Weddingbee boards

No, even if the tradition of the father presenting his bride to the groom was adopted from paganism, it has been practiced within the Catholic Church for so long it can still be considered a tradition (with a small t).   Within Catholicism there is a lot of different thoughts on how the liturgy should be done.  Part of this is because the General Instruction of the Roman Missal does not have as specific of rubrics as the Traditional Latin Mass did.  (granted I don't believe the procession is specified in the instruction for the TLM either) 

I read an article from a bishop who basically said that the father should not give the bride away to represent that the bride and groom are coming equally before God.  I think the other issue is that in current form of the Mass, the vows are said between the liturgy of the Word and the liturgy of the Eucharist.  Thus there is the argument that the procession be like any entrance procession with the cross bearer, the priest, the altar servers etc and then the bride and groom and bridal party processing behind him and then taking their seats for the beginning of Mass.  So there is the argument beyond gender equality that the de-emphasis on the parents, party and bride down the aisle, that is focuses it more on the celebration of the Mass and God.

However, in the Traditional Latin Mass, the vows are said prior to the beginning of Mass.  So you process, say your vows, blessings and prayers and then you sit in a special spot during the Mass.  Some Catholic cultures had the procession take place through the villege with everyone following behind.  They would meet outside the Church and the vows would be said on the Church steps.  They would then enter the church together as husband and wife and the Nuptial Mass would begin.  Even further back in history, Nuptial Masses were reserved for Royality and non-royalty would only have their vows outside of the church doors. 

@amyinchrist: I have seen it. 

Technically, in the Catholic Rite of Marriage, the bride is not given away - she must enter into the marriage freely.  If she does not enter the marriage freely, the marriage is invalid.  While it seems like semantics now, think of 2000 years ago.  In most faiths, your father told you who to marry.  In Christianity, women has the right to choose (which protestant women somehow lost after the reformation).

If you follow the letter of the law when it comes to the Rite of Marriage, the bride and groom should walk together down the aisle with the priest as a joint expression of intent to marry.  However, because of US custom, it is acceptable to change the order of procession.  Because of that, you almost always see either the groom + best man + priest coming out from a side door then the bride + father process down the aisle or the groom and groomsmen process first, then the bride and father process later. 

However, it would be improper to ask in a Catholic Rite of Marriage "who gives this woman away to be married" since even the perception that the bride is not entering the marriage of her own free will could invalidate the marriage.  Of course, your father walking you down the aisle as "support" is certainly acceptable.

That bit of advise in the book I think is completely bogus.  There are plenty of Catholic cultural traditions that have involved the father giving the bride away. 

After Vatican II, a lot of changes were made in the Church that weren't even what the council had intended.  For instance, most of the hymns we currently sing at Mass are copywritten and completely owned by a Protestant hymn company.  There are often theological problems within the lyrics, not to mention that some forms of music are inappropriate for liturgical use and hinder us from entering prayer.  The actual council affirmed that Gregorian Chant and Polyphony should be given a place of honor in Mass and should be the preferred choice in music.  Also Vatican II never intended every part of  the Mass to translated into the venacular (common language of the people).  It was encouraged that some parts could be for the sake of proper instruction, but Catholics were still supposed to be taught Latin as a part of their Catechetical training.  Meanwhile the current translation of the missal was very poorly done so that much of what is communicated in the Latin is watered down to de-emphasize certain aspects of the faith.  This is why the Vatican has been insisting we come up with a new translation.

The issue is that within the hierachy, there are politics going on.  I believe this idea that the father should not hand over his daughter stems from those who see this gesture as one of displaying inequality between the sexes.  Practically speaking, I think it has become problematic in the liturgy since the liturgical reforms changed when the vows were said.  In the old Mass, the Bride and Groom would meet either at the entrance of the Church outside (in some Catholic cultures like Spain) or at the altar rail and kneel down.  The priest and servers would come out and the vows would be said right away.    If they were outside the Church doors, than the Bride and Groom would process together at that point into the Church and they'd actually go past the altar rails and have their own kneelers almost directly in front of the altar (thought still giving enough room for the servers and priest who faced the altar during the majority of Mass rather than standing behind it and facing the people as it occurs today.  If they were already inside, they'd simply step past the altar rail after their vows and take their places.  This was also one of the few occassions where a lay person would be able to drink from the chalice.

Because they moved the vows to basically interupt the Mass, you get sort of this ackward thing of going up and standing in a way that blocks the altar and then going back to your pews and then going back up to say the vows and then going back down. 

In the old Mass, the the father would walk his daughter either down the aisle or the bride would actually process through the entire town with all the guests (and pretty much townspeople) gathering around her.   This whole town procession thing happened I believe mainly in Catholic cultures like Spain.  The bride would meet her groom at the steps of the Church and they would say their vows outside.  The doors of the church would then open and they'd process together down the aisle as husband and wife for the beginning of Mass. 

