Worst thing/biggest faux paux or mistake you've seen at a wedding?

ohannabelle

courtneyhindo said: @ohannabelle, that makes me so sad for your grandma!! how did everyone act towards each other after that wedding?
SIB

Grandma and Rosie were fine. Auntie Dorothea was not forgiven. Grandma pretty much cut her out of her life after that. Civil in public, but finished. Auntie Dorothea did ask, later, why she never got her yearly gift of Christmas cannoli any more, and Grandma said it was just so much work that they were for family only.

Ha! Now that's cold hard justice, Italian Grandma style. 

knottie9c5ed33df4bbd226

ohannabelle said:

courtneyhindo said:

@ohannabelle, that makes me so sad for your grandma!! how did everyone act towards each other after that wedding?

SIB

Grandma and Rosie were fine. Auntie Dorothea was not forgiven. Grandma pretty much cut her out of her life after that. Civil in public, but finished. Auntie Dorothea did ask, later, why she never got her yearly gift of Christmas cannoli any more, and Grandma said it was just so much work that they were for family only.

Ha! Now that's cold hard justice, Italian Grandma style. 

OMG that's too funny. Good for Grandma!

thisismynickname2

I want to preface a couple stories here. 

Confession: I used to hate weddings and really wanted to elope for my own. Why? Because people suck at hosting and I always assumed that that's just how weddings are.  So, when I got engaged and family relations prevented me from eloping, I planned the wedding I wanted with guidance from these boards. Who knew the reason I hated weddings was because of improper etiquette, and that weddings can actually rock when done properly? 

So here we go.

---90% of weddings I go to have gaps. My BFF is trying to lengthen her gap to ensure the bridal party has plenty of time for pictures. <facepalm>

---One wedding I attended was nicely done in the end, but had all kinds of bad etiquette leading up to it: Honeyfund, a request for guests to ship boxed shower gifts to the bride's home to avoid the bride paying shipping costs, and this bride put her bridal party to work for several days before the wedding to do all the DIY stuff she didn't have time for. The husband of one of the BMs was ironing tablecloths, for chrissakes! 

--- I've been to countless weddings where I end up at a table with SOs of the bridal party, while the bridal party sits at a head table. 

---Only one cash bar, but I readily forgave that as the groom was a recovering alcoholic. I knew they thought it was better to have it around for people who wanted it than go totally dry. 

As I get older, the weddings get better, actually! It's like we all learn from the mistakes of those who came before us. Lately weddings have still been gaptastic, but everyone has awesome food and great DJs or bands and open bar and I have a great time regardless of spending 12 hours in cocktail attire. 

NotTheOnlyOne

I am Miami born and raised and up until I was in my early 20’s, I thought it was normal for ladies to pay to attend bridal showers. Every single one I had attended as a teen and up, I remember the invitation coming with a fee and you had to pay around $25 to attend. I cannot express how embarrassing this seems to me now.  It wasn’t until I began planning my sister’s shower, which my mother fully paid for, that people began asking me how much it was and I was like, “What? It’s free!”

 

You don’t see it much anymore and if I were to receive an invite with a price tag, I would decline.

 

Oh, and this is just a cultural thing, but Hispanics don’t do the Bridesmaids pay for the shower thing.  The immediate family puts it together. Mother and sisters, maybe cousins. This is a concept I see only in movies.

 

I am planning (and paying for) my own shower with my mother and sister and Bridesmaids just have to show up.

swiftsticks

Long time lurker, first time snarker.<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

The longest gap I've experienced was 5 hours between a church wedding and a golf course hall reception. Totally unacceptable.

A wedding I went to this summer made us wait 1 hour between courses at dinner. Dinner was 3 hours. There were only 50 guests and the reception was at a restaurant. Their gap was 2 hours. And it was a cash bar. We left hungry and sober.

I have some serious snark about a wedding an old friend is having.

My invitation arrived 7 months before the wedding. The wedding is held over a long weekend and a STD was not sent. The invitation was addressed to me; it did not include my FI. The couple has met my FI before and we've been dating longer than they have. Oh, and their registry info was included with the invitation. It was really easy to RSVP no.

One of my BMs is in this wedding party and no one is allowed to see my old friend’s wedding dress. She won't tell anyone any details. It's not as if the wedding party can't be trusted. Is this normal? I've never heard of this before.

ETA: My formatting is bad and I should feel bad.

 

knottie9c5ed33df4bbd226

Knottie54195723 said:

Long time lurker, first time snarker.

The longest gap I've experienced was 5 hours between a church wedding and a golf course hall reception. Totally unacceptable.

A wedding I went to this summer made us wait 1 hour between courses at dinner. Dinner was 3 hours. There were only 50 guests and the reception was at a restaurant. Their gap was 2 hours. And it was a cash bar. We left hungry and sober.

I have some serious snark about a wedding an old friend is having.

My invitation arrived 7 months before the wedding. The wedding is held over a long weekend and a STD was not sent. The invitation was addressed to me; it did not include my FI. The couple has met my FI before and we've been dating longer than they have. Oh, and their registry info was included with the invitation. It was really easy to RSVP no.

