Podcasts about matrimony

Explore how matrimony acts as a "mothering" force of culture in this conversation with Stephen Jenkinson that shines a light on the wedding ritual, marriage, and their deeper layers. Has our modern culture lost the original empowering nature of the wedding day and of marriage itself? In this episode of Insights at the Edge, host Tami Simon welcomes Stephen Jenkinson—culture activist, founder of the Orphan Wisdom School, and author of the forthcoming book Matrimony. Here, Jenkinson explores the difference between weddings, marriage, and matrimony, revealing how authentic ritual can heal cultural wounds and foster community. Drawing from his new book and years of experience, he shares why matrimony is not just a private act but a vital, communal force that shapes the heart of culture itself. This episode is sponsored by BetterHelp. Listeners of Insights At The Edge get 10% off their first month at www.betterhelp.com/soundstrue. Note: This interview originally aired on Sounds True One, where these special episodes of Insights at the Edge are available to watch live on video and with exclusive access to Q&As with our guests. Learn more at join.soundstrue.com.  

Kick off Spooky Season with a trip down the aisle of the afterlife!This episode of Macabre explores haunted wedding venues, ghostly gowns that move on their own, honeymoons with a deadly twist, and chilling love stories from beyond the grave. We'll also uncover eerie marital traditions from cultures around the world — some that celebrate the living, and others that honor the dead.By the end, you'll be asking yourself: Was that mannequin in the bridal shop window just plastic… or something disturbingly human?Vote for Halley to become the "FACE of HALLOWEEN" here (through Oct.) :https://faceofhalloween.org/2025/heidi-2Patreon members get ad free content, early access and exclusive bonus episodes Paid supporters, Join us for Macabre Movie Nights and Game Nights : Macabre PatreonSend in your stories for a future listener episode!Email us at thatssomacabre@gmail.comJoin our private Facebook Group at : MacabrePodcastGet Macabre Exclusive Merch @ www.gothiccthreads.comJoin us on Discord: https://discord.gg/AgB7kgQMResources: Anna Baker Wedding Dress | Paranormal Wiki | FandomThe Corpse Bride in the Window: La Pascualita in Mexico | Ripley's Believe It orNot! | Aquariums, Attractions, MuseumsTil Death: Ghost Brides of the United States – Notebook of GhostsWoman who married ghost getting divorced after 'seeing him flirting with MarilynMonroe's spirit' at LA hotel | Irish StarGhost Marriages – When ‘Til Death Do Us Part' Isn't Enough | AMM BlogWedding Traditions With Dark and Twisted Origins - Business InsiderSupport this podcast at — https://redcircle.com/macabre-dark-history/exclusive-contentAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy

You'll leave this episode really having felt it! With new women's sports leagues, a hospital visit, & trauma detecting technology, Tyler Scheid & Markiplier tackle all the updates in sports. Wait…Taylor Swift & Travis Kelce are now engaged?! Pop in a mouthguard & keep an eye out while you listen to this explosive episode! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

