New Mass-less Nuptials trend

[Oneofthewomen]

I would guess that one of the biggest reason you do not see “Nuptial Masses”, especially in places where there is a priest shortage is because of this canon

Can. 905 §1. A priest is not permitted to celebrate the Eucharist more than once a day except in cases where the law permits him to celebrate or concelebrate more than once on the same day.

§2. If there is a shortage of priests, the local ordinary can allow priests to celebrate twice a day for a just cause, or if pastoral necessity requires it, even three times on Sundays and holy days of obligation.

 

[maximus]

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.

I know it is valid and technically there is no wrong in the actions. It’s a matter of heart, why seek out a rush ceremony where there were 2.5 hrs between reception and ceremony, the place of the reception was only 10 mins away.

 

[KendraDZ1902]

I know it is valid and technically there is no wrong in the actions. It’s a matter of heart, why seek out a rush ceremony where there were 2.5 hrs between reception and ceremony, the place of the reception was only 10 mins away.

Basically, you are an overly opinionated wedding guest?

It is possible that the place they were having the reception had other events that day and they couldn’t start their reception until afterwards. Seeing that it was before the vigil mass, that it may have to do with timing at the church.

No matter what the problems were that this couple faced, you should have known before the ceremony that the reception was hours after. Oh, and you didn’t have to go.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Basically, you are an overly opinionated wedding guest?
.

LOL you are describing my wife and I. I blame those stupid TV shows about weddings.

Trash I tell you trash! But darn addictive trash for my wife!

 

[KendraDZ1902]

LOL you are describing my wife and I. I blame those stupid TV shows about weddings.

Trash I tell you trash! But darn addictive trash for my wife!

LOL. When I was planning my wedding I started watching those reality wedding shows. Like, all of them! I can’t stop watching them and I have been married for a year and a half. hahaha. I record them because my husband finds them annoying. LOL.

 

[janeway529]

I guess if the couple wished to have a small wedding, not a grand one with family and friends and a big reception, then not having the Nuptial Mass is an option. All you need is the couple, the deacon/priest/bishop, and 2 witnesses.

 

[robwar]

I know it is valid and technically there is no wrong in the actions. It’s a matter of heart, why seek out a rush ceremony where there were 2.5 hrs between reception and ceremony, the place of the reception was only 10 mins away.

I think you might be making a number of assumptions here about the why this wasn’t a Mass but what concerns me is what you stated in your first post that your wife “heard” this was a going trend. Who or what did she “hear” this from? How do to you that this “opinion” was even based in any facts or truth? In other words, this is rumors and assumptions about others. Maybe unless you know the couple and the families involved, (is one from a large non-Catholic family and having a Mass might bring up problems?) it might be the wiser not to come on the internet to ask the rest of us for our thoughts and opinion on a wedding that did happen in a Catholic Church but we know nothing else about it. All this does is spread the “heard” from your wife. The older we get, the more we should realize that we shouldn’t be making judgements and assumptions of others unless we have all the facts on the table and not lump things together based on what someone “heard”.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

LOL. When I was planning my wedding I started watching those reality wedding shows. Like, all of them! I can’t stop watching them and I have been married for a year and a half. hahaha. I record them because my husband finds them annoying. LOL.

My wife uses them to get back at me for football season.

 

[maximus]

Basically, you are an overly opinionated wedding guest?

And you are not.

It is possible that the place they were having the reception had other events that day and they couldn’t start their reception until afterwards. Seeing that it was before the vigil mass, that it may have to do with timing at the church.

No matter what the problems were that this couple faced, you should have known before the ceremony that the reception was hours after. Oh, and you didn’t have to go.

There was no issue with timing, we wish the couples a long and happy life together; we also wish them heaven too. I left out quite a few things included loud mocking of the faith by members of the wedding party inside the church and would leave it at that, because in the end I am the opinionated bad person.

 

[maximus]

I think you might be making a number of assumptions here about the why this wasn’t a Mass but what concerns me is what you stated in your first post that your wife “heard” this was a going trend. Who or what did she “hear” this from? How do to you that this “opinion” was even based in any facts or truth? In other words, this is rumors and assumptions about others. Maybe unless you know the couple and the families involved, (is one from a large non-Catholic family and having a Mass might bring up problems?) it might be the wiser not to come on the internet to ask the rest of us for our thoughts and opinion on a wedding that did happen in a Catholic Church but we know nothing else about it. All this does is spread the “heard” from your wife. The older we get, the more we should realize that we shouldn’t be making judgements and assumptions of others unless we have all the facts on the table and not lump things together based on what someone “heard”.

Trying to be general (no need for specific information) and this is a forum were we are just a tag name; this is the whole purpose of the forum. You get to learn the leanings of the culture at large. T

 

[m134e5]

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 .

