Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think it's really cheeky to remove Christmas flowers from the altar for your wedding

433 replies

user1485342611 · 01/01/2018 14:25

A good friend of mine is on the flower team for our local church. They did the altar up beautifully for Christmas. A wedding had been booked in the church for a few days after Christmas and they wanted to remove all the flowers and replace with their own arrangements. It was explained to the B&G that once the Church was decorated for Christmas it had to stay that way until 12th night.

The couple kicked up an almighty fuss and said there was no way they wanted red and white flowers on the altar during their wedding. Then, with no permission, they went into the church, removed all the Christmas arrangements from the altar and left them at the side of the Church. They then replaced them with their own flowers, and brought the flowers away with them after the wedding, leaving the altar (and the steps outside which were also decorated for Christmas) bare.

They told no one what they had done and when it was discovered my friend and her team (all voluntary workers) who had spent hours getting the Church ready for Christmas, then had to give up more of their time restoring the altar to the way it was. They were absolutely furious.

AIBU to think this was unbelievably cheeky and to also not understand why you would get married at Christmas time and then object to the Church being decorated in a Christmassy fashion?

OP posts:
TheNewMrs · 01/01/2018 20:15

Agree with @RadioGaGoo

It's difficult as when I got married in church, the compulsory cost was £700+ (only a few months ago). If we didn't pay the full amount, then we didn't get married in that church. At that price I would have expected to be able to use my own flowers if I wished (I actually used the church flowers as they were lovely, but I'd have expected the choice after paying so much money)

However, if it's just a voluntary donation as in this instance then I do think the B&G were being VU, particularly as it was made clear to them from the outset.

Enidthecat · 01/01/2018 20:40

I'm not supporting them or what they did at all. I'm saying it's a bit shitty to publicly shame anyone for something like this.

YeahILoveSummer · 01/01/2018 20:42

Yes it is rude and disrespectful to move them without permission and then to not even bother to put them back! Very cheeky! Angry

thegreenheartofmanyroundabouts · 01/01/2018 20:44

The fee to be married in a C of E church is £441 for 2018. That gets you the building, the vicar, banns and a legal ceremony. If you want an organist bells and a choir it is going to cost more. Many churches charge for heating in the winter. In some parts of the country you might get an organist for £50 but it is nearer to £100in the south east. It's been a while since I worked in a church with bells but towers with 8 or 9bells need that number of people to ring them and they all will need paying. Church fees can mount up mount up but compared to the cost of a reception it is usually only a very small part of the cost of a wedding.

Lweji · 01/01/2018 20:45

Enidthecat

The OP didn't go straight to the DF with their photos.
A thread here only tells them they were unreasonable arseholes. They have not been publicly shamed.

SenecaFalls · 01/01/2018 20:51

We were not charged to have our wedding in the church because we were members.

IsaSchmisa · 01/01/2018 20:51

Would you still expect that even if you'd been specifically told your fee didn't include that thenewmrs?

Original poster
user1485342611 · 01/01/2018 20:58

You seem very upset about this Enid. Why would I want this thread picked up by a newspaper. The thought never even crossed my mind. As I've no intention of identifying the couple, the church or even the location how could the DM possibly make a story out of it?

OP posts:
Lizzie48 · 01/01/2018 21:07

Honestly, Enidthecat, you're the only one who has mentioned the DF. If that paper picks this up it will because of you carrying on about it!! Anyone would think you were actually angling for this to end up there.

Lweji · 01/01/2018 21:08

Or the bride.

Enidthecat · 01/01/2018 21:14

They'll make a story out of any old shit!

Ah yes anyone who disagrees with op must be the bride Hmm9

Lizzie48 · 01/01/2018 21:20

Then stop arguing and the thread will stop going. You're the one flipping well keeping it going. Hmm

BackforGood · 01/01/2018 21:40

It was explained to the B&G that once the Church was decorated for Christmas it had to stay that way until 12th night.

Why ?

I'm very involved in our Church, but I've never heard of this 'having' to be a thing ? I mean, don't get me wrong, if the flowers could last that long, then it's a bonus - no cost, little time etc 'two weeks for one amount of work / one cost'. However, if someone wants other flowers (to fit with a colour scheme) and they are paying for them and doing them, then you've still got flowers in Church without cost in time or money.

