Christening etiquette; Advice needed

Kiwi in IE

I need some advice. Our niece is being Christened shortly, and we are of course going out of respect for the parents. However Little Kiwi (5 years old) has been invited to a birthday party which clashes with the time of the Christening. My preference is to let him go to the first two hours of the party, miss the church bit, and then collect him an hour early to attend the family get together after. I am unsure of the correct etiquette around religious rituals and am wondering if this will be seen as acceptable, or horribly, unrecoverably rude?

The child whose party it is is a very good friend of little Kiwi and all his 'best friends' are going. Personally I think it is important for him to bond with and share as many fun experiences as possible with the children he will be in school for the next 8 years. I am aware that a Christening will be seen as a good reason to decline the party invite, but he wants to attend and personally I would prefer he did too.

The parents of the child are cultural Catholics and not particularly religious as far as I know. I don't want to be rude, but nor do I want Little Kiwi to miss out. OH feels the same way as me and is also unsure of the rudeness level. What are your thoughts?

Dr. Kenneth Noisewater

Like your neice's parents, I'm a cultural Catholic and not madly religious myself. I can only speak for myself, but I wouldn't be the slightest bit insulted to be honest. Anyway, what 8 year old would rather stand in a church at a ceremony he understands or cares little about than be at his friend's birthday party?! Let him go I say.

TwoShedsJackson

Do you have to be at the party with him or is he going to be looked after there by whoever's hosting it?

If the former, I'd make my excuses re. the christening and if pressed explain as you did here that this is an important event for your son.

If the latter, leave him off at the party and go to the christening, then get him later - he's hardly likely to be missed at the christening and I'm sure he would rather spend his time at the party than in church for over an hour, (not) listening to something of no interest to him whatsoever.

Kiwi in IE

deccurley wrote: »

Like your neice's parents, I'm a cultural Catholic and not madly religious myself. I can only speak for myself, but I wouldn't be the slightest bit insulted to be honest. Anyway, what 8 year old would rather stand in a church at a ceremony he understands or cares little about than be at his friend's birthday party?! Let him go I say.

Thank you. I was wondering whether to ask this in here or Christianity. I know that most A&A regulars, like myself would not care a jot for Christianing attendance, but I thought the Christianity regulars would most likely say he has to go. The views of a cultural Catholic (like the baby's parents who I am concerned about offending) is exactly what I need.

I will ask the parents how they feel about it first once we have decided he is definitely not going, but I was slightly worried that it might be rude to be even considering it. I don't want to end up in the middle of a falling out.

Kiwi in IE

TwoShedsJackson wrote: »

Do you have to be at the party with him or is he going to be looked after there by whoever's hosting it?

If the former, I'd make my excuses re. the christening and if pressed explain as you did here that this is an important event for your son.

If the latter, leave him off at the party and go to the christening, then get him later - he's hardly likely to be missed at the christening and I'm sure he would rather spend his time at the party than in church for over an hour, (not) listening to something of no interest to him whatsoever.

Unfortunately there is no way out of it for us TwoSheds! Would prefer to go to the afterfunction only myself, but that would be pushing good manners I feel.

Obliq

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

I will ask the parents how they feel about it first once we have decided he is definitely not going, but I was slightly worried that it might be rude to be even considering it. I don't want to end up in the middle of a falling out.

Why not ask them before you've decided?! I don't see how it would be more offensive to be considering letting little kiwi go to the party and asking their thoughts about him missing the churchy bit, than having decided already and then tell them?

Mind you, I'd be a bit sneaky myself and not fail to mention that little kiwi isn't used to being in church......whenever I've mentioned that about my kids, people fall over themselves to agree with me (no doubt imagining my little atheists proclaiming "There is no god, why are we here Mammy?" in the middle of the sermon and at the top of their little lungs...).

Czarcasm

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

The parents of the child are cultural Catholics and not particularly religious as far as I know. I don't want to be rude, but nor do I want Little Kiwi to miss out. OH feels the same way as me and is also unsure of the rudeness level. What are your thoughts?

I'm a regular practicing Roman Catholic OP and tbh there's absolutely no rudeness in what you're suggesting. There's no set etiquette for extended family when it comes to a Christening. If I were in your situation I'd certainly be considering his attendance at his friend's birthday party far more important than his cousin's Christening (I can't see his cousin objecting either ), and I don't think your niece's parents will be put out by your decision.