One of my BMs is in this wedding party and no one is allowed to see my old friend’s wedding dress. She won't tell anyone any details. It's not as if the wedding party can't be trusted. Is this normal? I've never heard of this before.

ETA: My formatting is bad and I should feel bad.

 

I was in a wedding in May and the bride wouldn't let ANYONE see her dress. I literally didn't know what it looked like until the day of, I only knew the designer and that there were feathers on it. Me, if someone asks to see a picture I have been showing it but I haven't been offering it up otherwise.

flantastic

Knottie54195723 said:

Long time lurker, first time snarker.

The longest gap I've experienced was 5 hours between a church wedding and a golf course hall reception. Totally unacceptable.

A wedding I went to this summer made us wait 1 hour between courses at dinner. Dinner was 3 hours. There were only 50 guests and the reception was at a restaurant. Their gap was 2 hours. And it was a cash bar. We left hungry and sober.

I have some serious snark about a wedding an old friend is having.

My invitation arrived 7 months before the wedding. The wedding is held over a long weekend and a STD was not sent. The invitation was addressed to me; it did not include my FI. The couple has met my FI before and we've been dating longer than they have. Oh, and their registry info was included with the invitation. It was really easy to RSVP no.

One of my BMs is in this wedding party and no one is allowed to see my old friend’s wedding dress. She won't tell anyone any details. It's not as if the wedding party can't be trusted. Is this normal? I've never heard of this before.

ETA: My formatting is bad and I should feel bad.

I don't think it matters. If you want your dress to be a surprise to everyone, that's your right. Do most people care about that? No. But if you do, there's no reason you have to show everyone who asks, even your WP.

swiftsticks

hicoco said:

Knottie54195723 said:

Long time lurker, first time snarker.<?xml:namespace prefix = o />

The longest gap I've experienced was 5 hours between a church wedding and a golf course hall reception. Totally unacceptable.

A wedding I went to this summer made us wait 1 hour between courses at dinner. Dinner was 3 hours. There were only 50 guests and the reception was at a restaurant. Their gap was 2 hours. And it was a cash bar. We left hungry and sober.

I have some serious snark about a wedding an old friend is having.

My invitation arrived 7 months before the wedding. The wedding is held over a long weekend and a STD was not sent. The invitation was addressed to me; it did not include my FI. The couple has met my FI before and we've been dating longer than they have. Oh, and their registry info was included with the invitation. It was really easy to RSVP no.

One of my BMs is in this wedding party and no one is allowed to see my old friend’s wedding dress. She won't tell anyone any details. It's not as if the wedding party can't be trusted. Is this normal? I've never heard of this before.

ETA: My formatting is bad and I should feel bad.

 

I was in a wedding in May and the bride wouldn't let ANYONE see her dress. I literally didn't know what it looked like until the day of, I only knew the designer and that there were feathers on it. Me, if someone asks to see a picture I have been showing it but I haven't been offering it up otherwise.

I'm the same way.

It's a dress. It's pretty. If someone wants to see a picture, fine. I'm not going to lose sleep if my FI sees it. I'm not going to shut out people who I like and are clearly excited to see a photo.

It's not an important classified secret, it's a dress.

ETA spelling

wrigleyville

thisismynickname said:

I want to preface a couple stories here. 

Confession: I used to hate weddings and really wanted to elope for my own. Why? Because people suck at hosting and I always assumed that that's just how weddings are.  So, when I got engaged and family relations prevented me from eloping, I planned the wedding I wanted with guidance from these boards. Who knew the reason I hated weddings was because of improper etiquette, and that weddings can actually rock when done properly? 

Ditto. I remember my brother's wedding as the first wedding I really, truly enjoyed. The ceremony started at 4:00, cocktail hour immediately after, then fun reception with no Dollar Dance (tradition in my family).

I remember thinking, "Oh! They put out snack trays! What a great idea!" Yes, it literally was the very first wedding I'd ever been to that had appetizers.

Every wedding I'd been to before that had a long gap, and when you showed up at the reception, you didn't eat until dinner was served (usually an hour into the reception, and then you still had to wait to go to the buffet). The little candy dishes at every table would be completely empty within a few minutes.

short+sassy

morewineplease said:

I have to say almost every wedding I have ever been to has been a major list of issues.

Thinking back I have only been to one (Friends parents second wedding) that was NOT a cash bar. I did not even know that was rude till I came to play here (Thank you). I have been too two pot luck weddings, a BYOB cookout and what I have learned was a PPD on the one year anniversary of the wedding in their house. One of the cash bar weddings was over ten years ago and the bride still bitches that she had to buy all her own drinks that night, because no one would buy her a drink. 

So let me just say thank you Knotties for making sure mine wedding is not a shit show!

