Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
Non - Catholic Wedding = Unhappy Catholic Parents
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
We're going for a Civil Ceremony in 6 weeks and there was never any objection to not going the church route, despite there being quite present Catholicism on both sides (more traditional superstition than blind faith).
I recently got the words for the ceremony sent to me and I cried when I read them - legal or not, they are very well worded to indicate the seriousness of the occasion and I found the words very deep and meaningful. Many people I know who were skeptical and had been to them have all agreed that they were much more romantic than a church wedding and were delighted to be out for drinks in 15 minutes
Hopefully things work out, but stick your ground. Mammies tend to throw around the "Big Threats" in the hopes that you will fear them enough to comply, but very few parents would happily deal with the lifelong shame of refusing to attend their child's marriage over unacceptance of their beliefs or lack thereof.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
magicbastarder wrote: »humanism is generally atheist, not anti-theist, as far as i understood. so doesn't set out to prove catholicism wrong, for example.
Agreed. My point is that it's an atheist philosophy.Hotblack Desiato wrote: »
Given that your never one to shy away from adopting an atheist position in any debate, I'm very surprised that you would be willing to include either of these as true humanism and argue in their favour but I suspect you know different..
The Humanist Association of Ireland is Atheist. Humanism in it's true form today, is atheist.
The humanist celebrants in Ireland must be must be members of HAI for at least 2 years before applying for the role. They are accredited by HAI and therefore you can be certain that they too are atheist.
And so while people are perfectly entitled to follow whatever trend, fad or fashion they wish, others are equally entitled to point out the glaring inconsistencies in the fact that in many cases they've dropped one option because it's inconsistent with their beliefs, for another option that's equally inconsistent with their beliefs.
As an aside, i've attended all 3 forms of wedding ceremony and my favourite by a mile was the civil. No nonsense, just cut to the chase and get the job done. The humanist ceremonies i've attended appeared to try very hard to look like a religious ceremony, just without the mention of God. One of them was even in a church like building
But the civil ceremonies i've just cut through all that with just enough ceremony and minimum of fuss.
OP - Regardless of your reasons, it's your day and you should ultimately do what suits both you and your partner. I don't necessarily agree that parents opinions don't matter and every effort should be made to include them but sometimes we just have to do it our way anyway and feck everyone else.0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
Given that your never one to shy away from adopting an atheist position in any debate,
I'd love to know how you think this sort of statement adds anything useful whatsoever to your points.I'm very surprised that you would be willing to include either of these as true humanism and argue in their favour but I suspect you know different..
I neither know nor care what "true" humanism is supposed to be - the very idea indicates a theistic mindset, that any philosophy can be "true" and therefore others false.
It's more rational to take a 'pick'n'mix' approach - yes even some religions have some good ideas, the problem with them all is the substantial baggage of bad ideas that go along with the good, and the requirement to believe in unevidenced deity/ies.
I don't particularly identify as a humanist, but there are some good ideas in there. There are some woo-ish ideas creeping in there among some adherents of it too.The Humanist Association of Ireland is Atheist.
I'm not a member so you'd have to ask them. Not everyone with no theistic belief identifies as an atheist.The humanist celebrants in Ireland must be must be members of HAI for at least 2 years before applying for the role. They are accredited by HAI and therefore you can be certain that they too are atheist.
How can anyone prove to the HAI they are an atheist? What if the HAI suspects that one of their celebrants is starting to believe a little bit in one or more gods, can they investigate and strike them off??
The idea is ridiculous. You simply have to take a person at their word when they state their belief or unbelief. The RC church cannot prove a priest has lost his faith if he doesn't tell anyone - if he carries out all his activities and ceremonies as he did before then he keeps his job indefinitely. Similarly the HAI cannot really know (and probably don't care) what a celebrant's private beliefs might be provided they carry out ceremonies in the manner set out by them.And so while people are perfectly entitled to follow whatever trend, fad or fashion they wish, others are equally entitled to point out the glaring inconsistencies in the fact that in many cases they've dropped one option because it's inconsistent with their beliefs, for another option that's equally inconsistent with their beliefs.
How's that? Do all ex-catholics become atheists? Are you claiming that humanist ceremonies are incompatible with atheism? At least as the HAI carry them out, they are not.The humanist ceremonies i've attended appeared to try very hard to look like a religious ceremony, just without the mention of God. One of them was even in a church like building
I've attended a civil wedding which was in a church! A private chapel in a castle which is now a hotel (where the reception was held - very handy!) Celebrant was from the HSE, who was fine with the venue provided the stained glass windows and statues were covered over with drapes. No religious music allowed either, but that's the same at the HSE's own venues (for our wedding we used the Ramones.)
