Snarky Brides

Looks like there's a PPD in my future

FI's cousin got engaged recently. We were with his family this past weekend and she was talking about her wedding plans. She really wants an outdoor wedding, but it's also important for her to have a church wedding. Since she and her FI are both Greek Orthodox and the priest won't marry them outside, her plan is to have a small, immediate family only church wedding, then do a big outdoor ceremony with the big party the next weekend.

FI sees absolutely no problem with this. Neither, apparently, does anyone else in the family. I mentioned that people will want to see the real ceremony and her response was basically "my guests won't know which one is the real thing." I wasn't going to harp on it too much because a) she's newly engaged and excited and I don't want to ruin that for her and b) it's not my family. They're planning for 2018 so I'm kind of hoping she changes her mind. 



Re: Looks like there's a PPD in my future

  • SP29SP29 member
    Sixth Anniversary 2500 Comments 500 Love Its 5 Answers
    edited May 2016
    But people will know, because you know now, before it's even been planned!

    I am sure someone who attended the immediate family ceremony will make a comment the next weekend about how lovely it was. That's something my grandma would do- no one in my family could ever pull off a PPD! ;)

    You've said your piece, so let it go from here. Although if it comes up again, you could mention that she should let people know her plans, so they can decide if they wish to attend the PPD. I'd figure out how to use different wording when saying this, but essentially try to make it sound like a good idea for her to let her guests know she already got married.
    OurWildKingdom
  • OurWildKingdomOurWildKingdom in the 216 member
    2500 Comments 500 Love Its Third Anniversary 5 Answers
    edited May 2016
    Pretty sure any guests who are Greek Orthodox will know the difference, even if no one else does! (I'm not, but I know the ceremony is quite different from your average Christian ceremony.)
    ernursejtigerlily6
  • I think she meant that they wouldn't know if the ceremony they were watching is the one that makes them legally married or if it was the other one.

    I'm not planning on saying anything else to her. We talked about it for a few minutes then moved on. I talked to FI about it a bit on our car ride home but that's it. As they say- not my circus, not my monkeys.

    Although if wedding talk ever comes up again maybe I'll direct her here...
    OurWildKingdom[Deleted User]SP29mollybarker11
  • OurWildKingdomOurWildKingdom in the 216 member
    2500 Comments 500 Love Its Third Anniversary 5 Answers
    I think she meant that they wouldn't know if the ceremony they were watching is the one that makes them legally married or if it was the other one.

    I'm not planning on saying anything else to her. We talked about it for a few minutes then moved on. I talked to FI about it a bit on our car ride home but that's it. As they say- not my circus, not my monkeys.
    Gotcha.  I do hope you can talk her into coming here.
  • I don't understand this at all.  If the religious ceremony is actually important to the couple why would they want a second?  We're very religious and I can't imagine having a second ceremony after our Mass.  Plus, to us, it's the religious ceremony that unites us, so that's what I'd want to share with my family and friends.

    I've heard of people doing this when the church wedding is important to someone other than the couple, which while is still not ok, I at least understand it.
    SP29
  • edited May 2016
    @scrunchythief - The religious ceremony was incredibly important to my family but it was more important for me to be able to write my own vows, so I did the opposite. I had my legal ceremony and reception that everyone came to (our wedding....) and then had it validated by the church later in a private ceremony with just my family and the witnesses. I just wore what I had worn to work that day to the church ceremony. 
  • I think the importance/symbolism/significance of the religious ceremony can be influenced by how attached the person is to their church, too. I don't have a "home" church--I've made every Sacrament in a different part of the state--so I'm okay with my (outdoor) civil wedding and having it blessed later. If she isn't as committed to a church thing as she is an outdoor thing, it might make more sense to her to do it this way. PPDs are a pain, I know, but are they harmful or just gauche? 
    AlternaTickers - Cool, free Web tickers
  • OurWildKingdomOurWildKingdom in the 216 member
    2500 Comments 500 Love Its Third Anniversary 5 Answers
    @scrunchythief - The religious ceremony was incredibly important to my family but it was more important for me to be able to write my own vows, so I did the opposite. I had my legal ceremony and reception that everyone came to (our wedding....) and then had it validated by the church later in a private ceremony with just my family and the witnesses. I just wore what I had worn to work that day to the church ceremony. 
    That doesn't sound like a PPD to me at all. I don't think there were any breaches of etiquette.
  • OurWildKingdomOurWildKingdom in the 216 member
    2500 Comments 500 Love Its Third Anniversary 5 Answers
    edited May 2016
    I think the importance/symbolism/significance of the religious ceremony can be influenced by how attached the person is to their church, too. I don't have a "home" church--I've made every Sacrament in a different part of the state--so I'm okay with my (outdoor) civil wedding and having it blessed later. If she isn't as committed to a church thing as she is an outdoor thing, it might make more sense to her to do it this way. PPDs are a pain, I know, but are they harmful or just gauche? 
    What you're describing doesn't sound like a PPD to me either (and yes, PPDs are very gauche). It's one thing to have a civil ceremony and then have it blessed privately later on, with less pageantry. (Or for that matter, to have a religious ceremony, then follow it up with a celebration of marriage.) It's another to do the whole schmeil with white dress, etc. twice or more., which it sounds like @Ghostie625's FI's cousin wants.

