Is it inappropriate to have a big wedding if-

[tasha99]

I think people should have the kind of wedding they want. Nothing wrong with celebrating your love.

Of course, I'm sure in some etiquette book, there is a rule against it. There are two types of etiquette rules: those designed to make people feel better (treat others kindly) and those designed to make people feel worse (judge others about petty crap). Getting up in arms over someone else's wedding would be latter kind of etiquette rule, and life's too short for that.

 

[pilesoflaundry]

I think getting married in the church with kids is a bit much but that's just how catholic standards are. The priest gave me a hard time for baptising ds before we were married like it was awful to have us standing up there unmarried but baptising the baby. He was rude etc. So I left the church after that but anyway...

I don't care really and wouldn't have said anything. If they want a big wedding and they can afford it so be it. I think your mil is probably reacting to the whole church thing after it's obviously they did things that go against the general church practices.

At least they got married!

 

[PaddingtonBear]

You see, that's what I think it all boils down to in many cases. The wedding becomes more important than what ought to be front and center......the MARRIAGE. [snip]
Over the past 15 years or so, I have seen a disturbing trend among couples in which the wedding is a near obsession and it seems precious little thought is given to the actual marriage and what it means. The wedding is one day and in truth, insignificant to your lives in total. Whether there is a baby involved has nothing to do with it, BTW. Pregnant, not pregnant...it doesn't matter. There is a reason the term "bridezilla" has been coined. Too many people are somehow under the delusion that the goal is a fancy, glorious wedding and once that is achieved.....Oh.....Well, what DOES happen after that?

Our wedding was significant to our lives in total. It was significant to my husband and I, to our families. It was a worship service that joined the two of us as one in marriage. In our church a wedding is not a sacrament, but it is still an important spiritual event. I took our vows seriously- far too seriously to say them in a hurry in a courtroom. I'm not knocking courtroom weddings, that's fine for those who want to marry that way, but it wouldn't have been fine for us. Its a pretty huge- rather illogical- leap to think that a person who doesn't run out and get married immediately just becuase she is pregnant is not taking marriage seriously or has some sort of a princess fantasy about a wedding. In fact, I would think that a wedding planned over time, would by nature require the bride and groom to give more thought toward the marriage itself, than the couple that runs out and gets hitched as a visceral response to an unplanned pregnancy.

A wedding may not be important to you, but baby or no baby, it would be important to my husband and I.

I think there are some people that are bridezillas, of course, but just becuase a wedding is important to a couple does not mean that they haven't thought about the marriage, planned for it, etc.

 

[look1angel]

Married for the second time last year, had a wedding more than twice the size of my first 29 yrs ago & all 5 of our kids were in it. Best day of my life next to giving birth to my children. I say you only live once so why not do it up the way you feel is right. It's all about the bride & groom, they don't care if YOU remember it, only that they will

BTW I'm catholic too & we skipped the church this time round...it's a catholic thing all that stuff about having the first one annulled...I passed

 

[bethy]

It's most definitely not a choice I would make. And I would internally cringe a little as a guest at such a wedding. For me, I would have gotten married well before the birth of my child. My child would have become the priority instead of a large party. I cannot relate to their decision to wait. But that's their decision and not mine of course.

 

[xoprincessmomxo]

Of course you have "the right" to feel however you want. But I can't imagine anyone frowning upon this couple the OP mentions without knowing the full details of why they waited to get married.

My cousin had a big wedding *her second, his first). She had a 4 year old from her previous wedding and a few months old baby with my cousin. They got married in that order because;

a) that's when everyone's various schedules meshed.

b) the hall could accommodate them

c) they had the money to cover it.

Your post helps sum up some of my thoughts on it. It's easy to judge when you don't know the whole situation.

My DH husband and I planned on getting married before we got pregnant. Unfortunately, my mother got sick and ended up passing away a week after I found out I was pregnant to the day. At that point getting married and having a wedding was the furthest thing from my mind. My daughter was 4 when we did get married and I was pregnant with my second. It had taken a long time for me to get over the fact that my mother would not be there to help me celebrate. We had a JOP wedding and a small reception with family, but if I'd wanted to have had a big wedding, I would have and I woud not have felt ashamed in the least. We did what was right for us. I would love to have a vows renewal ceremony sometime with just my DH and children to celebrate our family.....

 

[xoprincessmomxo]

It's most definitely not a choice I would make. And I would internally cringe a little as a guest at such a wedding. For me, I would have gotten married well before the birth of my child. My child would have become the priority instead of a large party. I cannot relate to their decision to wait. But that's their decision and not mine of course.