On this episode, my guest is Stephen Jenkinson, culture activist and ceremonialist advocating a handmade life and eloquence. He is an author, a storyteller, a musician, sculptor and off-grid organic farmer. Stephen is the founder/ principal instructor of the Orphan Wisdom School in Canada, co-founded with his wife Nathalie Roy in 2010. Also a sought-after workshop leader, articulating matters of the heart, human suffering, confusions through ceremony.He is the author of several influential books, including Money and the Soul's Desires, Die Wise: A Manifesto for Sanity and Soul (2015), Come of Age: The Case for Elderhood in a Time of Trouble (2018), A Generation's Worth: Spirit Work While the Crisis Reigns (2021), and Reckoning (2022), co-written with Kimberly Ann Johnson. His most recent book, Matrimony: Ritual, Culture, and the Heart's Work, was released in August 2025. He is also involved in the musical project Nights of Grief & Mystery with singer-songwriter Gregory Hoskins, which has toured across North America, Europe, Australia, and New Zealand.Show Notes:* The Bone House of the Orphan Wisdom Enterprise* Matrimony: Ritual, Culture and the Heart's Work* The Wedding Industry* Romantic Sameness and Psychic Withering* The Two Tribes* The Roots of Hospitality* The Pompous Ending of Hospitality* Debt, And the Estrangement of the Stranger* More Than Human Hospitality* The Alchemy of the Orphan Wisdom SchoolHomework:Matrimony: Ritual, Culture, and the Heart's Work | PurchaseOrphan WisdomThe Scriptorium: Echoes of an Orphan WisdomTranscription:Chris: This is an interview that I've been wondering about for a long time in part, because Stephen was the first person I ever interviewed for the End of Tourism Podcast. In Oaxaca, Mexico, where I live Stephen and Natalie were visiting and were incredibly, incredibly generous. Stephen, in offering his voice as a way to raise up my questions to a level that deserve to be contended with.We spoke for about two and a half hours, if I remember correctly. And there was a lot in what you spoke to towards the second half of the interview that I think we're the first kind of iterations of the Matrimony book.We spoke a little bit about the stranger and trade, and it was kind of startling as someone trying to offer their first interview and suddenly hearing something [00:01:00] that I'd never heard before from Stephen. Right. And so it was quite impressive. And I'm grateful to be here now with y'all and to get to wonder about this a little more deeply with you Stephen.Stephen: Mm-hmm. Hmm.Chris: This is also a special occasion for the fact that for the first time in the history of the podcast, we have a live audience among us today. Strange doings. Some scholars and some stewards and caretakers of the Orphan Wisdom enterprise. So, thank you all as well for coming tonight and being willing to listen and put your ears to this.And so to begin, Stephen, I'm wondering if you'd be willing to let those who will be listening to this recording later on know where we're gathered in tonight?Stephen: Well, we're in... what's the name of this township?Nathalie: North Algona.Stephen: North Algona township on the borders, an eastern gate [00:02:00] of Algonquin Park. Strangely named place, given the fact that they were the first casualties of the park being established. And we're in a place that never should have been cleared - my farm. It should never have been cleared of the talls, the white pines that were here, but the admiralty was in need back in the day. And that's what happened there. And we're in a place that the Irish immigrants who came here after the famine called "Tramore," which more or less means "good-frigging luck farming."It doesn't technically mean that, but it absolutely means that. It actually means "sandy shore," which about covers the joint, and it's the only thing that covers the joint - would be sand. You have to import clay. Now, that's a joke in many farming places in the world, but if we wanted any clay, we'd have to bring it in and pay for the privilege.And the farm has been in [00:03:00] my, my responsibility for about 25 years now, pretty close to that. And the sheep, or those of them left because the coyotes have been around for the first time in their casualty-making way... They're just out here, I'm facing the field where they're milling around.And it's the very, very beginnings of the long cooling into cold, into frigid, which is our lot in this northern part of the hemisphere, even though it's still August, but it's clear that things have changed. And then, we're on a top of a little hill, which was the first place that I think that we may have convened a School here.It was a tipi, which is really worked very well considering we didn't live here, so we could put it up and put it down in the same weekend. [00:04:00] And right on this very hill, we were, in the early days, and we've replaced that tipi with another kind of wooden structure. A lot more wood in this one.This has been known as "The Teaching Hall" or "The Great Hall," or "The Hall" or "The Money Pit, as it was known for a little while, but it actually worked out pretty well. And it was I mean, people who've come from Scandinavia are knocked out by the kind of old-style, old-world visitation that the place seems to be to them.And I'd never really been before I had the idea what this should look like, but I just went from a kind of ancestral memory that was knocking about, which is a little different than your preferences, you know. You have different kinds of preferences you pass through stylistically through your life, but the ones that lay claim to you are the ones that are not interested in your [00:05:00] preferences. They're interested in your kind of inheritance and your lineage.So I'm more or less from the northern climes of Northern Europe, and so the place looks that way and I was lucky enough to still have my carving tools from the old days. And I've carved most of the beams and most of the posts that keep the place upright with a sort of sequence of beasts and dragons and ne'er-do-wells and very, very few humans, I think two, maybe, in the whole joint. Something like that. And then, mostly what festoons a deeply running human life is depicted here. And there's all kinds of stories, which I've never really sat down and spoken to at great length with anybody, but they're here.And I do deeply favour the idea that one day [00:06:00] somebody will stumble into this field, and I suppose, upon the remains of where we sit right now, and wonder "What the hell got into somebody?" That they made this mountain of timber moldering away, and that for a while what must have been, and when they finally find the footprint of, you know, its original dimensions and sort of do the wild math and what must have been going on in this sandy field, a million miles in away from its home.And wherever I am at that time, I'll be wondering the same thing.Audience: Hmm.Stephen: "What went on there?" Even though I was here for almost all of it. So, this was the home of the Orphan Wisdom School for more than a decade and still is the home of the Orphan Wisdom School, even if it's in advance, or in retreat [00:07:00] or in its doldrums. We'll see.And many things besides, we've had weddings in here, which is wherein I discovered "old-order matrimony," as I've come to call it, was having its way with me in the same way that the design of the place did. And it's also a grainery for our storage of corn. Keep it up off the ground and out of the hands of the varmints, you know, for a while.Well that's the beginning.Chris: Hmm. Hmm. Thank you Stephen.Stephen: Mm-hmm.Chris: You were mentioning the tipi where the school began. I remember sleeping in there the first time I came here. Never would I have thought for a million years that I'd be sitting here with you.Stephen: It's wild, isn't it?Chris: 12 years later.?: Yeah.Chris: And so next, I'd like to do my best in part over the course of the next perhaps hour or two to congratulate you on the release of [00:08:00] your new book, Matrimony: Ritual, Culture, and the Heart's Work.Stephen: Thank you.Chris: Mm-hmm. I'm grateful to say like many others that I've received a copy and have lent my eyes to your good words, and what is really an incredible achievement.For those who haven't had a chance to lay their eyes on it just yet, I'm wondering if you could let us in on why you wrote a book about matrimony in our time and where it stands a week out from its publication.Stephen: Well, maybe the answer begins with the question, "why did you write a book, having done so before?" And you would imagine that the stuff that goes into writing a book, you'd think that the author has hopes for some kind of redemptive, redeeming outcome, some kind of superlative that drops out the back end of the enterprise.And you know, this is [00:09:00] the seventh I've written. And I would have to say that's not really how it goes, and you don't really know what becomes of what you've written, even with the kind people who do respond, and the odd non-monetary prize that comes your way, which Die Wise gamed that.But I suppose, I wrote, at all partly to see what was there. You know, I had done these weddings and I was a little bit loathe to let go, to let the weddings turn entirely into something historical, something that was past, even though I probably sensed pretty clearly that I was at the end of my willingness to subject myself to the slings and arrows that came along with the enterprise, but it's a sweet sorrow, or there's a [00:10:00] wonder that goes along with the tangle of it all. And so, I wrote to find out what happened, as strange as that might sound to you. You can say, "well, you were there, you kind of knew what happened." But yes, I was witness to the thing, but there's the act of writing a book gives you the opportunity to sort of wonder in three-dimensions and well, the other thing I should say is I was naive and figured that the outfit who had published the, more or less prior two books to this one, would kind of inevitably be drawn to the fact that same guy. Basically, same voice, new articulation. And I was dumbfounded to find out that they weren't. And so, it's sort of smarted, you know?And I think what I did was I just set the whole [00:11:00] enterprise aside, partly to contend with the the depths of the disappointment in that regard, and also not wanting to get into the terrible fray of having to parse or paraphrase the book in some kind of elevator pitch-style to see if anybody else wanted to look at it. You know, such as my touchy sense of nobility sometimes, you know, that I just rather not be involved in the snarl of the marketplace any longer.So, I withdrew and I just set it aside but it wasn't that content to be set, set aside. And you know, to the book's credit, it bothered me every once in a while. It wasn't a book at the point where I was actually trying to engineer it, you know, and, and give it some kind of structure. I had piles of paper on the floor representing the allegation of chapters, trying to figure out what the relationship was [00:12:00] between any of these things.What conceivably should come before what. What the names of any of these things might be. Did they have an identity? Was I just imposing it? And all of that stuff I was going through at the same time as I was contending with a kind of reversal in fortune, personally. And so in part, it was a bit of a life raft to give me something to work on that I wouldn't have to research or dig around in the backyard for it and give me some sort of self-administered occupation for a while.Finally, I think there's a parallel with the Die Wise book, in that when it came to Die Wise, I came up with what I came up with largely because, in their absolute darkest, most unpromising hours, an awful lot of dying people, all of whom are dead now, [00:13:00] let me in on some sort of breach in the, the house of their lives.And I did feel that I had some obligation to them long-term, and that part of that obligation turned into writing Die Wise and touring and talking about that stuff for years and years, and making a real fuss as if I'd met them all, as if what happened is really true. Not just factually accurate, but deeply, abidingly, mandatorily true.So, although it may be the situation doesn't sound as extreme, but the truth is, when a number of younger - than me - people came to me and asked me to do their weddings, I, over the kind of medium-term thereafter, felt a not dissimilar obligation that the events that ensued from all of that not [00:14:00] be entrusted entirely to those relatively few people who attended. You know, you can call them "an audience," although I hope I changed that. Or you could call them "witnesses," which I hope I made them that.And see to it that there could be, not the authorized or official version of what happened, but to the view from here, so to speak, which is, as I sit where I am in the hall right now, I can look at the spot where I conducted much of this when I wasn't sacheting up and down the middle aisle where the trestle tables now are.And I wanted to give a kind of concerted voice to that enterprise. And I say "concerted voice" to give you a feel for the fact that I don't think this is a really an artifact. It's not a record. It's a exhortation that employs the things that happened to suggest that even though it is the way it is [00:15:00] ritually, impoverished as it is in our time and place, it has been otherwise within recoverable time and history. It has.And if that's true, and it is, then it seems to me at least is true that it could be otherwise again. And so, I made a fuss and I made a case based on that conviction.There's probably other reasons I can't think of right now. Oh, being not 25 anymore, and not having that many more books in me, the kind of wear and tear on your psyche of imposing order on the ramble, which is your recollection, which has only so many visitations available in it. Right? You can only do that so many times, I think. And I'm not a born writing person, you know, I come to it maniacally when I [00:16:00] do, and then when it's done, I don't linger over it so much.So then, when it's time to talk about it, I actually have to have a look, because the act of writing it is not the act of reading it. The act of writing is a huge delivery and deliverance at the same time. It's a huge gestation. And you can't do that to yourself, you know, over and over again, but you can take some chances, and look the thing in the eye. So, and I think some people who are there, they're kind of well-intended amongst them, will recognize themselves in the details of the book, beyond "this is what happened and so on." You know, they'll recognize themselves in the advocacy that's there, and the exhortations that are there, and the [00:17:00] case-making that I made and, and probably the praying because there's a good degree of prayerfulness in there, too.That's why.Chris: Thank you. bless this new one in the world. And what's the sense for you?Stephen: Oh, yes.Chris: It being a one-week old newborn. How's that landing in your days?Stephen: Well, it's still damp, you know. It's still squeaky, squeaky and damp. It's walking around like a newborn primate, you know, kind of swaying in the breeze and listening to port or to starboard according to whatever's going on.I don't know that it's so very self-conscious in the best sense of that term, yet. Even though I recorded the audio version, I don't think [00:18:00] it's my voice is found every nook and cranny at this point, yet. So, it's kind of new. It's not "news," but it is new to me, you know, and it's very early in terms of anybody responding to it.I mean, nobody around me has really taken me aside and say, "look, now I want to tell you about this book you wrote." It hasn't happened, and we'll see if it does, but I've done a few events on the other side of the ocean and hear so far, very few, maybe handful of interviews. And those are wonderful opportunities to hear something of what you came up with mismanaged by others, you know, misapprehend, you could say by others.No problem. I mean, it's absolutely no problem. And if you don't want that to happen, don't talk, don't write anything down. So, I don't mind a bit, you know, and the chances are very good that it'll turn into things I didn't have in mind [00:19:00] as people take it up, and regard their own weddings and marriages and plans and schemes and fears and, you know, family mishigas and all the rest of it through this particular lens, you know. They may pick up a pen or a computer (it's an odd expression, "pick up a computer"), and be in touch with me and let me know. "Yeah, that was, we tried it" or whatever they're going to do, because, I mean, maybe Die Wise provided a bit of an inkling of how one might be able to proceed otherwise in their dying time or in their families or their loved ones dying time.This is the book that most readily lends itself to people translating into something they could actually do, without a huge kind of psychic revolution or revolt stirring in them, at least not initially. This is as close as I come, probably, to writing a sequence of things [00:20:00] that could be considered "add-ons" to what people are already thinking about, that I don't force everybody else outta the house in order to make room for the ideas that are in the book. That may happen, anyway, but it wasn't really the intent. The intent was to say, you know, we are in those days when we're insanely preoccupied with the notion of a special event. We are on the receiving end of a considerable number of shards showing up without any notion really about what these shards remember or are memories of. And that's the principle contention I think that runs down the spine of the book, is that when we undertake matrimony, however indelicately, however by rote, you know, however mindlessly we may do it, [00:21:00] inadvertently, we call upon those shards nonetheless.And they're pretty unspectacular if you don't think about them very deeply, like the rice or confetti, like the aisle, like the procession up the aisle, like the giving away of someone, like the seating arrangement, like the spectacle seating arrangement rather than the ritual seating arrangement.And I mean, there's a fistful of them. And they're around and scholars aside maybe, nobody knows why they do them. Everybody just knows, "this is what a wedding is," but nobody knows why. And because nobody knows why, nobody really seems to know what a wedding is for, although they do proceed like they would know a wedding if they saw one. So, I make this a question to be really wondered about, and the shards are a way in. They're the kind of [00:22:00] breadcrumb trail through the forest. They're the little bits of broken something, which if you begin to handle just three or four of them, and kind of fit them together, and find something of the original shape and inflection of the original vessel, kind of enunciates, begins to murmur in your hands, and from it you can begin to infer some three-dimensionality to the original shape. And from the sense of the shape, you get a set sense of contour, and from the sense of contour, you get a sense of scale or size. And from that you get a sense of purpose, or function, or design. And from that you get a sense of some kind of serious magisterial insight into some of the fundament of human being that was manifest in the "old-order matrimony," [00:23:00] as I came to call it.So, who wouldn't wanna read that book?Chris: Mm-hmm.Thank you. Mm-hmm. Thank you, Stephen. Yeah. It reminds me, just before coming up here, maybe two weeks ago, I was in attending a wedding. And there was a host or mc, and initially just given what I was hearing over the microphone, it was hard to tell if he was hired or family or friends. And it turned out he was, in fact, a friend of the groom. And throughout the night he proceeded to take up that role as a kind of comedian.Audience: Mm-hmm.Chris: This was the idea, I guess. Mm-hmm. And he was buzzing and mumbling and swearing into the microphone, [00:24:00] and then finally minimizing the only remnant of traditional culture that showed up in the wedding. And his thing was, okay, so when can we get to the part where it's boom, boom, boom, right. And shot, shot, shot, whatever.Stephen: Right.Chris: There was so much that came up in my memories in part because I worked about a decade in Toronto in the wedding industry.Mm-hmm. Hospitality industry. Maybe a contradiction in terms, there. And there was one moment that really kind of summed it up. I kept coming back to this reading the book because it was everything that you wrote seemed to not only antithetical to this moment, but also an antidote.Anyways, it was in North Toronto and the [00:25:00] owner of the venue - it was a kind of movie theatre turned event venue - and there was a couple who was eventually going to get married there. They came in to do their tasting menu to see what they wanted to put on the menu for the dinner, for their wedding.And the owner was kind of this mafioso type. And he comes in and he sees them and he walks over and he says, "so, you're gonna get married at my wedding factory."Audience: Mm-hmm.Chris: In all sincerity.Stephen: Mm-hmm.Chris: Right.Without skipping a beat. Could you imagine?Stephen: Yeah.I could. I sure could.Chris: Yeah. Yeah.Stephen: I mean, don't forget, if these people weren't doing what the people wanted, they'd be outta business.Audience: Mm-hmm.Stephen: No, that's the thing. This is aiding and abetting. This is sleeping with the enemy, stylistically-speaking. [00:26:00] The fact that people "settle" (that's the term I would use for it), settle for this, the idea being that this somehow constitutes the most honest and authentic through line available to us is just jaw dropping. When you consider what allegedly this thing is supposed to be for. I mean, maybe we'll get into this, but I'll just leave this as a question for now. What is that moment allegedly doing?Not, what are the people in it allegedly doing? The moment itself, what is it? How is it different from us sitting here now talking about it? And how is it different from the gory frigging jet-fuelled aftermath of excess. And how's it different from the cursing alleged master of ceremonies? How can you [00:27:00] tell none of those things belong to this thing?And why do you have such a hard time imagining what doesAudience: Hmm mmChris: Well that leads me to my next question.Stephen: Ah, you're welcome.Chris: So, I've pulled a number of quotes from the book to read from over the course of the interview. And this one for anyone who's listening is on page 150. And you write Stephen,"Spiritually-speaking, most of the weddings in our corner of the world are endogamous affairs, inward-looking. What is, to me, most unnerving is that they can be spiritually-incestuous. The withering of psychic difference between people is the program of globalization. It is in the architecture of most things partaking of the internet, and it is in the homogeneity of our matrimony. [00:28:00] It is this very incestuous that matrimony was once crafted and entered into to avoid and subvert. Now, it grinds upon our differences until they are details.And so, this paragraph reminded me of a time in my youth when I seemed to be meeting couples who very eerily looked like each other. No blood or extended kin relation whatsoever, and yet they had very similar faces. And so as I get older, this kind of face fidelity aside, I continue to notice that people looking for companionship tend to base their search on similitude, on shared interests, customs, experiences, shared anything and everything. This, specifically, in opposition to those on the other side of the aisle or spectrum, to difference or divergence. And so, opposites don't attract anymore. I'm curious what you think this psychic [00:29:00] withering does to an achieve understanding of matrimony.Stephen: Well, I mean, let's wonder what it does to us, generally, first before we get to matrimony, let's say. It demonizes. Maybe that's too strong, but it certainly reconstitutes difference as some kind of affliction, some kind of not quite good enough, some kind of something that has to be overcome or overwhelmed on the road to, to what? On the road to sameness? So, if that's the goal, then are all of the differences between us, aberrations of some kind, if that's the goal? If that's the goal, are all the [00:30:00] differences between us, not God-given, but humanly misconstrued or worse? Humanly wrought? Do the differences between us conceivably then belong at all? Or is the principle object of the entire endeavor to marry yourself, trying to put up with the vague differences that the other person represents to you?I mean, I not very jokingly said years ago, that I coined a phrase that went something like "the compromise of infinity, which is other people." What does that mean? "The compromise of infinity, which is other people." Not to mention it's a pretty nice T-shirt. But what I meant by the [00:31:00] phrase is this: when you demonize difference in this fashion or when you go the other direction and lionize sameness, then one of the things that happens is that compromise becomes demonized, too. Compromise, by definition, is something you never should have done, right? Compromise is how much you surrender of yourself in order to get by. That's what all these things become. And before you know it, you're just beaten about the head and shoulders about "codependence" and you know, not being "true to yourself" as if being true to yourself is some kind of magic.I mean, the notion that "yourself is the best part of you" is just hilarious. I mean, when you think about it, like who's running amuck if yourself is what you're supposed to be? I ask you. Like, who's [00:32:00] doing the harm? Who's going mental if the self is such a good idea? So, of course, I'm maintaining here that I'm not persuaded that there is such a thing.I think it's a momentary lapse in judgment to have a self and to stick to it. That's the point I'm really making to kind of reify it until it turns ossified and dusty and bizarrely adamant like that estranged relative that lives in the basement of your house. Bizarrely, foreignly adamant, right? Like the house guest who just won't f**k off kind of thing.Okay, so "to thine own self be true," is it? Well, try being true to somebody else's self for ten minutes. Try that. [00:33:00] That's good at exercise for matrimony - being true to somebody else's self. You'll discover that their selves are not made in heaven, either. Either. I underscore it - either. I've completely lost track of the question you asked me.Chris: What are the consequences of the sameness on this anti-cultural sameness, and the program of it for an achieved understanding of matrimony.Stephen: Thank you. Well, I will fess up right now. I do so in the book. That's a terrible phrase. I swear I'd never say such a thing. "In my book... I say the following," but in this case, it's true. I did say this. I realized during the writing of it that I had made a tremendous tactical error in the convening of the event as I did it over the years, [00:34:00] and this is what it came to.I was very persuaded at the time of the story that appears in the chapter called "Salt and Indigo" in the book. I was very, very persuaded. I mean, listen, I made up the story (for what it's worth), okay, but I didn't make it up out of nothing. I made it up out of a kind of tribal memory that wouldn't quite let go.And in it, I was basically saying, here's these two tribes known principally for what they trade in and what they love most emphatically. They turn out to be the same thing. And I describe a circumstance in which they exchange things in a trade scenario, not a commerce scenario. And I'm using the chapter basically to make the case that matrimony's architecture derives in large measure from the sacraments of trade as manifest in that story. [00:35:00] Okay. And this is gonna sound obvious, but the fundamental requirement of the whole conceit that I came up with is that there are two tribes. Well, I thought to myself, "of course, there's always two tribes" at the time. And the two tribe-ness is reflected in when you come to the wedding site, you're typically asked (I hope you're still asked) " Are you family or friend of the groom or friend of the bride?" And you're seated "accordingly," right? That's the nominal, vestigial shard of this old tribal affiliation, that people came from over the rise, basically unknown to each other, to arrive at the kind of no man's land of matrimony, and proceeded accordingly. So, I put these things into motion in this very room and I sat people accordingly facing each other, not facing the alleged front of the room. [00:36:00] And of course, man, nobody knew where to look, because you raised your eyes and s**t. There's just humans across from you, just scads of them who you don't freaking know. And there's something about doing that to North Americas that just throws them. So, they're just looking at each other and then looking away, and looking at each other and looking away, and wondering what they're doing here and what it's for. And I'm going back and forth for three hours, orienting them as to what is is coming.Okay, so what's the miscalculation that I make? The miscalculation I made was assuming that by virtue of the seating arrangement, by virtue of me reminding them of the salt and indigo times, by virtue of the fact that they had a kind of allegiance of some sort or another to the people who are, for the moment, betrothed, that those distinctions and those affiliations together would congeal them, and constitute a [00:37:00] kind of tribal affiliation that they would intuitively be drawn towards as you would be drawn to heat on a cold winter's night.Only to discover, as I put the thing into motion that I was completely wrong about everything I just told you about. The nature of my error was this, virtually all of those people on one side of the room were fundamentally of the same tribe as the people on the other side of the room, apropos of your question, you see. They were card carrying members of the gray dominant culture of North America. Wow. The bleached, kind of amorphous, kind of rootless, ancestor-free... even regardless of whether their people came over in the last generation from the alleged old country. It doesn't really claim them.