Did whoever took the booking in the first place (I don't know if that is the Vicar or someone else in your Church) clearly explain at the time of booking that one of the conditions of a Christmas wedding is that you like to keep the flowers you have arranged, and there wasn't the option to bring in their own flowers ?
or
Did you discuss with them what colours the would like, and offer (if they were paying) to make the 'Christmas Flowers' suits what they would like ? That's what we would have done in our Church.

I don't understand you saying that they don't pay to use the Church. The Church has costs associated with the Church being used for a wedding - heating, lighting, cleaning, often gardening / tidying the Churchyard, stewarding, the time of the Vicar, organist, often a choir and / or bellringers. Every Church I know of charges couples for using their building. (Our Church will 'not charge' for a regular attender, but they tend to make generous donations anyway, understanding the costs involved in running a Church.). Why on earth would you not make a charge ? Confused

Original poster
user1485342611 · 01/01/2018 21:48

Our church is always decorated for Christmas with red and white flowers, holly and candles. Most other churches I visit at Christmas are the same. I have never seen a church done up during Christmas with pink or blue or yellow flowers and as a member of my Church I would be very disappointed if that happened.

OP posts:
BackforGood · 01/01/2018 22:01

What about the other questions - you know, the rather crucial one about if, at the time of booking this conversation was had with the couple?

honeyroar · 01/01/2018 22:03

I'm not religious but if I were I think I'd rather go to Backforgood's church. It sounds kinder and altogether more Christian.

CurryWorst · 01/01/2018 22:04

did anyone tell the couple when they booked that they couldn't do their own flowers?

If not (and it sounds like not) then they are not even slightly in the wrong.

Lizzie48 · 01/01/2018 22:09

I can't say I've ever heard of it being a thing in the churches I've been to either. But I haven't taken much note of the colour of the flowers tbh. It certainly wouldn't worry me either way.

Puzzledandpissedoff · 01/01/2018 22:16

Every Church I know of charges couples for using their building

And so they should - like everything else, churches can't be run on fresh air

However there's surely a balance to be struck and it seems to me no coincidence that, back in around 2012, the relaxation in the regs around which CofE church you could be married at coincided with a nearly 40% increase in fees

This was no doubt a bonanza for the "prettier" churches when the crowds rushed to their doors, but I couldn't help noticing the church which remarried an already twice divorced acquaintance was the very opposite of "chocolate boxy", with a vicar who often bemoaned "his" lack of weddings

I can't possibly know whether this affected his decision to carry out the ceremony at all, but neither can I pretend that I didn't wonder ...

Strawberrybubblebath · 01/01/2018 22:19

Enid this thread proves nothing other than what MN users think.

There is no way to tell if some of the comments are from a person of faith or not. eg someone likens weddings to performances - that doesn't imply what their religious views are.

TrinitySquirrel · 01/01/2018 22:20

They're flowers. There are more important things in life to get your pearls in a twist about, frankly.

Yes they should have put them back but acting like they stole the donation box or something as bad is a bit OTT really.

Flowers just for you OP

BackforGood · 01/01/2018 22:22

You'd be very welcome honeyroar Grin. No need to have a faith either - the curious are very welcome.

FreddieClaryHorshieLion · 01/01/2018 23:03

Was it explained at the time of the booking?

Yes: YANBU.

No: YABU.

They might have spent hours choosing the flowers, the colour schemes, paid the florist. And depending on when they were told... well, if the florist had already prepared the flowers they’d be stuck paying the whole amount without even getting to use them. They might have left their flowers if both parties simply agreed that it was a misunderstanding / oversight and tried to compromise... or could have paid someone to redo the churche’s flower arrangements in red and white.

Lweji · 01/01/2018 23:09

If they had not been told at the time of the booking, they would have an argument to insist on having their own flowers, probably after ensuring that the existing flowers would be replaced by them or at their own cost.

By going behind the request to leave the flowers and not even replacing the original flowers back, they lost any reason that they could have.

isitme88 · 01/01/2018 23:21

Maybe it was a quick wedding due to personal reasons. We brought our wedding forward because of a terminal diagnoses. Perhaps the red and white flowers and the superstitions around it were too significant for the couple.
That or they're CF. But it's done now, not everyone will agree whether the B&G were right or wrong.