|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Wedding Disco
|
Pigwidgeon
Ship's Owl
# 10192
|
Posted
A bride, groom -- and CofE Vicar! -- lead a "flashmob."
(I would have joined the two older women who leave.)
Maybe this should be in Hell...
--------------------
"...that is generally a matter for Pigwidgeon, several other consenting adults, a bottle of cheap Gin and the odd giraffe."
~Tortuf
Posts: 9835 | From: Hogwarts | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Carys
Ship's Celticist
# 78
|
Posted
Was wondering when this would appear here, been much discussed on Twitter. Apparently aunt Betty went to the loo rather than walking out.
It's not style, but it worked for the couple. It was celebration and I don't think it's really different from an anthem or such like.
Carys
--------------------
O Lord, you have searched me and know me
You know when I sit and when I rise
Posts: 6896 | From: Bryste mwy na thebyg | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pigwidgeon
Ship's Owl
# 10192
|
Posted
Aren't anthems meant to praise or worship God? How does "Everybody Dance Now" do that?
(I guess I'm just grumpy.)
--------------------
"...that is generally a matter for Pigwidgeon, several other consenting adults, a bottle of cheap Gin and the odd giraffe."
~Tortuf
Posts: 9835 | From: Hogwarts | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804
|
Posted
It's not exactly to my liking, but I'm sure there are plenty of Christian worshippers in the world who wouldn't raise an eyelid at dancing in church. The particular song chosen is perhaps more of an issue.
Western marriage ceremonies are a bit devoid of movement. If I recall correctly, the Orthodox have quite a bit more flair when it comes to the ceremony.
[ 25. June 2013, 01:15: Message edited by: Olaf ]
Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Galilit
Shipmate
# 16470
|
Posted
I saw it yesterday.
My first thought was that the couple were just two people who got married in a church.
Rather than being two committed members of a radical indigenous theological movement based on Second Sam. 6:12-15
[And leave Miriam and her sisters out if this - she and they had dignity and anyway dancing wildly is a classic post-traumatic reaction]
--------------------
She who does Her Son's will in all things can rely on me to do Hers.
Posts: 624 | From: a Galilee far, far away | Registered: Jun 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amos
Shipmate
# 44
|
Posted
I've seen several discussions about this elsewhere but this morning's the first time I've had a look at the clip.
1) If it were my flashmob, the two grumpy great-aunts would be part of the plan, to add merriment to future viewings. The female version of the Senex Iratus of classical theatre.
2) It was a very CofE disco moment wasn't it? Apart from the discalced vicar, it felt a bit luke-warm and nervous. Like middle-class white English congregations trying to sing spirituals.
3) Saying 'Now you may kiss your bride' is totally naff.
4) If they'd practised it a little more and done it a little more enthusiastically, it could have been a pleasing and original way to emphasize the declaration of the marriage. After all, it was only two minutes. I've been at weddings where the poem about the two lonely dinosaurs went on interminably.
5) I wonder what Aunt Vera and Aunt Joyce did after they walked out? Hung around? Or drove to the garden centre? My guess is the former. Didn't want to miss the lunch and a chance to spread the disapproval.
6) It seems to me after a decade of officiating at weddings that it is incumbent upon the priest to help the congregation see in lover and beloved an icon of Christ and the Church, and it's incumbent upon the congregation to be prepared to look for this. If this truth can be conveyed through a disco flashmob instead of a solemn and joyful anthem, then I see nothing wrong with it.
[ 25. June 2013, 06:18: Message edited by: Amos ]
--------------------
At the end of the day we face our Maker alongside Jesus--ken
Posts: 7667 | From: Summerisle | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amos
Shipmate
# 44
|
Posted
Sorry to double-post: I've since learned that this wedding took place in rural Nottinghamshire. Knowing this, I take back all my comments about luke-warmness and lack of enthusiasm, and doff my cap to the bride, groom, vicar, and friends for vigorous and joyous proclamation.
