Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(WTKR)   Asshat priest shocks wedding by chewing out videographer during vows. Couple's faces are priceless   (wtkr.com ) divider line
    More: Asinine  
•       •       •

5041 clicks; posted to Video » on 21 Sep 2013 at 9:21 AM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



51 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2013-09-21 08:44:29 AM  
The acceptability of filming is usually worked out in advance, no?
 
2013-09-21 08:49:25 AM  
Just last night I was at a wedding where the priest and photographer actually spoke before the ceremony to coordinate where they would be filming.

/shocking, isn't it?
 
2013-09-21 08:52:52 AM  
Incidents like this often result in very quick, involuntary transfers.  Our local priest vanished after he refused to marry a couple who were co-habitating.
 
2013-09-21 09:12:41 AM  

edmo: The acceptability of filming is usually worked out in advance, no?


This.  I figure an experienced wedding photographer would know what is or is not an appropriate spot to film from.  Maybe the priest assumed the guy was experienced and didn't think a discussion needed to be had?
Or maybe the photographer didn't listen?
 
2013-09-21 09:29:58 AM  
This has been on various news outlets all week for some reason..
 
2013-09-21 09:34:40 AM  
Hey asshole fairy tale merchant- you were hired to do a job so quit arguing with your coworkers and get to it.
 
2013-09-21 09:59:36 AM  

serial_crusher: This. I figure an experienced wedding photographer would know what is or is not an appropriate spot to film from. Maybe the priest assumed the guy was experienced and didn't think a discussion needed to be had?
Or maybe the photographer didn't listen?



He who pays the piper calls the tune. Both the priest and the photog were employees of the bride and groom (or, at least, her parents). It looks like it's an outside wedding, so it's not like the guy was rolling film, standing on the alter and using the life-sized Crucifixion sculpture to help keep his balance. If the bride and groom want pictures taken from over the shoulder of the priest, the bride and groom have pictures taken from over the shoulder of the priest.

/"Bride and groom! Say, 'Bride and groom!'"
//That's your job.
 
2013-09-21 10:04:11 AM  
Photographer was in danger of revealing the NAMBLA bookmark in the bible. Case Closed.
 
2013-09-21 10:04:22 AM  

Gecko Gingrich: /"Bride and groom! Say, 'Bride and groom!'"


errr...

"Man and wife! Say, "Man and wife!'"


/Watched the entire O's-Rays unscheduled double-header last night.
//I haz a tired.
 
2013-09-21 10:06:56 AM  
Who still gets married? and more importantly by a priest?

It's 2013 isn't it?
 
2013-09-21 10:32:42 AM  

edmo: The acceptability of filming is usually worked out in advance, no?


Yes.  My own minister (UCC) would not allow pictures during the actual vows.  Most Catholic Priests didn't have an issue, but I never, ever, got up on the altar.  I have had mounted cameras on remotes, but a photographer should neither be seen or heard during a service.
 
2013-09-21 11:05:48 AM  
A true celebration of love and happiness!

/what a coont
 
2013-09-21 11:12:42 AM  
Gecko said: "Both the priest and the photog were employees of the bride and groom (or, at least, her parents) "

Um, no. I don't think you understand how church services work. There is no obligation to pay the priest, but most couples customarily give him or the church some honorarium. Still, that does not imply that the couple has any control over the ceremony.  Not even the music, even.  This is first a religious ceremony, not an entertainment production.    This looks like one of those cases where the videographers got too self-important, and they were so desperate to get the particular camera angle, they became obnoxious and a distraction.
I saw this at my cousin's wedding, and I was appalled, as a part-time wedding shooter myself. At the cousin's wedding, the shooter and assistant wore blue jeans and black t-shirts, and wheeled the camera up and down the aisle and next to the couple, on a wheeled dolly.  They even wheeled it right next tot he groom for the vows. They also hand-held 1K spotlights and had a third person, also in jeans and t-shirt, wrangling their AC power cable. The whole thing looked like the wedding was interrupting the work of a team of farking plumbers, snaking drains.    When I shoot weddings, I shoot with respect, in a way that doesn't call attention to the cameras.  If you need special angles, you get the right gear to shoot it remotely with a hidden camera, or you make do with what you CAN do. You don't go all paparazzi in the sanctuary.
 
2013-09-21 11:27:32 AM  
This is why people throughout the centuries have really hated priests.  They're arrogant little f*cks.
 