A wedding without Mass simply to allow more time for picture taking? This makes it look like some priorities are seriously out of order. I’ve been to enough Catholic wedding Masses where all the pictures were taken AFTER Mass, and where a reception that went without complaint followed to know it can be done just fine. I suppose a reasonable case could be made for having a wedding outside of Mass to prevent those who should not receive the Eucharist but would disregard the rule and receive anyway- but that’s about it. If I were a priest, I do not think I would officiate at a wedding outside of a Mass. I could not in good conscience hear a couple’s vows while sidestepping that which the Church teaches is the source and summit of our lives.

 

[agw123]

Ok, sometimes it has to do with time…

My wife and I got married 14 years ago and we had a “mass-less” ceremony at a Church for a multitude of reasons.

First our reception place was expecting us as 12noon on a Saturday, this was the only time available.

The Church was unavailble to us until 10:30. We asked for earlier but was told it was reserved for a funeral. (10 months ahead of time). I asked how do you know someone is going to die that far in advance. They said they just blocked the time in case there was one.

35 mins between Church and reception. 10:30 mass would end at 11:30, would be pushing it time wise, hence why we went the ceremony only.

 

[Hoosier_Daddy]

Ok, sometimes it has to do with time…

My wife and I got married 14 years ago and we had a “mass-less” ceremony at a Church for a multitude of reasons.

First our reception place was expecting us as 12noon on a Saturday, this was the only time available.

The Church was unavailble to us until 10:30. We asked for earlier but was told it was reserved for a funeral. (10 months ahead of time). I asked how do you know someone is going to die that far in advance. They said they just blocked the time in case there was one.

35 mins between Church and reception. 10:30 mass would end at 11:30, would be pushing it time wise, hence why we went the ceremony only.

Did you live in New York at the time or some place where there was only one reception place in the whole town?

 

[Gorgias]

I think you might be making a number of assumptions here about the why this wasn’t a Mass but what concerns me is what you stated in your first post that your wife “heard” this was a going trend. Who or what did she “hear” this from? How do to you that this “opinion” was even based in any facts or truth? In other words, this is rumors and assumptions about others. Maybe unless you know the couple and the families involved, (is one from a large non-Catholic family and having a Mass might bring up problems?)

Maximus,

I’m with Rob. Both the bride and the groom are Catholic? Both are practicing Catholics? (Based on your statement about the negative statements about the Church that you heard, I’m left wondering…)

And, you assert that they didn’t have a Mass in order to get out of Church more quickly. Is this something that they told you, or something that you or someone else is guessing is the reason?

Blessings,

G.

 

[Country_Gal]

I think people should just enjoy the wedding, the wedding party, and rejoice for the couple. It’s the bride’s day and she should get to plan her wedding the way she wants it. It sounds like the Church recognizes this and accommodates with more than one rite. Hooray.

 

[KendraDZ1902]

And you are not.

There was no issue with timing, we wish the couples a long and happy life together; we also wish them heaven too. I left out quite a few things included loud mocking of the faith by members of the wedding party inside the church and would leave it at that, because in the end I am the opinionated bad person.

No. I don’t care how couples do their wedding. It is their day.

Unless you are the wedding planner or was heavily involved with help planning the wedding, you honestly don’t know if there was an issue with timing. Since you are shocked that they didn’t do your way, I’m sure you weren’t involved with planning.

You can’t control the actions of people. You shouldn’t be mad or upset with the bride and groom because there was a few people who were rude. At my wedding, the father of the groom left before the reception and his new wife keyed my sister-in-law’s car. I know she didn’t blame me for their actions, I would hope other guests didn’t blame me either.

 

[dixieagle]

These days, when there are plenty of supposedly Catholic couples insisting on weddings on a beach or in a garden, I think that we should refrain from criticizing a couple who is actually being married in a perfectly permissible rite.

There are plenty of things about which we should get our knickers in a twist; validly and licitly married couples who make a different choice from ours isn’t one of them.

 

[agw123]

Did you live in New York at the time or some place where there was only one reception place in the whole town?

We wanted an afternoon wedding to save costs. Every place in NY starts their afternoon weddings at noon so they can have you out by 5 to be ready for the evening weddings.

 

[robwar]

Trying to be general (no need for specific information) and this is a forum were we are just a tag name; this is the whole purpose of the forum. You get to learn the leanings of the culture at large. T

Yes, we are all “tag” names and yes I understand that your general question is trying to ask about culture trends. I think that what is concerning is that what you are asking was based on comments about why this wedding wasn’t a Mass was that your wife “heard” that they didn’t want a Mass so there was more time for pictures etc is bordering on gossip and assumptions. I think if your basic question was “Is there a trend among Catholics getting married not to have a nuptial Mass?” with no other details or assumptions or scenarios is different than what you did here.

 

[freiabereinsam]

As an earlier poster said, it is only done because people (1) don’t like going to Mass and (2) have this can’t-wait-until-it’s-party-time feeling. However, the church allows this and it’s better than what many other people do, which is have the wedding outside of the church completely.

I think people should just enjoy the wedding, the wedding party, and rejoice for the couple. It’s the bride’s day and she should get to plan her wedding the way she wants it. It sounds like the Church recognizes this and accommodates with more than one rite. Hooray.

… So everything revolves only around the bride? Should the groom have no say in planning a wedding?