Benny_Cake

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

Thank you. I was wondering whether to ask this in here or Christianity. I know that most A&A regulars, like myself would not care a jot for Christianing attendance, but I thought the Christianity regulars would most likely say he has to go. The views of a cultural Catholic (like the baby's parents who I am concerned about offending) is exactly what I need.

Honestly, I can't see any problem with this. I'd do the same thing myself in your shoes. Not going to a friends birthday party is a big thing for an 8 year-old. A cousin's christening - not so much! As Czarcasm said, there is no set etiquette in any case. I wouldn't spend any time worrying about this.

The 2c of someone who isn't a practicing Catholic (but who frequents the Christianity forum on occasion)!

Peregrinus

I don't think many practising, devout, etc, Christians would have any problem at all with what you propose. Not bringing an 8-year old to a church ceremony (baptism, wedding, whatever) and bringing them to the get-together afterwards is perfectly fine, and I would think pretty common.

Philope

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

I need some advice. Our niece is being Christened shortly, and we are of course going out of respect for the parents. However Little Kiwi (5 years old) has been invited to a birthday party which clashes with the time of the Christening. My preference is to let him go to the first two hours of the party, miss the church bit, and then collect him an hour early to attend the family get together after. I am unsure of the correct etiquette around religious rituals and am wondering if this will be seen as acceptable, or horribly, unrecoverably rude?

The child whose party it is is a very good friend of little Kiwi and all his 'best friends' are going. Personally I think it is important for him to bond with and share as many fun experiences as possible with the children he will be in school for the next 8 years. I am aware that a Christening will be seen as a good reason to decline the party invite, but he wants to attend and personally I would prefer he did too.

The parents of the child are cultural Catholics and not particularly religious as far as I know. I don't want to be rude, but nor do I want Little Kiwi to miss out. OH feels the same way as me and is also unsure of the rudeness level. What are your thoughts?

Can't see the problem at all. If one of my atheist friends/relatives quietly preferred to skip the church bit, for whatever reason, but join the family/friends get together later, I would be more than happy with that. Same for a wedding, but even more so for a Christening.

In your example, even more so, because many religious people, inc. family, might have to miss it for similar reasons, especially if their own child had to go to a kids party as well. No biggy at all in my opinion.

Bring some desert / cakes / bit of food round to the after Christening get together, and that's your pressie sorted as well. Yum.

Hope you enjoy both parties !

I Heart Internet

Kiwi. I don't think this is a "religious" question at all. It is simply a question of general family etiquette.

Firstly, my own view on Christenings is that they should be for immediate family - parents, grandparents, siblings. So a missing cousin, I wouldn't see as a deal breaker.

But for you, I don't think there is any question - if asked to attend a family event like this, it would be disrespectful not to show up to the "main event". I don't think one's personal views about religious belief should hold any particular sway.

For example, if invited to a wedding (civil, humanist, rcc, muslim, etc,etc) one wouldn't dream (unless specifically invited to the afters) of not attending the actual wedding and just turning up for dinner. I think that would be very bad form.

My advice is that family christening trumps child's friend's birthday party and you should both be there, but talk it through with those inviting you to the christening.

Cabaal

From my experience only direct family show up to christianings, everyone else shows up later and generally speaking the reason for showing up later is for a piss up and meet up. I don't agree with the piss up part but thats certainly the way most country christenings go.

As events go it really only has meaning to the parents and that only in some cases, most do it just because its the "done thing" and for the party, day out and photos.

Philope

I've been to dozens of family and friend Christenings, but thankfully never been to a "piss up" one. Usually it's just a family and friend get together in someone's house afterwards, or sometimes going to a hotel for a meal etc. The piss up's do happen, but let's just say, it's more for the end of the market who are more interested in piss ups to begin with, and they never end too well.

Qs

Philope wrote: »

The piss up's do happen, but let's just say, it's more for the end of the market who are more interested in piss ups to begin with, and they never end too well.

Really? Maybe the circles I socialise in aren't at "the end of the market" you approve of but I've been to plenty of christenings that moved on to a pub after the religious ceremony and I have had no experience of them ending in anyway negatively.

Cabaal

Qs wrote: »

Really? Maybe the circles I socialise in aren't at "the end of the market" you approve of but I've been to plenty of christenings that moved on to a pub after the religious ceremony and I have had no experience of them ending in anyway negatively.

Philope, you appear to be making some massive assumptions here,

When I say piss ups, I mean some people needing the excuse to drink any amount. I don't mean failing around the place or any of that nonsense.