2013-09-21 11:34:30 AM  

Gecko Gingrich: serial_crusher: This. I figure an experienced wedding photographer would know what is or is not an appropriate spot to film from. Maybe the priest assumed the guy was experienced and didn't think a discussion needed to be had?
Or maybe the photographer didn't listen?


He who pays the piper calls the tune. Both the priest and the photog were employees of the bride and groom (or, at least, her parents). It looks like it's an outside wedding, so it's not like the guy was rolling film, standing on the alter and using the life-sized Crucifixion sculpture to help keep his balance. If the bride and groom want pictures taken from over the shoulder of the priest, the bride and groom have pictures taken from over the shoulder of the priest.

/"Bride and groom! Say, 'Bride and groom!'"
//That's your job.


Good point. All 4 of them probably should have discussed the plan in advance. Bride and groom could have found a new priest if that's what they wanted.
 
2013-09-21 11:48:32 AM  

Benevolent Misanthrope: This is why people throughout the centuries have really hated priests.  They're arrogant little f*cks.


Yep. Why allow some self-important douche to ruin a wedding ceremony when he is not necessary to the conduct of or legal status of the wedding? As someone stated above, it's not as if the videographers were in the church tramping over baby-jesus statues or something, they're outside, get over yourself priest.

This just shows how ridiculous the modern wedding has become. People spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to throw a lavish party with drinking, dancing, and bridesmaid-bangning, but then still need to have a jesus-approved wedding. So they get some tightly wound jerk to officiate over a ceremony and talk all jesussy while everyone secretly wishes the worst part of the wedding would just end so they can start drinking.
 
2013-09-21 11:51:15 AM  
With all the nonsense and fluff that weddings have become, I'm with the priest on this one.
 
2013-09-21 12:14:06 PM  

Any Pie Left: Gecko said: "Both the priest and the photog were employees of the bride and groom (or, at least, her parents) "

Um, no. I don't think you understand how church services work. There is no obligation to pay the priest, but most couples customarily give him or the church some honorarium. Still, that does not imply that the couple has any control over the ceremony.  Not even the music, even.  This is first a religious ceremony, not an entertainment production.    This looks like one of those cases where the videographers got too self-important, and they were so desperate to get the particular camera angle, they became obnoxious and a distraction.
I saw this at my cousin's wedding, and I was appalled, as a part-time wedding shooter myself. At the cousin's wedding, the shooter and assistant wore blue jeans and black t-shirts, and wheeled the camera up and down the aisle and next to the couple, on a wheeled dolly.  They even wheeled it right next tot he groom for the vows. They also hand-held 1K spotlights and had a third person, also in jeans and t-shirt, wrangling their AC power cable. The whole thing looked like the wedding was interrupting the work of a team of farking plumbers, snaking drains.    When I shoot weddings, I shoot with respect, in a way that doesn't call attention to the cameras.  If you need special angles, you get the right gear to shoot it remotely with a hidden camera, or you make do with what you CAN do. You don't go all paparazzi in the sanctuary.


Did you miss the part where this wasn't in a church?
 
2013-09-21 12:25:50 PM  

TheHighlandHowler: Our local priest vanished after he refused to marry a couple who were co-habitating.


In his defense, it was a man trying to marry a wheel of cheese.

/slippery slope
 
2013-09-21 12:36:25 PM  
They should have done, what my wife and I did, get married at a Bahai temple. There was no religious official presiding.  We simply had to make one short, prescribed statement and the rest it, we could make up, on our own.  I would have been just as happy to get married at city hall, but my wife wanted to have some kind of ceremony, and the Bahai temple in Evanston, IL, is very nice.  The best part of the whole thing, was when we told my mother-in-law to be, where we were going to have the ceremony. She's very Roman Catholic, and when my wife told her, the ceremony would be at the Bahai temple, she looked at me, shocked, and said, "Temple?!?! Jewish!?!?".
 
2013-09-21 12:41:59 PM  
Don't worry, she can get it right at her next wedding in a few years.
 
2013-09-21 12:45:09 PM  
They weren't even in a church. How does he have any say at all about what happens in some outdoor facility?

Uptight little doosh just needs a thorough man-pumping.
 
2013-09-21 01:41:09 PM  
Having it outside doesn't mean all the rules automatically no longer pertain. The Pope says mass in soccer stadiums, priests hold mass at cemetaries and in open meadows or whatever, but the mass is still conducted the same way.   What this is, is about Millenials who don't actually care about their religion all that much, who consder the event to be just that, an event, like one of their childhood birthday parties, where everything is catered to them.   They want the religious ceremony to conform to some crap they saw on a soap opera somewhere, or in a movie.  Hey, if they wanna do stuff like that, hire actors and build a set and do whatever you want.   You want to celebrate and solemnify the sacrament, then you do it the way the priest says, because that's kind of the whole point of a wedding mass.
 