Wait, wait....let me SAVOR this a moment.  The bride was mad...because she CHOSE to have a cash bar...and then had to pay for her drinks at her own reception.  Priceless!

thisismynickname2

wrigleyville said: thisismynickname said: I want to preface a couple stories here. Confession: I used to hate weddings and really wanted to elope for my own. Why? Because people suck at hosting and I always assumed that that's just how weddings are.  So, when I got engaged and family relations prevented me from eloping, I planned the wedding I wanted with guidance from these boards. Who knew the reason I hated weddings was because of improper etiquette, and that weddings can actually rock when done properly? 
--------------------------------------Ditto. I remember my brother's wedding as the first wedding I really, truly enjoyed. The ceremony started at 4:00, cocktail hour immediately after, then fun reception with no Dollar Dance (tradition in my family).
I remember thinking, "Oh! They put out snack trays! What a great idea!" Yes, it literally was the very first wedding I'd ever been to that had appetizers.
Every wedding I'd been to before that had a long gap, and when you showed up at the reception, you didn't eat until dinner was served (usually an hour into the reception, and then you still had to wait to go to the buffet). The little candy dishes at every table would be completely empty within a few minutes. ------------------------ Boxes? Paragraphs? -------------

Oh! That reminds me! I guess my sister has been the victim of bad etiquette in regard to the bolded. When I was planning my 6pm ceremony, 6:30pm coctail hour, and 7:30pm dinner, my sister was all, "Are you going to feed your bridal party at least? Because we'll be starving." I was taken aback, like, dude of course I'll give you snacks during the day, but this was a point of contention. LO AND BEHOLD--- She assumed I wouldn't have appetizers during cocktail hour (and never asked for clarification.) I assumed she had a weird appetite and was being bitchy because 6:30 is a totally reasonable time to tuck into crab cakes. She actually had no idea until the day before my wedding that there would be heavy apps starting at 6:30 because no wedding she attended had appetizers.

Mind = blown. 

banana468

So far the worst I've experienced at a reception involved paying for soda out of pocket but the BP was given free reign of the open bar (and I wasn't in the wedding but DH was).

I've seen other things that were yucky but they were the standard things that we complain about (gap, cash bar, bad food).  I'll suck up a few things but making me pay for anything I want to drink is just crappy. 

Cookie Pusher

I've been lucky that most weddings I've been to had only one or two etiquette breaches (one had a gap, one kept the guests waiting half an hour after the start time, we never received thank you cards for a few, etc.), but one wedding we attended just made me shake my head. Honeyfund, "donation in lieu of favors" signs AND a donation jar at the reception, walk from parking to ceremony site was downhill through a large muddy field, not enough food during cocktail hour, no seating during cocktail hour and we were not permitted to enter the reception area, not enough food for dinner (the chaffing dishes were constantly empty), and the rain plan consisted of having the guests walk up a set of small, rickety wooden steps to the second floor of the reception space that had no ventilation. Good thing for the older guests that the weather stayed nice.

retro_belle24_23092757

I went to a wedding last October where my FI was in the WP and I wasn't. The couple has the WP sit together and their significant others sat the Random tables. I was pissed. I didn't know anybody at the table. Then they had a cash bar. The bride's justification was that it was a morning/early afternoon wedding and they didn't want to pay for  alcohol. The groom is going to be a groomsman in our wedding and I will make sure that he sits next to his wife during the reception and we have an open bar. 

beachyone15

I went to one that didn't have a backup plan for rain. So of course it rained. The ceremony was under a gazebo that we all crowded under (standing) while cold rain was blowing in on all of us. This part wasn't so much a faux-paux, but it made me really sad. One of the aunts made the wedding cake and there was blue detailed writing (a Bible verse I think) all along the cake. There were candles all around it so the blue icing started running down the cake and it looked awful! Fortunately, the couple spent all their money on an open bar so that helped.

speakeasy14

I was in a wedding in my early twenties that was a train wreck from the start.  

The bride threw a fit about having to extend invitations to significant others.  Her claim was that if she didn't know the person or didn't like them they weren't welcome at her wedding.  So she only invited significant others that she liked.   My best friend and I were both denied to bring our boyfriends because the bride didn't like my best friend's boyfriend, and didn't know mine.  The night before the wedding one person called and said they couldn't make it so the bride called me and said "We had one person cancel and we tried to think of who we could invite, but anyone we thought of we would have to give them a plus one.  So we tried to think of who we could invite and remembered that you and your bf have been dating for awhile. Since it is only one seat you can bring your bf if you want."  

On top of that there was nothing but drama from the bride's family.  Her sister was the worst though.  Anytime her sister, the MOH, felt like she wasn't getting any attention she would break down in tears and throw a hissy fit.  This included throwing a huge fit in the middle of the hair salon because she didn't like the way the stylist was doing her hair.  She also stormed out of the reception during dinner when they said it was time for the MOH and BM toasts.  She made everyone wait 15-20 minutes while she cried, then when she decided she was ready to give her toast she spent 20 minutes talking about herself and what she wants she gets married.  

jenna8984

1st wedding I ever attended- 19 years old. Ex- boyfriend was brother of the bride so he sat at the head table and I sat alone with random strangers. I had never been to a wedding so I thought it was normal but I hated it.