I've certainly never seen any event turn into something like that, so not sure what events you've been to.

The event is about a child and in my view is no different to a childs birthday party, i wouldn't see drink as ok at a childs birthday party. Of course the child birthday party has more meaning in my view.

Philope

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/piss-up

Cabaal

Philope wrote: »

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/piss-up

As we've learned on this forum today, a word can have any meaning you want it to

Doesn't change the fact that I've never seen any people drinking at any christianing end badly,

Maybe its just the crowd some people hang around, I don't even drink so not going to affect me at the end of the day :pac:

Philope

Cabaal wrote: »

As we've learned on this forum today, a word can have any meaning you want it to

So true, who needs dictionaries anyway, pesky things aren't they

Sulla Felix

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

I will ask the parents how they feel about it first once we have decided he is definitely not going, but I was slightly worried that it might be rude to be even considering it. I don't want to end up in the middle of a falling out.

Ahh, Kiwi, I know you're here a while so you should know by now that that kind of direct resolution of problems isn't how we handle things here. If you ask the parents before hand, why you're denying them the later pleasure of grouching about you for the son having missed the christening!

All seriousness aside, ask, I'm sure they'll agree there's no need for him at it.

jimd2

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

I need some advice. Our niece is being Christened shortly, and we are of course going out of respect for the parents. However Little Kiwi (5 years old) has been invited to a birthday party which clashes with the time of the Christening. My preference is to let him go to the first two hours of the party, miss the church bit, and then collect him an hour early to attend the family get together after. I am unsure of the correct etiquette around religious rituals and am wondering if this will be seen as acceptable, or horribly, unrecoverably rude?

The child whose party it is is a very good friend of little Kiwi and all his 'best friends' are going. Personally I think it is important for him to bond with and share as many fun experiences as possible with the children he will be in school for the next 8 years. I am aware that a Christening will be seen as a good reason to decline the party invite, but he wants to attend and personally I would prefer he did too.

The parents of the child are cultural Catholics and not particularly religious as far as I know. I don't want to be rude, but nor do I want Little Kiwi to miss out. OH feels the same way as me and is also unsure of the rudeness level. What are your thoughts?

There is absolutely no problem with what you are suggesting. I think that little Kiwi should go to the party as the kids party years are regretfully short. If you can make an appearance at the actual ceremony great but, if it is a good bit out off your way to drop the child and pick up, then excuses to the parents explaining the situation should be accepted. However, it would be good to attend if for no other reason than a catchup and chat with other family members. As the years go on these events get less and less.

Banbh

Etiquette at Christenings? The most important thing for the non-religious person is, as soon as the bell is rung, to kneel down, put your forehead to the floor and raise your rear end. Everyone else will be doing this and it is important not to look out of place.

Kiwi in IE

Little Kiwi has accepted the birthday party invitation. Have had disapproving looks but not from the parents of the child in question, so I couldn't give a flying €;(&!

sawdoubters

the child should be at the Christening for the church service after that the person who is only married into the family,would drive the other kid to the party,and the person whos niece was being christened would stay at family gatering.the church service will only be 30 minutes long,


the other way is the kid should stay at the family gatering all the time and not go to the party

you are making a big mistake just sending the kid to the party,

Sulla Felix

sawdoubters wrote: »

the child should be at the Christening for the church service after that the person who is only married into the family,would drive the other kid to the party,and the person whos niece was being christened would stay at family gatering.the church service will only be 30 minutes long,


the other way is the kid should stay at the family gatering all the time and not go to the party

you are making a big mistake just sending the kid to the party,

Why?

Kiwi in IE

Another question pertaining to same Christening;

Priest is a family friend of OH's family. Grew up in same town as OH and his brother. Have met him a couple of times and found him to be rude and obnoxious. And this without him being in any way aware of my views on religion. Any woman he dosn't know he refers to as 'Mary' in a dismissive "I can't be arsed trying to remember your name" way. This is how he has addressed me anytime I have met him. Last time I half heard a conversation about marriage between himself and OH where he was talking about marriage and 'the true religion'. We were not married at the time, and the jist of it was that I should be accepting of marriage into the Catholic religion. OH brought up Catholic but 'lapsed' and pretty much agnostic. Handled it well and I stayed out, but I won't stay out this time.