    I'm not as knowledgeable as others here, so please correct me if I'm wrong.
  • I think the importance/symbolism/significance of the religious ceremony can be influenced by how attached the person is to their church, too. I don't have a "home" church--I've made every Sacrament in a different part of the state--so I'm okay with my (outdoor) civil wedding and having it blessed later. If she isn't as committed to a church thing as she is an outdoor thing, it might make more sense to her to do it this way. PPDs are a pain, I know, but are they harmful or just gauche? 
    What you're describing doesn't sound like a PPD to me either (and yes, PPDs are very gauche). It's one thing to have a civil ceremony and then have it blessed privately later on, with less pageantry. (Or for that matter, to have a religious ceremony, then follow it up with a celebration of marriage.) It's another to do the whole schmeil with white dress, etc. twice or more., which it sounds like @Ghostie625's FI's cousin wants.

    I'm not as knowledgeable as others here, so please correct me if I'm wrong.
    I'm a total n00b (newb?) here, both to the boards and to wedding planning in general. (Well, a kind of planning n00b. This is my third engagement...but that's another story). I can get the appeal of a PPD--I have a lot of non-Catholic friends, and a wedding Mass would be torture for them--and I think if you're upfront with your guests about the double dipping then you're at least just being tacky and not being deceitful. I'm not exactly the klassiest ladee, so I'm down with someone who wants to be tacky as long as they're on the level about it. 
    AlternaTickers - Cool, free Web tickers
  • I think the importance/symbolism/significance of the religious ceremony can be influenced by how attached the person is to their church, too. I don't have a "home" church--I've made every Sacrament in a different part of the state--so I'm okay with my (outdoor) civil wedding and having it blessed later. If she isn't as committed to a church thing as she is an outdoor thing, it might make more sense to her to do it this way. PPDs are a pain, I know, but are they harmful or just gauche? 
    What you're describing doesn't sound like a PPD to me either (and yes, PPDs are very gauche). It's one thing to have a civil ceremony and then have it blessed privately later on, with less pageantry. (Or for that matter, to have a religious ceremony, then follow it up with a celebration of marriage.) It's another to do the whole schmeil with white dress, etc. twice or more., which it sounds like @Ghostie625's FI's cousin wants.

    I'm not as knowledgeable as others here, so please correct me if I'm wrong.
    I'm a total n00b (newb?) here, both to the boards and to wedding planning in general. (Well, a kind of planning n00b. This is my third engagement...but that's another story). I can get the appeal of a PPD--I have a lot of non-Catholic friends, and a wedding Mass would be torture for them--and I think if you're upfront with your guests about the double dipping then you're at least just being tacky and not being deceitful. I'm not exactly the klassiest ladee, so I'm down with someone who wants to be tacky as long as they're on the level about it. 
    @ABeautifulJourney, I'm assuming from your posts that you're Catholic.  It's not a simple matter to have a civil ceremony and then have a convalidation (having the marriage "blessed").  Convalidations are meant for Catholics who were lapsed at the time of their wedding, and wish to return to the Church and have their marriage regularized.  Most priests will not do a planned convalidation simply to have an outdoor ceremony.

    Something I love about Catholicism is that the churches are all connected.  It's not necessarily about it being in a particular church you're attached to, but about being attached to the entire community, worldwide and through the ages.  Also, another option is to not have a full Mass, though still in a church.