Not to be rude, but I suggest you decline any invitations to such weddings. No bride wants their guests to sit in the audience and cringe on their joyous day.

 

[redlight]

Nope.

 

[m&m's mom]

Our kids were 1 and 4 when we got married.
We have been together happily for 20 years now.
That being said, I personally thought it would have been riduclous & inappropriate to have the big church wedding at that time.
I also felt like money would absolutely be better spent than on a wedding at that point i.g. college accts for the kids etc.
In full disclosure I never wanted a big wedding so the very small costume party/wedding party we had was perfect for us.

 

[Nancyg56]

I would rather that the couple waited and was sure that they were marrying because they loved each other and wanted to be married rather than marrying because they were expecting a child. Perhaps some people would look down on the decision to celebrate their marriage with all of their family and friends and to sanctify the Union in Church but not me.

 

[maelstrom]

I think people should have whatever kind of wedding they want and if other people have a problem with it, they don't have to attend.

 

[crazee4mickey]

I don't see it has inappropriate at all.

I think the fact they waited until their child was one year old is a testament of their love....can you imagine the hub bub if they got married while she was pregnant?! Then of course it would be "he's only marrying her because she's pregnant"--they waited a year big whoop!

Hope they have a wonderful life together as a family and remember the big, beautiful wedding they had to celebrate it!

 

[Aisling]

Any "perceived tackiness" is outweighed by the fact that they are creating an intact family for their child. Good for them!

I agree. And the couple had a beautiful wedding to remember in their older years. All's well as far as my opinion goes.

I like that the priest didn't take issue with it. If he's anything like my priests, he probably told the couple "God isn't particular when it comes to your wedding gown if it's white, offwhite, or having a big wedding party, just that you've decided to create a family and take your vows before Him."

 

[EMom]

Our wedding was significant to our lives in total. It was significant to my husband and I, to our families. It was a worship service that joined the two of us as one in marriage. In our church a wedding is not a sacrament, but it is still an important spiritual event. I took our vows seriously- far too seriously to say them in a hurry in a courtroom. I'm not knocking courtroom weddings, that's fine for those who want to marry that way, but it wouldn't have been fine for us. Its a pretty huge- rather illogical- leap to think that a person who doesn't run out and get married immediately just becuase she is pregnant is not taking marriage seriously or has some sort of a princess fantasy about a wedding. In fact, I would think that a wedding planned over time, would by nature require the bride and groom to give more thought toward the marriage itself, than the couple that runs out and gets hitched as a visceral response to an unplanned pregnancy.

A wedding may not be important to you, but baby or no baby, it would be important to my husband and I.

I think there are some people that are bridezillas, of course, but just becuase a wedding is important to a couple does not mean that they haven't thought about the marriage, planned for it, etc.

I had a formal church wedding, bridesmaids, reception, honeymoon, etc. Yes, that mattered to me and was quite important. I looked forward to it as much as any woman. We spent a good amount of time planning it. But I always kept in perspective that the wedding was secondary to the marriage, and by a long shot. The wedding was the avenue to the marriage, not the actual destination itself, as it seems to be for so many.

I'm not advocating marrying simply because you're pregnant. I've seen people do that and walk into years of misery. A young woman I know recently had a baby with her BF who is, to be blunt, no good. A worthless alcoholic, who has griped nonstop about how much her pregnancy is inconveniencing him. I, among others, told her there was no reason to marry him and plenty of reasons NOT to. I told her that it may not be easy, but she can raise this baby without him, and that there are good men out there who would love her and that child, and she doesn't have to settle for him. (She's afraid she'll always be alone.) In her case, my words to her mother were not, "Are they getting married?" but, "Dear lord, please tell me she's not marrying him."

But if I was in a committed relationship, then yes, I'd get on with it. My priorities would shift and the big wedding would go way down on the list. Way down.

 

[Scurvy]

I had a formal church wedding, bridesmaids, reception, honeymoon, etc. Yes, that mattered to me and was quite important. I looked forward to it as much as any woman. We spent a good amount of time planning it. But I always kept in perspective that the wedding was secondary to the marriage, and by a long shot. The wedding was the avenue to the marriage, not the actual destination itself, as it seems to be for so many.