2013-09-21 02:05:41 PM  
He should have been fired, right there, on the spot. Tell him to get the hell off their property and call in an justice of the peace or something.
 
2013-09-21 02:26:32 PM  

Any Pie Left: Having it outside doesn't mean all the rules automatically no longer pertain. The Pope says mass in soccer stadiums, priests hold mass at cemetaries and in open meadows or whatever, but the mass is still conducted the same way.   What this is, is about Millenials who don't actually care about their religion all that much, who consder the event to be just that, an event, like one of their childhood birthday parties, where everything is catered to them.   They want the religious ceremony to conform to some crap they saw on a soap opera somewhere, or in a movie.  Hey, if they wanna do stuff like that, hire actors and build a set and do whatever you want.   You want to celebrate and solemnify the sacrament, then you do it the way the priest says, because that's kind of the whole point of a wedding mass.


I missed the part where Catholicism was the only allowed religion.
 
2013-09-21 02:36:06 PM  

Hand Banana: He should have been fired, right there, on the spot. Tell him to get the hell off their property and call in an justice of the peace or something.


(Alternately, after the ceremony) "Hey, Father, about that honorarium? Uh...fuggedaboutit."
 
2013-09-21 02:45:29 PM  
It's happened before...
 
2013-09-21 03:52:48 PM  
Page won't load, any linkage?
 
2013-09-21 04:03:10 PM  

thisisyourbrainonFark: Page won't load, any linkage?


here you go. By the way this link is even better because it has him speaking before he yells at the photographer.
 
2013-09-21 04:30:23 PM  

thisisyourbrainonFark: Page won't load, any linkage?


The YouTube source:
something would happen by Michael Borriello - 383,394 views
Published on Sep 17, 2013

googling  Noelle Rob Ruehle will get you lots of coverage, including videos of news segments discussing this video along with interviews of the couple.
 
2013-09-21 04:31:31 PM  

insano: everyone secretly wishes the worst part of the wedding would just end so they can start drinking.


Are you not supposed to start drinking before the crappy part?  Oops.  The few weddings I've been to, we've been doing it wrong.
 
2013-09-21 04:32:21 PM  

danielscissorhands: thisisyourbrainonFark: Page won't load, any linkage?

here you go. By the way this link is even better because it has him speaking before he yells at the photographer.


Ah, it makes more sense now. Sounds like the paps at a damn red carpet right behind the priest's head. No wonder he wanted them to leave.
 
2013-09-21 04:46:19 PM  
imageshack.us
 
2013-09-21 05:33:05 PM  
Gee, everyone immediately jumping on the priest.   As a photographer (hobby) but having shot weddings, and seen many more, I'm betting that the videographer was being a jerk and deserved a little smackdown.  You choose to have a Catholic ceremony, you play by their rules.

I've hidden video cameras behind flower arrangements, tucked a wireless mike into the bride's bouquet, and use long/fast lenses to shoot discreetly from a distance without flash.    And I dress nicely.  No one has ever given me a hard time.
 
2013-09-21 05:44:15 PM  

Any Pie Left: Gecko said: "Both the priest and the photog were employees of the bride and groom (or, at least, her parents) "

Um, no. I don't think you understand how church services work. There is no obligation to pay the priest, but most couples customarily give him or the church some honorarium. Still, that does not imply that the couple has any control over the ceremony.  Not even the music, even.  This is first a religious ceremony, not an entertainment production.    This looks like one of those cases where the videographers got too self-important, and they were so desperate to get the particular camera angle, they became obnoxious and a distraction.
I saw this at my cousin's wedding, and I was appalled, as a part-time wedding shooter myself. At the cousin's wedding, the shooter and assistant wore blue jeans and black t-shirts, and wheeled the camera up and down the aisle and next to the couple, on a wheeled dolly.  They even wheeled it right next tot he groom for the vows. They also hand-held 1K spotlights and had a third person, also in jeans and t-shirt, wrangling their AC power cable. The whole thing looked like the wedding was interrupting the work of a team of farking plumbers, snaking drains.    When I shoot weddings, I shoot with respect, in a way that doesn't call attention to the cameras.  If you need special angles, you get the right gear to shoot it remotely with a hidden camera, or you make do with what you CAN do. You don't go all paparazzi in the sanctuary.


no obligation to pay? things are different where i live. churches charge many hundreds of dollars for the service. my nephew just started looking; the first house of worship they went to the minister stated $600.00. both nephew and his to-be are life long church going folks; i can't imagine what prices they quote at a couple that doesn't fit their little check list of who is not worthy of their almighty blessing.
 