Now we are married. It was done in a registry office and I am expecting comment about same, and some sort of attempt to have us convert to/reaquiant with 'the one true religion'. How should I handle this? I have already decided I will counter 'Mary' with 'Father Ted' or 'Dougal'. Should I let fly (e.g similar to my ratings in here) or hold my toungue to keep the peace?

Kiwi in IE

sawdoubters wrote: »

the child should be at the Christening for the church service after that the person who is only married into the family,would drive the other kid to the party,and the person whos niece was being christened would stay at family gatering.the church service will only be 30 minutes long,

Any reason why?

We are doing quite the opposite actually. Child will miss church bit and be collected half an hour early from party to attend family meal.

Sulla Felix

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

Another question pertaining to same Christening;

Priest is a family friend of OH's family. Grew up in same town as OH and his brother. Have met him a couple of times and found him to be rude and obnoxious. And this without him being in any way aware of my views on religion. Any woman he dosn't know he refers to as 'Mary' in a dismissive "I can't be arsed trying to remember your name" way. This is how he has addressed me anytime I have met him. Last time I half heard a conversation about marriage between himself and OH where he was talking about marriage and 'the true religion'. We were not married at the time, and the jist of it was that I should be accepting of marriage into the Catholic religion. OH brought up Catholic but 'lapsed' and pretty much agnostic. Handled it well and I stayed out, but I won't stay out this time.

Now we are married. It was done in a registry office and I am expecting comment about same, and some sort of attempt to have us convert to/reaquiant with 'the one true religion'. How should I handle this? I have already decided I will counter 'Mary' with 'Father Ted' or 'Dougal'. Should I let fly (e.g similar to my ratings in here) or hold my toungue to keep the peace?

If he makes a bid to get you back to the church, tell him you've been thinking along the same lines and starting next week you're going to be taking the family to <insert local CoI congregation here>. Should make him splutter a bit and you'll probably get a few giggles from the saner family members.

Or you could take the high ground and just maintain your indifferent to the whole thing. I wouldn't be obnoxious about it though. Go funny, or go serious.

Kiwi in IE

Sulla Felix wrote: »

I wouldn't be obnoxious about it though

Awwwwwwwwww! Not even if he's obnoxious first (which I'm expecting)?

Sulla Felix

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

Awwwwwwwwww! Not even if he's obnoxious first (which I'm expecting)?

Be the bigger woman? Anyway, maybe he's obnoxious because at christenings in particular he's surrounded by semi-sycophantic mock-pious assholes that he doesn't see for the rest of the year.
He might find your honesty refreshing!

Czarcasm

Sulla Felix wrote: »

Be the bigger woman? Anyway, maybe he's obnoxious because at christenings in particular he's surrounded by semi-sycophantic mock-pious assholes that he doesn't see for the rest of the year.
He might find your honesty refreshing!

Important thing to remember here Sulia is that priests are people too, and this particular priest himself does indeed sound like an obnoxious mock pious asshole that the OP won't see for the rest of... well, not for a very long time again anyway!

OP just treat him like you would anyone else who you know is just spouting ****e talk but you'll put up with it for the sake of keeping the peace. It honestly wouldn't surprise me if he was doing it within earshot of you just to get a rise, there's no need to give him even more ammunition.

Better off to maintain your dignity and show that you're there for your family's sake, you're not there to provide anyone with entertainment, and that's all lowering yourself to this guy's level will do.

Brian Shanahan

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

Now we are married. It was done in a registry office and I am expecting comment about same, and some sort of attempt to have us convert to/reaquiant with 'the one true religion'. How should I handle this? I have already decided I will counter 'Mary' with 'Father Ted' or 'Dougal'. Should I let fly (e.g similar to my ratings in here) or hold my toungue to keep the peace?

Just next time he tries to butt in on a conversation or "bring you back to the true religion", just say to him "I'm sorry mr. (he's the type to go ape over not being called fr.) I don't talk to rude obnoxious misogynists." It'll guarantee that a) he'll never talk to you again and b) you'll get a lot of admiration from others behind his back, as they'll have been wanting to do similar for years, but don't have the testes.

Peregrinus

Always hard to know how to respond to boorishness of this kind, but responding with boorishness in return is not likely to leave you feeling good about yourself afterwards. This is, after all, your niece's christening, arranged by her parents, and I'm sure they'd greatly prefer there wasn't a big scene at it. Anything you can do to avoid or defuse a row with this boor will be a gift to them. Avoid the bloke to the extent possible, and enter into a pact with someone to come and rescue you if you can't shake him off.

mathepac

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

... Our niece is being Christened shortly ...