[ 25. June 2013, 06:34: Message edited by: Amos ]
--------------------
At the end of the day we face our Maker alongside Jesus--ken
Posts: 7667 | From: Summerisle | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
The comments I've read from the couple suggest it has made them likely to come back to the church, whereas they'd originally gone to the church for the wedding only at the suggestion of their reception venue. That looks like success, to me, much as I would have wanted to hide under a pew had I been present.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Poppy
Ship's dancing cat
# 2000
|
Posted
It was short and it was joyful. Brilliant.
I've used dance in services in place of a hymn, in the sermon slot or as prayer. The problem of moving the furniture to allow the congregtation to move means that it isn't practical for a main Sunday service (although I have led processional dances around the church) but on retreats and conferences it can work really well.
Dance can be joyful, it can be medatative and it can be prayerful. For dyslexics like me who have to wade through acres of words at every service it is a blessed moment of encounter with God.
--------------------
At the still point of the turning world - there the dance is...
Posts: 1406 | From: mostly on the edge | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
MrsDoyle
Shipmate
# 13579
|
Posted
I blame gay marriage! (no not really but someone had to get it in!)
Posts: 343 | From: Manchester.England | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Devils Advocate
Shipmate
# 16484
|
Posted
I dont see that happening at our shack somehow . I would need to administer Sal Volatile to Father ( Not to mention several large gins)
--------------------
"Oh I have wrought much evil with my spells"
Posts: 97 | From: Lincs | Registered: Jun 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amos
Shipmate
# 44
|
Posted
Poppy, you and I have had our differences over the years on the matter of liturgical dance. I'm so glad that we're agreed about this one! ![[Smile]](smile.gif) And so peace breaks out.
--------------------
At the end of the day we face our Maker alongside Jesus--ken
Posts: 7667 | From: Summerisle | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
Seen a lot of people on twitter saying how wonderful this is and this is how the church should be. Will nowhere be left for introverts? ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by MrsDoyle:
I blame gay marriage! (no not really but someone had to get it in!)
Don't blame me, my wedding plans (if I get married) include liturgy from the 1549 Book of Common Prayer, and copious amounts of classical music.
--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Vade Mecum
Shipmate
# 17688
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Seen a lot of people on twitter saying how wonderful this is and this is how the church should be. Will nowhere be left for introverts?
Or people with taste?
--------------------
I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
Posts: 307 | From: North London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ceremoniar
Shipmate
# 13596
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
Aren't anthems meant to praise or worship God? How does "Everybody Dance Now" do that?
(I guess I'm just grumpy.)
Hardly. My take is that, like most liturgical nonsense, and despite various attempts at rationalizing this one as an authentic this and a genuine that, and how much good can come of it, blah, blah, blah (same claptrap that we have heard for decades while churches empty)...The simple reality is that people are simply taking something that is purely secular (and basically self-indulgent, to boot) and trying, through the use of many creative arguments, to rationalize inserting said self-indulgence into the Church's liturgy and sacraments. Despite all of the postmodern talk about liturgy being the work of the people (obviously there is some truth to that), its primary purpose is to reverently direct hearts and mind to God. Part of this involves a surrender of personal will, and that simply is not popular at this point in history--quite the contrary, as anthropocentrism is the order of the day. A wedding reception is the proper venue for this sort of display of "Look at us," but then again, that would not "make a statement" in quite the same way, would it? (And this is coming from a Yank whose own self-absorbed culture produced much of the music that encouraged these Brits to shake up their own sensibilities).
The reason that devotion to the Sacred Heart and Divine Mercy are so conspicuous in the Church is that they remind us of this in a most uncomfortable way.
Posts: 1240 | From: U.S. | Registered: Apr 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Adeodatus
Shipmate
# 4992
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
A bride, groom -- and CofE Vicar! -- lead a "flashmob."
I must be getting old. This makes no kind of sense to me at all, on any level.
--------------------
"What is broken, repair with gold."
Posts: 9779 | From: Manchester | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
Aw ... what lot of curmudgeons you all are!
Do I like it? No.
Would I, a reticent 59-year old British man, be embarrassed to take part? Definitely.
Can I dance? Not in a thousand years.
Is it in liturgical good taste? Pull the other one, it's got bells (and smells) on.
Does it focus on God's glory and majesty? Well, hardly!
