ZOWIE…you got my head spinning. “If someone can prudently see that placing themselves in a lower place could embarass their hosts, they shouldn’t do it.” Not sure what this would be referring to. Using the literal example of this passage from Luke, he is not talking about parents of the new couple.
“How do you know that?” you ask. Because in the Jewish ceremony the bride is given by her parents in marriage. And our Catholic weddings follow the Jewish tradition. So parents have a part in the ceremony. Hence, we have the fathers of our brides give them “away” to the groom.
No, you are correct. The Ten Commandments does not state that the wedding invitations should list the parents on the wedding invitation. But it has been the Catholic tradition, in following the Jewish one, that the parents of the bride give the reception. Parents, traditionally, have a part in the religious ceremony with the couple. Parents are honored participants. Fact.
Let’s just discuss one situation here: the groom’s parents getting half the bill or no inclusion on the invite. I do not think that is right.
Let’s just discuss that situation. You are the groom’s parents. The bride’s parents are doing the wedding you have not been consulted, fair enough, until they hand you the bill for your share. Hmmm. In the meantime, you and hubby were planning on holding the rehersal dinner, and maybe there is a $$ present coming. Now you are given half the wedding reception bill. Warm fuzzies? I don’t think so. And if you don’t pay up, no inclusion on invitation. Fair?
Second scenario, as per OP, there are financial bumps happening in groom’s family. Bride’s family went ahead and made arrangements never consulting groom’s family about any part of the gala but want them to pay half. Fair?
“If someone can prudently see that placing themselves in a lower place could embarass their hosts, they shouldn’t do it.” Let us say that the priest marrying the couple does not know if he is invited to the reception or if there is any particular place set up for him to sit. He is kind of forced to ask the couple if they want him to come by the reception and he is kind of forced to ask if they have anywhere particular they want him to sit if he gets there and no one aims him in the right direction. He ought to have a place of honor, it is kind of a slap in the face for him to assume he does not, and yet you would be surprised. This kind of thing unfortunately also happens to the spouses of parents who have divorced and re-married. Brides and grooms dread having to witness the way their parents are going to handle these things. The priest, parent or step-parent who goes out of his or her way to be gracious and go with the flow will have the bridal couple’s eternal appreciation and affection!
I have said that the invitation includes the hosts, which in its most basic meaning includes everyone making any substantial contribution to paying for the social event. If you don’t want to help shoulder the bill, why would you get your nose in a twist that you aren’t on the invitation? It is sensible to put you there–guests like to know the names of the people whose names they ought to know at a wedding–but it isn’t strictly required.
This sounds like a situation that shows how communication is in order. The minute somebody hands you a bill for a social event, you have also been handed a place to speak up as one of the hosts. Your bank account has just been included in the wedding by the happy couple. You are automatically allowed to open your mouth about the financial end of it. At the time when you are “handed the bill” for the wedding reception, it was time to bring up the matter of the nature of the rehearsal dinner you had assumed you’d be paying for, who would be paying for that, and so on. (Well, you should have brought up your desire for communication on that point as soon as they were engaged, but we will get to that.) If the contribution is anything beyond a token, you of course ought to be treated as a co-host and included on the invitation, if you want to be. (Of course this is all negotiable; if everyone is satisfied, any arrangement can be ‘all good.’)
The foundation for the communication surrounding a wedding is to tell your child when he or she announces his or her engagement to you that you need to have a conversation with them before long about any financing for the wedding. Let them know that it is their wedding and theirs to plan, of course, but that you are letting them know up front that you aren’t going to be expecting to get a bill handed to you without anyone getting your consent for the expenditures first. You also should let them know if you would like the honor of being one of the hosts, which of course includes pitching in the money for it, if you are going to feel left out if you aren’t asked. I would issue a profuse apology to my child that I was even bringing this up, but since my sons and I agree that people can go insane when there is a wedding, they’d be on the same page with my desire to have all assumptions explained as things went along. Letting it be known that you realize that there is no single way to put on a wedding and so you want to have a conversation about your place in the big day before any unspoken expectations are unintentionally violated on either side is the most basic good sense and consideration.
There was a time when there were very clear societal expectations about who planned and paid for what part of a wedding celebration. We don’t live in those days. As this thread shows, there are a lot of differing expectations out there. It makes sense to talk about it early. Carefully, respectfully, and humbly, but the earlier, the better. Especially if you may to put your foot down later or may have to ride in to the rescue later, having had that conversation from the get-go will be something you will be glad of.
