Wedding of William and Catherine: Suggestions and Musings

[melissaadrian]

I agree with you, a person in line for the throne can not even marry a Catholic, a faith not so far from their own..I can't see them doing something that is so far off base..

But they can marry a Jew, Hindu, Budhist, sikh.....it is just catholic they can't marry. So better not have any rosaries and catholic nuns around.

 

[scooter]

While they may legally be allowed to marry a Jew, Hindu, Buddhist or Sikh, you can be sure that the 'establishment' would have a grand mal fit and refuse to allow the match, racist as that may be.

 

[Osipi]

Maybe its just me but I don't really see any "religious" practices from other faiths being added to the ceremony but rather cultural practices as touches to their special day. To me, if Kate did the henna thing, it would be just as adding a sprig of myrtle to her wedding bouquet. I don't see any of this as an affront to any religion or taking away from their own practices but a gentle added touch of some internationally used wedding custom.

As for the breaking of the glass at the end of the ceremony, I went looking and what I found was very interesting. There are many meanings to the breaking of the glass. I wonder which one William and Kate would choose?

There are various interpretations of why we do this and where the breaking glass Jewish wedding tradition came from. Here are a few of the most popular explanations:

• Temple: Breaking of the Jewish wedding glass is a reminder of the destruction of the Temples in Jerusalem.
• Superstitious: A loud noise is thought to drive away evil spirits.
• Sadness/Joy: A reminder that even in times of great joy that there is sadness. That life will bring sadness as well as joy.
• Hymen: A breaking of the glass represents symbolically the breaking of the hymen, and the consummation of the marriage.
• Fragile: The glass symbolizes the love and relationship of the couple and is fragile, so it must be cared for and not broken.
• Broken World: A reminder that although the couple came together as a single union, the world as a whole is broken and needs mending.
• Marriage is Forever: A broken Jewish wedding glass is forever changed, likewise, the couple are forever changed by the marriage and take on a new form.
• Be Fruitful: A hope that your happiness will be as plentiful as the shards of glass…or that your children will be as plentiful as the shards of glass.

Breaking Glass Jewish Wedding Tradition Meanings

One ancient tradition I love is the the handfasting. The couple are joined together at the wrists at the ceremony and remain joined that way for the next month (moon). The couple were plied with honey mead to ensure a happy time together too (honey).

Whatever these two are doing on their day regardless of how "outside of the box" and looked on unfavorably by some, we have to remember that this is essentially THEIR day and we've just been allowed to be a part of it all worldwide.

 

[Princess of Durham]

Hmmm, the Prince of Wales has commented on being the "defender of faith". I wonder if this could possibly be true and one of his ideas.

 

[Osipi]

I believe the custom of lavishing diamonds, emeralds, rubies and sapphires on the bride is probably a thing of the past - although it was not too long ago that it was in place (Diana got jewels).

Queen Elizabeth II was given a stunning diamond necklace by South Africa for her 21st birthday, IIRC, and received other jewels at that time as well (times have really changed).

For a while there it looked as someone wanted to buy a beautiful collection of rainbow diamonds as a wedding present. I can't remember offhand the value of these but it wasn't cheap.

I'm sure the tradition would have continued with William and Kate and they would have received some very nice gemstones in jewelry or whatnot but they have decided to ask that instead of wedding gifts such as these, that people make a donation to one of charities that William and Kate have selected with one of them being a New Zealand relief fund.

 

[melissaadrian]

Maybe its just me but I don't really see any "religious" practices from other faiths being added to the ceremony but rather cultural practices as touches to their special day...

I agree, its more a reflection of culture than of religion. It isn't like they are trying to claim they have knowledge or belief in Judaism or such. You can show respect for other cultures. I went to an East Indian wedding, I took off my shoes, and had a scarf to cover my hair, I am not sikh, but I showed reverence to that culture.

The glass I have heard as being said that love is precious, let the vows that be taken and marriage formed, be as hard to break, as it would be for the glass to be made whole again. It is beautiful symbolism, which has nothing to do specifically with the Jewish faith. There are many interfaith ceremonies, Christian/Jew, where a priest will have them break the glass. It is merely symbolism of the union.

I love handfasting ceremonies as well. There is such beautiful tradition, I think some still do it in Scotland (well tied for the ceremony at least). The whole sharing of honey mead, could be considered similar to the sharing of sweets as mentioned.

I don't know if this story is true, but I don't think if it is, that is has to be such a cause for stir. Now a days brides and grooms are always personalizing their weddings. They write their own vows, they serenade each other, some light candles, include their kids, release buttteflies.... Lots of these have roots in ancient tradition, but we don't think of it. Yes this is being televised, but it is still their wedding, and it shouldn't be too shocking they might want a few personal touches to it. And considering their travels and interests, including other cultures is a reflection.

