New Mass-less Nuptials trend

[maximus]

Yesterday my wife and I attended a wedding of a daughter of one of her cousins. Based on the schedule between the estimated ending of the wedding mass and reception there was 2 hours to spare so we figured we go to confession. Well, the service was not a mass but a shorten ceremony,so I figured it was officiated by a deacon since in the area we were visiting there is a priest shortage. My wife was surprised that it was not a mass, Priest at confession was the officiator of the mass. Afterwards my wife learned that this is a new trend. Nowadays people find that mass is too long and they want the saved time for picture taking so the have a mass-less nuptials.

Am I too old school to think that two Catholics getting married should opt for the full mass when there is more than plenty of time to fit it in? Why marry people in the church when this could have been done at any outdoor/indoor wedding venue?

God bless .

 

[Phemie]

Yesterday my wife and I attended a wedding of a daughter of one of her cousins. Based on the schedule between the estimated ending of the wedding mass and reception there was 2 hours to spare so we figured we go to confession. Well, the service was not a mass but a shorten ceremony,so I figured it was officiated by a deacon since in the area we were visiting there is a priest shortage. My wife was surprised that it was not a mass, Priest at confession was the officiator of the mass. Afterwards my wife learned that this is a new trend. Nowadays people find that mass is too long and they want the saved time for picture taking so the have a mass-less nuptials.

Am I too old school to think that two Catholics getting married should opt for the full mass when there is more than plenty of time to fit it in? Why marry people in the church when this could have been done at any outdoor/indoor wedding venue?

God bless .

If everyone loved the Mass as they should that wouldn’t be a common situation. I’d rather see them opt for a Liturgy of the Word than see them at Mass with a ‘can’t wait until it’s over to party’ attitude and see people who haven’t been to Mass or Confession in years go up to Communion because that’s what you do at Mass.

 

[robert_chacon]

That is ridiculous officiating priests even allow there to be no mass, especially if its simply due to save time! They shouldnt even be getting married in the Church if they do not appreciate the Mass as part of the wedding liturgy. How sad and pathetic. I can understand situations where one spouse is non Catholic and she her family and friends are non Catholic. But even that is a bad trend. I made that mistake. I did have a dispensation to marry a non Catholic, but after a failed marriage , I would only remarry another Catholic if I were to receive an annulment. It is hard enough to make marriage work, but when you are not building a life on the shared belief in the truth of the Church you only bring additional challenges. And in doing so it would be such a blessing to celebrate that sacrament with the Mass liturgy.

 

[Country_Gal]

I can see doing it if many of the guests are non-Catholic. Yes Catholic wedding Masses are rather long. And its embarrassing if the priest has to announce no communion for non-catholics.

 

[jmcrae]

Why marry people in the church when this could have been done at any outdoor/indoor wedding venue?

God bless.

The marriage would not be valid if it did not take place in Church, but there is no law that says it has to be a Mass.

If it’s on a weekend, people assume that they’ve “been to Mass” if they went to a wedding Mass, so then they skip their Sunday obligation (or else they complain bitterly about having to go to Mass twice in a row), and also there is the issue mentioned above of non-Catholic wedding guests receiving Communion.

Keeping it as a wedding only simplifies everything. The Catholic guests clearly know they haven’t been to Sunday Mass yet that weekend, and the non-Catholic guests don’t accidentally commit sacrilege. For the priest it’s a win-win on those counts, and for the couple it’s just that much easier.

 

[RoseMary131]

attended a wedding

Well, the service was not a mass

Am I too old school to think that two Catholics getting married should opt for the full mass when there is more than plenty of time to fit it in? Why marry people in the church when this could have been done at any outdoor/indoor wedding venue?

God bless .

The Church does not only offer the Sacrament of Matrimony in Mass.

Couples can choose to receive the Sacrament of Matrimony outside of Mass.

Couples may choose to receive the Sacrament outside of Mass - and may have different reasons for doing so. It is a valid option given by the Church.

The Church asks that the Sacrament be received in the church - as opposed to other places. Because this is a Sacrament, it takes place in God’s presence, in God’s House, at God’s altar, with a witness of the Church - either a priest or deacon.