[00:38:00]There were two tribes, but I was wrong about who they were. That was one tribe. Virtually everybody sitting in the room was one tribe.So, who's the other tribe? Answer is: me and the four or five people who were in on the structural delivery of this endeavour with me. We were the other tribe.We didn't stand a chance, you see?And I didn't pick up on that, and I didn't cast it accordingly and employ that, instead. I employed the conceit that I insisted was manifest and mobilized in the thing, instead of the manifest dilemma, which is that everybody who came knew what a wedding was, and me and four or five other people were yet to know if this could be one. That was the tribal difference, if you [00:39:00] will.So, it was kind of invisible, wasn't it? Even to me at the time. Or, I say, maybe especially to me at the time. And so, things often went the way they went, which was for however much fascination and willingness to consider that there might have been in the room, there was quite a bit more either flat affect and kind of lack of real fascination, or curiosity, or sometimes downright hostility and pushback. Yeah.So, all of that comes from the fact that I didn't credit as thoroughly as I should have done, the persistence in Anglo-North America of a kind of generic sameness that turned out to be what most people came here ancestrally to become. "Starting again" is recipe for culture [00:40:00] loss of a catastrophic order. The fantasy of starting again. Right?And we've talked about that in your podcast, and you and I have talked about it privately, apropos of your own family and everybody's sitting in this room knows what I'm talking about. And when does this show up? Does it show up, oh, when you're walking down the street? Does it show up when you're on the mountaintop? Does it show up in your peak experiences? And the answer is "maybe." It probably shows up most emphatically in those times when you have a feeling that something special is supposed to be so, and all you can get from the "supposed to" is the allegation of specialness.Audience: Mm-hmm.Stephen: And then, you look around in the context of matrimony and you see a kind of febral, kind of strained, the famous bridezilla stuff, all of that stuff. [00:41:00] You saw it in the hospitality industry, no doubt. You know, the kind of mania for perfection, as if perfection constitutes culture. Right? With every detail checked off in the checkbox, that's culture. You know, as if everything goes off without a hitch and there's no guffaws. And in fact, anybody could reasonably make the case, "Where do you think culture appears when the script finally goes f*****g sideways?" That's when. And when you find out what you're capable of, ceremonially.And generally speaking, I think most people discovered that their ceremonial illiteracy bordered on the bottomless.That's when you find out. Hmm.Chris: Wow.Stephen: Yeah. And that's why people, you know, in speech time, they reach in there and get that piece of paper, and just look at it. Mm-hmm. They don't even look up, terrified that they're gonna go off script for a minute as [00:42:00] if the Gods of Matrimony are a scripted proposition.Chris: Mm-hmm. Yeah. Thank you for sharing that with us, that degree of deep reflection and humility that I'm sure comes with it.Stephen: Mea Culpa, baby. Yeah, I was, I got that one totally wrong. Mm-hmm. And I didn't know it at the time. Meanwhile, like, how much can you transgress and have the consequences of doing so like spill out across the floor like a broken thermometer's mercury and not wise up.But of course, I was as driven as anybody. I was as driven to see if I could come through with what I promised to do the year before. And keeping your promise can make you into a maniac.Audience: Hmm hmm.Chris: But I imagine that, you [00:43:00] know, you wouldn't have been able to see that even years later if you didn't say yes in the first place.Stephen: Oh, yeah. Yeah. And I wouldn't have been able to make the errors.Chris: Right.Stephen: Right. Yeah. I mean, as errors go, this is not a mortal sin. Right, right. And you could chalk it up to being a legitimate miscalculation. Well, so? All I'm saying is, it turns out I was there too, and it turns out, even though I was allegedly the circus master of the enterprise, I wasn't free and clear of the things we were all contending with, the kind of mortality and sort of cultural ricketiness that were all heirs to. That's how I translated it, as it turns out.So, PS there was a moment, [00:44:00] which I don't remember which setting it was now, but there was a moment when the "maybe we'll see if she becomes a bride" bride's mother slid up to me during the course of the proceedings, and in a kind of stage whisper more or less hissed me as follows."Is this a real wedding?"I mean, that's not a question. Not in that setting, obviously not. That is an accusation. Right. And a withering one at that. And there was a tremendous amount of throw-down involved.So, was it? I mean, what we do know is that she did not go to any of the weddings [00:45:00] that she was thinking of at the time, and go to the front of the room where the celebrant is austerely standing there with the book, or the script, or the well-intentioned, or the self-penned vows and never hissed at him or her, "is this a real wedding?"Never once did she do that. We know that.Right.And I think we know why. But she was fairly persuaded she knew what a real wedding was. And all she was really persuaded by was the poverty of the weddings that she'd attended before that one. Well, I was as informed in that respect as she was, wasn't I? I just probably hadn't gone to as many reprobate weddings as she had, so she had more to deal with than I did, even though I was in the position of the line of fire.And I didn't respond too well to the question, I have to say. At the moment, I was rather combative. But I mean, you try to do [00:46:00] what I tried to do and not have a degree of fierceness to go along with your discernment, you know, just to see if you can drag this carcass across the threshold. Anyway, that happened too.Chris: Wow. Yeah. Dominant culture of North America.Stephen: Heard of it.Chris: Yeah. Well, in Matrimony, there's quite a bit in which you write about hospitality and radical hospitality. And I wanted to move in that direction a little bit, because in terms of these kind of marketplace rituals or ceremonies that you were mentioning you know, it's something that we might wonder, I think, as you have, how did it come to be this [00:47:00] way?And so I'd like to, if I can once again, quote from matrimony in which you speak to the etymology of hospitality. And so for those interested on page 88,"the word hospitality comes from hospitaller, meaning 'one who cares for the afflicted, the infirm, the needy.' There's that thread of our misgivings about being on the receiving end of hospitality. Pull on it. For the written history of the word, at least, it has meant, 'being on the receiving end of a kind of care you'd rather not need.'"End quote.Stephen: That's so great. I mean, before you go on with the quote. It's so great to know that the word, unexamined, just kind of leaks upside, doesn't it? Hospitality, I mean, nobody goes "Hospitality, ew." [00:48:00] And then, if you just quietly do the obvious math to yourself, there's so much awkwardness around hospitality.This awkwardness must have an origin, have a home. There must be some misgiving that goes along with the giving of hospitality, mustn't there be? How else to understand where that kind of ickiness is to be found. Right? And it turns out that the etymology is giving you the beginnings of a way of figuring it out what it is that you're on the receiving end of - a kind of succor that you wish you didn't need, which is why it's the root word for "hospital."Chris: Hmm hmm. Wow.Audience: Hmm.Chris: May I repeat that sentence please? Once more."For the written history of the word, at least, it has meant, [00:49:00] 'being on the receiving end of a kind of care you'd rather not need.'"And so this last part hits home for me as I imagine it does for many.And it feels like the orthodoxy of hospitality in our time is one based not only in transaction, but in debt. And if you offer hospitality to me, then I owe you hospitality.Stephen: Right.Chris: I'm indebted to you. And we are taught, in our time, that the worst thing to be in is in debt.Stephen: Right?Chris: And so people refuse both the desire to give as well as the learning skill of receiving. And this is continuing on page 88 now."But there's mystery afoot with this word. In its old Latin form, hospice meant both 'host' and 'guest.'"Stephen: Amazing. One. Either one, This is absolutely amazing. We're fairly sure that there's a [00:50:00] acres of difference between the giver of hospitality and the receiver that the repertoire is entirely different, that the skew between them is almost insurmountable, that they're not interchangeable in any way. But the history of the word immediately says, "really?" The history of the word, without question, says that "host" and "guest" are virtually the same, sitting in different places, being different people, more or less joined at the hip. I'll say more, but you go ahead with what you were gonna do. Sure.Chris: "In it's proto Indo-European origins, hospitality and hospice is a compound word: gosh + pot. And it meant something like [00:51:00] 'stranger/guest/host + powerful Lord.'It is amazing to me that ancestrally, the old word for guest, host, and stranger were all the same word. Potent ceremonial business, this is. In those days, the server and the serve were partners in something mysterious. This could be confusing, but only if you think of guest, host, and stranger as fixed identities.If you think of them as functions, as verbs, the confusion softens and begins to clear. The word hospice in its ancient root is telling us that each of the people gathered together in hospitality is bound to the others by formal etiquette, yes, but the bond is transacted through a subtle scheme of graces.Hospitality, it tells us, is a web of longing and belonging that binds people for a time, some hithereto unknown to each other is a clutch of mutually-binding elegances, you could say. In its ancient practice, [00:52:00] hospitality was a covenant. According to that accord, however we were with each other. That was how the Gods would be with us. We learn our hospitality by being on the receiving end of Godly administration. That's what giving thanks for members. We proceed with our kin in imitation of that example and in gratitude for it."Mm-hmm.And so today, among "secular" people, with the Gods ignored, this old-time hospitality seems endangered, if not fugitive. I'm curious how you imagine that this rupture arose, the ones that separated and commercialized the radical relationships between hosts and guests, that turned them from verbs to nouns and something like strangers to marketplace functions.[00:53:00]Stephen: Well, of course this is a huge question you've asked, and I'll see if I can unhuge it a bit.Chris: Uhhuh.Stephen: Let's go right to the heart of what happened. Just no preliminaries, just right to it.So, to underscore again, the beauty of the etymology. I've told you over and over again, the words will not fail you. And this is just a shining example, isn't it? That the fraternization is a matter of ceremonial alacrity that the affiliation between host and guest, which makes them partners in something, that something is the [00:54:00] evocation of a third thing that's neither one of them. It's the thing they've lent themselves to by virtue of submitting to being either a host or a guest. One.Two. You could say that in circumstances of high culture or highly-functioning culture, one of the principle attributes of that culture is that the fundament of its understanding, is that only with the advent of the stranger in their midst that the best of them comes forward.Okay, follow that. Yeah.So, this is a little counterintuitive for those of us who don't come from such places. We imagine that the advent of strangers in the midst of the people I'm describing would be an occasion where people hide their [00:55:00] best stuff away until the stranger disappears, and upon the disappearance of the stranger, the good stuff comes out again.You know?So, I'm just remembering just now, there's a moment in the New Testament where Jesus says something about the best wine and he's coming from exactly this page that we're talking about - not the page in the book, but this understanding. He said, you know, "serve your best wine first," unlike the standard, that prevails, right?So again, what a stranger does in real culture is call upon the cultural treasure of the host's culture, and provides the opportunity for that to come forward, right? By which you can understand... Let's say for simplicity's sake, there's two kinds of hospitality. There's probably all kinds of gradations, [00:56:00] but for the purposes of responding to what you've asked, there's two.One of them is based on kinship. Okay? So, family meal. So, everybody knows whose place is whose around the table, or it doesn't matter - you sit wherever you want. Or, when we're together, we speak shorthand. That's the shorthand of familiarity and affinity, right?Everybody knows what everybody's talking about. A lot of things get half-said or less, isn't it? And there's a certain fineness, isn't it? That comes with that kind of affinity. Of course, there is, and I'm not diminishing it at all. I'm just characterizing it as being of a certain frequency or calibre or charge. And the charge is that it trades on familiarity. It requires that. There's that kind of hospitality."Oh, sit wherever you want."Remember this one?[00:57:00]"We don't stand on ceremony here.""Oh, you're one of the family now." I just got here. What, what?But, of course, you can hear in the protestations the understanding, in that circumstance, that formality is an enemy to feeling good in this moment, isn't it? It feels stiff and starched and uncalled for or worse.It feels imported from elsewhere. It doesn't feel friendly. So, I'm giving you now beginnings of a differentiation between how cultures who really function as cultures understand what it means to be hospitable and what often prevails today, trading is a kind of low-grade warfare conducted against the strangeness of the stranger.The whole purpose of treating somebody like their family is to mitigate, and finally neutralize their [00:58:00] strangeness, so that for the purposes of the few hours in front of us all, there are no strangers here. Right? Okay.Then there's another kind, and intuitively you can feel what I'm saying. You've been there, you know exactly what I mean.There's another kind of circumstance where the etiquette that prevails is almost more emphatic, more tangible to you than the familiar one. That's the one where your mother or your weird aunt or whoever she might be, brings out certain kind of stuff that doesn't come out every day. And maybe you sit in a room that you don't often sit in. And maybe what gets cooked is stuff you haven't seen in a long time. And some part of you might be thinking, "What the hell is all this about?" And the answer is: it's about that guy in the [00:59:00] corner that you don't know.And your own ancestral culture told acres of stories whose central purpose was to convey to outsiders their understanding of what hospitality was. That is fundamentally what The Iliad and The Odyssey are often returning to and returning to and returning to.They even had a word for the ending of the formal hospitality that accrued, that arose around the care and treatment of strangers. It was called pomp or pompe, from which we get the word "pompous." And you think about what the word "pompous" means today.It means "nose in the air," doesn't it? Mm-hmm. It means "thinks really highly of oneself," isn't it? And it means "useless, encumbering, kind of [01:00:00] artificial kind of going through the motions stuff with a kind of aggrandizement for fun." That's what "pompous" means. Well, the people who gave us the word didn't mean that at all. This word was the word they used to describe the particular moment of hospitality when it was time for the stranger to leave.And when it was mutually acknowledged that the time for hospitality has come to an end, and the final act of hospitality is to accompany the stranger out of the house, out of the compound, out into the street, and provision them accordingly, and wish them well, and as is oftentimes practiced around here, standing in the street and waving them long after they disappear from view.This is pompous. This is what it actually means. Pretty frigging cool when you get corrected once in a while, isn't it? [01:01:00] Yeah.So, as I said, to be simplistic about it, there's at least a couple of kinds, and one of them treasures the advent of the stranger, understanding it to be the detonation point for the most elegant part of us to come forward.Now, those of us who don't come from such a place, we're just bamboozled and Shanghai'ed by the notion of formality, which we kind of eschew. You don't like formality when it comes to celebration, as if these two things are hostile, one to the other. But I'd like you to consider the real possibility that formality is grace under pressure, and that formality is there to give you a repertoire of response that rescues you from the gross limitations of your autobiography.[01:02:00]Next question. I mean, that's the beginning.Chris: Absolutely. Absolutely. Mm-hmm. Thank you once again, Stephen. So alongside the term or concept of "pompe," in which the the guest or stranger was led out of the house or to the entrance of the village, there was also the consideration around the enforcement of hospitality, which you write about in the book. And you write that"the enforcement of hospitality runs the palpable risk of violating or undoing the cultural value it is there to advocate for. Forcing people to share their good fortune with the less fortunate stretches, to the point of undoing the generosity of spirit that the culture holds dear. Enforcement of hospitality is a sign of the eclipse of hospitality, typically spawned by insecurity, contracted self-definition, and the darkening of the [01:03:00] stranger at the door.Instead, such places and times are more likely to encourage the practice of hospitality in subtle generous ways, often by generously treating the ungenerous."And so there seems to be a need for limits placed on hospitality, in terms of the "pompe," the maximum three days in which a stranger can be given hospitality, and concurrently a need to resist enforcing hospitality. This seems like a kind of high-wire act that hospitable cultures have to balance in order to recognize and realize an honorable way of being with a stranger. And so I'm wondering if you could speak to the possibility of how these limits might be practiced without being enforced. What might that look like in a culture that engages with, with such limits, but without prohibitions?Stephen: Mm-hmm. That's a very good question. [01:04:00] Well, I think your previous question was what happened? I think, in a nutshell, and I didn't really answer that, so maybe see how I can use this question to answer the one that you asked before: what happened? So, there's no doubt in my mind that something happened that it's kind of demonstrable, if only with the benefit of hindsight.Audience: Right.Stephen: Or we can feel our way around the edges of the absence of the goneness of that thing that gives us some feel for the original shape of that thing.So you could say I'm trafficking in "ideals," here, and after a fashion, maybe, yeah. But the notion of "ideals," when it's used in this slanderous way suggests that "it was never like that."Chris: Mm-hmm.Stephen: And I suggest to you it's been like that in a lot of places, and there's a lot of places where it's still like that, although globalization [01:05:00] may be the coup de grâce performed upon this capacity. Okay. But anyway.Okay. So what happened? Well, you see in the circumstance that I described, apropos of the stranger, the stranger is in on it. The stranger's principle responsibility is to be the vector for this sort of grandiose generosity coming forward, and to experience that in a burdensome and unreciprocated fashion, until you realize that their willingness to do that is their reciprocity. Everybody doesn't get to do everything at once. You can't give and receive at the same time. You know what that's called? "Secret Santa at school," isn't it?That's where nobody owes nobody nothing at the end. That's what we're all after. I mean, one of your questions, you know, pointed to that, that there's a kind of, [01:06:00] what do you call that, teeter-totter balance between what people did for each other and what they received for each other. Right. And nobody feels slighted in any way, perfect balance, et cetera.Well, the circumstance here has nothing of the kind going with it. The circumstance we're describing now is one in which the hospitality is clearly unequal in terms of who's eating whose food, for example, in terms of the absolutely frustrated notion of reciprocity, that in fact you undo your end of the hospitality by trying to pay back, or give back, or pay at all, or break even, or not feel the burden of "God, you've been on the take for fricking hours here now." And if you really look in the face of the host, I mean, they're just getting started and you can't, you can't take it anymore.[01:07:00]So, one of the ways that we contend with this is through habits of speech. So, if somebody comes around with seconds. They say, "would you like a little more?"And you say, "I'm good. I'm good. I'm good." You see, "I'm good" is code for what? "F**k off." That's what it's code for. It's a little strong. It's a little strong. What I mean is, when "I'm good" comes to town, it means I don't need you and what you have. Good God, you're not there because you need it you knucklehead. You're there because they need it, because their culture needs an opportunity to remember itself. Right?Okay. So what happened? Because you're making it sound like a pretty good thing, really. Like who would say, "I think we've had enough of this hospitality thing, don't you? Let's try, oh, [01:08:00] keeping our s**t to ourselves. That sounds like a good alternative. Let's give it a week or two, see how it rolls." Never happened. Nobody decided to do this - this change, I don't think. I think the change happened, and sometime long after people realized that the change had had taken place. And it's very simple. The change, I think, went something like this.As long as the guest is in on it, there's a shared and mutually-held understanding that doesn't make them the same. It makes them to use the quote from the book "partners," okay, with different tasks to bring this thing to light, to make it so. What does that require? A mutually-held understanding in vivo as it's happening, what it is.Okay. [01:09:00] So, that the stranger who's not part of the host culture... sorry, let me say this differently.The culture of the stranger has made the culture of the host available to the stranger no matter how personally adept he or she may be at receiving. Did you follow that?Audience: A little.Stephen: Okay. Say it again?Audience: Yes, please.Stephen: Okay. The acculturation, the cultured sophistication of the stranger is at work in his or her strangerhood. Okay. He or she's not at home, but their cultural training helps them understand what their obligations are in terms of this arrangement we've been describing here.Okay, so I think the rupture takes place [01:10:00] when the culturation of one side or the other fails to make the other discernible to the one.One more time?When something happens whereby the acculturation of one of the partners makes the identity, the presence, and the valence of the other one untranslatable. Untranslatable.I could give you an example from what I call " the etiquette of trade," or the... what was the word? Not etiquette. What's the other word?Chris: The covenant?Stephen: Okay, " covenant of trade" we'll call it. So, imagine that people are sitting across from each other, two partners in a trade. Okay? [01:11:00] Imagine that they have one thing to sell or move or exchange and somebody has something else.How does this work? Not "what are the mechanics?" That can be another discussion, but, if this works, how does it work? Not "how does it happen?" How does it actually achieve what they're after? Maybe it's something like this.I have this pottery, and even though you're not a potter, but somebody in your extended family back home was, and you watched what they went through to make a fricking pot, okay?You watched how their hands seized up, because the clay leached all the moisture out of the hands. You distinctly remember that - how the old lady's hands looked cracked and worn, and so from the work of making vessels of hospitality, okay? [01:12:00] It doesn't matter that you didn't make it yourself. The point is you recognize in the item something we could call "cultural patrimony."You recognize the deep-runningness of the culture opposite you as manifest and embodied in this item for trade. Okay? So, the person doesn't have to "sell you" because your cultural sophistication makes this pot on the other side available to you for the deeply venerable thing that it is. Follow what I'm saying?Okay. So, you know what I'm gonna say next? When something happens, the items across from you cease to speak, cease to have their stories come along with them, cease to be available. There's something about your cultural atrophy that you project onto the [01:13:00] item that you don't recognize.You don't recognize it's valence, it's proprieties, it's value, it's deep-running worth and so on. Something happened, okay? And because you're not making your own stuff back home or any part of it. And so now, when you're in a circumstance like this and you're just trying to get this pot, but you know nothing about it, then the enterprise becomes, "Okay, so what do you have to part with to obtain the pot?"And the next thing is, you pretend you're not interested in obtaining the pot to obtain the pot. That becomes part of the deal. And then, the person on the making end feels the deep running slight of your disinterest, or your vague involvement in the proceedings, or maybe the worst: when it's not things you're going back and forth with, but there's a third thing called money, which nobody makes, [01:14:00] which you're not reminded of your grandma or anyone else's with the money. And then, money becomes the ghost of the original understanding of the cultural patrimony that sat between you. That's what happened, I'm fairly sure: the advent, the estrangement that comes with the stranger, instead of the opportunity to be your cultural best when the stranger comes.And then of course, it bleeds through all kinds of transactions beyond the "obvious material ones." So, it's a rupture in translatability, isn't it?Chris: You understand this to happen or have happened historically, culturally, et cetera, with matrimony as well?Stephen: Oh, absolutely. Yeah.Yeah. This is why, for example, things like the fetishization of virginity.Audience: Mm-hmm. [01:15:00]Stephen: I think it's traceable directly to what we're talking about. How so? Oh, this is a whole other long thing, but the very short version would be this.Do you really believe that through all of human history until the recent liberation, that people have forever fetishized the virginity of a young woman and jealously defended it, the "men" in particular, and that it became a commodity to trade back and forth in, and that it had to be prodded and poked at to determine its intactness? And this was deemed to be, you know, honourable behavior?Do you really think that's the people you come from, that they would've do that to the most cherished of their [01:16:00] own, barely pubescent girls? Come on now. I'm not saying it didn't happen and doesn't still happen. I'm not saying that. I'm saying, God almighty, something happened for that to be so.And I'm trying to allude to you now what I think took place. Then all of a sudden, the hymen takes the place of the pottery, doesn't it? And it becomes universally translatable. Doesn't it? It becomes a kind of a ghosted artifact of a culturally-intact time. It's as close as you can get.Hence, this allegation of its purity, or the association with purity, and so on. [01:17:00] I mean, there's lots to say, but that gives you a feel for what might have happened there.Chris: Thank you, Stephen. Thank you for being so generous with your considerations here.Stephen: You see why I had to write a book, eh?Audience: Mm-hmm.Stephen: There was too much bouncing around. Like I had to just keep track of my own thoughts on the matter.But can you imagine all of this at play in the year, oh, I don't know, 2022, trying to put into motion a redemptive passion play called "matrimony," with all of this at play? Not with all of this in my mind, but with all of this actually disfiguring the anticipation of the proceedings for the people who came.Can you imagine? Can you imagine trying to pull it off, and [01:18:00] contending overtly with all these things and trying to make room for them in a moment that's supposed to be allegedly - get ready for it - happy.I should have raised my rates on the first day, trying to pull that off.But anyway.Okay, you go now,Chris: Maybe now you'll have the opportunity.Stephen: No, man. No. I'm out of the running for that. "Pompe" has come and come and gone. Mm.Chris: So, in matrimony, Stephen, you write that"the brevity, the brevity of modern ceremonies is really there to make sure that nothing happens, nothing of substance, nothing of consequence, no alchemy, no mystery, no crazy other world stuff. That overreach there in its scripted heart tells me that deep in the rayon-wrapped bosom of that special day, the modern wedding is scared [01:19:00] silly of something happening. That's because it has an ages-old abandoned memory of a time when a wedding was a place where the Gods came around, where human testing and trying and making was at hand, when the dead lingered in the wings awaiting their turn to testify and inveigh."Gorgeous. Gorgeous.Audience: Mm-hmm.Chris: And so I'm curious ifStephen: "Rayon-wrapped bosom." That's not, that's not shabby.Chris: "Rayon-wrapped bosom of that special day." Yeah.So, I'm curious do you think the more-than-human world practices matrimony, and if so, what, if anything, might you have learned about matrimony from the more-than-human world?Stephen: I would say the reverse. I would say, we practice the more-than-human world in matrimony, not that the more-than-human world practices matrimony. We practice them, [01:20:00] matrimonially.Next. Okay. Or no? I just gonna say that, that's pretty good.Well, where do we get our best stuff from? Let's just wonder that. Do we get our best stuff from being our best? Well, where does that come from? And this is a bit of a barbershop mirrors situation here, isn't it? To, to back, back, back, back.If you're thinking of time, you can kind of get lost in that generation before, or before, before, before. And it starts to sound like one of them biblical genealogies. But if you think of it as sort of the flash point of multiple presences, if you think of it that way, then you come to [01:21:00] credit the real possibility that your best stuff comes from you being remembered by those who came before you.Audience: Hmm.Stephen: Now just let that sit for a second, because what I just said is logically-incompatible.Okay? You're being remembered by people who came before you. That's not supposed to work. It doesn't work that way. Right?"Anticipated," maybe, but "remembered?" How? Well, if you credit the possibility of multiple beginnings, that's how. Okay. I'm saying that your best stuff, your best thoughts, not the most noble necessarily. I would mean the most timely, [01:22:00] the ones that seem most needed, suddenly.You could take credit and sure. Why, why not? Because ostensibly, it arrives here through you, but if you're frank with yourself, you know that you didn't do that on command, right? I mean, you could say, I just thought of it, but you know in your heart that it was thought of and came to you.I don't think there's any difference between saying that and saying you were thought of.Audience: Mm-hmm.Stephen: So, that's what I think the rudiments of old-order matrimony are. They are old people and their benefactors in the food chain and spiritually speaking. Old people and their benefactors, the best part of them [01:23:00] willed to us, entrusted and willed to us. So, when you are willing to enter into the notion that old-order matrimony is older than you, older than your feelings for the other person, older than your love, and your commitment, and your willingness to make the vows and all that stuff, then you're crediting the possibility that your love is not the beginning of anything.You see. Your love is the advent of something, and I use that word deliberately in its Christian notion, right? It's the oncomingness, the eruption into the present day of something, which turns out to be hugely needed and deeply unsuspected at the same time.I used to ask in the school, "can you [01:24:00] have a memory of something you have no lived experience of?" I think that's what the best part of you is. I'm not saying the rest of you is shite. I'm not saying that. You could say that, but I am saying that when I say "the best part of you," that needs a lot of translating, doesn't it?But the gist of it is that the best part of you is entrusted to you. It's not your creation, it's your burden, your obligation, your best chance to get it right. And that's who we are to those who came before us. We are their chance to get it right, and matrimony is one of the places where you practice the gentle art of getting it right.[01:25:00] Another decent reason to write a book.Chris: So, gorgeous. Wow. Thank you Stephen. I might have one more question.Stephen: Okay. I might have one more answer. Let's see.Chris: Alright. Would I be able to ask if dear Nathalie Roy could join us up here alongside your good man.So, returning to Matrimony: Ritual, Culture and the Heart's Work. On page 94, [01:26:00] Stephen, you write that"hospitality of the radical kind is