And yet ... there's something about it. Just don't make it mandatory (any more than Kate and Wills' trees in Westminster Abbey).
[ 25. June 2013, 13:34: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Miffy
Ship's elephant
# 1438
|
Posted
Now Amos - according to one source, the wedding party had been practising their dance moves for nearly four weeks. How much longer do you need?
I'm sure the old aunties were merely seizing the opportunity to pop out for a loo break.
I thought it was absolutely brilliant! And I'm an introvert. As long as it doesn't become mandatory, as BPTF says, I'm all for it.
--------------------
"I don't feel like smiling." "You're English dear; fake it!" (Colin Firth "Easy Virtue")
Growing Greenpatches
Posts: 4739 | From: The Kitchen | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
Aren't anthems meant to praise or worship God? How does "Everybody Dance Now" do that?
(I guess I'm just grumpy.)
Two people in love expressing their joy, surrounded by friends and family doing likewise, seems pretty much like worship and praise of God to my mind.
![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif) What Amos said. The only wrong note was 'you may kiss your bride', which is not only naff but sexist.
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
I agree with Baptist Trainfan. It's not my way of doing things, but:-
A wedding is not a wholly liturgical act. The couple are marrying each other. They are doing so before God. The church blesses the wedding and prays for their marriage. But the wedding is still theirs, not the church's. It is also a time to rejoice. There are some things that really would be inappropriate, just as there are with funerals. But we aren't entitled to say you can only get married in our church if you comply with what Mrs Beamish thinks is good taste.
As it happens, I don't like 'you may now kiss the bride' either. It's a peculiar innovation which people have picked up recently from films. I don't know where the film industry got it from.
It's also a lie. Even before the Great War there would have been very few couples where not even their lips had touched each other's until after the wedding.
Anglican Brat, are you sure a wedding according to the 1549 Prayer Book would a. be valid, and b. be different from one according to the 1662 Prayer Book, which is?
It is of course your call whether you can persuade your fiancée actual or hypothetical, to use the old vows and the old preface rather than its more mealy mouthed replacement.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amos
Shipmate
# 44
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ceremoniar:
quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
Aren't anthems meant to praise or worship God? How does "Everybody Dance Now" do that?
(I guess I'm just grumpy.)
Hardly. My take is that, like most liturgical nonsense, and despite various attempts at rationalizing this one as an authentic this and a genuine that, and how much good can come of it, blah, blah, blah (same claptrap that we have heard for decades while churches empty)...The simple reality is that people are simply taking something that is purely secular (and basically self-indulgent, to boot) and trying, through the use of many creative arguments, to rationalize inserting said self-indulgence into the Church's liturgy and sacraments. Despite all of the postmodern talk about liturgy being the work of the people (obviously there is some truth to that), its primary purpose is to reverently direct hearts and mind to God. Part of this involves a surrender of personal will, and that simply is not popular at this point in history--quite the contrary, as anthropocentrism is the order of the day. A wedding reception is the proper venue for this sort of display of "Look at us," but then again, that would not "make a statement" in quite the same way, would it? (And this is coming from a Yank whose own self-absorbed culture produced much of the music that encouraged these Brits to shake up their own sensibilities).
The reason that devotion to the Sacred Heart and Divine Mercy are so conspicuous in the Church is that they remind us of this in a most uncomfortable way.
Ceremoniar, your post reminds me of a formerly well-known American poem which begins like this:
'Miniver Cheevy, child of scorn,
Grew lean while he assailed the seasons;
He wept that he was ever born,
And he had reasons.'
--------------------
At the end of the day we face our Maker alongside Jesus--ken
Posts: 7667 | From: Summerisle | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
It's not my kind of thing, but it seems to be winding up the right people to make me see it as a Good Thing.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gramps49
Shipmate
# 16378
|
Posted
About a month ago we had a hymn to the tune of a Waltz. There was dancing in the aisles.
Regarding this flashmob, I enjoyed how the little boy in front got down with it.
Posts: 2193 | From: Pullman WA | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
About a month ago we had a hymn to the tune of a Waltz. There was dancing in the aisles.