2013-09-21 05:49:57 PM  

KrispyKritter: no obligation to pay? things are different where i live. churches charge many hundreds of dollars for the service. my nephew just started looking; the first house of worship they went to the minister stated $600.00. both nephew and his to-be are life long church going folks; i can't imagine what prices they quote at a couple that doesn't fit their little check list of who is not worthy of their almighty blessing.


At every church I've attended, members and people who regularly attend/donate get the church cheaply or free, though the preacher/priest gets some token of appreciation, usually money.  People who never go to church, but are looking for a venue get charged.
 
2013-09-21 06:38:59 PM  

Earguy: Gee, everyone immediately jumping on the priest.   As a photographer (hobby) but having shot weddings, and seen many more, I'm betting that the videographer was being a jerk and deserved a little smackdown.  You choose to have a Catholic ceremony, you play by their rules.

I've hidden video cameras behind flower arrangements, tucked a wireless mike into the bride's bouquet, and use long/fast lenses to shoot discreetly from a distance without flash.    And I dress nicely.  No one has ever given me a hard time.


If the photographer deserves a smackdown, *let the couple do it*. It's their day, their production, and their problem. The only looks of shock *I* saw on the couple were "WTF is this priest going on about?"

It's not your day Bubba. Stand down.
 
2013-09-21 06:40:30 PM  
Relax. This will seem a minor incident when the couple gets divorced and fights over the division of property and child custody.
 
2013-09-21 06:42:42 PM  
This isn't a religion thing.  Whoever is performing the ceremony gets deference by everyone because they are the one who can pull the plug at the last second...if the priest, minister, JOTP decides it's not happening then you are farked.  And you don't want to be one to ruin the bride's day because you will rather have opened the ark of the covenant

/shoots weddings
//never fails to talk to the one performing the ceremony
///didn't get a shot and the bride complains, just blame the minister
 
2013-09-21 07:01:27 PM  

darkman2000: Whoever is performing the ceremony gets deference by everyone because they are the one who can pull the plug at the last second...if the priest, minister, JOTP decides it's not happening then you are farked.


My sister's second (of three so far) weddings nearly got canceled because the groom showed up drunk.  Really drunk, thanks to his mom who tried to torpedo the marriage by "having a couple drinks with my son" before the wedding.  The preacher was going to not do it, but instead delayed the ceremony for over an hour why they pumped him with coffee and walked him around.  If you know what to look for, the video is hilarious, he's swaying and slurring.
 
2013-09-21 08:11:50 PM  

CheapEngineer: Earguy: Gee, everyone immediately jumping on the priest.   As a photographer (hobby) but having shot weddings, and seen many more, I'm betting that the videographer was being a jerk and deserved a little smackdown.  You choose to have a Catholic ceremony, you play by their rules.

I've hidden video cameras behind flower arrangements, tucked a wireless mike into the bride's bouquet, and use long/fast lenses to shoot discreetly from a distance without flash.    And I dress nicely.  No one has ever given me a hard time.

If the photographer deserves a smackdown, *let the couple do it*. It's their day, their production, and their problem. The only looks of shock *I* saw on the couple were "WTF is this priest going on about?"

It's not your day Bubba. Stand down.


Seriously. It's not like the photographer surprised them by getting up there; they clearly saw and had no issue with it. The only one throwing a biatchfit was that closet-case Jesusfreak.
 
2013-09-21 10:06:35 PM  

HairBolus: thisisyourbrainonFark: Page won't load, any linkage?

The YouTube source:
something would happen by Michael Borriello - 383,394 views
Published on Sep 17, 2013

googling  Noelle Rob Ruehle will get you lots of coverage, including videos of news segments discussing this video along with interviews of the couple.


danielscissorhands: thisisyourbrainonFark: Page won't load, any linkage?

here you go. By the way this link is even better because it has him speaking before he yells at the photographer.


Gracias.

Weird. Has he never done a ceremony involving technology?
 
2013-09-21 10:52:00 PM  
There is a real disconnect here between people of faith and people who are casual about faith, and what the expectations are.  Either indoors, or outdoors, a "church"  marriage conducted by a priest or minister  is a sacrament  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacrament  The orders and rituals of participating in the sacrament are written down and followed the same for every couple.