99% chance the priest never gets rebuked by his bishop for this.Sources:https://www.returntotradition.orgorhttps://substack.com/@returntotradition1Contact Me:Email: return2catholictradition@gmail.comSupport My Work:Patreonhttps://www.patreon.com/AnthonyStineSubscribeStarhttps://www.subscribestar.net/return-to-traditionBuy Me A Coffeehttps://www.buymeacoffee.com/AnthonyStinePhysical Mail:Anthony StinePO Box 3048Shawnee, OK74802Follow me on the following social media:https://www.facebook.com/ReturnToCatholicTradition/https://twitter.com/pontificatormax+JMJ+#popeleoXIV #catholicism #catholicchurch #catholicprophecy#infiltration

99% chance the priest never gets rebuked by his bishop for this.Sources:https://www.returntotradition.orgorhttps://substack.com/@returntotradition1Contact Me:Email: return2catholictradition@gmail.comSupport My Work:Patreonhttps://www.patreon.com/AnthonyStineSubscribeStarhttps://www.subscribestar.net/return-to-traditionBuy Me A Coffeehttps://www.buymeacoffee.com/AnthonyStinePhysical Mail:Anthony StinePO Box 3048Shawnee, OK74802Follow me on the following social media:https://www.facebook.com/ReturnToCatholicTradition/https://twitter.com/pontificatormax+JMJ+#popeleoXIV #catholicism #catholicchurch #catholicprophecy#infiltration