Don't worry. The church has enough po-faced miserable fuckers to pour cold water over any normal person being caused to actually smile in church rather than run screaming.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
Surely you can have fun in church without being totally cringe-worthy?
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Surely you can have fun in church without being totally cringe-worthy?
Not sure the evidence is on your side there ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
But seriously, your cringe-worthy is someone else's meaningful and enjoyable event.
FWIW, I find genuflection and crossing oneself cringeworthy. I have no intention of going into the whys and wherefores because I haven't a clue. I just do. "Cringeworthiness" is not in and of itself a guide to whether something is the sort of thing up with which we should not put. Relax, grab a decent beer, put on some rock and roll. We can do pretty much what we like in church when it comes down to it without bothering anyone else because there's hardly anyone there.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
It's not my kind of thing, but it seems to be winding up the right people to make me see it as a Good Thing.
![[Snigger]](graemlins/snigger.gif)
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oblatus
Shipmate
# 6278
|
Posted
quote:
Don't worry. The church has enough po-faced miserable fuckers to pour cold water over any normal person being caused to actually smile in church rather than run screaming. [/QB]
Is this seriously an acceptable post in this forum?
Posts: 3823 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
Aw ... what lot of curmudgeons you all are!
Do I like it? No.
Would I, a reticent 59-year old British man, be embarrassed to take part? Definitely.
Can I dance? Not in a thousand years.
Is it in liturgical good taste? Pull the other one, it's got bells (and smells) on.
Does it focus on God's glory and majesty? Well, hardly!
And yet ... there's something about it. Just don't make it mandatory (any more than Kate and Wills' trees in Westminster Abbey).
I know! get Steve Chalke to do it and within a week everyone'll be clamouring to do it!
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
SyNoddy
Shipmate
# 17009
|
Posted
Mrs Beamish might throw her hands up in horror but I for one am delighted that the couple's joy was expressed, along with that of their families and friends, in the midst of their wedding service.
Can someone just remind me what was Jesus first miracle??
Posts: 53 | From: Somewhere near the Middle | Registered: Mar 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Vade Mecum
Shipmate
# 17688
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SyNoddy:
Mrs Beamish might throw her hands up in horror but I for one am delighted that the couple's joy was expressed, along with that of their families and friends, in the midst of their wedding service.
Can someone just remind me what was Jesus first miracle??
Was it disco dancing? Oh wait, no, no it wasn't.
Besides, His wine was good...
--------------------
I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
Posts: 307 | From: North London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amos
Shipmate
# 44
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oblatus:
quote:
Don't worry. The church has enough po-faced miserable fuckers to pour cold water over any normal person being caused to actually smile in church rather than run screaming.
Is this seriously an acceptable post in this forum? [/QB]
In my experience, it seriously is.
--------------------
At the end of the day we face our Maker alongside Jesus--ken
Posts: 7667 | From: Summerisle | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anselmina
Ship's barmaid
# 3032
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oblatus:
quote:
Don't worry. The church has enough po-faced miserable fuckers to pour cold water over any normal person being caused to actually smile in church rather than run screaming.
Is this seriously an acceptable post in this forum? [/QB]
Not only acceptable, but rather pertinent. Seriously.
Ceremoniar, thank you for your post. Until I'd read what you'd written I was very doubtful of the value of this flashmob wedding moment - but now I'm willing to think well of it and those who did it, including the vicar. You have one or two opinions there, which would make good points in the discussion, but they're fighting to make themselves heard above the disgust you feel for the persons involved. So I'm going to come down on the side of goodwill towards all people, including inappropriate dancing queens in church.
--------------------
Irish dogs needing homes! http://www.dogactionwelfaregroup.ie/ Greyhounds and Lurchers are shipped over to England for rehoming too!
Posts: 10002 | From: Scotland the Brave | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
Hey! Trendy vicar alert!
A very memorably occasion, and I hope the couple do return to the church. But they'd need to be aware that normal services are probably nothing like this.
As for the aunts, we shouldn't be too hard on them. I'm sure that for them, this was just an interlude rather than an essential part of the proceedings. People are allowed to dip in and out of the action at real discos, so there should be no compulsion to watch dodgy dancing in a church!