I'm not advocating marrying simply because you're pregnant. I've seen people do that and walk into years of misery. A young woman I know recently had a baby with her BF who is, to be blunt, no good. A worthless alcoholic, who has griped nonstop about how much her pregnancy is inconveniencing him. I, among others, told her there was no reason to marry him and plenty of reasons NOT to. I told her that it may not be easy, but she can raise this baby without him, and that there are good men out there who would love her and that child, and she doesn't have to settle for him. (She's afraid she'll always be alone.) In her case, my words to her mother were not, "Are they getting married?" but, "Dear lord, please tell me she's not marrying him."

But if I was in a committed relationship, then yes, I'd get on with it. My priorities would shift and the big wedding would go way down on the list. Way down.

EMom, I understand what you are saying and I agree with you completely. I was trying to think of a way to say what I was thinking, but I just couldn't figure out how to word it. You said it better than I ever could have.

 

[PaddingtonBear]

But I always kept in perspective that the wedding was secondary to the marriage, and by a long shot. The wedding was the avenue to the marriage, not the actual destination itself, as it seems to be for so many.

There is no evidence in the OP's post that this couple viewed a wedding as the destination itself. I don't think there's a ton of evidence that people in generally who have children out of wedlock view the wedding as the conculsion rather than the commencement of thier lives. I think you're equating apples and oranges; wedding obsessed brides are not demonstrably more common amongst couples who already have children together than amongst couples who do not.

But if I was in a committed relationship, then yes, I'd get on with it. My priorities would shift and the big wedding would go way down on the list. Way down.

That's you. I don't nessecarily think having a child, who is your #1 priority, and having a wedding celebration are in any way incompatible; I don't even think that one compromises the other.

Sorry, I'm not trying to harp on you, I actaully agree with some of your points, I just think there's some intrensic bias there about having kids out of wedlock that you are rationalizing.

There are many people (and I'm not directing this at Emom, just generally) who think big weddings are for those who maintain a prentense of virginity, or that those who haven't live by the 'rules' don't deserve weddings in the church. I'm not one of them. I'm one who thinks that for by grace are we saved, not of ourselves, so its not for me to judge a couple's worthyness of a traditional wedding.

 

[Free4Life11]

To me it depends on the registry. They have a child and have obviously established a home together, so I can't imagine there is much stuff they need that they don't have (well, if they can afford a big wedding? Maybe parents are paying...who know).

Big wedding = more guests = more gifts, so I could potentially see this as a major gift grab or even investment if they invited enough people. But again, I'd have to see the registry if there was one.

 

[Scurvy]

Sorry, I'm not trying to harp on you, I actaully agree with some of your points, I just think there's some intrensic bias there about having kids out of wedlock that you are rationalizing.

There are many people (and I'm not directing this at Emom, just generally) who think big weddings are for those who maintain a prentense of virginity, or that those who haven't live by the 'rules' don't deserve weddings in the church.

I don't necessarily have a bias about having kids out of wedlock, and I certainly don't think that you have to live by the "Rules" to deserve a big wedding. However, I do think it's foolish to delay getting married so you can afford a big wedding when there are children involved. First, because to me it would be more important to have my family intact than it would be to have a large wedding. (And by intact, I mean legally as well as emotionally - and to me marriage is important; it's different than just living together.) Second because once you start having children money is suddenly much more important than it is when you are single and childfree. The money you spend on a big wedding could be going into a college fund for the child, or could pay for family vacations, or any of the other expenses that you have once you become a parent. I find it odd when someone prioritizes what is essentially a big party enough to put their marriage on hold to wait for it, especially when there are children involved. But I know everyone doesn't feel that way.

 

[lillygator]

It's most definitely not a choice I would make. And I would internally cringe a little as a guest at such a wedding. For me, I would have gotten married well before the birth of my child. My child would have become the priority instead of a large party. I cannot relate to their decision to wait. But that's their decision and not mine of course.

wow, hope you would choose not to attend so you can cringe at home instead of at someone's joyous affair.

things happen in life....

 

[koima]

I can't imagine a single reason why a couple should forgo a joyful celebration of their marriage simply because they've already had a child together.

Our wedding certainly didn't define my marriage, but I hold that day with such fondness in my heart, not just because it began our marriage but because we had those people there to share it with us! It is such a wonderful memory of being surrounded by all of the people who loved us so much. Why should a couple be criticized for wanting to express their love and make that commitment surrounded by those who love them?

I also think that a couple who gets married a year after having a child together - which is not an easy experience for a couple - is showing a great deal of thought and consideration for the marriage and not just the "princess day." They already have a taste of the hard times and the joy that can come from marriage and are ready to make that commitment with eyes wide open.