 

[melissaadrian]

For a while there it looked as someone wanted to buy a beautiful collection of rainbow diamonds as a wedding present. I can't remember offhand the value of these but it wasn't cheap.

I'm sure the tradition would have continued with William and Kate and they would have received some very nice gemstones in jewelry or whatnot but they have decided to ask that instead of wedding gifts such as these, that people make a donation to one of charities that William and Kate have selected with one of them being a New Zealand relief fund.

I have a feeling they will still get some fine jewels and such. I'd think people like the Sultan of Quatar, will not simply make a donation. Minor guests, ones who may have bought the royal equivalent of a toaster, what ever that is, will likely make donations. And all of those of us who don't get invited but want to share in the day. But I'd be expecting some jewels as well, and other gifts, from the more high profile guests. And the queen.

 

[melissaadrian]

While they may legally be allowed to marry a Jew, Hindu, Buddhist or Sikh, you can be sure that the 'establishment' would have a grand mal fit and refuse to allow the match, racist as that may be.

Unless the person agreed to convert perhaps. And even if say something wacky like Prince Harry marrying Princess Imman (I think that is the one who is a Sandhurst grad) or Jordan, and she converted to Anglicanism for him, they may still include some of her cultural roots in the ceremony. Not religious tie ins, but still a tip off to the culture.

Including other religions doesn't make sense, unless one spouse is another faith, to me. But including other cultures, seems to happen a lot more than people think, in small ways.

 

[Osipi]

The glass I have heard as being said that love is precious, let the vows that be taken and marriage formed, be as hard to break, as it would be for the glass to be made whole again. It is beautiful symbolism, which has nothing to do specifically with the Jewish faith. There are many interfaith ceremonies, Christian/Jew, where a priest will have them break the glass. It is merely symbolism of the union.

This explanation of the meaning is the most beautiful one that I've heard yet. Looking around for the meanings I happened to glance at an ad that will make a wedding heirloom keepsake out of the shards of glass that is broken. That would be a nice memento for Wills and Kate.

I love handfasting ceremonies as well. There is such beautiful tradition, I think some still do it in Scotland (well tied for the ceremony at least). The whole sharing of honey mead, could be considered similar to the sharing of sweets as mentioned.

Handfastings are widely accepted these days as legal marriage ceremony worldwide predominately in the wiccan/pagan communities.
Most still use part of that ritual with their own weddings hence going on a "honeymoon". The reasons and practices of honeymoons are as wide and with various meanings just as some wedding practices are.

I don't know if this story is true, but I don't think if it is, that is has to be such a cause for stir. Now a days brides and grooms are always personalizing their weddings. They write their own vows, they serenade each other, some light candles, include their kids, release buttteflies.... Lots of these have roots in ancient tradition, but we don't think of it. Yes this is being televised, but it is still their wedding, and it shouldn't be too shocking they might want a few personal touches to it. And considering their travels and interests, including other cultures is a reflection.

Its all in the preferences of the couple planning their wedding. When my son and daughter in law married last summer, it was revealed after the ceremony that they both had gotten tattoos of UPC bar codes with the numerals 07172010 on their left wrists. That is uniquely them. That is the reason I find it heartwarming that William and Kate are adding their own personal touches to their day that makes it uniquely theirs. It shows me that this is a couple that have taken time and care in deciding to spend the rest of their lives together and are planning this celebration as a team that has meaning for the both of them.

I mentioned in an earlier post that as adding some cultural practices is really a nice gentle addition, the practice of jumping the broom would kind of be a bit tacky for Westminster Abbey. Its interesting to note that this is one of the old ways that has roots in Wales. Perhaps they'll work it in somewhere during their day?

Jumping the broom - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In Wales, Romani (Gypsy) couples would get married by eloping together, when they would "jump the broom," or over a branch of flowering broom or a besom made of broom.[3] Welsh Kale and English Romanichal Gypsies and Romanichal populations in Scotland practiced the ritual into the 1900s. [4]

The Welsh[5] had a centuries-old custom called priodas coes ysgub, or "broom-stick wedding" alluded to in Dundes' work. Local variations of the custom were developed in different parts of England and Wales. Instead of placing the broom on the ground, and jumping together, the broom was placed in an angle by the doorway. The groom jumped first, followed by the bride.[6]

 

[Kataryn]

While they may legally be allowed to marry a Jew, Hindu, Buddhist or Sikh, you can be sure that the 'establishment' would have a grand mal fit and refuse to allow the match, racist as that may be.

