Jewish wedding traditions adopted by non-Jewish couple

[Psi U MC Vito]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

I don't know why a non-Christian would want to take communion, or what the Archbishop was thinking. If he thinks of it as merely symbolic, sounds like he'd be happier in ECUSA!

Hey! We believe in the Real Presence. That being said, this sounds like a bishop we would want.

[ellebud]

I believe that she would want a Yichud room. I had never seen this until recently.

And the most traditional of chuppahs is four poles that hold up a tallis (or tallit). That is the prayer shawl that men wear and now, in reform and possibly conservative synagogues (help me here...I'm not as familiar with conservative traditions) women now wear them as well.

A chuppah can be as simple or as elegant as the bride and groom (or the people footing the bill) want it to be. The ones here are amazing. But the chuppah is not only the starting of a new family, the chuppah will (hopefully) shield and shelter the new couple. And the parents are not excluded from this picture. Although they are not directly under the chuppah they stand next to it. Hopefully this signifies the parents' blessings and support.

(And just know that when Ellebud is standing up there...I'll be the one sobbing with joy. I'm a sucker for a happy beginning.)

[barbino]

ellebud, what is a Yichud room?
Also, I hate to say it, but I was the one who recently suggested to our church administration that we have a "Christian Seder." Due to comments on here, I am rethinking this. I have a Christian friend who has had one in her own home, though (I was not there) and we have discussed this. I had two married Jewish friends who met at a seder and loved to tell their story.

[aephi alum]

Yichud means seclusion. Immediately after the ceremony, the bride and groom leave the chuppah and go to a separate space where they spend the first moments of their married life together, without family and friends intruding. In the old days, the marriage would be consummated during this time. My husband and I spent our yichud saying to each other, "Holy shit, we're married?!" LOL

ETA: I think this is a great idea to incorporate into a wedding, no matter the couple's religion(s). It's nice not to be inundated by well-wishers and thrown into a receiving line when you've just exchanged vows seconds ago.

[CutiePie2000]

Originally Posted by aephi alum

Yichud means seclusion. Immediately after the ceremony, the bride and groom leave the chuppah and go to a separate space where they spend the first moments of their married life together, without family and friends intruding. In the old days, the marriage would be consummated during this time. My husband and I spent our yichud saying to each other, "Holy shit, we're married?!" LOL

ETA: I think this is a great idea to incorporate into a wedding, no matter the couple's religion(s). It's nice not to be inundated by well-wishers and thrown into a receiving line when you've just exchanged vows seconds ago.

I think this is a very nice idea as well and definitely has applications for more secular couples.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by ellebud

I believe that she would want a Yichud room. I had never seen this until recently.

And the most traditional of chuppahs is four poles that hold up a tallis (or tallit). That is the prayer shawl that men wear and now, in reform and possibly conservative synagogues (help me here...I'm not as familiar with conservative traditions) women now wear them as well.

A chuppah can be as simple or as elegant as the bride and groom (or the people footing the bill) want it to be. The ones here are amazing. But the chuppah is not only the starting of a new family, the chuppah will (hopefully) shield and shelter the new couple. And the parents are not excluded from this picture. Although they are not directly under the chuppah they stand next to it. Hopefully this signifies the parents' blessings and support.

(And just know that when Ellebud is standing up there...I'll be the one sobbing with joy. I'm a sucker for a happy beginning.)

I was raised in a Conservative Egalitarian synagogue (affiliated with USCJ). I was called to the torah as a bat mitzvah and indeed have a tallis.

Chuppah traditions also vary regionally...some are held by four attendants, some are simply draped over the bride and groom, etc. I don't know about the suspended chuppah referenced upthread; I've never seen that.

And I can't believe there are religions that DON'T have a yichud room :-)

[SWTXBelle]

Originally Posted by Psi U MC Vito

Hey! We believe in the Real Presence. That being said, this sounds like a bishop we would want.

I meant the Real Presence as in transubstantiation - which of course ECUSA does not believe in, as per article XXIX of the Articles of Religion. I apologize for not being clearer. // end communion hijack, at least as far as I'm concerned.

[KSUViolet06]

Originally Posted by aephi alum

Yichud means seclusion. Immediately after the ceremony, the bride and groom leave the chuppah and go to a separate space where they spend the first moments of their married life together, without family and friends intruding. In the old days, the marriage would be consummated during this time. My husband and I spent our yichud saying to each other, "Holy shit, we're married?!" LOL

ETA: I think this is a great idea to incorporate into a wedding, no matter the couple's religion(s). It's nice not to be inundated by well-wishers and thrown into a receiving line when you've just exchanged vows seconds ago.

I like this. In many situations, it's probably the only actual alone time you'll get for the entire day until the shindig is over.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

It outlines those sects which the Roman Catholics recognize and which the RCs consider able to take communion, but also notes that non-RCs should follow the dictates of their religious organization. I'll have to pay special attention to it this Sunday - I know it lists those groups. There are extraordinary circumstances in which I know priests can give communion to non-RCs, but I doubt that attending a wedding would be one of them.