Baptised

Czarcasm

mathepac wrote: »

Baptised

Christening is the ceremony at which the child is given a Christian name at the time of their baptism (the sacrament) by way of welcoming them into the Church.

Therefore the OP is still correct.

mathepac

Nope. You should have checked your internet source more carefully. There is no part of the sacrament / ceremony / rite performed in a Catholic Church that is called Christening.

"Baptism into the Catholic Christian community enhances the faith of the parents, godparents, family and the parish community in which it is celebrated. As a Sacrament of the Church it is not a private christening; it belongs to the larger parish and the Catholic community throughout the world."

http://www.rathminesparish.ie/sacraments-a-services/2-uncategorised/64-why-baptism-some-general-pointers

And it certainly isn't split into two parts one consisting of the sacrament in the church and the second the party / piss-up afterwards.

Just FYI

Czarcasm

mathepac wrote: »

Nope.You should have checked your internet source more carefully. There is no part of the sacrament / ceremony / rite performed in a Catholic Church that is called Christening.

"Baptism into the Catholic Christian community enhances the faith of the parents, godparents, family and the parish community in which it is celebrated. As a Sacrament of the Church it is not a private christening; it belongs to the larger parish and the Catholic community throughout the world."

http://www.rathminesparish.ie/sacraments-a-services/2-uncategorised/64-why-baptism-some-general-pointers

You might have some nifty ninja editing skills there matt, but you're still playing pedantic semantics. I don't need to check any internet sources btw, I know what I'm talking about, and we all knew what the OP meant.

And it certainly isn't split into two parts one consisting of the sacrament in the church and the second the party / piss-up afterwards.

Just FYI

Who ever said it was? I certainly didn't. I just didn't understand your unnecessary pedantic semantics is all.

Peregrinus

Ah, but the document you quote doesn't say that baptism isn't a christening; it says it's not a private christening, because "it belongs to the larger parish and the Catholic community throughout the world". In other words, it's a public, universal christening.

The word "christen" comes, unsurprisingly, from the word "Christ". It came into the English language in about the ninth century, and originally meant "to convert to Christianity" or "to make Christian", so not just an individual but a nation, a building, etc, could be christened.

By about the fourteenth century the predominant meaning had come to be "to admit or initiate into the Christian church by baptism". This meaning is still current.

In the sixteenth century, another meaning arose; to give a name to a person at baptism. Still later, by about the eighteenth century, this meaning extended by analogy to any naming/dedication ceremony, whether Christian or not - church bells could be said to be christened, for example, as could ships. And finally the meaning was extended to cover the mere act of naming somebody or something, without any ceremony at all.

Sacramental baptism is a christening in all of these senses (except in the case of adult baptism, which usually doesn't involve conferring any name, and so is a christening only in the senses involving initiation into the church). A baptism ceremony is very commonly referred to as a christening, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Kiwi in IE

mathepac wrote: »

Baptised

mathepac wrote: »

And it certainly isn't split into two parts one consisting of the sacrament in the church and the second the party / piss-up afterwards.

Just FYI

Well there are two parts to this one; the first in a church and the second in a restaurant. And whatever the 'official' term is for such a ritual, it seems everybody knew what I was talking about despite my error. Obviously you also understood what I meant since you were able to provide the term needed for correction.

Kiwi in IE

Personally I think better names for the ritual would be; Notice of intention to indoctrinate (or allow indoctrination), or Induction into the institute of delusion. I'm sure the incorrect term 'Christening' is more socially acceptable than the above factual discriptions.

Czarcasm

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

Personally I think better names for the ritual would be; Notice of intention to indoctrinate (or allow indoctrination), or Induction into the institute of delusion. I'm sure the incorrect term 'Christening' is more socially acceptable than the above factual discriptions.

They are a bit of a mouthful :pac:

jimd2

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

Another question pertaining to same Christening;

Priest is a family friend of OH's family. Grew up in same town as OH and his brother. Have met him a couple of times and found him to be rude and obnoxious. And this without him being in any way aware of my views on religion. Any woman he dosn't know he refers to as 'Mary' in a dismissive "I can't be arsed trying to remember your name" way. This is how he has addressed me anytime I have met him. Last time I half heard a conversation about marriage between himself and OH where he was talking about marriage and 'the true religion'. We were not married at the time, and the jist of it was that I should be accepting of marriage into the Catholic religion. OH brought up Catholic but 'lapsed' and pretty much agnostic. Handled it well and I stayed out, but I won't stay out this time.