2nd wedding- different ex-boyfriend was the best man so again he sat at the head table and I sat with his parents.

3rd wedding- 2 hour long Catholic Mass (no offense to anyone but that's torturous to non-Catholic me) then a 3 hour gap. We didn't know where to go and googled a random bar nearby.

4th wedding- My friend actually called me a week before the wedding and said "Well I'd like you to come but I didn't actually put you on the invite list. Groomsman Ryan is single, so why don't you come as his plus one?" Ummm fucking weird and rude. But I was actually good friends with Ryan so we said what the hell and went along with it.

5th wedding- Was in the couple's backyard. They did not put out any appetizers, and took off to a local park to take pictures for THREE hours. Ceremony was 4-4:10 then we stood around until they came back for dinner at 7.

6th wedding- At home PPD after marrying on a cruise.

short+sassy

jenna8984 said:

3rd wedding- 2 hour long Catholic Mass (no offense to anyone but that's torturous to non-Catholic me) then a 3 hour gap. We didn't know where to go and googled a random bar nearby.

SIB:

It definitely wasn't a "worst" wedding.  But the long Catholic Mass portion was a big fail for me for two reasons (neither one the couple's fault).

1) My Catholic b/f (at the time) should have warned me there would be a mass.  I had never been to a wedding that had one.  There I was, expecting the ceremony to be about wrapped up, when all of a sudden the priest starts going into sermon mode.  In my mind, I was like, "What?  WTF?  What is happening?"

2) To the priest.  Here's an idea, when you are orating a mass for a wedding, give just a touch of thought to the fact that a good portion of your audience might be Protestant or not Christian at all.  Your entire sermon was about the eucharist, a very Catholic-specific term.  It took me 20 minutes to figure out WHAT you were even talking about.  For other Christians, it is the same thing as communion.  For non-Christians, it is a Christian rite celebrating the body and blood of Christ that was given for us, usually using red wine/grape juice and bread/host.  Extra snark: Do you see how quickly I explained that?

One of my biggest wedding pet peeves...and I'm not even a guest for this one...is couples who hire the police department to escort and stop traffic in all directions...including the entire freeway (one side) sometimes...while the wedding guests are traveling from the ceremony site to the reception site.  It's not necessary, it's rude, and it is very dangerous.  So just STOP IT!!!  I realize this is region-specific and, fortunately, in most cities this kind of ridiculousness is not done or allowed.        

thisismynickname2

short+sassy said:

One of my biggest wedding pet peeves...and I'm not even a guest for this one...is couples who hire the police department to escort and stop traffic in all directions...including the entire freeway (one side) sometimes...while the wedding guests are traveling from the ceremony site to the reception site.  It's not necessary, it's rude, and it is very dangerous.  So just STOP IT!!!  I realize this is region-specific and, fortunately, in most cities this kind of ridiculousness is not done or allowed.        

Holy fuck no. I've never seen this and people get bent out of shape when POTUS ties up traffic. A holier-than-thou wedded couple would get shot. And no, I'm probably not exaggerating for my city when I say they'd probably get shot. 

Only funerals and POTUS get an escort. 

[Deleted User]

thisismynickname said:

short+sassy said:

One of my biggest wedding pet peeves...and I'm not even a guest for this one...is couples who hire the police department to escort and stop traffic in all directions...including the entire freeway (one side) sometimes...while the wedding guests are traveling from the ceremony site to the reception site.  It's not necessary, it's rude, and it is very dangerous.  So just STOP IT!!!  I realize this is region-specific and, fortunately, in most cities this kind of ridiculousness is not done or allowed.        

Holy fuck no. I've never seen this and people get bent out of shape when POTUS ties up traffic. A holier-than-thou wedded couple would get shot. And no, I'm probably not exaggerating for my city when I say they'd probably get shot. 

Only funerals and POTUS get an escort. 

True dat.  Everyone around here gets pissed when the president is home.

short+sassy

Oh!  I just re-read what I wrote and wanted to clarify.  They don't block the WHOLE route from ceremony to reception...but will move up and block traffic as the wedding guests are progressing through.  Yes, just like for a funeral...except its not (snarky face).

On the...thankfully rare...occasion when POTUS is in town.  The entire freeway and major roadways will be entirely shut down for hours.

Crazy coincidence.  I just so happened to be walking around downtown right before the POTUS motorcade was coming through.  I knew he was in town that day, but didn't realize he was right THERE.  So I figured, "What the heck?  I'll wait around and check it out.  How many opps like this does one get?"

It was actually pretty cool and more stunning than I would have imagined.  Police motorcycles as far as the eye could see both in front and behind.  TWO identical limos with the presidential seal...so you don't know which one he is actually in .  And about a dozen super dark-tinted and ominous looking SUVs in front and behind the limos.