    Come check out the Catholic board!  There's a bunch of ladies there who are super well informed about the process, and they were a bunch of help when we were getting married.  
    OurWildKingdom

  • @scrunchythief - The religious ceremony was incredibly important to my family but it was more important for me to be able to write my own vows, so I did the opposite. I had my legal ceremony and reception that everyone came to (our wedding....) and then had it validated by the church later in a private ceremony with just my family and the witnesses. I just wore what I had worn to work that day to the church ceremony. 
    @Knottie1434655985, I don't think it's quite a PPD, it's just that you can only get married once (without a divorce in between).  If the legal ceremony is what you considered your wedding, I think your family should've respected that and not put pressure on you to have a religious ceremony too.  

    But I'm very stubborn, and have had to stand up to my family in order to live my religious beliefs, so I think I'm a bit upset on your behalf, perhaps more than you are:)
  • What she is planning is definitely a PPD. If she wanted to do the big outdoor thing and have that as her legal wedding and then have a small ceremony in the church AFTER that, then I would have no problem with it. I'm actually having a second ceremony myself because I am Catholic and FI is Orthodox. It's not a PPD because the first wedding, the Catholic ceremony, is the one that will make us legally married and everybody is invited to that one. Sometime later we will do a much smaller, immediate family only ceremony in the Greek church. Nobody will be invited to the small ceremony who wasn't invited to the big one, which is also one of the issues with a PPD- as posters have said in other posts, people want to see you become husband and wife, and knowing or finding out later that you're already married cheapens it.

    OurWildKingdom
  • What she is planning is definitely a PPD. If she wanted to do the big outdoor thing and have that as her legal wedding and then have a small ceremony in the church AFTER that, then I would have no problem with it. I'm actually having a second ceremony myself because I am Catholic and FI is Orthodox. It's not a PPD because the first wedding, the Catholic ceremony, is the one that will make us legally married and everybody is invited to that one. Sometime later we will do a much smaller, immediate family only ceremony in the Greek church. Nobody will be invited to the small ceremony who wasn't invited to the big one, which is also one of the issues with a PPD- as posters have said in other posts, people want to see you become husband and wife, and knowing or finding out later that you're already married cheapens it.


    Ok so here's what's confusing to me about PPDs, and I know posters have strong opinions about this but I just can't bring myself to care. If both of those ceremonies are meaningful to you and FI, why does it matter which one your guests see? They will both be something that is spiritually necessary for you to feel that you are "married". I just think that everyone gets to define for themselves what they need to feel married. For you and your FI, it's both of your religions blessing the union AND the legal component. Why wouldn't the logic also follow "our guests want to see what is spiritually meaningful to us, so they will be disappointed if they don't get to see the greek orthodox ceremony"

    I guess I just don't see why what your cousin is doing matters at all. As long as the wedding in front of their guests is something they consider necessary to feel married, then I don't see how you can tell them it's just a cheap reenactment.


  • Ok so here's what's confusing to me about PPDs, and I know posters have strong opinions about this but I just can't bring myself to care. If both of those ceremonies are meaningful to you and FI, why does it matter which one your guests see? They will both be something that is spiritually necessary for you to feel that you are "married". I just think that everyone gets to define for themselves what they need to feel married. For you and your FI, it's both of your religions blessing the union AND the legal component. Why wouldn't the logic also follow "our guests want to see what is spiritually meaningful to us, so they will be disappointed if they don't get to see the greek orthodox ceremony"

    I guess I just don't see why what your cousin is doing matters at all. As long as the wedding in front of their guests is something they consider necessary to feel married, then I don't see how you can tell them it's just a cheap reenactment.
    I see where you're coming from, but in this case she said the religious ceremony is important to them and that's what they're not inviting everyone to. It just feels like she wants to have her cake and eat it too.

    Also, a religious ceremony can make you spiritually and legally married, so if having a religious marriage is important to a couple then why would you have a separate civil ceremony? Two different religions I get, but religious and civil (unless a requirement in your country) I just don't understand. Also, I feel that the first time you vow to spend the rest of your life with someone is a big moment, and as a guest I would want to witness that moment.

    In my case, the second ceremony isn't to make us both "feel" married, but more about FI being in good standing with his church. If we didn't need to have both we wouldn't.

    It's fine that you don't care, and I'm sure there are other people who agree with you, and maybe I'm splitting hairs a bit, but that's JMO.
    OurWildKingdom
This discussion has been closed.
Choose Another Board
Search Boards