Hasn't a Habsburg married a Hindu? I doubt there is another family as "catholic" as thiso ne, so if even they accept such a marriage by now, everybody else will too.

 

[Madame Royale]

Sure, but the Habsburgs are a deposed Imperial Family. They can do as they wish being that they are private citizens.

 

[Kataryn]

Sure, but the Habsburgs are a deposed Imperial Family. They can do as they wish being that they are private citizens.

I found that deposed Royals are much more pompous than those still reigning because there is no need for them to go with the times and be loved and respected by their people. So it should be much easier for the reigning family of a multicultural country to accept a bride from another cultural background than for those whose rank depends on rules and laws from times long gone.

 

[Madame Royale]

I find members of deposed royal families are free to marry whoever they wish. Apart from whatever personal prejudices they may have, they are under no legislative obligation to marry within the terms of historical specification, nor are they subject to the social scrutiny of public expectation.

I do agree with you that a good many people belonging to deposed royal houses can seem rather supercilious and can appear very class driven (I guess apart from photo's and jewellery, all they can do to reiterate their lineage is marry well), but it remains that they are not subject to any expectations other than their own

 

[Kataryn]

I see your point here, Madame Royale (Duchesse d'Angouleme, is it?). But even in reigning houses, anybody can do as he wishes - at a price, but he or she can. That's what Human Rights are for.So it's not a matter of laws, but of the question if the heir has the same idea of the future of his house than the head of it. EG I doubt any direct heir to an European throne would marry an African girl, even a princess, thus introduce African genes into the gene pool of his august family. Or could you see William marry the siste of prince Seeiso of Lesotho and make her his future queen? Okay, one of the Windsor-girls is married to a Maori but she is far removed from the line of sucessions < ed Warren >... Sorry if I sound like a racist but this is not abou my own opinion of intercultural marriages but my thoughts about the lines the Royal houses follow.

 

[Lady Ann]

Quote by mellisaadrian:::[But they can marry a Jew, Hindu, Budhist, sikh.....it is just catholic they can't marry. So better not have any rosaries and catholic nuns around.]

Is this a rhetorical question???

While they may legally be allowed to marry a Jew, Hindu, Buddhist or Sikh, you can be sure that the 'establishment' would have a grand mal fit and refuse to allow the match, racist as that may be.

You took the words right out of my mouth...

 

[soapstar]

Maybe its just me but I don't really see any "religious" practices from other faiths being added to the ceremony but rather cultural practices as touches to their special day. To me, if Kate did the henna thing, it would be just as adding a sprig of myrtle to her wedding bouquet. I don't see any of this as an affront to any religion or taking away from their own practices but a gentle added touch of some internationally used wedding custom.

I agree. Personally I like the idea and don't really see a problem with them adding these little touches to their ceremony.

 

[Mirabel]

Adding non-Christian elements to a Christian wedding ceremony is an affront, at least to me. Either you are or you are not.

Yes, I think they are far more likely to cause offense than to please.
They should stick with the traditional, and not try to be trendy.

 

[texankitcat]

There is a big difference between getting bar codes tattooed on your wrists which have no cultural or religious meanings, and incorporating religious cultural wedding traditions from other countries that have nothing to do with your own. William is 2nd in line to the throne of England and all common wealth countries. He is not Hindu, Muslim nor Jewish. If the intent is to show they embrace all cultural and religious diversity, then why not incorporate Sihk, Japanese, Chinese, African, Maori, etc.., as well? I find the idea more novelty than showing true respect for cultural and religious diversity.

On a side note, my sister-in-law whom I love dearly is Jewish. I absolutely respect her religion and traditions and the fact she is raising my neices in the Jewish traditions. Although we love each other, I know that if I had gone to her when I got married and told her I would like to incorporate Jewish traditions in my wedding, the first thing she would say is "Why? You aren't Jewish". I know for certain she would not have been supportive nor understood regardless of my intent.

I seriously doubt that this rumour about William and Kate is true. If it is, it will backfire and be extremely controversial.

 

[muriel]

I seriously doubt that this rumour about William and Kate is true. If it is, it will backfire and be extremely controversial.

Whilst none of us can comment on the accuracy of the rumour, I personally do not why any such gestures are likely to "backfire and be extremely controversial"

Lets be clear, it will be an Anglican service - there is no deviating from that fact. Incorporating traditions from some of the groups that make up multi-cultural Britain (as opposed to the wider Commonwealth) will just be a nice touch. It will really be no different from having a Bollywood inspried dance routine at the reception, or having dim sum as canapes at the reception. There is no obligation to cover each and every ethnic group.