(Marriage between a Catholic and a non-baptized person - is not a Sacrament - but the Church requires the exchange of vows to take place within the Church - unless special permission has been granted.)

 

[Tenebrae]

This is nothing new. My parents’ wedding in 1941 was a marriage ceremony, not a Nuptial Mass. I remember my mother telling me that this was quite common in those days.

 

[janeway529]

The marriage would not be valid if it did not take place in Church,

Actually, that’s not technically true. There is a canonical dispensation from the bishop for weddings taking place outside of a church building, but in practice, I’ve never heard of an instance where a bishop has given this dispensation.

 

[1ke]

Yesterday my wife and I attended a wedding of a daughter of one of her cousins. Based on the schedule between the estimated ending of the wedding mass and reception there was 2 hours to spare so we figured we go to confession. Well, the service was not a mass but a shorten ceremony,so I figured it was officiated by a deacon since in the area we were visiting there is a priest shortage. My wife was surprised that it was not a mass, Priest at confession was the officiator of the mass. Afterwards my wife learned that this is a new trend. Nowadays people find that mass is too long and they want the saved time for picture taking so the have a mass-less nuptials.

The preferred norm when two Catholics marry in the Church is the Marriage Rite within Mass. When a Catholic marries a non-Catholic, the preferred norm is the Marriage Rite outside of Mass.

Am I too old school to think that two Catholics getting married should opt for the full mass when there is more than plenty of time to fit it in?

No, it is the norm.

Why marry people in the church when this could have been done at any outdoor/indoor wedding venue?

Not so. Catholics have an obligation to marry in the Church regardless of whether they opt to have a Nuptial Mass. The Rite of Marriage outside Mass is valid. It is 100% valid. It may not have been to your liking, but there is nothing actually wrong with it.

 

[1ke]

That is ridiculous officiating priests even allow there to be no mass, especially if its simply due to save time!

Valid liturgy options in the Church are not “ridiculous”.

There are assumptions being made as to the reason, in actuality none of us knows the reason in this instance including the OP.

They shouldnt even be getting married in the Church if they do not appreciate the Mass as part of the wedding liturgy. How sad and pathetic.

So, it is your position that a valid, approved Rite in the Catholic Church is sad and pathetic?

 

[malphono]

This is nothing new. My parents’ wedding in 1941 was a marriage ceremony, not a Nuptial Mass. I remember my mother telling me that this was quite common in those days.

Yes, that’s true. A Nuptial Mass was always somewhat of a rarity, and IIRC, when there was a Nuptial Mass, it was on Saturday in the late morning.

Nowadays, of course, weddings can be any day of the week, (one has to, of course, pay attention to the requirements of the catering hall), and what with the “cell-phone generation” and all (no one has time for anything other than their electronic devices; can’t be without those for more than 5 minutes … but I digress), usually in the late afternoon or early evening. I guess that means the wedding itself has to be as short a possible so that people can get to the all-important reception.

 

[coachdennis]

Yes, that’s true. A Nuptial Mass was always somewhat of a rarity, and IIRC, when there was a Nuptial Mass, it was on Saturday in the late morning.

Nowadays, of course, weddings can be any day of the week, (one has to, of course, pay attention to the requirements of the catering hall), and what with the “cell-phone generation” and all (no one has time for anything other than their electronic devices; can’t be without those for more than 5 minutes … but I digress), usually in the late afternoon or early evening. I guess that means the wedding itself has to be as short a possible so that people can get to the all-important reception.

So you admit it was a rarity in the past and in the same breath lambast an entire generation for choosing the same valid option and assume there are automatically less concerned about their faith as if people BEFORE this generation only did something out of the purest of motives!

Nice, really nice!!!

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

I can see doing it if many of the guests are non-Catholic. Yes Catholic wedding Masses are rather long. And its embarrassing if the priest has to announce no communion for non-catholics.