 This is not about the couple "hiring" the priest and church, but about the couple coming to the priest and church to ask that their union be solemnized in the traditional way.

 You buy the dress, you rent the reception hall, rehearsal dinner catering, barkeeper and liquor, and band or D.J., you can hire the organist, the tuxes, the florist, and asshole photographers and the limo driver, but the priest does not "work" for you. He's not a contractor. Huge difference that couples might not understand. Obviously a lot of Farkers don't understand it either.

 The priest agrees to perform  the ceremony if you meet all the church qualifications, such as having already gotten the previous sacraments of  baptism, confession, communion, confirmation, and usually, at least of of the couple belonging to the church and being a member in good standing, including having passed your mandatory pre-cana conference, where you deeply examine yourselves and your relationship to God and each other, and study the details of the commitment you are making.  If you think you can get just any priest to marry you, without all those pre-requisites, it ain't easy and it ain't supposed to be.  Any money that passes to the priest is to be considered a donation or an "honorarium", not a payment.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honorarium

That money does not obligate the priest to be anyone's biotch. It either goes to defray expenses like the power bill for running the lights and A/C for the service, or it goes into a charitable fund pool for discretionary spending on things the church or priest might need, like gas for the car when he drives over to the old folks home to give the sacrament of anointing the sick, or holding a mass for shut-ins, etc. Or maybe it buys him some good scotch and cigars because he's a man after all and that stuff doesn't come out of the offertory. Really, we don't give a fark what he does with however much you feel you want to contribute in the honorarium, you're technically not obligated to pay him anything, really, because the Diocese and parish pays him.  Examples to the contrary notwithstanding.

  I think the bridal party gets so used to paying for every other aspect of the wedding and being catered to and fawned over by all the contractors, they forget that that stuff is not actually required to become married. That shiat is all to impress people.

Participation in the wedding mass, at least in Catholic churches, is about the couple committing themselves to God in a binding union, blessed by the Almighty, represented by the Priest. You don't "hire" the priest any more than you "hire" God to bless you. This means you play it the Priest's way, and it means you don't get to pick "wind beneath my wings" or any other secular song as part of the wedding service, only approved worship music, because what the wedding is, is the community coming together to worship God and participate in His blessing of a Holy Union.

If you don't like or want to play ball with this, well, fine,  it's not for everyone, and I have no problem with you; go get a civil service, decorate it any way you want, hire Night Ranger to play "Sister Christian" as she walks down the aisle, and have an Elvis Impersonator officiate, or whatever, and Rev. Elvis I'm sure will let the photogs go anywhere they want. A judge can sign your paperwork and give you a civil ceremony.  But if you want the sacrament, you have to take it the same way it comes for everybody, with the prescribed rituals and orders.   People who fly off the handle about this  may have a problem with authority figures, but that's irrelevant because submitting to the official ceremony is a declaration of submitting to all that comes with.  If you don't like that, really you're free to go elsewhere and bless you, but you have no right to biatch about a rule that's hardly new or uniquely applied to you.

Thus endeth the lesson.
 
2013-09-21 10:58:52 PM  
Shot wedding video for almost 20 years. We'd always go to the rehearsal to block our shots, check to make sure the wireless mics worked without interfering with the church system, etc.

We also used that time to talk to the officiant and ask him what his ground rules were.

The day of the ceremony we would have a five minute meeting with the still photographer to make sure we were all in sync so we could produce the best product for our client.

We prided ourselves on being invisible during the ceremony (no lights, etc) and we, of course, wanted to do the best job possible for the couple, but also wanted all involved to be happy to work with us in the future ... including the priests.

I've seen a lot of Spielberg wannabes throw up 1k lights, fly in jibs, etc and make the day more about them than anyone else.

When we first started I thought some priests were being egotistical douche bags by ordering us around and greatly restricting what we could do. Then I saw other peers in action and understood the amazing amount of shiat some of those guys would pull just to get a shot.
 