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
SyNoddy
Shipmate
# 17009
|
Posted
Aunty Betty was going to the loo! And as is the accepted norm, took a female companion along. Her husband stayed and danced with the best of them.
Apparently the wedding couple were non church attendees but following the whole process of planning and rehearsing their wedding are now attending.
Sounds like a brilliant outcome to me
Posts: 53 | From: Somewhere near the Middle | Registered: Mar 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Laurelin
Shipmate
# 17211
|
Posted
Exclamation Mark - ![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif)
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
But seriously, your cringe-worthy is someone else's meaningful and enjoyable event.
This.
quote:
"Cringeworthiness" is not in and of itself a guide to whether something is the sort of thing up with which we should not put.
I do sympathise with Jade. If somebody tried to do this to me at my wedding, I'd send the heavy guys round. I find it naff, and daft ... but also in an endearingly English way. Vicar of Dibley material, you couldn't make it up. ![[Eek!]](eek.gif) ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
And there's nothing like a 'Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells' response to restore a sense of perspective.
Besides, let's remind ourselves of this awesome Royal Wedding spoof, which was just as enjoyable as the event itself:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=Kav0FEhtLug
[ 26. June 2013, 09:32: Message edited by: Laurelin ]
--------------------
"I fear that to me Siamese cats belong to the fauna of Mordor." J.R.R. Tolkien
Posts: 545 | From: The Shire | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
CL
Shipmate
# 16145
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Vade Mecum:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Seen a lot of people on twitter saying how wonderful this is and this is how the church should be. Will nowhere be left for introverts?
Or people with taste?
Or dignity.
--------------------
"Even if Catholics faithful to Tradition are reduced to a handful, they are the ones who are the true Church of Jesus Christ." - Athanasius of Alexandria
Posts: 647 | From: Ireland | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by CL:
quote:
Originally posted by Vade Mecum:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Seen a lot of people on twitter saying how wonderful this is and this is how the church should be. Will nowhere be left for introverts?
Or people with taste?
Or dignity.
I'm not normally a fan of proof-texting but I'll make an exception here. Forget taste and dignity, I'd rather be on the side of King David, who 'danced before the Lord with all his might' and said 'I am willing to look even more foolish than this, even to be humiliated in my own eyes!' (From 2 Samuel 6)
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
Tell you what CL; I'll not insist you do interesting, engaging and occasionally quirky and unusual things in your shack if you don't insist we do whatever it is that floats your boat in ours.
Deal?
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
For me, there two slightly different questions.
1) Should it have been done in the first place?
Well - it's certainly not my thing and I wouldn't have gone along with it. And - to be honest - I am not that sure whether the priest concerned was really expressing herself or simply being used by the couple. If this was fully her style as well, OK. But I get the feeling it wasn't.
2) Should it have been done when it was (ie - after "those whom God has joined together...")?
No no and thrice no.
That is one of the most solemn and powerful moments in the wedding service. To leap straight from there into "Everybody dance now" was just crass. It deflated the whole ceremony. It removed the awe and wonder. To me, all it said was "this is OUR ceremony and we don't give a flying f**k about anyone else."
The priest should have negotiated a more suitable moment for this (after the signing of the registers?) - not colluded with the couple.
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
2) Should it have been done when it was (ie - after "those whom God has joined together...")?
No no and thrice no.
That is one of the most solemn and powerful moments in the wedding service. To leap straight from there into "Everybody dance now" was just crass. It deflated the whole ceremony. It removed the awe and wonder. To me, all it said was "this is OUR ceremony and we don't give a flying f**k about anyone else."
But it was their ceremony. And not everyone recognises awe and wonder in the same way; for you, what this couple did removed the awe and wonder, but maybe for them it perfectly encapsulated how they mark occasions that are full of awe and wonder. Each to their own, I say.
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Earwig
Pincered Beastie
# 12057
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
And - to be honest - I am not that sure whether the priest concerned was really expressing herself or simply being used by the couple. If this was fully her style as well, OK. But I get the feeling it wasn't.
I've met Kate Bottley, and I reckon she was very up for this. She's also heavily involved in the CofE's Weddings Project.