In this episode, we welcome Stephen Jenkinson—writer, teacher, storyteller, and founder of the Orphan Wisdom School. Stephen is known for breaking open the marrow of language and returning it in all its poetic weight. His work on elderhood, grief, dying wise, and the making (and unmaking) of culture has touched people all over the world.His newest book, Matrimony: Ritual, Culture, and the Heart's Work, takes on what he calls the “mother of a culture”—the wedding. In a time when so many weddings risk becoming performances, spectacles, or non-events, Stephen asks: what would it mean to make a wedding real?In this conversation we explore:Why vows are not the same as promisesHow families, friends, and communities become witnesses rather than spectatorsWhy weddings matter in a culture of high divorce rates and discredited ritualsWhat it means for the union of two people to implicate everyone presentThe difference between a ceremony that entertains and a ceremony that truly happensThis is not just a conversation about marriage. It's about consequence, culture, and what it might take to make our ceremonies—and our lives—real.Links You'll LoveOrphan WisdomMatrimony the BookArc + Craft: An Exploration of Creativity and Culture Making EventLoved this ep? Try this one:160 Manda Scott - Pondering how we became accidental gods of this land & seeking connection to it with humility not controlPod Partners Rock: Australian Medicinal Herbs    Code: Future5Support the ShowCasual Support - Buy Me A CoffeeRegular Support - PatreonBuy the Book - Futuresteading - live like tomorrow matters, Huddle - creating a tomorrow of togethernessSupport the show

This engaging episode features an insightful conversation with Mayda and Michael Bland, who delve into their artistic collaboration and the genesis of their musical partnership. The dialogue begins with a recounting of the pivotal moment that brought them together, highlighting the chance encounter that led to Michael discovering Mayda's unique sound. They discuss the formation of Sonic Matrimony, their production company, which embodies their commitment to fostering innovation and creativity in their musical endeavors. Michael articulates his philosophy on music production, emphasizing the significance of being actively involved in the creative process as a means to achieve authenticity in their work.As the episode unfolds, the focus shifts to their recent EP, “Stereotyping,” where both artists provide a comprehensive overview of the creative journey behind the project. Mayda reflects on her artistic evolution, sharing insights into her songwriting process and the influences that have shaped her musical identity. The dialogue also touches upon the intricate arrangements and instrumentation that characterize their work, revealing the thoughtful collaboration that went into crafting each track. Their upcoming performances are discussed, showcasing their dedication to engaging with audiences and the importance of live music in their artistic expression.Furthermore, the conversation takes a deeper turn as Mayda and Michael candidly share their experiences navigating the challenges of the music industry. They reflect on the competitive landscape of the Twin Cities, a region rich in musical talent, and discuss the strategies they employ to distinguish themselves amidst the burgeoning local scene. Their insights into the collaborative nature of the Twin Cities music community reveal a supportive network of artists committed to mutual growth and artistic exploration. Ultimately, this episode serves as a celebration of their artistic journey and an exploration of the vibrant musical landscape they inhabit.Takeaways: During this podcast episode, Michael Bland elaborated on his production company Sonic Matrimony, emphasizing its focus on hands-on music creation rather than traditional label dynamics. Mayda shared insights about her musical journey, highlighting the significance of collaboration with Michael Bland, which has greatly influenced her artistic development. The duo discussed their experiences within the Twin Cities music scene, noting its rich diversity and the challenges of standing out amidst a plethora of talented musicians. Listeners were treated to a preview of Mayda's upcoming performance, scheduled for February 8th at the Uptown Bar and Café in Minneapolis, showcasing her latest musical endeavors. Michael's unique perspective on the music industry was revealed, particularly how he navigates challenges while maintaining creative integrity and collaboration with various artists. Mayda's songwriting process was explored, emphasizing her ability to weave everyday experiences into compelling lyrics that resonate with listeners, showcasing her unique artistic voice. Links referenced in this episode:MySpace.com/maytamillercdbaby.com/maydamillercdbaby.comCompanies mentioned in this episode: Sonic Matrimony CD Baby MySpace Bless the Nation Halloween Alaska New Congress Doomtree Clique Prince Jonas Brothers Todd Rundgren