Our wedding Mass was 45 minutes. We were the only Catholics in our families and there was NO problem with communion. We actually put a tasteful instruction in our programs. In fact I find that Non Catholics are much more understanding than irregular Catholics. If I was invited to the wedding of another faith, as a guest I would not be embarrassed that I was not to take part in the religious ceremony! Why would I be? I am not of that faith.

To the OP

It is quite common in my old diocese to have a deacon officiate if one of the two betrothed were not Catholic. Also everyone was given the choice. We opted for the Mass because we wanted to receive the Eucharist in our wedding. We felt it was important to have Our Lord there on our tongues. After the wedding we had a reception at an upscale restaurant. Since it was about noonish there was no dancing or partying. The restaurant closed down for us and we had about 100 people there.
We liked it because the Mass and the wedding were the main focus of our wedding. Because those were the two most important things happening in our lives that day.
I have not been in my new diocese long enough to know about what the norm is here yet.

 

[malphono]

So you admit it was a rarity in the past and in the same breath lambast an entire generation for choosing the same valid option and assume there are automatically less concerned about their faith as if people BEFORE this generation only did something out of the purest of motives!

Nice, really nice!!!

And now to the ignore list. This just isn’t worth the trouble.

 

[Stella_Matutina]

I can see doing it if many of the guests are non-Catholic. Yes Catholic wedding Masses are rather long. And its embarrassing if the priest has to announce no communion for non-catholics.

Why is it embarrassing?

My husband and I are the only Catholics in our entire family aside from my mother-in-law. Our non-catholic relatives were very respectful and understanding about the Church’s rules about Holy Communion. We were also not embarrassed about the Church’s teachings. The Eucharist is God. If you don’t believe that, don’t receive. Pretty simple.

 

[Stella_Matutina]

Our wedding Mass was 45 minutes. We were the only Catholics in our families and there was NO problem with communion. We actually put a tasteful instruction in our programs. In fact I find that Non Catholics are much more understanding than irregular Catholics. If I was invited to the wedding of another faith, as a guest I would not be embarrassed that I was not to take part in the religious ceremony! Why would I be? I am not of that faith.

Beat me to the point I just made! Words right out of my mouth.

 

[jmcrae]

Actually, that’s not technically true. There is a canonical dispensation from the bishop for weddings taking place outside of a church building, but in practice, I’ve never heard of an instance where a bishop has given this dispensation.

You’re right. I should have prefaced my comment with "In general, … "

 

[MorEphrem]

I don’t really see a mass-less nuptial as problematic. To my understanding, this has been tradition in the East for a very long time. Why? Because the intent of marriage is to dispense the graces of Matrimony.

 

[maximus]

The marriage would not be valid if it did not take place in Church, but there is no law that says it has to be a Mass. .

I understand that, It just the part about getting the ceremony over as quickly as possible.

If it’s on a weekend, people assume that they’ve “been to Mass” if they went to a wedding Mass, so then they skip their Sunday obligation (or else they complain bitterly about having to go to Mass twice in a row), and also there is the issue mentioned above of non-Catholic wedding guests receiving Communion. .

Good point

Keeping it as a wedding only simplifies everything. The Catholic guests clearly know they haven’t been to Sunday Mass yet that weekend, and the non-Catholic guests don’t accidentally commit sacrilege. For the priest it’s a win-win on those counts, and for the couple it’s just that much easier.

Valid points, but must we be so sloppy when it comes to God. .

 

[maximus]

The Church does not only offer the Sacrament of Matrimony in Mass.

Couples can choose to receive the Sacrament of Matrimony outside of Mass.

Couples may choose to receive the Sacrament outside of Mass - and may have different reasons for doing so. It is a valid option given by the Church.

The Church asks that the Sacrament be received in the church - as opposed to other places. Because this is a Sacrament, it takes place in God’s presence, in God’s House, at God’s altar, with a witness of the Church - either a priest or deacon.

(Marriage between a Catholic and a non-baptized person - is not a Sacrament - but the Church requires the exchange of vows to take place within the Church - unless special permission has been granted.)

I know that, the point was about so much meticulous planning in some aspects and just getting the ceremony over with as soon as possible for photos and partying. Yeah there was no transgression and I understand that.