Now we are married. It was done in a registry office and I am expecting comment about same, and some sort of attempt to have us convert to/reaquiant with 'the one true religion'. How should I handle this? I have already decided I will counter 'Mary' with 'Father Ted' or 'Dougal'. Should I let fly (e.g similar to my ratings in here) or hold my toungue to keep the peace?

You are perfectly within your rights to stop him in his tracks when he calls you Mary or whatever and say nicely "you may have forgotten but my name is ----". If he tries to lecture on your choice of venue for your wedding just point out that there are many choosing to go for a registry office and that he should be happy with that because, after all, it means he and other priests are not therefore spending their time doing ceremonies for people that won't be back again until the next big occasion. Sometimes being nice but firm is more effective than the sarcastic "Father Ted" or "Dougal" comment.
Overall, if it was me I would just avoid him as much as possible. These occasions are not that long and it's not that difficult to say hi and move on.

mathepac

Czarcasm wrote: »

... Who ever said it was? I certainly didn't. ...

From the OP ..

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

... My preference is to let him go to the first two hours of the party, miss the church bit, ...

Seems clear here, one bit in church, the other bit elsewhere.

Cabaal

jimd2 wrote: »

You are perfectly within your rights to stop him in his tracks when he calls you Mary or whatever and say nicely "you may have forgotten but my name is ----". If he tries to lecture on your choice of venue for your wedding just point out that there are many choosing to go for a registry office and that he should be happy with that because, after all, it means he and other priests are not therefore spending their time doing ceremonies for people that won't be back again until the next big occasion. Sometimes being nice but firm is more effective than the sarcastic "Father Ted" or "Dougal" comment.
Overall, if it was me I would just avoid him as much as possible. These occasions are not that long and it's not that difficult to say hi and move on.

I gota say the ignoring it sends the wrong message to such an ignorant sounding man.

A quick Father Dougal as a response is enough to show him how much you care about him, after that you don't have to get into a debate,

Kiwi in IE

jimd2 wrote: »

Overall, if it was me I would just avoid him as much as possible. These occasions are not that long and it's not that difficult to say hi and move on.

Unfortunately this will not be the case as he will be coming to the apparently controversial second part of the christening.

Czarcasm

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

Unfortunately this will not be the case as he will be coming to the apparently controversial second part of the christening.

Kiwi ignore the priest being a prick and remember the most important person on the day is your niece. No point in good champagne going to waste over the head of the priest when it's meant to be saved for wetting the baby's head as part of the christening

The Irish also set aside the top layer of their wedding cake – typically a fruitcake – to celebrate their first baby. And a bottle of champagne is saved from the reception to “wet the baby’s head” at the christening.

Sulla Felix

First I heard of the champagne part, the cake tier used to be common enough I suppose.

jimd2

Cabaal wrote: »

I gota say the ignoring it sends the wrong message to such an ignorant sounding man.

A quick Father Dougal as a response is enough to show him how much you care about him, after that you don't have to get into a debate,

I don't think I said that the OP should ignore it. However there are ways and means to get a point across without lowering yourself to the other persons level and I think that a sarcastic Fr Dougal remark would do that. Alright if it is just the two of them in the conversation but a bit off putting if there are others in the conversation. The saying that less is more and a facial expression as well as saying something like "not all women are called Mary" could bring him down to earth rather than calling him Father Ted or Fr Dougal in obvious retaliation. Remember others in the conversation won't realise that he or she has had previous dealings with the priest and that these feelings of dislike have been building up from other meetings.

Either way I will be interested in how the OP gets on at the christening.

Banbh

I was never at a christening (apart from my own) but I'm told that the Godfather and Godmother are asked 'do you renounce Satan and all his works?' That must surely be the part not to miss, especially if a Godfather answered 'not really'.

robindch

Some Religious Scriptwriter wrote:

Question: Do you renounce Satan and all his works?

Reply: Your eminence, I reject his very existence.

Hotblack Desiato

Sulla Felix wrote: »

First I heard of the champagne part, the cake tier used to be common enough I suppose.

And there's no way the cake will go off in only eight months.

Czarcasm

ninja900 wrote: »

And there's no way the cake will go off in only eight months.

Fruitcake doesn't go off, well, not for years at least! :eek:


The Physics of Why Old Fruitcakes Don't Die