Baby at wedding

In article ,
Ericka Kammerer wrote:

dragonlady wrote:

Some churches only allow use of their chapel by adherents to the
religion.

But it can be pretty dicey to define "adherents."
There are lots of people who'll claim to be of a certain
denomination but who are far from regular churchgoers.
Some churches do restrict these things to active parishoners.
Others prefer to be more open under the theory that the
church should be a more welcoming institution, not to mention
that many see weddings as an outreach opportunity.

In my mother's church (Presbyterian) you can only get married in their
sanctuary if the Board (or whatever their governing body is called!)
votes to allow it -- the basic premise is that, by allowing the use of
their sanctuary, the congregation is sanctioning/supporting the
marriage, so they have to actually vote to approve it.

In others, you have to prove that you are at least a member of the
appropriate denomination.

And in some, a minister or priest of that denomination must perform the
wedding -- and, more, if it is not the minister of THAT congregation,
that minister must approve the use of the facilities by an outside
minister. (My brother -- a Lutheran minister -- has refused to conduct
weddings for nominal members -- even one who was the granddaughter of a
Pillar of the Church -- when he felt that the couple should not get
married. His mandatory premarital counselling was a total disaster.)

Then there are those that rent their space out to pretty much anyone who
wants it, with no restrictions as to religion or officiants or -- in our
case -- pretty much anything else! As a down town church with a
beautiful sanctuary, a well appointed kitchen, and right next door to a
club with great banquet and dance facilities, wedding rentals is a good
source of revenue, and there is nothing in our theology or philosophy
that insists that we only allow the sanctuary to be used for weddings of
which we would approve. While it has, from time to time, resulted in
people coming back to check us out, that's clearly not our primary goal
-- it is about revenue and about being open and available.




Those that do not usually consider rental of their space to be part of
their financial planning -- it's how they raise money, and I doubt if
they resent people doing it!

They don't have to resent it to want/need to
weed out some applicants. There are many churches that
are in high demand for one reason or another. Having a
long list of requirements is one way to cut down on the
demand. I've noticed this at many popular churches like
the National Cathedral and the military academy chapels.
The list of rules and regs is practically a book.

That makes some sense, I suppose.

I would imagine the cost is also somewhat prohibitive -- at least, for
the National Cathedral! (I assume military academy chapels are free for
their attendees?)
--
Children won't care how much you know until they know how much you care

dragonlady wrote:

I would imagine the cost is also somewhat prohibitive -- at least, for
the National Cathedral!

Oddly, I don't think it's so much the fee for the
church that is prohibitive, but all the rules and regs make
things add up considerably (organist fee, sexton's fee,
thou-shalt-haves, etc.).

(I assume military academy chapels are free for
their attendees?)

I *think* so (you'd think I'd know, having been
in two different military academy weddings), but incidentals
can also run up for those.

Best wishes,
Ericka

dragonlady wrote in message ...
In article ,
Ericka Kammerer wrote:

Mary Gordon wrote:

Too strange. You'd wonder why they'd care - since a lot of the
decoration that gets put in churches for weddings is non-floral (i.e.
those bunches of lace and ribbons etc. in garlands that get put on
pews etc.)

Well, like I said, cynical me thinks it's often about
putting roadblocks in the way when you have more demand than
supply ;-) I think a lot of churches, especially picturesque
ones, have gotten a bit PO'ed about having lots of people
wanting to have weddings in their church without having
any interest in espousing the religion.

Best wishes,
Ericka


Some churches only allow use of their chapel by adherents to the
religion.

Those that do not usually consider rental of their space to be part of
their financial planning -- it's how they raise money, and I doubt if
they resent people doing it!

The Catholic church we had our religious ceremony in is both an active
parish and a National Historic Site (run jointly by NPS), and is
available to all Christian ceremonies, it need not be Catholic. They
do charge, but honestly, it's a pretty nominal fee, comparable to
other downtown historic RC churches in this and other cities.

I doubt the 'no artificial flowers' rule is meant to weed people out
there, since the people doing it are already willing to pay. I really
have no other ideas though!

However, some folks may resent the loss of the time the space is
available for congregational use!

Most of the churches that are in high demand for weddings already have
alloted times for them, IME. They are set around already established
congregational activities.


I've never dealt with a church that had a ban on artificial flowers, so
I've never had to ask why.


It didn't occur to me to ask, as it was a non-issue anyway. I've no
desire to call and ask, either, now that it's all over . It's a
common enough thing in Catholic Churches these days, however.

"Phoebe & Allyson" wrote in message
...
Jenrose wrote:
snerk Been tried, doesn't work. Heck, I couldn't be "turned" gay
even when I wanted to.

