|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Wedding Disco
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
BroJames
A couple I know recently took advice from PPL and PRS about their original first choice for recessional music.
They were informed BY BOTH that, since it would be when the actual service was over then there would be a fee levied...
String quartets while these can be effective there may be problems: for a wedding it is likely to be impossible for them to be put in the centre of the nave near a resonating board (or similar) - say under a chancel arch - so the sound may not carry.
Second, people soak up volume much like soft furnishings - with a large church and sizeable congregation a quartet is unlikely to be audible.
No, I'm not a grouch but having recently had a wedding with just a harpist for the hymns I can tell you it was disastrous: inaudible even during the hymn intros, useless for the verses. It ended up with an unedifying duet between the vicar and bride's father and since the vicar in question is tone deaf ![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif)
And a harpist plinking out the Canon in D by Pachelbel lacks oomph.. ![[Snigger]](graemlins/snigger.gif)
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zacchaeus
Shipmate
# 14454
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
BroJames, cheers for looking up the PRS and PPL position on using copyright music at weddings. I thought it was exempt but you've saved me the work of checking!
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
You are quite wrong in saying a priest shouldn't express any views about music within a liturgy in his own church: the Parish Priest is ultimately responsible for ALL the content of any service which takes place in the building.
Where there is a competent Director of Music then they should advise a wedding couple about suitable music - and no, that doesn't necessarily mean they'll be limited to "trad" hymns and organ music. But it does mean that they'll get advice from someone with rather more experience for a wedding than the couple getting married.
All right then, I think if a priest is willing to have a wedding service in his / her church building then part of that giving of permission is that they cede responsibility to the couple for large parts of the service. Within the law, I think the priest should give gentle guidance as to the content of the service but no more than that; if the couple want music, decor etc. that the priest considers to be in awful taste then that's too bad; the priest should suck it up, IMO.
Priests who aren't prepared to let couples choose whatever hideous music they want, shouldn't let their church building be used for weddings as they're obviously far too precious about it. ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
A Church of England priest don't have a choice about that. If a couple fit the legal requirements, the vicar is obliged to allow the wedding..
Posts: 1905 | From: the back of beyond | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zacchaeus
Shipmate
# 14454
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by anne:
In churches like my current one where couples may leave down a short aisle and choose to have bells rung, very few people are going to hear more than the first four bars of any recessional music.
Anything after that will be drowned out by the bells.
In my last church, the bellringers stood inside the chancel, right next to the organ and so it actually got dangerous if they tried to play and ring at the same time, because the ringers couldn't hear one another call - not to mention the noise for the rest of us!
The physical attributes of the builidngs does shape what is possible and what is not. Musically or otherwise, our problem is that we do not have a magnificent organ and we can't match the grandeur that some might ask.
We have so many brides who have seen something in a film or in a bridal Magazine, that they are desperate to have at their wedding, not realising that what they see working for example in a large garden in a film, might not work in a small village church. But I digress..
Posts: 1905 | From: the back of beyond | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zacchaeus:
A Church of England priest don't have a choice about that. If a couple fit the legal requirements, the vicar is obliged to allow the wedding..
How sure are you of that? He or she is obliged to marry them, or in certain circumstances to allow his or her church to be used if they can find someone else to perform the service. I would be much less confident in asserting that this means they are entitled to insist on the inclusion of anything that is not in either the BCP or Common Worship - which applies to all the hymns and music.
I'm fairly sure, for example, that the couple can't write their own slushy yuk-making vows in stead of the prescribed ones.
Although Common Worship gives quite a lot of extra optional material, I also do not think people are entitled to omit prescribed bits they don't like. For example, there are two alternative prefaces, but as far as I know, it's one or the other, and that's the only choice. You can't have neither, or just something like 'In marriage the couple can wash one another in their happy bunnyhood frolicking in the sunshine upon their happy hillside of love'.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zacchaeus:
A Church of England priest don't have a choice about that. If a couple fit the legal requirements, the vicar is obliged to allow the wedding..
Yes, but the requirement is to marry the couple according to the rites of the Church of England. There is no actual requirement to allow the couple any choices whatsoever. I don't think there's even a legal impediment to a parish priest deciding that all weddings in his parish will be 1662, with his choice of readings from scripture. It might not be the best pastoral practice, though.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zacchaeus
Shipmate
# 14454
|
Posted
I was answering South coast kevin who said
'Priests who aren't prepared to let couples choose whatever hideous music they want, shouldn't let their church building be used for weddings as they're obviously far too precious about it.'
I never meant to imply that priests had to allow the couple anything that they wanted - just to say that what Kevin suggested, refusing a wedding was not an option.
Posts: 1905 | From: the back of beyond | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
There's always going to be some non-negotiables. At the very least it has to be the presence of a priest (or deacon) and the exchange of the legally-prescribed vows. So while the parish priest has to allow a couple to marry, s/he must insist on that. It seems perfectly reasonable to insist on more, and certain basic parameters, though common sense and pastoral wisdom would indicate the need for flexibility.
--------------------
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
|
|
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
BroJames
A couple I know recently took advice from PPL and PRS about their original first choice for recessional music.
They were informed BY BOTH that, since it would be when the actual service was over then there would be a fee levied...
Interesting. I wonder if it applies to the processional too (and music before the Sunday service, and the final voluntary). It would imply that a fee needs to be paid for any music for the recessional (and those other cases too) where the composer or arranger has been dead for less than 70 years, including organ music.