In Catholic Countries that did not have this eleborate outdoor tradition, the father would escort the bride down where she'd meet her husband.  Then together they'd process the short distance to the altar rail and kneel down to wait for the priest and the servers.  Then they'd say their vows.  After they were husband and wife, than they'd go up the steps and past the altar rail where kneelers were arranged for them and chairs given to them.   Though there would still be room in front of the altar for the altar servers and the priest. 

The change in the order has created a problem.  Technically the tradition was (as you can see) for husband and wife to possess together as a new couple (even a short distance) just before the Mass began.  Their vows were never a part of the Mass and did not interupt the Mass.  It was never the case that the bride and groom as an unmarried couple yet would process together as if they were already united.

The old missal actually gives no instruction to the procession.  The missal started with the bride and groom being either at the altar or at the steps of the Church being met by the priest.  The procession has always been a cultural tradition and has always differed depending on what country and culture you lived in. 

The tradition of the father ushering his daughter does appear in some catholic cultures and did appear in the United States.  I would agree that the Unity Candle is not a part of Catholic Tradition, but this whole "giving flowers to Mary" really did not have a place in the Older form of the Mass either.   Meanwhile there was definitely no kiss.  The Church has better arguments in rooting out these issues than in removing the father ushering the bride.  In fact, like I was trying to say, the bigger problem stems from having the vows interupt the Mass.  That is definitely a part of the new missal and I don't believe brides and grooms can request its changed because it is a part of the rubrics, but the decision was a poor decision made by liturigical committees. 

Theologically, I think the argument is ungrounded for preventing the dad from ushering his daughter.  The bride and groom are not united until they give their matrimonial consent.  Also God presented Eve to Adam.  The best compromise is to have the groom stand at the first pew, receive the bride and process the rest of the short distance, I think.  Its the only way around of losing the fact that the Mass begins before they're married.

Just had to pipe in on this one--- my husband and I walked down the aisle together. I'm SO glad we did! We did it for 2 reasons. First, I LOVED that this style of procession honored all of our parents more, and not just my dad. To me, our wedding wasn't about us as much as it was about our families/parents, God, and us. Second, I loved the symbolism-- us taking this big step-- figuratively and each step up the aisle, literally-- together. 

i was a little hesitant about it since we knew my dad wouldn't be thrilled, but Mrs. Pug's post about the Parasas cemented our decision.

There's another reason I'm really happy we did it though. When I stood in the back of the church, holding hands with my very-very-soon-to-be-husband, watching our parents walk up the aisle in front of us, my heart swelled just thinking about what a great example our parents had set for us, as they modeled their journey in marriage for us. I hadn't expected it, but after our vows, that was the most powerfully emotional moment of the day. I felt very connected, very proud of our parents; and very ready for us to start our own marriage and our own family. 

That's not to knock the other style of processions-- obviously it's beautiful and very special for a bride to walk down the aisle with her parents (mom, dad, or both). It just didn't make sense to me. Just thought I'd mention it since no one had commented saying they had seen it.

@red seatle - that's great.  Those first steps are really special. 

As for our procession, my husband walked his mom down the aisle with his dad following.  He then took his place up front.  I had my brother walk my mom down the aisle with Dad following.  My brother was also the best man.  This left the maid of honor (my sister) without an escort, but I had her fiance (they got married two months afterward) walk her down the aisle.  He took all the usher duties and had been downgraded from a groomsmen after I lost a bridesmaid.  So I had 3 girls and 4 guys to figure out.  I only had the best man and maid of honor stand up front.  Everyone else went directly into their pews.  I wanted to emphasis that they were the official secular witnesses while the priest was the witness of the Church.  It also kept the front from being cluttered with people and thus blocking the view of the tabernacle and altar.

When I came down the aisle with my Dad, my now-husband had such a pleased look on his face.  He just looked so confident and I know I felt so confident about marrying him.  We had a Traditional Latin Mass, so the way it worked was that my husband walked up a bit, I was exchanged between my Dad and him and we walked together to the kneelers (the church didn't have an altar rail) and knelt down.  At this point I had no clue what to do with the bouquet.  I'm so used to folding my hands to pray and my sister didn't think of grabbing my bouquet.  It was rather annoying to hold onto it.  But we had a good period of time just to kneel there and pray.  Then the priest and the servers came out from the side.  There were some prayers while kneeling and then we stood up to exchange our vows.  There were some more prayers.

Unforunately we have to have a Low Mass rather than a High Mass because the scola fell through.  I'm not sure if it was from using the low Mass or what, but after we said out vows, we went into the pews, the priest explained that he needed to prepare for Mass and that everyone should pray for us.  He and the servers then went back into the vestibule and he changed for the Mass.  I do think that with a High Mass, the change in the priest's outfit does occur, but typically the chior sings during this time so you don't have this long period of silence.  Oh well.  I know people got a bit antsy in their pews, but nothing I could do about that.