Aw, you just haven't met the right woman.


Damndest thing was that I *did*... still didn't work.

Jenrose

Ericka Kammerer wrote in
:

dragonlady wrote:

Some churches only allow use of their chapel by adherents
to the religion.

But it can be pretty dicey to define "adherents."
There are lots of people who'll claim to be of a certain
denomination but who are far from regular churchgoers.
Some churches do restrict these things to active
parishoners. Others prefer to be more open under the theory
that the church should be a more welcoming institution, not
to mention that many see weddings as an outreach
opportunity.

and *some* churches are just plain difficult...
when i planned to get married, my intended & i went to visit
the pastor. now, mind you, this is a church i had attended
weekly since i was 9 years old, & had been confirmed in (by
this pastor) & tithed to.
during the conversation, it came out that my intended & i had
the same address. now, we *weren't* 'living together', we just
happened to live in the same building. at this point, the
pastor became rather snotty & informed us not only would he
*not* marry us, he wouldn't allow us the use of the church...
in fact, if we really wanted to get married, we should go talk
to the UU church because "they'll marry *anybody*".
well, *excuse* me! needless to say, that was the *last* time
i attended church & i'd have to say i'm no longer an adherent
to *that* faith.
i tend to think churches should be a wee bit more open to
thier communities...
lee not married

"enigma" wrote in message
. ..
Ericka Kammerer wrote in
:

dragonlady wrote:

Some churches only allow use of their chapel by adherents
to the religion.

But it can be pretty dicey to define "adherents."
There are lots of people who'll claim to be of a certain
denomination but who are far from regular churchgoers.
Some churches do restrict these things to active
parishoners. Others prefer to be more open under the theory
that the church should be a more welcoming institution, not
to mention that many see weddings as an outreach
opportunity.

and *some* churches are just plain difficult...
when i planned to get married, my intended & i went to visit
the pastor. now, mind you, this is a church i had attended
weekly since i was 9 years old, & had been confirmed in (by
this pastor) & tithed to.
during the conversation, it came out that my intended & i had
the same address. now, we *weren't* 'living together', we just
happened to live in the same building. at this point, the
pastor became rather snotty & informed us not only would he
*not* marry us, he wouldn't allow us the use of the church...

I am so sorry that you had problems with this pastor. I guess some people
are old fashion or something. Hope all went well with your wedding
eventhough it wasn't where you wanted to get married.

in fact, if we really wanted to get married, we should go talk
to the UU church because "they'll marry *anybody*".
well, *excuse* me! needless to say, that was the *last* time
i attended church & i'd have to say i'm no longer an adherent
to *that* faith.

Was it the denomination the believed like this or just that pastor? I am
only asking because we have some churches in our denomination that are more
strict then others.

i tend to think churches should be a wee bit more open to
thier communities...

Most churches are ore open minded to their communities.

Kay

lee not married

"Kaybee" wrote in
:

in fact, if we really wanted to get married, we should go
talk to the UU church because "they'll marry *anybody*".
well, *excuse* me! needless to say, that was the *last*
time
i attended church & i'd have to say i'm no longer an
adherent to *that* faith.

Was it the denomination the believed like this or just that
pastor? I am only asking because we have some churches in
our denomination that are more strict then others.

in that case i think it was the pastor, but i do have some
serious problems with other parts of the church's positions on
things.
this particular pastor came to the curch when i was around 14
or 15 & we butted heads several times in study classes too. he
was a very rigid thinker. he alienated a good number of the
church deacons (i remember showing up a bit late one Sunday &
one of the deacons was sitting outside the church. i asked him
why & he said that he felt closer to God out there...)
lee

"enigma" wrote in message
. ..
"Kaybee" wrote in
:

in fact, if we really wanted to get married, we should go
talk to the UU church because "they'll marry *anybody*".
well, *excuse* me! needless to say, that was the *last*
time
i attended church & i'd have to say i'm no longer an
adherent to *that* faith.

Was it the denomination the believed like this or just that
pastor? I am only asking because we have some churches in
our denomination that are more strict then others.

in that case i think it was the pastor, but i do have some
serious problems with other parts of the church's positions on
things.
this particular pastor came to the curch when i was around 14
or 15 & we butted heads several times in study classes too. he
was a very rigid thinker. he alienated a good number of the
church deacons (i remember showing up a bit late one Sunday &
one of the deacons was sitting outside the church. i asked him
why & he said that he felt closer to God out there...)

that is funny that the decon said that. well I guess we will have this. I
ahve been lucky enough to have pastors that are open minded....

kay
lee