My SO’s sister is getting married this weekend. She’s Jewish, her husband-to-be is Baptist (both are non-practicing), so they’re having a non-denominational wedding. However, the bride’s mother wants to maintain as many Jewish customs as she can in the ceremony. They had a bit of a row about whether or not the guests at the ceremony should stand when the bride makes her appearance and walks down the aisle, as they typically do in Christian weddings. Her mother says this is not done at Jewish weddings and would prefer that all the guests follow Jewish custom (a difficulty, as the groom’s family is Baptist) and remain seated. Can anyone enlighten as to what the Jewish custom is, or at least anecdotes from your experience?
The guests are supposed to stand and rise as both the bride and groom come down the aisle and remain standing until the bride or groom passes them by. The reason for this is because a bride and groom are considered as royalty on their wedding day.
What Eve’s referring to is the breaking of a glass after the wedding. It’s the very last thing done in the ceremony. The groom stomps on it with his foot to signify…um…to signify…40 years in the desert? That even Jews can be badasses? Glass is cheaper than crystal? I’m not sure.
Also, there’s a chupa. It’s a four poled covering that the bride and groom stand under during the ceremony. The poles can be attached to the floor or, joy of joys! You can enlist four very special people to hold the damn thing up for 20 minutes. No really, it’s fun. Trust me.
It’s a sign of mourning for the destruction of the Temple. It shows that even at the times of our greatest happiness, we still remember and mourn for the destruction of the Temple.
I’m going to disagree with Zev about the chupa (btw, that’s a hard “ch” as in “chutzpha”). In my upbringing, a chupa is not recommended at an interfaith or nondenominational wedding, as the canopy represents the about-to-be-married couple’s new Jewish home. And if the wedding isn’t Jewish, don’t expect the home to be very Jewish either. (At least that’s my take on it. Two Jews, three opinions.)
OTOH, thanks Zev for the note about considering the bridal couple as royalty. I had forgotten that we were supposed to stand for the groom’s entrance. (I’ve attended too many Xian weddings recently, not enough Jewish ones.)
As long as we’re on the subject, is it traditional in Jewish ceremonies for both parents to accompany the bride in the opening processional? This always seemed like a nice idea to me (although I don’t know the reason behind it).
Most of the time the bride is brought in by her mother and her mother-in-law.
I was walked in by my folks, my groom was walked in by his. It was nice and didn’t leave the poor guy standing at the altar while the other women were fussing with my dress.
There are two different customs. One is that the bride’s parents accompany the bride and the groom’s parents accompany the groom. The other is that the two fathers accompany the groom and the two mothers accompany the bride.
BTW, I should point out that both customs are equally valid. By my wedding, my father and father-in-law walked me down. This was done because my mother felt uncomfortable walking down the aisle with my father (my parents are divorced and my father is remarried). However, by my sister’s wedding, she apparently got used to the idea because both of my parents walked my sister down the aisle.
Yeah, that was my reaction too. I mean, even assuming all the Jews attending the ceremony agree with her mother, all the Baptists and miscellany will stand out of habit. I don’t know what her mother expects the bride to do – call everyone, make an announcement? I don’t know.
zev, the bride’s parents are divorced and the father is remarried, like yours. I know that the bride’s father is giving her away but I’m not sure how the MOB is fitting in with that. I think there was an issue there as well.
To the best of my knowledge, there will not be a chupa – it’d probably be inappropriate considering the circumstances, huh?
It’s probably better to do whatever makes people most comfortable and able to enjoy the special day. I would have preferred being walked down by both of my parents, but I accepted the other way out of concern for my mother’s feelings on the matter.
In short, this shouldn’t be a sticking point. Especially since, in terms of Jewish law, this won’t be a valid marriage anyway. The couple should simply do whatever they want and try to offend/make feel uncomfortable the fewest number of people.
Again, as I mentioned, since the marriage would not be recognized by Jewish law, it doesn’t make that much of a difference.
I tend to agree with you, zev – the die, as they say, has been cast. I don’t think it’s really about adhering to Jewish custom at this point, if you catch my drift.
The version I heard was that the choupa symbolizes the wedding chamber, and the shattering of the glass by the groom symbolizes…well…you know – the “action” in the wedding chamber (assuming the wife is a virgin).
:o
Always made sense to me – I guess I’ve just got a dirty mind.
You are partially right about the chupa, however. The bride going under the chupahdoes symbolize the groom bringing the bride into their new home. You’re completely off-base on the glass, however.
In any event, I should point out that when the new husband and wife are secluded immediately following the ceremony, there is no “action” going on. The seclusion is to create the legal presumption that the marriage has been consumated.
However, (at least at Orthodox ceremonies) the bride and groom have been fasting all day (there is a custom that they do so) and they have probably not seen each other in over a week (also a common custom). In addition, many Orthodox Jewish couples strictly adhere to the law regarding physical contact between the sexes. As such, the new couple has never even touched each other yet. It’s highly unlikely that they would then immediately “jump in the sack.” In most cases they are probably hugging, maybe kissing and grabbing a bite to eat (especially if it’s a nighttime wedding).
Does that mean that no one has ever done it in the yichud (seclusion) room? No. But it is certainly not the norm.
OK zev – I am certainly not going to argue with you, because I’m certain you’re right. But I do think it makes for a nice bit of Freudian symbolism, intended or not.