The bumf about the Weddings Project says "This project aims to to attract more couples to a church wedding as the ceremony of choice; to build in the general public a growing sense that the Church of England is an enthusiastic believer in marriage and to care for couples so well that they have an excellent experience and recommend a church wedding to others, and to approach the task so that more of them may become part of a church community."
I reckon the dance helps with this.
Posts: 3120 | From: Yorkshire | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Earwig:
I've met Kate Bottley, and I reckon she was very up for this. She's also heavily involved in the CofE's Weddings Project.
Ah! That explains a lot.
One of the key bits of the ethos of the Weddings Project appears to be "give the punters what they want, when they want it." I'm not saying that there shouldn't be an attempt to meet the requests of couples but I found the two day seminar given by the Weddings Project to be a trifle too much of a teeter into craven submission.
I am uneasy about the kind of pressure that is sometimes put on churches to relinquish all standards. I actually think that most churches have a good idea of what will work work and what won't, and that these insights of experience are ditched at your peril.
For example, as a wedding recently, the couple were insistent they they leave the church to an Elton John track on CD, rather than the pretty spectacular church organ. According to the Weddings Project (as I understand it), we should have simply said "of course! What ever you want."
We did, respectfully, suggest alternatives. The couple stuck with what they wanted. And I have to say that it was one of the limpest exits of bride and groom that I have seen in our church. It just lost something.
We weren't trying to be deliberately obstructive or snooty. We've just found, over many years, what we know works in our building and what tends to flop.
And how far do you go in yielding to the whims and trends of wedding couples? Is there a line that you draw, beyond which you say "no can do"? If so, where is it?
Let me be clear - I believe strongly in trying to provide weddings of the highest quality, where the couple (and their guests) go away deeply satisfied by all we have been able to do for them. We will do an awful lot to make their day as perfect as we can. But I am just not sure that the Weddings Project approach is the right way, because so often it seems to point to ways that cheapen and diminish.
(We also tend to get great feedback from our wedding couples, so we must be doing something right.)
[ 26. June 2013, 18:22: Message edited by: Oscar the Grouch ]
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
roybart
Shipmate
# 17357
|
Posted
If I had read about this in a short article, i would probably have had doubts, or at least done some sniffing with nose in the air.
Having now seen the video -- which looks remarkably and delightfully like an episode of "The Vicar of Dibley," with Dawn French wearing a long blonde wig and having a great old time -- I find myself wishing I had been there.
As for those who heap scorn on this, I aam reminded of the rigorous Puritan John Endicott, who broke up dancing celebration (and whipped the participants) in Hawthorne's "Maypole of Merrymount."
Amos, I get your point about Miniver Cheevy, but Cheevy himself -- though living in the past -- tended to identify with the more romantic aspects of the past (Camelot, the Medici, knights in shining armor). His past he lives in is MORE fun than the "commonplace" world he lives in now. "Scorn" is indeed one of hia qualities, but so is "born too late." H
P.S.
[ 26. June 2013, 18:41: Message edited by: roybart ]
--------------------
"The consolations of the imaginary are not imaginary consolations."
-- Roger Scruton
Posts: 547 | From: here | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
2) Should it have been done when it was (ie - after "those whom God has joined together...")?
No no and thrice no.
That is one of the most solemn and powerful moments in the wedding service. To leap straight from there into "Everybody dance now" was just crass. It deflated the whole ceremony. It removed the awe and wonder. To me, all it said was "this is OUR ceremony and we don't give a flying f**k about anyone else."
I have been to several weddings where there has been a round of applause after the bride and groom kiss at that point in the service, and I have seen nothing wrong with that.
This dancing is a long way away from my taste, but in essence, isn't it the same thing?
I wouldn't do it, and I would feel decidedly uncomfortable if I was a guest at a wedding and I felt pressure to take part (and so I would suggest that people not do it because it's their obligation as hosts not to make their guests feel uncomfortable) but I don't think there's anything intrinsically bad about it.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Plique-à-jour
Shipmate
# 17717
|
Posted
That's not a flashmob. What do they think flashmob means? This isn't it.
--------------------
-
-
Posts: 333 | From: United Kingdom | Registered: Jun 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Printer-friendly view