Interviewing Stephen Jenkinson is not for the faint of heart. In this thirdconversation on the Dying Your Way Podcast, I stepped into the ring once again with one of the great cultural teachers of our time. We explored his latest book Matrimony—a text that challenges, confronts, and ultimately blesses the reader with the possibility of change. What began as a “slog” of words became an initiation through storytelling, ritual, patrimony, vows, and grief. Stephen makes the case that matrimony is not a private romance but a cultural act—a village-making event that has profound resonance for how we face death, loss, and love itself. I survived. I stretched. I grew. And I am incrementally, if not forever changed. My hope is that you, too, will listen to this conversation, buy the book, share this podcast with others and so you too can take up the work in your own way. The village really needs us. Purchase Matrimony at https://orphanwisdom.com/shop/ For step-by-step support, enroll in the Dying Your Way End of Life Training

This summary of the Catechism's teaching on the sacrament of Matrimony pulls together several beautiful themes regarding marriage and family. Fr. Mike emphasizes the family as the Domestic Church, that community where parents and children grow in charity, forgiveness, prayer, and self-giving. We're reminded that the communion of love shared by husband and wife in marriage is a sacramental sign of the union between Christ and his Church. Today's readings are Catechism paragraphs 1659 through 1666. This episode has been found to be in conformity with the Catechism by the Institute on the Catechism, under the Subcommittee on the Catechism, USCCB. For the complete reading plan, visit ascensionpress.com/ciy Please note: The Catechism of the Catholic Church contains adult themes that may not be suitable for children - parental discretion is advised.

“Love seeks to be definitive,” the Catechism tells us in this section on marital fidelity. The faithfulness of husband and wife in the sacrament of Matrimony is a sign of God's irrevocable covenant with humanity. This fidelity is both beautiful and challenging. Fr. Mike addresses painful separation and divorce situations and how the whole ecclesial community should respond with truthful love. Today's readings are Catechism paragraphs 1646 through 1651. This episode has been found to be in conformity with the Catechism by the Institute on the Catechism, under the Subcommittee on the Catechism, USCCB. For the complete reading plan, visit ascensionpress.com/ciy Please note: The Catechism of the Catholic Church contains adult themes that may not be suitable for children - parental discretion is advised.

Author and wisdom-carrier Stephen Jenkinson returns for a deeply textured, no-BS unpacking of Matrimony — his newest cultural autopsy. We track the broken shards of our seemingly antiquated wedding traditions back to their source, dissect the difference between promises and vows, and talk about what happens when ritual life flatlines into spectacle. Stephen calls out the privatization of love, the poverty of “authentic,” and the radical hospitality required to make a vow matter.This is not a “how to plan your special day” conversation. It's a clear-eyed, occasionally confronting exploration of what matrimony could be if we had the chops, the courage, and the cultural literacy to make it real.Watch on Odysee + Progressive Radio NetworkPart 2:danikatz.locals.comwww.patreon.com/danikatzAll things Dani, including books, courses, coaching + consulting:www.danikatz.comPlus, schwag:danikatz.threadless.comAll things Stephen Jenkinson:www.orphanwisdom.comWildcraft Herbs:www.wildcraftherbs.comUse promo code DANI11 for discounts and free gifts!Show notes:On writing Matrimony & being an officiantEtymology & meaning of a ‘crisis'Examining the ritual of modern weddingsSearching for ‘real' inside matrimony'It takes a village' of strangersWedding invitations & non-sacred wording“Do you vow….?”The ir/relevance of marriage ‘Blessing', origin and meaning What cultured people doRole of the ArtistPrivatization of loveA profound story about a morning afterPushback to S's matrimonial methodsGracefully breathing life into ritual Roles of elders in matrimonyWorking with words as spells

On the 135th episode of the What is a Good Life? podcast, I'm delighted to welcome our guest, Stephen Jenkinson. Stephen is a cultural worker, teacher, author, and ceremonialist. He is the creator and principal instructor of the Orphan Wisdom School, founded in 2010. He has master's degrees from Harvard University (theology) and the University of Toronto (social work). He's the author of Come of Age, the award-winning Die Wise, Money and the Soul's Desires, and Reckoning (with Kimberly Ann Johnson). His latest book, Matrimony: Ritual, Culture and the Heart's Work, invites readers to contemplate the significance of matrimony, ceremony, and cultural articulation—and how to redeem them for future generations.In this rich conversation, Stephen explores profound questions about life, love, and the nature of existence. The discussion delves into the essence of ceremonies, particularly in matrimony, emphasising the need for meaningful endings and the responsibilities we hold towards future generations. The discussion weaves fate, ancestry, humility, and the call to “proceed as if you're needed” into a meditation on how we might live fully inhabited lives.For Stephen's latest book, Matrimony:To buy your copy: https://orphanwisdom.com/store/matrimony/About the book: https://orphanwisdom.com/books/matrimony/For more of Stephen's work: Website: https://orphanwisdom.com/Contact me at mark@whatisagood.life if you'd like to explore your own lines of self-inquiry through 1-on-1 coaching, my 5-week group courses, or to discuss experiences I create to stimulate greater trust, communication, and connection, amongst your leadership teams.- For the What is a Good Life? podcast's YouTube page: https://www.youtube.com/@whatisagoodlife/videos- My newsletter: https://www.whatisagood.life/- My LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/mark-mccartney-14b0161b4/00:01 – Introduction01:37 – The Condition of Pondering06:28 – Roots of Pondering10:16 – The Dream Another World Has of You19:36 – Needed vs Important21:46 – Matrimony and the Presence of the Absence26:00 – Longing and Belonging 31:00 – Modern wedding and the privatisation of love35:47 – The Art of the Ending41:40 – Pompe and the Necessity of Closure43:47 – Ritual as a Gift to the Village45:45 – The White Heat of Possibility51:25 – The Active Witness53:43 – What Is a Good Life for Stephen?

Together, with Fr. Mike, we begin the section on the sacrament of holy Matrimony. We unpack two elements of the sacrament, namely marriage in the order of creation and marriage under the regime of sin. Fr. Mike emphasizes that marriage is a partnership between man and woman that is oriented towards the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring. Today's readings are Catechism paragraphs 1601-1608. This episode has been found to be in conformity with the Catechism by the Institute on the Catechism, under the Subcommittee on the Catechism, USCCB. For the complete reading plan, visit ascensionpress.com/ciy Please note: The Catechism of the Catholic Church contains adult themes that may not be suitable for children - parental discretion is advised.

Together, with Fr. Mike, we reach the conclusion and “nugget day” for the section on the sacrament of Holy Orders. Fr. Mike reiterates that all three degrees of the sacrament are a longed for element of the “priestly people.” They are those called to go before God and before his people as a mediator. Fr. Mike also explains that for those who are not called to either “sacrament of service”, Holy Orders or Matrimony, we are all called “to be able to rejoice with those who have received gifts.” Today's readings are Catechism paragraphs 1590-1600. This episode has been found to be in conformity with the Catechism by the Institute on the Catechism, under the Subcommittee on the Catechism, USCCB. For the complete reading plan, visit ascensionpress.com/ciy Please note: The Catechism of the Catholic Church contains adult themes that may not be suitable for children - parental discretion is advised.

I sat down for the second time with my favourite philosopher, wordsmith, truth-teller - and now matrimony's fiercest ally - Stephen Jenkinson, to dive deep into love, relationships, and the rituals that hold them together... or should. What started as a conversation about weddings quickly turned into something much bigger. Stephen shared how officiating ceremonies led him to defend matrimony itself - not the performance, but the sacred, messy, meaningful practice of two people choosing each other, again and again. He calls himself matrimony's ally and a 'spirit lawyer' of sorts for marriage... and after hearing him, you’ll get why. He brings the same fire and the depth as he did it his first phenomenal appearance on the show (ep695) - telling stories that are as unorthodox as they are unforgettable, breaking down the meaning behind words like 'catastrophe' and 'matrimony', and exposing how far we’ve drifted from the roots of our language, our rituals, and our relationships. This conversation doesn’t float at the surface. It goes all the way down into ancestry, witnesshood, grief, and the quiet work of keeping love alive when the honeymoon’s long gone. True to form, there’s nothing surface-level here, and Stephen leaves my mind whirring... Enjoy! SPONSORED BY TESTART FAMILY LAWYERS Website: testartfamilylawyers.com.au STEPHEN JENKINSON Website: orphanwisdom.com TIFFANEE COOK Linktree: linktr.ee/rollwiththepunches/ Website: tiffcook.com LinkedIn: linkedin.com/in/tiffaneecook/ Facebook: facebook.com/rollwiththepunchespodcast/ Instagram: instagram.com/rollwiththepunches_podcast/ Instagram: instagram.com/tiffaneeandco See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Stephen Jenkinson is a culture activist and ceremonialist advocating a handmade life and eloquence. He is an author, a storyteller, a musician, sculptor and off-grid organic farmer. He is the founder/ principal instructor of the Orphan Wisdom School in Canada, co-founded with his wife Nathalie Roy in 2010. Also a sought-after workshop leader, articulating matters of the heart, human suffering, confusions through ceremony. He is the author of Matrimony: Ritual, Culture and the Heart's Work (2025), Come of Age: The Case for Elderhood in a Time of Trouble (2018), and the award-winning Die Wise: A Manifesto for Sanity and Soul (2015).  On this Episode: Stephen Jenkinson | @stephenjenkinsonofficial |  Adam Jackson | @adam___jackson Connect with Sacred Sons:  Start Here–Check In With Sacred Sons: Check-In Survey    Join The Circle Online Community: Join The Circle Join a Sacred Sons Event Near You: Event Calendar Sacred Sons Upcoming Events:   CONVERGENCE X: Across Nations   REMEMBRANCE II: Seeds of Change Shop: Sacred Sons Apparel & Cacao  Instagram: @sacredsons  Website: sacredsons.com   YouTube: Sacred Sons    Music: Ancient Future Want to become a Sponsor of Sacred Sons Podcast? Sponsorship Request Form 

The Catechism enters Chapter Three on the “Sacraments at the Service of Communion” which include both Holy Orders and Matrimony. As it introduces the sacrament of Holy Orders, Fr. Mike reminds us that every vocation is a gift, and that—no matter what state of life we are in or have been called to—we should read this chapter with an open heart and a grateful spirit. Today's readings are Catechism paragraphs 1533-1538. This episode has been found to be in conformity with the Catechism by the Institute on the Catechism, under the Subcommittee on the Catechism, USCCB. For the complete reading plan, visit ascensionpress.com/ciy Please note: The Catechism of the Catholic Church contains adult themes that may not be suitable for children - parental discretion is advised.

Thursday January 4, 2018 North Adams Massachusetts 42-year-old White Transgender woman and Community Advocate Christa Leigh Steele- Knudslien creator and organizer of Miss Trans Pageant New England was discovered with sharp and blunt force trauma all over her upper torso. Her husband of over 2 years 49-year-old Mark Steele- Knudslien initially is nowhere to be found, but when Detective John Casserone and CSI Agent Amanda Burgess enters the scene what they discover is a lovestory filled with tuburlence, toxicity, and turmoil leading to old saying, "If I Can't Have You" defined truly in the marriage between former LGBTQ power couple Mark and Christa Leigh Steele- Knudslien.