I do consider it part of my responsibility to advise if something really won't work (including harp for processional/recessional and hymns). I don't recall having a string quartet for hymns in a larger church. In a smaller church (seating 100-120) a string quartet at the back was well able to support hymn singing with the church packed. If the couple really wanted a string quartet for that part of the music, I would ask them to refer the question of its adequacy to the quartet themselves.
As we are not fortunate enough to have a resident organist, I don't have someone whose income depends on the fees from occasional offices to consider in the equation.
Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
I wonder how the question was put to the organisations in question. If you ask them if you must pay for music played "after the service is over", I guess they will say yes.
However, I would have thought that coming into and leaving the service are integral parts of the process of the service. Whilst I accept they are not part of the liturgy per se - I don't think most people would consider them separate events. If you said, in this wedding the bride will come into piece x have these hymns and leave to piece y - I'd be surprised if they said, well that's all fine but we want the money for piece y.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
dj_ordinaire
Host
# 4643
|
Posted
My understanding is that a payment will usually be arranged for the service on the grounds of the number of people required and their time. I've never heard of payment per piece but I suppose if a couple wanted something very complicated that would require a lot of practice-time beforehand then it could be argued they should pay for this as well? Compared to the cost of most modern weddings, we are not talking about very much money here, in any case...
--------------------
Flinging wide the gates...
Posts: 10335 | From: Hanging in the balance of the reality of man | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
quote:
Originally posted by Oscar the Grouch:
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."
I've never been involved in planning a wedding but I imagine I'd be pretty miffed if the minister or anyone else gave unsolicited advice to my wife-to-be and me regarding our exit music. Even if there was a 'pretty spectacular church organ'.
Perhaps because you're seeing it from the viewpoint of a consumer purchasing a service. I'm sure there are churches that will oblige those who want to see it that way; I suppose the question is whether that's appropriate.
--------------------
"The Eucharist is not a play, and you're not Jesus."
--Sr Theresa Koernke, IHM
Posts: 2512 | From: Oakland, CA | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fr Weber:
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
I've never been involved in planning a wedding but I imagine I'd be pretty miffed if the minister or anyone else gave unsolicited advice to my wife-to-be and me regarding our exit music.
Perhaps because you're seeing it from the viewpoint of a consumer purchasing a service. I'm sure there are churches that will oblige those who want to see it that way; I suppose the question is whether that's appropriate.
I should explain that there are some assumptions behind my posts in this thread. I'm talking about weddings where the couple aren't part of the church that meets in the building they're using. So, naturally, I'm talking about weddings being officiated over by a priest who is willing to have their building used by such a couple (as it happens, I'm not sure I would be willing to do this, were I the priest here).
Given these conditions, I feel it would be impolite for the priest to offer anything but very gentle suggestions regarding the decor, music and so forth, unless the couple specifically ask for his / her input. Basically, I think by permitting the building to be hired by a couple that isn't part of the church, the relationship has pretty much become a consumer - service provider arrangement.
--------------------
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
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
quote:
Originally posted by Fr Weber:
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
I've never been involved in planning a wedding but I imagine I'd be pretty miffed if the minister or anyone else gave unsolicited advice to my wife-to-be and me regarding our exit music.
Perhaps because you're seeing it from the viewpoint of a consumer purchasing a service. I'm sure there are churches that will oblige those who want to see it that way; I suppose the question is whether that's appropriate.
I should explain that there are some assumptions behind my posts in this thread. I'm talking about weddings where the couple aren't part of the church that meets in the building they're using. So, naturally, I'm talking about weddings being officiated over by a priest who is willing to have their building used by such a couple (as it happens, I'm not sure I would be willing to do this, were I the priest here).
Given these conditions, I feel it would be impolite for the priest to offer anything but very gentle suggestions regarding the decor, music and so forth, unless the couple specifically ask for his / her input. Basically, I think by permitting the building to be hired by a couple that isn't part of the church, the relationship has pretty much become a consumer - service provider arrangement.
But in the CoE, priests don't permit their building to be hired by couples - priests are obliged to marry couples in their parish regardless of the couple's belief or relationship to the church (as long as the couple can legally marry of course). So if you were the priest at your church, and your church was CoE, you would have no choice but to marry the totally non-Christian couple who lived in your parish and was legally able to marry. In that context, it is not a equal consumer-service provider arrangement.
--------------------
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
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
South Coast Kevin, it goes with the cure of souls. The priest is priest for for all those in the parish, not just the ones that attend his or her church.
Wherever you live, and whatever you believe, there is someone whose task it is to have a mission to you.
I think I'm right in imagining that the recent relaxation of the rules about where you can get married doesn't actually change that. There's still a default assumption that you will marry in the parish church where one at least of the couple lives. The ability to marry somewhere else is a concession, not a right.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636
|
Posted
The 2008 Marriage Measure gives couples a legal right to marry in any Church of England Church where one of them has a Qualifying Connection with the church where they wish to marry. The parish priest's only discretion on this is the reasonable exercise of discretion about the choice of date. (There is also discretion not to marry a couple, from within or outside the parish, where one of them has a previous marriage partner still living.)
A priest only has discretion about marrying a couple if neither of them has a Qualifying Connection.
Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by BroJames:
The 2008 Marriage Measure gives couples a legal right to marry in any Church of England Church where one of them has a Qualifying Connection with the church where they wish to marry. The parish priest's only discretion on this is the reasonable exercise of discretion about the choice of date. (There is also discretion not to marry a couple, from within or outside the parish, where one of them has a previous marriage partner still living.)
A priest only has discretion about marrying a couple if neither of them has a Qualifying Connection.
Thank you for that. I stand corrected.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