2013-09-21 11:08:53 PM  
Bob the Nob:  Right on, bro, been there done that. You tell it like it is.  Officiants have been burned a lot of times and the thing about that is, while the offender gets burned and is banned, the rest of us that play nice and follow the rules all get lumped in with the bad guys, and we have a lot of suspicion to overcome.  I did a rehearsal for a wedding, the officiant was even my own Parochial Vicar, kew me for years. And I did what Bob here does; make sure he saw where my camera was going to be and what it looked like.  Even after all that, he threw me a curve ball on the actual day. He comes in early and sees my camera position, exactly the way it had been at the rehearsal, and suddenly, he didn't like the tripod being so high up. I was Groom's side, aisle seat, eight rows back.  I wound up lowering the camera tripod to just higher than the backs of the pews,  and bumping it into the edge of the aisle a bit, everybody was happy.  I've planted extra cameras on tabletop tripods on the piano or organ, and peeking out from behind some columns.  One of my fave priests in a home parish was also a shutterbug and he had invisible  camera blind type lens hatches custom built into the walls behind the altar, so photogs and video guys could get that front angle without being seen or making a disturbance.
 
2013-09-22 02:54:34 AM  
I'm assuming the priest's philosophy runs along the lines of "Buying a bus ticket doesn't let you sit on top of the steering wheel."

Could have been a little more polite..
 
2013-09-22 02:59:35 AM  

Any Pie Left: There is a real disconnect here between people of faith and people who are casual about faith, and what the expectations are.  Either indoors, or outdoors, a "church"  marriage conducted by a priest or minister  is a sacrament  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacrament  The orders and rituals of participating in the sacrament are written down and followed the same for every couple.

 This is not about the couple "hiring" the priest and church, but about the couple coming to the priest and church to ask that their union be solemnized in the traditional way.

 You buy the dress, you rent the reception hall, rehearsal dinner catering, barkeeper and liquor, and band or D.J., you can hire the organist, the tuxes, the florist, and asshole photographers and the limo driver, but the priest does not "work" for you. He's not a contractor. Huge difference that couples might not understand. Obviously a lot of Farkers don't understand it either.

 The priest agrees to perform  the ceremony if you meet all the church qualifications, such as having already gotten the previous sacraments of  baptism, confession, communion, confirmation, and usually, at least of of the couple belonging to the church and being a member in good standing, including having passed your mandatory pre-cana conference, where you deeply examine yourselves and your relationship to God and each other, and study the details of the commitment you are making.  If you think you can get just any priest to marry you, without all those pre-requisites, it ain't easy and it ain't supposed to be.  Any money that passes to the priest is to be considered a donation or an "honorarium", not a payment.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honorarium

That money does not obligate the priest to be anyone's biotch. It either goes to defray expenses like the power bill for running the lights and A/C for the service, or it goes into a charitable fund pool for discretionary spending on things the church or priest might need, like gas for the ...


And that's why I went to the JP.
 
2013-09-22 07:17:59 AM  

Any Pie Left: There is a real disconnect here between people of faith and people who are casual about faith, and what the expectations are.  Either indoors, or outdoors, a "church"  marriage conducted by a priest or minister  is a sacrament  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacrament  The orders and rituals of participating in the sacrament are written down and followed the same for every couple.

 This is not about the couple "hiring" the priest and church, but about the couple coming to the priest and church to ask that their union be solemnized in the traditional way.

 You buy the dress, you rent the reception hall, rehearsal dinner catering, barkeeper and liquor, and band or D.J., you can hire the organist, the tuxes, the florist, and asshole photographers and the limo driver, but the priest does not "work" for you. He's not a contractor. Huge difference that couples might not understand. Obviously a lot of Farkers don't understand it either.

 The priest agrees to perform  the ceremony if you meet all the church qualifications, such as having already gotten the previous sacraments of  baptism, confession, communion, confirmation, and usually, at least of of the couple belonging to the church and being a member in good standing, including having passed your mandatory pre-cana conference, where you deeply examine yourselves and your relationship to God and each other, and study the details of the commitment you are making.  If you think you can get just any priest to marry you, without all those pre-requisites, it ain't easy and it ain't supposed to be.  Any money that passes to the priest is to be considered a donation or an "honorarium", not a payment.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honorarium

That money does not obligate the priest to be anyone's biotch. It either goes to defray expenses like the power bill for running the lights and A/C for the service, or it goes into a charitable fund pool for discretionary spending on things the church or priest might need, like gas for the ...


Let me guess. You own a Chik-Fil-A.
 
2013-09-22 09:29:40 AM  
WHAT HAPPENED AT TAYLOR'S WEDDING?
 
2013-09-22 12:22:00 PM  
" Let me guess. You own a Chik-Fil-A. "

This is an ad-hominem attack, and not only is it very off-base in my case, it doesn't counter anything I've explained.  But it's the kind of comeback you can expect from a precious snowflake who's had a coddled, entitled up-bringing; when they come up against a hard "no", they get petulant. You'll get over it.
 
Displayed 50 of 51 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report