What was it about the humanist ceremonies which, in your opinion, made them 'look religious' ? Bear in mind the form of the ceremony is very largely up to the couple concerned and the celebrant is unlikely to have an issue using any wording the couple prefer provided it is not explicitly religious.
Were these couples divorced and prohibited from marrying in a church, but would have preferred to?Scrap the cap!
0 -
Hotblack Desiato wrote: »I'd love to know how you think this sort of statement adds anything useful whatsoever to your points.
I meant nothing bad by it. I'm just used to seeing you debate from an atheistic view point. I was surprised to see you support the concept of diluting humanism with theism. That was all.Hotblack Desiato wrote: »I neither know nor care what "true" humanism is supposed to be - the very idea indicates a theistic mindset, that any philosophy can be "true" and therefore others false.
It's more rational to take a 'pick'n'mix' approach - yes even some religions have some good ideas, the problem with them all is the substantial baggage of bad ideas that go along with the good, and the requirement to believe in unevidenced deity/ies.
Fair enough. We're agreed.Hotblack Desiato wrote: »I don't particularly identify as a humanist, but there are some good ideas in there. There are some woo-ish ideas creeping in there among some adherents of it too.
Absolutely. So again we're in agreement. But as I said, I was surprised to see you make the point in favour of the theistic element creeping in. On that point we diverge a little. But it is what it is and people are free to adopt and change whatever they want.Hotblack Desiato wrote: »I'm not a member so you'd have to ask them.
Well instead of asking them we can just consult their website...
"It is for people who base their interpretation of existence on the evidence of the natural world and its evolution, and not on belief in the supernatural (theistic god, miracles, afterlife, revealed morality etc.)."
We can go backwards and forwards on this all day. Yes there are diluted versions of humanism out there. But the humanism we're discussing in relation to weddings in Ireland, is absolutely atheist in it's philosophy.Hotblack Desiato wrote: »How can anyone prove to the HAI they are an atheist? What if the HAI suspects that one of their celebrants is starting to believe a little bit in one or more gods, can they investigate and strike them off??
The idea is ridiculous. You simply have to take a person at their word when they state their belief or unbelief. The RC church cannot prove a priest has lost his faith if he doesn't tell anyone - if he carries out all his activities and ceremonies as he did before then he keeps his job indefinitely. Similarly the HAI cannot really know (and probably don't care) what a celebrant's private beliefs might be provided they carry out ceremonies in the manner set out by them.
I have no idea what point your making here. Either way, i have no disagreement with you on any of it.Hotblack Desiato wrote: »How's that? Do all ex-catholics become atheists? Are you claiming that humanist ceremonies are incompatible with atheism? At least as the HAI carry them out, they are not.
No. I'm saying humanism has a particular view point and philosophy. As does the RC Church. People are turning away from the RC church in their droves and opting for a Humanist wedding instead. I'm suggesting that a significant number of these people, would also have an issue with the humanist view point if they actually thought about it. But they don't because Humanism is the new buzz word and so they just blindly follow. The option for a humanist wedding has always been there but people only started opting for it when it became popular and convenient. That's all i was saying.Hotblack Desiato wrote: »I've attended a civil wedding which was in a church! A private chapel in a castle which is now a hotel (where the reception was held - very handy!) Celebrant was from the HSE, who was fine with the venue provided the stained glass windows and statues were covered over with drapes. No religious music allowed either, but that's the same at the HSE's own venues (for our wedding we used the Ramones.)
Great choice. We went for a more homegrown theme. Hot House Flowers, Van Morrison, The Furey's, Liam Clancy, and a few others...
Hotblack Desiato wrote: »What was it about the humanist ceremonies which, in your opinion, made them 'look religious' ? Bear in mind the form of the ceremony is very largely up to the couple concerned and the celebrant is unlikely to have an issue using any wording the couple prefer provided it is not explicitly religious.
It's difficult to put a finger on it. All i can say is that the humanist ceremonies didn't feel much different. Maybe because we were sat in church seats with stained glass windows, maybe it was the flowers and white dresses. I don't know. But the civil ceremony definitely felt secular whereas the humanist didn't. I've only been to a couple though and i'm sure they are wide and varied.Hotblack Desiato wrote: »Were these couples divorced and prohibited from marrying in a church, but would have preferred to?
No. All starrey eyed loved up first timers just like ourselves at the time.0 -
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
BlueLagoon1 wrote: »Has anyone got any advice for this difficult time?
I am not sure what advice is possible. You have two people ignorantly acting like your wedding day is somehow THEIR day and should pander to them and their wishes. They have lost sight of the fact that it is YOUR day and it needs to reflect YOU and your life and personality and desires and most of all the relationship you are formalizing in union.