In this festive wedding season, what if matrimony wasn't here to affirm the intensity of love between two people but a courageous submission to the unknown?  Jennifer speaks with Stephen Jenkinson—cultural activist, author, ceremonialist—about the necessary burdens of love through the ritual of matrimony. With characteristic poetic edge, Stephen challenges the Western obsession with autonomy, authenticity and safety and gestures toward a redemptive cultural project: one of radical hospitality, memory, and the mystery of matrimony as a village-making act.Together they dive into:How matrimony is distinct from weddings and is rooted in mothering culture, not just romantic loveThe lost valence of patrimony, and what it asks of usThe role of the stranger in belonging and village makingWhy being “yourself” might not be the gift you think it isThis conversation reveals how ritual and ceremony thins the membrane with other worlds, makes congress with the divine and helps us honor what's come before —so we might find our place, and responsibility, in what's yet to come.Links & Resources:Order Stephen Jenkinson's newest book Matrimony: Ritual, Culture and the Heart's Work Learn more about Orphan Wisdom SchoolGet Jennifer's biweekly newsletter for radical encouragement on the hard mess of being humanConnect with Jennifer on Instagram or LinkedIn Gratitude for this show's theme song Inside the House, composed by the talented Yukon musician, multi-instrumentalist and sound artist Jordy Walker. Artwork by the imaginative writer, filmmaker and artist Jon Marro.

Date: Sunday, July 13, 2025Title: Heavenly MatrimonyPreacher: Wayne MeadowsSeries: Romans (Part 21)Passage: Romans 7:1-6

This blogcast explores “Saints Louis and Zelie: Helping Your Spouse Get to Heaven” written by Annie Harton and read by Fatima Monterrubio Cruess.In this blog post, Annie shares how one of marriage's goals is to get the other spouse to Heaven and how Louis and Zelie Martin, the parents of St. Thérèse of Lisieux, embodied that. Neither Zelie nor Louis felt called to marriage before they met. They both felt a strong pull to religious life. Louis wanted to become a monk and Zelie wanted to become a religious sister. Louis was turned away because he had trouble learning Latin and Zelie was turned away for respiratory problems. The two of them met and immediately fell in love. They married 3 months later, but still felt convicted to live a life of abstinence since God was their deepest love. After a few years of marriage, a spiritual director encouraged them to consummate their marriage and this led to giving birth to nine children. Four children died in infancy, the remaining five entered religious life and became Saints themselves. During the canonization Mass Pope Francis said, “The holy spouses Louis Martin and Marie-Azélie Guérin (Zelie) practiced Christian service in the family, creating day by day an environment of faith and love which nurtured the vocations of their daughters, among whom was Saint Therese of the Child Jesus.” There is so much to share about this faith-filled couple, so I encourage you to read more about them on your own time. They are the patron saints of illness, mental illness, marriage, parenting, and widowers. I hope that something in their story will give you hope and encouragement in your own life. The same wedding vows have been used in the Church since Medieval times so these nineteenth century lovebirds said the same words we hear at Catholic weddings today: “I promise to be true to you in good times and in bad, in sickness and in health. I will love you and honor you all the days of my life." In the marriage prep classes I teach, I often point out to the couples that compatible means “to suffer with.” Author Jason Evert adds, “If you are not willing to suffer with someone until death do you part, then you are not compatible.” Engagement is usually just focused on planning a wedding party rather than discerning a life together. Feasting only has meaning when it's accompanied with fasting. You can't have the Resurrection without the Passion. Our Lord loves love. He IS Love! The Bible begins with a marriage in Genesis and ends with a marriage in Revelation. Right in the middle of the Bible is Song of Songs. The Sacrament of Marriage is a representation of the love between Christ and His Beloved Bride – the Church. The Catechism of the Church explains the grace that is in the sacrament of Matrimony: “By reason of their state in life and of their order, [Christian spouses] have their own special gifts in the People of God.” This grace proper to the sacrament of Matrimony is intended to perfect the couple's love and to strengthen their indissoluble unity. By this grace they “help one another to attain holiness in their married life and in welcoming and educating their children.” CCC 1641 As we celebrate the feast of Sts. Zelie and Louis, let us remember how marriage sanctifies us while not defining us. In my book Single Truth: You are more than your relationship status, I write that “marriage is an assist and not the goal.” In the recent Gospel, Jesus challenged us to always put Him first and to love Him most (Matthew 10:37). If you're single, are you idolizing marriage and expecting it to make you happier than you are right now? If you're married, how are you helping your spouse get to heaven? St. Zelie and St. Louis, pray for us! Author:Annie Harton is a proud alumna of Saint Mary's College and the University of Notre Dame. She is a licensed marriage and family therapist, author, and speaker. Her self-published book, Single Truth: You Are More than Your Relationship Status, inspired her to start a business called You Are More. She specializes in helping singles and couples explore how they're more than their diagnoses, their pasts, their jobs, and their relationship statuses while also reminding them that God is more than any problem they bring Him. You can find out more about Annie and inquire about working with her at youaremore.org and annieharton.com Follow us:The Catholic Apostolate CenterThe Center's podcast websiteInstagramFacebookApple PodcastsSpotify Fr. Frank Donio, S.A.C. also appears on the podcast, On Mission, which is produced by the Catholic Apostolate Center and you can also listen to his weekly Sunday Gospel reflections. Follow the Center on Facebook, Instagram, X (Twitter), and YouTube to remain up-to-date on the latest Center resources.

Outline:IntroductionThe Marriage Service ExplainedA Brief Liturgical HistoryOverviewThe Unity of Christendom conference is held annually in Liverpool, NY at the Church of St. Mary the VirginSaint Athanasius ChurchVideo Version

The Catechism introduces the seven sacraments that Christ offers the Church: Baptism, Confirmation, Eucharist, Reconciliation, Anointing of the Sick, Holy Orders, and Matrimony. The Catechism highlights the fact that the sacraments are “by the Church” because the Church is “Christ's action at work”, and they are “for the Church” because they “manifest and communicate to men…the mystery of communion with the God who is love.” Fr. Mike focuses on the fact that while ministerial priests administer many of the sacraments, their priesthood is at the service of the baptismal priesthood, into which all of the baptized are ordained. Today's readings are from Catechism paragraphs 1113-1121. This episode has been found to be in conformity with the Catechism by the Institute on the Catechism, under the Subcommittee on the Catechism, USCCB. For the complete reading plan, visit ascensionpress.com/ciy Please note: The Catechism of the Catholic Church contains adult themes that may not be suitable for children - parental discretion is advised.

Today on Valentine In The Morning: Listeners shared the most memorable speakers from their graduation ceremonies, and the absolute wildest things they've witnessed at weddings.Listen live every weekday from 5–10am Pacific: https://www.iheart.com/live/1043-myfm-173/Website: 1043myfm.com/valentineInstagram: @ValentineInTheMorningFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/valentineinthemorningTikTok: @ValentineInTheMorning

Ding dong, ding dong! No, that's not the door, it's the peal of church bells announcing the arrival of a newly married Michael. We're freshly back from sunny Melbourne with tales of nuptials and romance. After that, it's a little bit of photography chat, a handful of miffs, and even some Rec Engine to cap us off. This episode's mistakes include: Extended sincerity. Unrelatable Oscar fantasies. ANZAC cringe. Egregious factual inaccuracies. Kiss your spouse, then like us on Facebook, follow us on Instagram, rate us on Apple Podcasts and Spotify, and send your questions to deepfought@gmail.com.

This week is Eggmans first show picking a topic and a guest! With Verdansk back in Warzone and a tournament behind our shoulders this glorious man picked to discuss the tournament and the game itself with returning guest BEEF! Enjoy the antics and off topic shenanigans! Cheers!   BEEF Twitch: TheSliceOfBeef - Twitch Palword Podcast: https://open.spotify.com/show/79niJJCLTdPEHCimY2BUZR    DISCORD https://discord.gg/p63Da7w  RUSSELL: Twitter: https://twitter.com/drjex0725  EGGMAN54: Twitch? COMING SOOOOON! ELMMERFUDD Twitch: https://www.twitch.tv/elmmerfuddgames  YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/elmmerfuddgames    

In this episode of the Fresh Fiction Podcast, we're whisked away to Gilded Age Newport with bestselling mystery author Alyssa Maxwell, as we uncover the secrets behind her newest release, Two Weddings and a Murder.

Sometimes, it seems like lifelong Catholic marriage is impossible in this crazy modern world we live in. But the Church and the saints prove that, by the grace of God, there's another way, that faithful, fruitful, loving marriages are just as possible as they've ever been, says Caitrin Bennett, Catholic wife, mother, and author of Holier Matrimony. Are you enjoying this podcast? I invite you to listen to more shows brought to you by the Marian Fathers of the Immaculate Conception. Join us daily for enriching, spiritual content which will help you on your journey with Jesus Christ. Simply visit DivineMercyPlus.org for a complete list of our shows. That's DivineMercyPlus.org. Please “follow” or “subscribe” to this podcast to receive the latest episodes and updates. If you have been blessed by this podcast, please consider leaving a review. Reviews greatly improve our podcast ranking, and will help spread this podcast to other people throughout the world. Thank you and God bless you! 

In This Episode: Wild Waxing Stories, Gentle Parenting & Candle DreamsWe gave the ladies the floor to plug their businesses and share what they're passionate about—and let's just say, they did not disappoint. From favorite candles (and whether they belong in stores) to waxing nightmares and asking clients to leave, we're getting real about the beauty industry.Aaron might just be next in line for a live beard wax—will it actually happen?We also dive into:    •    The viral Anthony Edwards child support rumors    •    The truth (and struggles) of gentle parenting    •    What motherhood/fatherhood has taught us    •    Male vs. female friendships—are they really that different?    •    One meal forever? Our forever food picks    •    Comfort shows, foods & hobbies    •    Top 3 artists & podcasts we're loving right nowTap in, laugh with us, and join the conversation in the comments!https://tatyskinandbeauty.as.me/https://www.instagram.com/motowncandlelady?igsh=MXVqN2F2bHB4Z2dweA==

Balaam-like, Satan can't curse God's people, but he can turn the blessing of marriage into a battlefield.

The stars of a unique romance that's going viral – a major league baseball player and the team's mascot – join to tell their love story for the first time. Also, Jack Black stops by to catch up and talk about his upcoming movie ‘A Minecraft Movie' and getting ready to host ‘Saturday Night Live.' Plus, chef Zaynab Issa shares a delicious recipe for garlicky pasta salad.

