Interfaith marriage... or is it?

[weemodin]

Issue:

Boyfriend and I are planning a Jan. ''05 wedding. He''s agnostic and I''m moderately Episcopalian (i.e. I believe in God and Jesus Christ but I''m not a believer in the whole "being Christian is the only way to get into that club called heaven" deal and I''m totally open to other beliefs.)
We''re not getting married in a church, but I would really like to get married by an Episcopal minister, since I know one that I really like and I think it would be special. Plus, my family would certainly prefer it to us getting hitched by the local justice of the peace.
Boyfriend isn''t totally opposed to the idea, BUT he is hesitant about the requirement that he be baptized (which, by the way, I think is a bit odd too). However, to me the baptism is just a hoop to jump through.

My whole idea, which may be ignorant or callous, correct me if I''m wrong, is that since he doesn''t really believe in ANY religion, being baptized just to "go through the motions" wouldn''t hurt him/destroy his sense of spirituality and would be a nice compromise since he won''t get married in the church. However, I''d like some opinions on this. Further, does anyone know any Christian religions that let you bypass this baptism requirement?

** For those of you for whom this post raises larger looming concerns about the wisdom of our marriage, rest assured, we''ve discussed these things in detail. I''d never force him to go to church with me or to believe in my beliefs, and he''ll allow me to take the children (future children) to church and to raise them in my faith since he knows it''s important to me. And yes, we can talk openly about religion.

 

[glitterata]

Have you discussed the issue with the minister you want to marry you? What does he (or she) say the meaning is behind the requirement that your fiance get baptized?

If I were in your fiance's shoes, I would balk at getting baptized into a faith I didn't hold. I would find that too close to hypocracy for my taste. However, I don't expect everyone would feel the same way I do. What matters is how your fiance and you feel.

 

[fire&ice]

Yeah, what do you mean by Baptized? Were his parents also agnos? If not, he probably was baptized.

Families are funny. Your parents may never forgive you for not having a church wedding. I admire your fiance for putting their wishes above his. Marriage is hard enough w/o starting off with friction.

 

[sumi]

I agree with glitterata. That seems like a pretty hypocritical thing to do.

I was raised in the Catholic Church, but that wasn't my choice. As soon as I felt I was an adult and could make my own decisions, I left the church and never looked back. As you can guess, I am not a very religious person. However, I do have friends who are very religious. Their faith is something that is very important to them and I respect that. It's admirable for anyone to have certain ideals that really mean something to them, whether it be religious ideals or political ideals, etc, etc. I think it would be very rude to people who really are religious to get baptized for something like this. If I were very religious, I would be deeply offended. Being baptized in to a religion is nothing to play around with. Out of respect to people who really are religious, I would not do it.

 

[weemodin]

Yeah, Sumi, that seems to be my real problem with it too -- it seems somehow offensive to the religion to have someone just "go through the motions" and get baptized so that a minister can marry us. And I'm certainly not going to try to convert him -- I love him exactly how he is now, agnosticism included.

As for my parents, they'd certainly forgive me for not having a church wedding -- they aren't particularly religious themselves, just nominally so.

And yes, his parents are also agnostics, so he's not been baptized.

Query: who marries you if you don't have a minister do it? I've only been to church weddings so far, so a minister is the only option I've considered. Also, does anyone know if there's any way to incorporate religion into a wedding -- without having it performed by a minister? I guess I just want some element of my faith to be present in the ceremony, but I don't want it to be there at the expense of making my boyfriend feel hypocritical. I feel like there's got to be some sort of a compromise that acknowledges my personal faith yet doesn't stifle his agnostic beliefs. I thought that having the wedding in a secular location but performed by a minister would be a good compromise -- not in the church, but not wholly secular. However, I don't want the whole baptizm issue to make it seem innapropriate.

Has anyone gone through a similar situation?

