, baptismal certificates, some background information, and evidence of parish participation. I was 35, and the priest asked to speak with my parents to be sure I hadn’t been married before.

There was a non-Catholic couple who showed up at my parish some time ago and wanted to be married in the church [small “c”] because they liked its Gothic architecture. They offered the pastor a big chunk of change if he would let them use the building, and they wanted the host removed during the ceremony. So, what is the significance of Jamaica in your lives that you want to get married there? Does it occupy a place in your life more important than the Church? I have been to Jamaica, but only because my employer sent me there on business, and believe me I wouldn’t go back again under any circumstances.

 

[Emerite]

Puzzleanie’s statement about “if their parents did not bring them to the sacraments at the appropriate age,” should, all the more, prompt us to rear our children “in the faith.” If given the chance to do it all again, in addition to providing our kids with education in Catholic schools in the 1970’s and 1980’s and to live by the golden rule, I’d talk to my children more about Jesus, telling them bible stories, be more alert to their Christian development, explain to them the significance of the Mass and Holy Eucharist and say grace before meals (even when dining out) and evening prayers together as a family. In today’s world, children and adults will continue to need the love and stability of a Christian living faith.

And now, I see how the outside world has shaped our kids, only wishing we could go back. Don’t have any regrets. My spouse and I are now studying bible history, maps, etc., in anticipation of a trip to the Holy Land – this will be so awesome! We only hope this will be a good influence, and ask for prayers for one of our wonderful-otherwise kids who chose to marry outside the church at a resort, and appears to be influenced by “the alien church of what’s happening now.”