The two mothers in question simply have to get over it. And over themselves. And I would not pussyfoot around making that blatantly clear to them albeit in the most polite and cordial ways possible.An Claidheamh wrote: »The difference is civil ceremonies are for people who just want to be married. Humanist ones are for fad followers who make childish snide remarks about symbolic age-old Catholic ceremonies.....
I think I will let people who want such ceremonies to tell us why they want them.... rather than have you simply make it up on their behalf just so you can be snide.
Yes some people want to "just be married". But some people want a ceremony. They want their family and friends there. They want to declare their love openly in front of others rather than in a back room signing a piece of paper. They want to make vows that are actually heard and witnessed by more than just each other.
And there is NOTHING whatsoever wrong with any of that. Certainly not solely because you are full of hate for them simply for wanting it.
Actually only one couple I know ever ended up considering a humanist wedding as a reaction against a catholic one. It was an atheist and a pretty strong catholic. The latter REALLY wanted a church wedding in her own parish church. So they went along to meet the priest about it in his church on the clontarf sea front.
The priest basically told them that since himself never went to church or attended prayer he would not consider to marry them on religious and moral grounds........... unless.... cough cough ahem ahem wink wink nudge nudge.... palm out.... say no more say no more.
At which point despite her dedication to that church she told him exactly what she thought of him, they walked out, and after long considerations of other ceremonies they could have.... they decided the flexibility and openness and ability to personalize it made a humanist wedding the best choice for them.
And not a money grabbing self-serving opportunist did they find when organizing it either. And in the end she openly said the ceremony was more personal to her, and represented her more, than anything she would have had from her own church and she could not have been happier with it.An Claidheamh wrote: »I hate to break it to you and the O P but Humanist ceremonies are the whole Church ceremony!
I have been to many of each and there were very few similarities at all. And there was nothing in the humanist ceremony that was talking about unsubstantiated myths or fairy tales in it.
So I am not sure exactly what points of comparison you are using to declare them both identical. Seating arrangements perhaps? They were quite identical, given than you know people sat in rows all facing the front.... but that hardly seems relevant.An Claidheamh wrote: »Are they even practicing humanists?.... Of course not!
I did not realize you knew the couple personally to be able to tell us what they practice or not? Where are you getting your information or..... heaven forbid..... are you merely making stuff up as you go along again? Gasp.
But by all means tell us what exactly a "practicing humanist" is, what they do, and what qualifies them as such. Are there ceremonies they attend? Mantras they recite to reaffirm their faith to themselves and others? What is it exactly?I can’t help but get the feeling that a lot of couples are opting for a humanist ceremony instead without actually giving any thought as to whether humanism is compatible with their beliefs or not.
I notice you did not actually mention WHAT is "giving you that feeling" so I would be interested to know. Because I have been at quite a few at this stage and I know every single one of them put a lot of thought into what ceremony they wanted and why they wanted it. And not one of them gave any appearance of doing it because of trendiness. Is there something substantive giving you this feeling, or do you just have a differing set of personal anecdotes to my own?An Claidheamh wrote: »The part in humanist ceremonies where spirits are invited perhaps.....
This has not happened at a single one of the ones I was at. Not a single one I attended mentioned anything that was based in myth, folklore, fairy tales or unsubstantiated nonsense. You make it sound like you are mixing up humanist weddings with Wicca somewhere along the line.Fair enough. To me it just smacks of attention seeking but each to thier own.
We are talking about weddings here. They are MEANT to be attention seeking. It is kinda the point. 0 -
You've missed the point of what I was writing about by perhaps a thousand country miles
Ok Let's see...If it was as you say, the majority of Christian parents would act this way. But they don't.
To which you replied..I think that's open to debate.
I didn't miss your point at all. It's impossible to miss. It's pretty cut and dried.
You are generalising and denigrating an entire group of parents based on your own prejudices and that is not a position I can take seriously or engage with.I'm trying to having a peaceful discussion about how religion works in general terms, while you're telling me, in increasingly heated terms, about my feelings. Do you know me personally, and if not, how on earth do you know what I feel? :rolleyes:
As am I. I have neither been un-peacful nor heated. Nor have i told you how you "feel".
As i've said a couple of times now, I get how religion works in general. I even get your slant on how it works to a certain extent. I don't agree but i get it. That's not the issue here..
The issue is that when you write off an entire group of parents in the way that you have, any further points you make, no matter how valid, are held in that light and are difficult to take seriously as a result
I can only assume your claims that i'm getting heated and not being peacful are an attempt to discredit me but your accusations are simply not bourne out by my posts which are there, unedited for anyone to see.Anyhow, it's best to drop the topic if you're not interested in discussing it peacefully.
Indeed :rolleyes:0 -
Advertisement
Advertisement