GREAT time to have committed a crime, lol.  Almost the entirety of the city's police department was part of that.

princessleia22

I went to a wedding that had 3-hour gap (ceremony & reception at same location).  I was in wedding party, so I spent that time running around town with WP in a party bus.  DH stayed back and we got a hotel room just so he had somewhere to crash during the gap.  Most guests hung out in the hotel bar. The reception had a head table for just WP.  DH sat with my parents, so at least he knew someone at his table.  While waiting for food, DH came up to talk to me, since he hadn't seen me most of the day. They did have an open bar, but it hadn't opened yet.  While DH was talking to me, a waiter came up and asked what I wanted to drink.  Since DH was right there, he asked for a rum & coke... the waiter says "the bar is currently only open for the WP, not other guests". Really?  So, of course, I say, "okay then, since I'm in the WP, I would like to order a rum & coke" and promptly gave it to DH when it arrived. Oh, there was also B-listing for that wedding.

ohannabelle

short+sassy said:

jenna8984 said:

3rd wedding- 2 hour long Catholic Mass (no offense to anyone but that's torturous to non-Catholic me) then a 3 hour gap. We didn't know where to go and googled a random bar nearby.

SIB:

It definitely wasn't a "worst" wedding.  But the long Catholic Mass portion was a big fail for me for two reasons (neither one the couple's fault).

1) My Catholic b/f (at the time) should have warned me there would be a mass.  I had never been to a wedding that had one.  There I was, expecting the ceremony to be about wrapped up, when all of a sudden the priest starts going into sermon mode.  In my mind, I was like, "What?  WTF?  What is happening?"

2) To the priest.  Here's an idea, when you are orating a mass for a wedding, give just a touch of thought to the fact that a good portion of your audience might be Protestant or not Christian at all.  Your entire sermon was about the eucharist, a very Catholic-specific term.  It took me 20 minutes to figure out WHAT you were even talking about.  For other Christians, it is the same thing as communion.  For non-Christians, it is a Christian rite celebrating the body and blood of Christ that was given for us, usually using red wine/grape juice and bread/host.  Extra snark: Do you see how quickly I explained that?

One of my biggest wedding pet peeves...and I'm not even a guest for this one...is couples who hire the police department to escort and stop traffic in all directions...including the entire freeway (one side) sometimes...while the wedding guests are traveling from the ceremony site to the reception site.  It's not necessary, it's rude, and it is very dangerous.  So just STOP IT!!!  I realize this is region-specific and, fortunately, in most cities this kind of ridiculousness is not done or allowed.        

Here's a better idea: understand what you're asking, here, with your "suggestions."

A priest isn't allowed to change the rituals or traditions of mass or the sacraments of marriage to accommodate possible visitors. It doesn't go like that. The traditions and rituals are not optional. You don't wing it. No leaving parts out or changing things for your convenience.

You really really seriously can't possibly think that anyone should change the most sacred and holy rites of their religious traditions because visitors might not "get it?" Seriously? You're griping because a priest used a Catholic term in a Catholic ceremony in a Catholic Church? Give just "a touch of thought" to that.

Priests aren't there to entertain an "audience."  That isn't what it's about. You wouldn't go to a Jewish ceremony and whine about people speaking Hebrew but you don't, or go to a Greek Orthodox ceremony and complain that you didn't get the rituals, so they should change them to be more accommodating to Protestants or whatever to please you?

Here's a better idea. Before I go to another person's church, I do a little research and read up on what to expect and what I might be participating in. Ten minutes on Google, you should be good.

There are many many many things at weddings to snark about, but other people's religious traditions aren't one of them. 

Sorry, but this whole thing just sounded entitled. Everybody should change their religious traditions for me, because I didn't get it. 

Nope. 

knottie9c5ed33df4bbd226

thisismynickname said:

short+sassy said:

One of my biggest wedding pet peeves...and I'm not even a guest for this one...is couples who hire the police department to escort and stop traffic in all directions...including the entire freeway (one side) sometimes...while the wedding guests are traveling from the ceremony site to the reception site.  It's not necessary, it's rude, and it is very dangerous.  So just STOP IT!!!  I realize this is region-specific and, fortunately, in most cities this kind of ridiculousness is not done or allowed.        

Holy fuck no. I've never seen this and people get bent out of shape when POTUS ties up traffic. A holier-than-thou wedded couple would get shot. And no, I'm probably not exaggerating for my city when I say they'd probably get shot. 

Only funerals and POTUS get an escort. 

Do you live in Chicago??

badbnagdway

This was not at a wedding itself but was something a bride did that was against etiquette and also made me feel kind of sucky. 

To try to boil it down, I know this bride from school. We were fairly close at the time but don't see each other or talk often these days. I found out shortly after getting engaged that she was also engaged, but that she hadn't told me. I had met the guy on a trip a couple years back but had no idea they had even been dating. Anyway, I told her congratulations, and we did a little wedding planning chat. She told me when her wedding was, where it was (a DW), and that I would be getting a save the date soon. Save the date and invitation never came, I wasn't invited at all and never heard from her again. I sent them a congratulatory card. I have gone back and forth on whether we will invite them to our wedding. Obviously I'm leaning no. 

db1984

ohannabelle said:

short+sassy said:

jenna8984 said:

3rd wedding- 2 hour long Catholic Mass (no offense to anyone but that's torturous to non-Catholic me) then a 3 hour gap. We didn't know where to go and googled a random bar nearby.

