Doing such services doesn’t imply that one believes anythkng.
Not meaning to jump into a rumpus, but it seems to me that participating in rituals is something no one should be forced into (especially when a ritual is forbidden in one’s religion).
A wedding is a ritual laden with meaning, not just a random event like a summer picnic. And the photographer plays an important role in commemorating and framing as beautiful the ritual in question; the photographer’s job inherently ‘celebrates’ the ritual he memorialises. I can imagine how a wedding photographer might feel unable, in their conscience, to ‘celebrate’ this ritual by attending, witnessing, and commemorating it in such a way that the pictures spread a false image of beauty about a practice they consider spiritually destructive.
I mean the following question in the spirit of sincere casual conversation, not as a ‘gotcha’:
Have you considered how your opinion might change if the photographer was legally forced to serve at a suicide ritual? That’s not a made-up thing (although those who undergo it don’t call it that). I’m speaking of euthanasia as practiced at Dignitas clinic in Sweden, or as sometimes practiced in my country (Canada). I don’t believe it’s always ritualized — maybe it’s only the minority that get ritualized. But retaliation does happen. By ritual here I mean varied and personalized things like gathering friends and family together for a party, final meal, photos, then during the actual euthanasia injection sequence, pseudo-spiritual language like “I’ll see you on the other side, Martha,” and after death, performing ritualized actions for family like opening the door and saying “I’m just letting Martha’s soul leave.” Anyway, you get the picture.
My point is, in my country and some others, citizens have a legal ‘right’ to euthanasia, and sometimes ritualize it. And I don’t think inviting outside photographers is currently a thing (when I’ve heard of photos I’ve usually assumed it’s with a family camera)… but what if it becomes one? Should event photographers be legally compelled to ‘serve’ by witnessing and commemorating a suicide ritual?
Even if it’s a far-fetched example, what’s the meaningful difference between that and witnessing and commemorating a commitment-to-sexual-sin ritual? From the Catholic point of view, I mean. Obviously from a secular point of view the state calls multiple things ‘marriage’ and ‘wedding’ and thinks that if someone calls themselves a ‘wedding photographer’ that obligates them to serve for rituals falling under whatever definition the state imposes.
Anyway. I don’t know. Maybe the answer is to cease calling oneself a ‘wedding photographer’, and to call oneself a ‘Catholic and Christian events’ photographer or something.