New Order of Marriage-Lent
  • TeresaW
    Posts: 42
    Hello,

    I am wondering, I have a couple getting married on the 1st Saturday in Lent, and I know the Gloria should be sung, and we just have to steer clear of too much celebratory music during the Mass. Are we allowed, however, to do preludes/recessional on the organ with it being before the Mass and after the Mass? The bride was also interested in either another vocalist doing harmony or having a violinist - but would a violinist be going against the GIRM?

    The General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM) states:

    313. In Lent the playing of the organ and musical instruments is allowed only in order to support the singing. Exceptions, however, are Laetare Sunday (Fourth Sunday of Lent), Solemnities, and Feasts.

    But Marriage is not a feast or solemnity...

    The bride likes "happy music" so I'm not sure how to steer away from trumpet voluntaries and such, especially if it's at the "outside of Mass" points.

    Thoughts?
  • TeresaW
    Posts: 42
    I should add she wanted harmonies by the vocalist. The violin I guess could support the singing but that means it can't play in harmony or parts... which would kind of defeat the purpose, in my opinion.
  • StephenMatthew
    Posts: 112
    Several members will offer answers to your question, but I will offer a thought or two.

    While a marriage is not a feast or solemnity, I think it can be argued that it is in fact an inherently solemn and festal celebration, the requirement for the Gloria reflects that reality. Ritual masses are not exempt from the liturgical calendar, but weddings, funerals, ordinations, consecrations, etc. are all there own things and may be said to be part of a sort of liturgical calendar that spans the life of a person rather than being annual seasonal exercises. However, perhaps a wedding in Lent is an opportunity to consider and celebrate aspects of marriage usually overlooked.
    Thanked by 1TeresaW
  • CCoozeCCooze
    Posts: 1,259
    I do believe that the rubrics for Lent must still be followed, except that the Nuptial Mass will have the Gloria.

    So:
    During the wedding, no solo organ, no solo violin, etc. - no music without voice.
    No Alleluia.
    No altar flowers.

    I do believe that different priests have different ideas of whether or not to have processional/recessional music during Lent, and that those who do may have various ideas for what types of music is suitable.
    Talking to the rector about prelude/postlude music is probably the way to go.

    That being said, since the Introit/Entrance chant is usually sung at the entrance of the priest, which preceeds the bridal procession, it may be best for her to choose something with vocals - because the ceremony has begun.
    Perhaps everyone/the cantor could sing her favorite hymn?

    (I am rambling, a bit, I know. I apologize. I have a head cold.)
    Thanked by 1TeresaW
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 3,177
    Quick question: Did you consult with the Pastor about the Mass to be used?

    When I have done Sunday Weddings it has always been within the context of the formulary for the Sunday Mass (Orations, Readings, Propers, et cet.), going from the idea that the Sunday takes precedence over a Ritual Mass (these have been during O.T. and Easter, but never during Lent), I don't have my ordo with me, so I can't check to see the veracity of that, though.

    The Church has traditionally forbidden the Solemnization of Weddings during Lent and Advent: they could get married but outside of Mass, the Nuptial Mass being forbidden, and no flowers or solo instrumental music was allowed. I do not know if this ban is still in effect universally (I doubt it, since after the Council, well, let's not go there), but it could still be at the Diocesan level, I assume. (This used to be one of the Precepts of the Church: to not Solemnize a Marriage at the forbidden times.)

    Mini-rant: Personally, I think that Sunday weddings should be forbidden, anyway. I'd never heard of them until a few years ago when I had my first (as DM, lest any confusion arise). Scheduling Sunday Weddings usually has nothing to do with religion: it's because the hallowed reception hall was only available that day -- and after all, the reception is the point of having a wedding: just look at all the money they sink into crudites, no wonder they "can't pay the organist". And that's just for starters: I mean, you can't call it Holy Matrimony until the groom gets drunk and throws up on his mother-in-law -- consumatus est. It's high time the Church gets her children to do what is proper (in marriage and in all things), rather than bending to the degenerate modern culture; let them book the reception hall based on when the Solemnization of a Wedding is appropriate.
    Thanked by 2M. Jackson Osborn eft94530
  • TeresaW
    Posts: 42
    To clarify, the Wedding is on a Saturday, not a Sunday. The Nuptial Mass is no longer forbidden during Lent, as is made clear in the New Order of Marriage that just came out at the close of the year. So the Mass will be the Nuptial Mass.

    That's what makes this thing so complicated...It's during Lent, regardless.
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,415
    .
  • francis
    Posts: 10,826
    I entirely agree with MJO on the matter... an exquisite 'point'.
    Thanked by 1M. Jackson Osborn
  • M. Jackson Osborn
    Posts: 8,415
    Actually, Francis, it often seems that defense of the timeless traditions of a theologically pungent kalendar, whether it's the matter at hand, jostling Epiphany and Ascension around, and a generous list of other stuff because they are inconvenient for pampered Americans and a craven 'Rome', is actually 'point-less', They couldn't care less.

    I had elected not to carry on about it, but you jostled me into doing so.
    And, I applaud heartily Salieri's sentiments.
  • SalieriSalieri
    Posts: 3,177
    Teresa: My apologies, I could have sworn that you said Sunday, not Saturday. I guess sometimes the brain moves faster than the eyeballs!
  • francis
    Posts: 10,826
    and I figured that was what you were thinking...

    the whole notion of convenience has literally destroyed our liturgical calendar.
  • TeresaW
    Posts: 42
    I know, I'm starting to hate convenience as well. What use is our religion if it is too convenient? Is it really something that marks us as "different" and "set-apart" if it is too normalized?

    Thank you all for your time.
    Thanked by 2CHGiffen eft94530
Add a Comment