SIB:

It definitely wasn't a "worst" wedding.  But the long Catholic Mass portion was a big fail for me for two reasons (neither one the couple's fault).

1) My Catholic b/f (at the time) should have warned me there would be a mass.  I had never been to a wedding that had one.  There I was, expecting the ceremony to be about wrapped up, when all of a sudden the priest starts going into sermon mode.  In my mind, I was like, "What?  WTF?  What is happening?"

2) To the priest.  Here's an idea, when you are orating a mass for a wedding, give just a touch of thought to the fact that a good portion of your audience might be Protestant or not Christian at all.  Your entire sermon was about the eucharist, a very Catholic-specific term.  It took me 20 minutes to figure out WHAT you were even talking about.  For other Christians, it is the same thing as communion.  For non-Christians, it is a Christian rite celebrating the body and blood of Christ that was given for us, usually using red wine/grape juice and bread/host.  Extra snark: Do you see how quickly I explained that?

One of my biggest wedding pet peeves...and I'm not even a guest for this one...is couples who hire the police department to escort and stop traffic in all directions...including the entire freeway (one side) sometimes...while the wedding guests are traveling from the ceremony site to the reception site.  It's not necessary, it's rude, and it is very dangerous.  So just STOP IT!!!  I realize this is region-specific and, fortunately, in most cities this kind of ridiculousness is not done or allowed.        

Here's a better idea: understand what you're asking, here, with your "suggestions."

A priest isn't allowed to change the rituals or traditions of mass or the sacraments of marriage to accommodate possible visitors. It doesn't go like that. The traditions and rituals are not optional. You don't wing it. No leaving parts out or changing things for your convenience.

You really really seriously can't possibly think that anyone should change the most sacred and holy rites of their religious traditions because visitors might not "get it?" Seriously? You're griping because a priest used a Catholic term in a Catholic ceremony in a Catholic Church? Give just "a touch of thought" to that.

Priests aren't there to entertain an "audience."  That isn't what it's about. You wouldn't go to a Jewish ceremony and whine about people speaking Hebrew but you don't, or go to a Greek Orthodox ceremony and complain that you didn't get the rituals, so they should change them to be more accommodating to Protestants or whatever to please you?

Here's a better idea. Before I go to another person's church, I do a little research and read up on what to expect and what I might be participating in. Ten minutes on Google, you should be good.

There are many many many things at weddings to snark about, but other people's religious traditions aren't one of them. 

Sorry, but this whole thing just sounded entitled. Everybody should change their religious traditions for me, because I didn't get it. 

Nope. 

1)  He may not have known it was going to be a full Nuptial Mass.  It is possible to be married in the Catholic Church without a full Mass.

2) No, it's not the same as communion in other Christian churches.  We Catholics believe that the wine and Host are actually the Blood and Body of Christ.  This is why no one is allowed to partake unless they are practicing Catholics in a state of grace.

[Deleted User]

db1984 said:

ohannabelle said:

short+sassy said:

jenna8984 said:

3rd wedding- 2 hour long Catholic Mass (no offense to anyone but that's torturous to non-Catholic me) then a 3 hour gap. We didn't know where to go and googled a random bar nearby.

SIB:

It definitely wasn't a "worst" wedding.  But the long Catholic Mass portion was a big fail for me for two reasons (neither one the couple's fault).

1) My Catholic b/f (at the time) should have warned me there would be a mass.  I had never been to a wedding that had one.  There I was, expecting the ceremony to be about wrapped up, when all of a sudden the priest starts going into sermon mode.  In my mind, I was like, "What?  WTF?  What is happening?"

2) To the priest.  Here's an idea, when you are orating a mass for a wedding, give just a touch of thought to the fact that a good portion of your audience might be Protestant or not Christian at all.  Your entire sermon was about the eucharist, a very Catholic-specific term.  It took me 20 minutes to figure out WHAT you were even talking about.  For other Christians, it is the same thing as communion.  For non-Christians, it is a Christian rite celebrating the body and blood of Christ that was given for us, usually using red wine/grape juice and bread/host.  Extra snark: Do you see how quickly I explained that?

One of my biggest wedding pet peeves...and I'm not even a guest for this one...is couples who hire the police department to escort and stop traffic in all directions...including the entire freeway (one side) sometimes...while the wedding guests are traveling from the ceremony site to the reception site.  It's not necessary, it's rude, and it is very dangerous.  So just STOP IT!!!  I realize this is region-specific and, fortunately, in most cities this kind of ridiculousness is not done or allowed.        

Here's a better idea: understand what you're asking, here, with your "suggestions."

A priest isn't allowed to change the rituals or traditions of mass or the sacraments of marriage to accommodate possible visitors. It doesn't go like that. The traditions and rituals are not optional. You don't wing it. No leaving parts out or changing things for your convenience.