I'm sure that a wedding isn't one of them, but that really wasn't my point. I think you're reading more into what I said than I intended. My first point were simply that the statement "If you are not in communion with the Roman Catholic Church . . . you don't take communion" was a bit of an overstatement. My second (and main) point was that what ellebud described was not, I don't think, the same as what the article in the OP describes. The article describes two people who decide to appropriate religious traditions of a religion they do not claim as their own because they like those traditions and want something "different." What ellebud described is an officiating clergyman violating the canons of his own religion (perhaps so as not to seem inhospitable, but who knows), effectively placing a burden on others to know what the rules are. In the first instance, it's people not of the religion who might be seen as acting inappropriately; in the second instance, it's the member of (and authority figure in) the religion who would be seen to be acting inappropriately.

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

I meant the Real Presence as in transubstantiation - which of course ECUSA does not believe in, as per article XXIX of the Articles of Religion. I apologize for not being clearer. // end communion hijack, at least as far as I'm concerned.

It is a highjack, but as long as we've gone there: a major pet peeve of mine is to equate transubstantiation and Real Presence. Transubstation is a way (based on Aristotelian philosophy) of explaining and understanding the Real Presence, but it is hardly the only way. While it is the official understanding of the Real Presence of the Roman Catholic Church, many Christians (including some Roman Catholics I know of, not to mention those who agree with Article XXIX of the Articles of Religion) fully believe in the Real Presence without adhering to transubstantiation as an explanation of that Presence.

[/pet peeve rant off]

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by KSUViolet06

I like this. In many situations, it's probably the only actual alone time you'll get for the entire day until the shindig is over.

Fewer than half of couples actually have sex on their wedding days. Most are too tired by the time they are done, and have done it before anyway, so they just go to sleep.

This isn't to say that most Jewish couples actually do it in the yichud room anymore, but as someone upthread said, just sitting and saying "holy sh*t, we're married" as just the two of you is important, too.

[SWTXBelle]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

I'm sure that a wedding isn't one of them, but that really wasn't my point. I think you're reading more into what I said than I intended. My first point were simply that the statement "If you are not in communion with the Roman Catholic Church . . . you don't take communion" was a bit of an overstatement. My second (and main) point was that what ellebud described was not, I don't think, the same as what the article in the OP describes. The article describes two people who decide to appropriate religious traditions of a religion they do not claim as their own because they like those traditions and want something "different." What ellebud described is an officiating clergyman violating the canons of his own religion (perhaps so as not to seem inhospitable, but who knows), effectively placing a burden on others to know what the rules are. In the first instance, it's people not of the religion who might be seen as acting inappropriately; in the second instance, it's the member of (and authority figure in) the religion who would be seen to be acting inappropriately.

It is a highjack, but as long as we've gone there: a major pet peeve of mine is to equate transubstantiation and Real Presence. Transubstation is a way (based on Aristotelian philosophy) of explaining and understanding the Real Presence, but it is hardly the only way. While it is the official understanding of the Real Presence of the Roman Catholic Church, many Christians (including some Roman Catholics I know of, not to mention those who agree with Article XXIX of the Articles of Religion) fully believe in the Real Presence without adhering to transubstantiation as an explanation of that Presence.

[/pet peeve rant off]

Okay, I lied and am back on the hijack for a moment.

I apologize for not being clear about speaking to the hijack as opposed to the op.

It is of course a matter of how Real Presence is defined - since I was coming from a Roman Catholic perspective, that was how I was using it, which I thought was clear. I will make sure to clearly state transubstantiation if that is what I mean as opposed to the broader concept of the Real Presence in mixed company. // real end of my hijack - maybe.

[ForeverRoses]

I don't know if this is traditional, or if this was just something this couple had done; but at a Jewish wedding I attended the couple took the glass that was broken at the end of the ceremony and then had some of the glass pieces put into mezuzahs. I think they kept one for themselves and then gave one to each set of parents.

I also love the idea of a Yichud room.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by ForeverRoses

I don't know if this is traditional, or if this was just something this couple had done; but at a Jewish wedding I attended the couple took the glass that was broken at the end of the ceremony and then had some of the glass pieces put into mezuzahs. I think they kept one for themselves and then gave one to each set of parents.

I also love the idea of a Yichud room.

I have seen this a lot lately. Sort of a "new tradition".

[Low C Sharp]

Our congregation has had seders for this purpose a few times in the past, and we've asked people from a near-by synagogue to join us for it, help us plan it and lead us in it.

See, this is what I'm talking about. This shows respect for the still-living, still-practicing Jews who created and who preserve that tradition. Seders aren't something that went away at the time of Christ, to be revived as a Christian historical relic. We have treasured them through thousands of years of exile and persecution.

Obviously, people have a right to worship how they want, and if you want to have a ritual dinner where you talk about how the three matzos represent the Trinity, zei gezundt (GC translation: bless your heart). But calling it a Seder is bastardizing something others find precious and holy. I wouldn't try to stop you, but if I see that, I know you don't respect us.

Re: huppas: several years ago, I was a bridesmaid at a NY-area wedding where I and other attendants held the four poles of the huppah during the ceremony. For me, this really drove home the commitment of friends and family to support the new household. It was almost like the four of us made vows, too.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by Low C Sharp

. . . zei gezundt (GC translation: bless your heart) . . .

Okay, please, please, please tell me I'm not being disrespectful if I use this from time to time. Please?