 

[aljdewey]

I guess I'd have a theoretical problem with it......if it's viewed as being "just a hoop to jump through", then why it is important to do at all? I know the faith requires it, but the faith expects that someone undertaking the sacrament is doing it for more than just "checking off the box" reasons.




If it's just going through the motions, and it's not meant anyway, then I can't see how that's valuable to the faith.....a token baptism shouldn't be so important.

 

[Mara]

Personally...I say get him baptized and converted. If he doesn't really care, and is willing to go through the motions and it wouldn't be hypocrisy for HIM to do it, then it doesn't matter what the church or faith would think or how they might benefit.




I say this because I am a very cafeteria Roman Catholic, but it was all definitely 'going through the motions' for me, it was required by my family. I believe in God, so it didn't bother me to do it...but I am by no means an active church member or follower nor do I believe in hellfire and brimstone. The irony is that my family is not really religious either so I have no idea why I went through all of that! My Mom wanted me to get married in a church because it's prettier. Sorry!




I also know that some religions can be quite strict as to who enters and/or gets their 'blessing'. My Mom had my 2nd sister when she was unmarried and got married after the baby was born. Catholicism is SOO strict...you have to meet with a priest before they will baptize your child, and he was unwilling to baptize my sister because her parents were unmarried when she was born even though they'd recitified the problem later! So typical of that strict, unbending faith I don't subscribe to. So I can see how your church may want you to jump through these hoops for whatever reasons of their own...and if you don't do it, they may just flat out refuse you. Luckily she found another less strict, younger priest to do it and he was more flexible. There may be a similar way around things for you?




Anyway...that said, if HE is not bothered by doing it when he doesn't believe it...then just do it..esp if it would make you and your family happy (key!). If he was against it, or had some strong beliefs of his own that he would compromise....then I would definitely not advise it. But since he sounds open, I wouldn't see anything wrong with it. It's not like he believes he will be going to hell by doing it, right?

Anyway some may disagree, but my two cents

 

[ChooChoo]

Weemodin,

I don't think your bf should have to get baptized if it makes him uncomfortable. If I were him, I would feel very uncomfortable going through such a solemn ceremony without my heart being in it.

You have many options - you can get a minister who routinely performs interfaith weddings who would let you pick and choose the elements you are both happy with. Many liberal Episcopalean and Unitarian ministers would fit the bill very nicely (in fact, I am surprised that you picked one who requires a baptism - from my understanding, that is not the norm). They could also do a beautiful outdoor ceremony (or you could go to a Unitarian church, they can be very pretty) and it could be personalized to your beliefs, not religious traditions.

 

[Maria D]

----------------
On 1/25/2004 10:00:43 PM weemodin wrote:

Query: who marries you if you don't have a minister do it? **snip** Also, does anyone know if there's any way to incorporate religion into a wedding -- without having it performed by a minister? I guess I just want some element of my faith to be present in the ceremony, but I don't want it to be there at the expense of making my boyfriend feel hypocritical. I feel like there's got to be some sort of a compromise that acknowledges my personal faith yet doesn't stifle his agnostic beliefs. ----------------

weemodin, do you have a Unitarian Universalist church in your area? I would suggest contacting a UU minister. This is not my faith but I do know people of in similar situations that were married in UU churches.

I, personally, do not believe in baptism for the sake of "going through the motions." I mean, it's a sacrament. I'm an agnostic myself, so it's not that it offends me on a religious level. How do you feel about people "going through the motions of marrying" just so their spouse can get a green card? Kind of cheapens the whole idea of marriage, doesn't it. I feel this baptism would cheapen the your religious beliefs which would then beg the question of why you want to bother with a religious wedding at all.

I'm kind of surprised your Episcopalian minister requires this if you're not getting married in the church. Do Episcopalians not allow interfaith marriage? I thought even Catholic priests would marry a Catholic to a non-Catholic under the condition that they are not married at the alter and they agree to raise any children as Catholic.

Anyway, I think you and your fiance may be pleasantly surprised at the "spiritality" of a UU wedding. Good luck!