You really really seriously can't possibly think that anyone should change the most sacred and holy rites of their religious traditions because visitors might not "get it?" Seriously? You're griping because a priest used a Catholic term in a Catholic ceremony in a Catholic Church? Give just "a touch of thought" to that.

Priests aren't there to entertain an "audience."  That isn't what it's about. You wouldn't go to a Jewish ceremony and whine about people speaking Hebrew but you don't, or go to a Greek Orthodox ceremony and complain that you didn't get the rituals, so they should change them to be more accommodating to Protestants or whatever to please you?

Here's a better idea. Before I go to another person's church, I do a little research and read up on what to expect and what I might be participating in. Ten minutes on Google, you should be good.

There are many many many things at weddings to snark about, but other people's religious traditions aren't one of them. 

Sorry, but this whole thing just sounded entitled. Everybody should change their religious traditions for me, because I didn't get it. 

Nope. 

1)  He may not have known it was going to be a full Nuptial Mass.  It is possible to be married in the Catholic Church without a full Mass.

2) No, it's not the same as communion in other Christian churches.  We Catholics believe that the wine and Host are actually the Blood and Body of Christ.  This is why no one is allowed to partake unless they are practicing Catholics in a state of grace.

Now you're just talking semantics.  It's the same actions to a non-religious person.  To that person not participating, it matters not at all what the person receiving the host believes or feels in their hearts.  As a lapsed Protestant, I thought it was a very good explanation.

flantastic

adk19 said:

db1984 said:

ohannabelle said:

short+sassy said:

jenna8984 said:

3rd wedding- 2 hour long Catholic Mass (no offense to anyone but that's torturous to non-Catholic me) then a 3 hour gap. We didn't know where to go and googled a random bar nearby.

SIB:

It definitely wasn't a "worst" wedding.  But the long Catholic Mass portion was a big fail for me for two reasons (neither one the couple's fault).

1) My Catholic b/f (at the time) should have warned me there would be a mass.  I had never been to a wedding that had one.  There I was, expecting the ceremony to be about wrapped up, when all of a sudden the priest starts going into sermon mode.  In my mind, I was like, "What?  WTF?  What is happening?"

2) To the priest.  Here's an idea, when you are orating a mass for a wedding, give just a touch of thought to the fact that a good portion of your audience might be Protestant or not Christian at all.  Your entire sermon was about the eucharist, a very Catholic-specific term.  It took me 20 minutes to figure out WHAT you were even talking about.  For other Christians, it is the same thing as communion.  For non-Christians, it is a Christian rite celebrating the body and blood of Christ that was given for us, usually using red wine/grape juice and bread/host.  Extra snark: Do you see how quickly I explained that?

One of my biggest wedding pet peeves...and I'm not even a guest for this one...is couples who hire the police department to escort and stop traffic in all directions...including the entire freeway (one side) sometimes...while the wedding guests are traveling from the ceremony site to the reception site.  It's not necessary, it's rude, and it is very dangerous.  So just STOP IT!!!  I realize this is region-specific and, fortunately, in most cities this kind of ridiculousness is not done or allowed.        

Here's a better idea: understand what you're asking, here, with your "suggestions."

A priest isn't allowed to change the rituals or traditions of mass or the sacraments of marriage to accommodate possible visitors. It doesn't go like that. The traditions and rituals are not optional. You don't wing it. No leaving parts out or changing things for your convenience.

You really really seriously can't possibly think that anyone should change the most sacred and holy rites of their religious traditions because visitors might not "get it?" Seriously? You're griping because a priest used a Catholic term in a Catholic ceremony in a Catholic Church? Give just "a touch of thought" to that.

Priests aren't there to entertain an "audience."  That isn't what it's about. You wouldn't go to a Jewish ceremony and whine about people speaking Hebrew but you don't, or go to a Greek Orthodox ceremony and complain that you didn't get the rituals, so they should change them to be more accommodating to Protestants or whatever to please you?

Here's a better idea. Before I go to another person's church, I do a little research and read up on what to expect and what I might be participating in. Ten minutes on Google, you should be good.

There are many many many things at weddings to snark about, but other people's religious traditions aren't one of them. 

Sorry, but this whole thing just sounded entitled. Everybody should change their religious traditions for me, because I didn't get it. 

Nope. 

1)  He may not have known it was going to be a full Nuptial Mass.  It is possible to be married in the Catholic Church without a full Mass.

2) No, it's not the same as communion in other Christian churches.  We Catholics believe that the wine and Host are actually the Blood and Body of Christ.  This is why no one is allowed to partake unless they are practicing Catholics in a state of grace.

Now you're just talking semantics.  It's the same actions to a non-religious person.  To that person not participating, it matters not at all what the person receiving the host believes or feels in their hearts.  As a lapsed Protestant, I thought it was a very good explanation.