Deborah Roberts talks with producer Gary Wynn about what it takes to bring the audience to the location of our stories to visualize how it unfolded: finding spaces to shoot,  renting motorcycles, protecting gear from floods, and searching for those telling details that help viewers understand who a person was in life. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

An open marriage, a secret affair and a sinister plot for murder.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This is a special re-release of an episode featuring guest host Jackson Kroopf speaking with the incomparable Kimberly Ann Johnson and Stephen Jenkinson. We're bringing this conversation back to let you know about something special happening this weekend from Stephen Jenkinson and the Orphan Wisdom School: Sanity and Soul: Die Wise 10 Years. Taking place on March 15th and 16th at 10am Pacific, this 6-part online event is a deep dive into the wisdom of death, grief, and the soul, 10 years after the publication of Stephen's transformative book Die Wise. You'll get to experience the depth of Stephen's work in a pretty unique way: through 4 recorded grief counsel sessions with dying people, hearing Stephen practice, in 2025, the kind of work described in Die Wise. Plus, he'll be joined by two brilliant colleagues—a neuroscientist studying human consciousness and a filmmaker exploring the afterlife—to discuss the lasting impact of Die Wise on grief counseling, death doulas, and the way these ideas continue to shape our world. If you want to learn more and register, visit orphanwisdom.com/events. But now, enjoy this conversation from March 2023, following Reckoning at Mt. Madonna. Please do consider gifting yourself or a loved one this upcoming offering, Sanity & Soul that promises to provide some ceremony in these  troubled times in ways only Stephen and the Orphan Wisdom School can. Link: https://orphanwisdom.com/event/die-wise-sanity-and-soul-ten-years-on/   What You'll Here in this Episode: Reflections on witness from retired birth and death workers The value of disillusionment The power of loneliness The proliferation of self pathologizing The complex politics of feelings The religion of western psychology Adolescents grabbing for pop psychology labels The respect in not offering solutions The eagerness to escape from pain while grieving Is love dead? Blessing not as approval but the emergence of something new Marriage as both celebration and loss Matrimony between cultures An only child and single parent inviting in a new husband Building an escape route as you enter a union The no-go zone of contemporary western marriage 15 minute weddings, 15 minute funerals, 15 minute births The cultural casualties of uniformity Being healthy enough to tend to home and neighbor   Links ig @reckoning live Sanity & Soul Sign-Up https://orphanwisdom.com/event/die-wise-sanity-and-soul-ten-years-on/

Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.  Genesis 2:24   Summary Unity between man and woman was God's original plan, but the Fall not only broke our relationship with God, it also broke our relationship with each other.  But the good news is that Jesus has given us grace in the sacrament of Matrimony so we can have a oneness in marriage that would be impossible otherwise!  With unity, couples can handle anything life dishes out. Without it, even the easy things will seem hard. Couples need to constantly be striving for unity, because if spouses aren't intentional, those marriages will drift apart!  In this podcast, we will give you three tools - honoring, forgiveness, and vulnerability - that you can use to start moving towards your spouse.  We need to intentionally use these tools to work towards the greater unity within the gift of marriage that God has for us.     Key Takeaways All couples must strive for unity - if you float along, you will drift apart Unity was what we were made for, but the fall introduced distrust into the male/female relationships There are three things you can do to move towards unity:  honoring, forgiveness, and vulnerability On the scale of Affirmation/Criticism, choose to honor your spouse, even publicly to build them up On the scale of Resentment/Forgiveness, choose to forgive them instead of being resentful of their shortcomings On the scale of Detachment/Intimacy we need to choose vulnerability and openness to our spouse.    Couple Discussion Questions On a scale of 1-10, how are we doing in our unity? In which of the three areas can we do better?  Which one of these three areas is the most challenging for me?  Why do I think that is?     Resources Free Mini-Marriage Retreat:  https://messyfamilyproject.org/guide/mini-marriage-check-in/ Register for the Family Board Meeting!  https://messyfamilyproject.org/course/family-board-meeting/ Easter Webinar Register here…. www.Catholiccouplesgetaway.com  

Team Busted Halo recently traveled across the country to broadcast from the Los Angeles Religious Education Congress, but one of our guests traveled all the way from Australia to speak at the event! Father Dave welcomes Father Richard Leonard, a Jesuit priest and pastor of Our Lady of the Way in North Sydney. He is the author of numerous books including, “Why God? Stories to Inspire Faith” and “Hatch, Match and Dispatch: A Catholic Guide to Sacraments” from Paulist Press.

On this date in 1906, according to City Attorney Aaron Bessie of Wahpeton, he filed papers that had been served on Ruby Weston the previous day. Bessie asserted that public records could be viewed by anyone in the register of deeds office and sheriff's process docket, under the date of February 21, 1906.

After looking at 5 key passages concerning marriage over the course of 5 weeks, Dr. Larry Ball, Pastor Ken Endean, and Pastor Emmanuel Malone answer several questions that were asked by members of Tri-City Baptist Church throughout the series.

Archbishop Vigneron joins host Mike Chamberland to discuss the Sacrament of Marriage, one of the Sacraments at the Service of Communion. Their conversation takes us through the sacrament itself, covers how marriage is reflected in Scripture, and touches on the differences between the secular and Catholic understanding of marriage.(0:21) Host Mike Chamberland, flying solo without cohost Mary Wilkerson this month, welcomes Archbishop Vigneron to another episode of Eyes on Jesus. The Archbishop shares some highlights of the last month, including the solemn opening of the Jubilee Year of Hope, meeting with Knights of Columbus leadership, and the Christmas holiday. (4:09) Mike introduces today's topic: the Sacrament of Matrimony. Archbishop Vigneron begins by talking about the difference between the Sacraments of Initiation (Baptism, Confirmation, Holy Eucharist), Sacraments at the Service of Communion (Matrimony, Holy Orders), and Sacraments of Healing (Reconciliation, Anointing of the Sick). Mike then asks Archbishop Vigneron to provide an overview of what happens during the Sacrament of Matrimony. (10:07) Archbishop Vigneron suggests there are “two archetypes” of marriage through salvation history: First, the marriage of God in the world, which is inscribed in the nature of the human person, and then the marriage of Christ with humanity in the Church. He clarifies that while the Sacrament of Matrimony can take place outside the celebration of the Eucharist, it is most appropriately celebrated within the context of the Mass. He and Mike then discuss who actually “confers” the Sacrament of Matrimony: the husband and wife.(14:47) Archbishop Vigneron shares how the Sacrament of Matrimony is reflected in Scripture, beginning with the creation of Adam and Eve in the Book of Genesis. Mike asks about the purpose of marriage, which Archbishop Vigneron summarizes as a way for God's sons and daughters to fulfill their own purpose and participate in the mystery of communion. Archbishop Vigneron then explains what we mean when we say marriage is “unitive and procreative.”(26:53) Mike asks the Archbishop to explain why the Catholic Church rejects divorce. Archbishop Vigneron points to Scripture, where Jesus Christ teaches that divorce had previously been permitted due to a human hardness of heart. But now, “we have hearts of flesh, not stone, by the power and grace of Christ.” Archbishop Vigneron then explains how the secular concept of divorce differs from a declaration of nullity from the Church. (35:04) Archbishop Vigneron shares about the annual Together in Holiness Conference, an opportunity for spouses to grow together in holiness and, for those who are parents, to learn how to form their children in the Catholic faith. He also looks back on a marriage ceremony he celebrated early in his priestly ministry and shares what he most enjoys about celebrating this sacrament. Then, he talks about the witness of his parents living out their vocation as a married couple. (42:15) Mike shares his own experience of being married for 21 years, learning from the witness of his own parents and other couples in his life. He and the Archbishop then discuss the Feast of St. Valentine, or St. Valentine's Day. Archbishop Vigneron suggests that while the secular celebration is often focused on romance itself, the Christian focus for relationships should be on love, which remains even in times when romance fades. He and Mike then offer their advice to couples preparing for marriage and those struggling in their marriages. (48:20) Archbishop Vigneron answers listener questions about his favorite memory as a bishop, how to address others' doubts of God, and the one thing he'd ask God for if given the chance. He then closes the episode with a prayer and blessing.

Questions Covered:  05:49 – I've heard there's 7 Sacraments. Two are mutually exclusive (Matrimony & Holy Orders). If a Catholic Man is unmarried/not ordained religious and receives the other 5 Sacraments, is he missing something/less than others who are married/ordained?  15:21 – When talking to Tom earlier, you left on a cliffhanger. Where in the Bible does it say you should be Catholic?  37:41 – As a non-Catholic, can I go to Confession?  44:02 – Is there a connection between Classical Liberalism / democracy (differing ideas in society) and Protestantism (having differences in faith in the “Church”)?  50:37 – Could you give me a Biblical/Traditional defense on Marian Doctrine in general?  …

Manhunt underway for gunman who killed UnitedHealthCare CEO; Simple solutions to refill, reuse & repeat single-use items; Etienne Murphy stars in holiday film 'Mistletoe & Matrimony.' Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

This summary of the Catechism's teaching on the sacrament of Matrimony pulls together several beautiful themes regarding marriage and family. Fr. Mike emphasizes the family as the Domestic Church, that community where parents and children grow in charity, forgiveness, prayer, and self-giving. We're reminded that the communion of love shared by husband and wife in marriage is a sacramental sign of the union between Christ and his Church. Today's readings are Catechism paragraphs 1659 through 1666. This episode has been found to be in conformity with the Catechism by the Institute on the Catechism, under the Subcommittee on the Catechism, USCCB. For the complete reading plan, visit ascensionpress.com/ciy Please note: The Catechism of the Catholic Church contains adult themes that may not be suitable for children - parental discretion is advised.

“Love seeks to be definitive,” the Catechism tells us in this section on marital fidelity. The faithfulness of husband and wife in the sacrament of Matrimony is a sign of God's irrevocable covenant with humanity. This fidelity is both beautiful and challenging. Fr. Mike addresses painful separation and divorce situations and how the whole ecclesial community should respond with truthful love. Today's readings are Catechism paragraphs 1646 through 1651. This episode has been found to be in conformity with the Catechism by the Institute on the Catechism, under the Subcommittee on the Catechism, USCCB. For the complete reading plan, visit ascensionpress.com/ciy Please note: The Catechism of the Catholic Church contains adult themes that may not be suitable for children - parental discretion is advised.

The grace of the Sacrament of Marriage provides husbands and wives the strength to love one another with supernatural, tender, and fruitful love. Fr. Mike covers the characteristics of the marriage bond and the different roles of husbands and wives. He explains what it means to “be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ.” We also learn that indissolubility, faithfulness, and openness to fertility are requirements of conjugal love. Today's readings are Catechism paragraphs 1638-1645. This episode has been found to be in conformity with the Catechism by the Institute on the Catechism, under the Subcommittee on the Catechism, USCCB. For the complete reading plan, visit ascensionpress.com/ciy Please note: The Catechism of the Catholic Church contains adult themes that may not be suitable for children - parental discretion is advised.

What does a Catholic wedding look like? Today, we dive into the liturgical celebration of marriage and learn that the celebration must be valid, worthy, and fruitful. Additionally, we briefly cover virginity for the sake of the Kingdom and how this particular call highlights the beauty and goodness of marriage. Fr. Mike emphasizes that those called to celibacy can truly live joyful and fulfilling lives. Today's readings are Catechism paragraphs 1618-1624. This episode has been found to be in conformity with the Catechism by the Institute on the Catechism, under the Subcommittee on the Catechism, USCCB. For the complete reading plan, visit ascensionpress.com/ciy Please note: The Catechism of the Catholic Church contains adult themes that may not be suitable for children - parental discretion is advised.

Together, with Fr. Mike, we begin the section on the sacrament of holy Matrimony. We unpack two elements of the sacrament, namely marriage in the order of creation and marriage under the regime of sin. Fr. Mike emphasizes that marriage is a partnership between man and woman that is oriented towards the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring. Today's readings are Catechism paragraphs 1601-1608. This episode has been found to be in conformity with the Catechism by the Institute on the Catechism, under the Subcommittee on the Catechism, USCCB. For the complete reading plan, visit ascensionpress.com/ciy Please note: The Catechism of the Catholic Church contains adult themes that may not be suitable for children - parental discretion is advised.

Together, with Fr. Mike, we reach the conclusion and “nugget day” for the section on the sacrament of Holy Orders. Fr. Mike reiterates that all three degrees of the sacrament are a longed for element of the “priestly people.” They are those called to go before God and before his people as a mediator. Fr. Mike also explains that for those who are not called to either “sacrament of service”, Holy Orders or Matrimony, we are all called “to be able to rejoice with those who have received gifts.” Today's readings are Catechism paragraphs 1590-1600. This episode has been found to be in conformity with the Catechism by the Institute on the Catechism, under the Subcommittee on the Catechism, USCCB. For the complete reading plan, visit ascensionpress.com/ciy Please note: The Catechism of the Catholic Church contains adult themes that may not be suitable for children - parental discretion is advised.