So just because you don't believe something, there's no reason to understand it accurately? I wouldn't say she needed to understand it accurately as long as she was respectful of not participating, but I wouldn't say the distinction is unimportant.

db1984

flantastic said:

adk19 said:

db1984 said:

ohannabelle said:

short+sassy said:

jenna8984 said:

3rd wedding- 2 hour long Catholic Mass (no offense to anyone but that's torturous to non-Catholic me) then a 3 hour gap. We didn't know where to go and googled a random bar nearby.

SIB:

It definitely wasn't a "worst" wedding.  But the long Catholic Mass portion was a big fail for me for two reasons (neither one the couple's fault).

1) My Catholic b/f (at the time) should have warned me there would be a mass.  I had never been to a wedding that had one.  There I was, expecting the ceremony to be about wrapped up, when all of a sudden the priest starts going into sermon mode.  In my mind, I was like, "What?  WTF?  What is happening?"

2) To the priest.  Here's an idea, when you are orating a mass for a wedding, give just a touch of thought to the fact that a good portion of your audience might be Protestant or not Christian at all.  Your entire sermon was about the eucharist, a very Catholic-specific term.  It took me 20 minutes to figure out WHAT you were even talking about.  For other Christians, it is the same thing as communion.  For non-Christians, it is a Christian rite celebrating the body and blood of Christ that was given for us, usually using red wine/grape juice and bread/host.  Extra snark: Do you see how quickly I explained that?

One of my biggest wedding pet peeves...and I'm not even a guest for this one...is couples who hire the police department to escort and stop traffic in all directions...including the entire freeway (one side) sometimes...while the wedding guests are traveling from the ceremony site to the reception site.  It's not necessary, it's rude, and it is very dangerous.  So just STOP IT!!!  I realize this is region-specific and, fortunately, in most cities this kind of ridiculousness is not done or allowed.        

Here's a better idea: understand what you're asking, here, with your "suggestions."

A priest isn't allowed to change the rituals or traditions of mass or the sacraments of marriage to accommodate possible visitors. It doesn't go like that. The traditions and rituals are not optional. You don't wing it. No leaving parts out or changing things for your convenience.

You really really seriously can't possibly think that anyone should change the most sacred and holy rites of their religious traditions because visitors might not "get it?" Seriously? You're griping because a priest used a Catholic term in a Catholic ceremony in a Catholic Church? Give just "a touch of thought" to that.

Priests aren't there to entertain an "audience."  That isn't what it's about. You wouldn't go to a Jewish ceremony and whine about people speaking Hebrew but you don't, or go to a Greek Orthodox ceremony and complain that you didn't get the rituals, so they should change them to be more accommodating to Protestants or whatever to please you?

Here's a better idea. Before I go to another person's church, I do a little research and read up on what to expect and what I might be participating in. Ten minutes on Google, you should be good.

There are many many many things at weddings to snark about, but other people's religious traditions aren't one of them. 

Sorry, but this whole thing just sounded entitled. Everybody should change their religious traditions for me, because I didn't get it. 

Nope. 

1)  He may not have known it was going to be a full Nuptial Mass.  It is possible to be married in the Catholic Church without a full Mass.

2) No, it's not the same as communion in other Christian churches.  We Catholics believe that the wine and Host are actually the Blood and Body of Christ.  This is why no one is allowed to partake unless they are practicing Catholics in a state of grace.

Now you're just talking semantics.  It's the same actions to a non-religious person.  To that person not participating, it matters not at all what the person receiving the host believes or feels in their hearts.  As a lapsed Protestant, I thought it was a very good explanation.

So just because you don't believe something, there's no reason to understand it accurately? I wouldn't say she needed to understand it accurately as long as she was respectful of not participating, but I wouldn't say the distinction is unimportant.

It's not just semantics.  There is a complicated ritual involved.  As I said, only practicing Catholics in a state of grace are allowed to partake of the consecrated bread and wine.  That is not true in other denominations.  It's not the same.

ohannabelle

I just don't think it's okay to snark on religion. 

I apologize if I sounded snappy, but I don't think anybody's religious practices or beliefs should be on a thread of faux pas, mistakes, and things that were wrong. I think it's just wrong.

 If I wasn't a cranky old overtired broad with a backache I might have actually said it diplomatically, instead of getting all crankypants on the post, and should have known an uncomfortable conversation would follow. For that, I apologize.

It's one thing to say, damn, that Mass was long, or I was completely lost during the parts that were in Hindustani, or whatever unfamiliar religious service. 

It was the "maybe just think about it and get a clue" tone that irked me. Not that the service was long and unfamiliar. No non Catholic (myself included) could possibly understand all the five bajillion layers of symbolism and tradition and law of the Catholic Church. If we start with semantics, we could be here twenty years, and probably still need additional reading material. Though it's really really interesting and a huge part of religious history.  Fascinating. Which isn't the point. 

I'm not obligated to fully understand it, I am obligated not to criticize what I don't understand, and to be respectful.

That was the point. That was what my post should have said. Just that. 

 I would feel the same if the snark towards the officiant, and how he needed to clue in, was directed at a Wiccan, or a fundamentalist Baptist, or a Sikh or a Buddhist. Or even a Unitarian. 

Just please no to religious snarks.