 

[texankitcat]

Whilst none of us can comment on the accuracy of the rumour, I personally do not why any such gestures are likely to "backfire and be extremely controversial"

Lets be clear, it will be an Anglican service - there is no deviating from that fact. Incorporating traditions from some of the groups that make up multi-cultural Britain (as opposed to the wider Commonwealth) will just be a nice touch

Are there not Japanese, Chinese, Sikhs, Africans, etc.., also living and raising families in Britain? What about the countries that are being represented by those that are invited?

You may think of this as nothing more than a charming gesture, however since this wedding will be televised around the world and William will one day be Defender of the Faith of the Church of England, I think you are trivializing or not understanding the possible impact.

 

[KittyAtlanta]

This is so disappointing that I have no further comment on this thread.

 

[muriel]

Are there not Japanese, Chinese, Sikhs, Africans, etc.., also living and raising families in Britain? What about the countries that are being represented by those that are invited?

You may think of this as nothing more than a charming gesture, however since this wedding will be televised around the world and William will one day be Defender of the Faith of the Church of England, I think you are trivializing or not understand the impact.

I am not sure how adopting certain traditional gestures from other cultures will in any way is trivialising or compromising Willaim's future position as Defender of the Faith.

William's primary constituency are the people of Britain, and to a lesser extent, the other countries of which Queeen is head of state (which as you know is only a subset of the Commonwealth). The largest ethnic and religious groups in the UK outside the Anglican and Catholic communities are people from the Indian sub-continent (comprising Hindu, Sikh and Muslim faiths), Jewish people and Afro-Carribeans. As you are no doubt aware, Christianity is widespread amongst the Afro-Carribean communities. You may also be aware that the henna custom for the bride referred to is used amongst Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims.

Just because the wedding will be televised around the world does not mean that he needs to appease every ethnic or religious group of the world.

 

[muriel]

This is so disappointing that I have no further comment on this thread.

What is dissappointing?

 

[Queen Penelope]

To me, if Kate did the henna thing, it would be just as adding a sprig of myrtle to her wedding bouquet.

If they were of that culture/religion then yes, I would agree. But Kate being Kate I don't think her doing henna is the same as adding a sprig of Myrtle IMO

I can appreciate the sentiment on their part, but IMO it would be more appropriate for William and Kate to perhaps visit a mosque, temple, etc, rather than try to incorporate bits of other religions into the wedding. They are both CoE - it's not like they come from two different religious backgrounds where you would try to incorporate elements of both religions at the wedding.

I really like the idea that someone mentioned of incorporating elements into the reception rather than the ceremony - that would be more appropriate IMO.

 

[soapstar]

Whilst none of us can comment on the accuracy of the rumour, I personally do not why any such gestures are likely to "backfire and be extremely controversial"

Lets be clear, it will be an Anglican service - there is no deviating from that fact. Incorporating traditions from some of the groups that make up multi-cultural Britain (as opposed to the wider Commonwealth) will just be a nice touch. It will really be no different from having a Bollywood inspried dance routine at the reception, or having dim sum as canapes at the reception. There is no obligation to cover each and every ethnic group.

Exactly. These touches (if the article is even true) will be a very, very tiny part of the ceremony. It's a nice gesture and I don't understand why it would be extremely controversial.

 

[Hissy]

Exactly. These touches (if the article is even true) will be a very, very tiny part of the ceremony. It's a nice gesture and I don't understand why it would be extremely controversial.

Yeah, I don't mind it myself. I don't know this couple personally but if true this could be something very important to them. I would be interested in knowing why they would choose those particular additions to their ceremony. I do see how religion touches a nerve with some people. I just like the idea that the couple would do something different in a royal wedding which is usually quite predictable. So I hope it would be received well, people opening their hearts to other ceremonies is a good thing to me. Shows tolerance and empathy I think.

As for the truth of the article it quotes someone from the palace. Is anyone aware of this woman mentioned?

Article stated: "Buckingham Palace spokesperson Esther Calthorpe-Watts said: "They want everyone to feel a part of the wedding. And while, religiously, the ceremony will be completely Anglican in nature, they felt it appropriate to include these small gestures towards other faiths."

Princess of Durham wrote: "The story I was told about the henna was that as long as it lasted on the bride's hand she did not have to do any housework. After that she was directed in her chores by her mother in law."

Very funny!

 

[ladongas]

Well, if it's all right with the Archbishop of Canterbury,

then it's certainly all right with me. It's unlikely that the AofC would allow these tiny observances if they were offensive to him. So why should we find them objectionable?

 

[Madame Royale]

Noting is confirmed it's pertinent to add, but to me an incorporation of any other religious or cultural act that is not their own is quite innapropriate for the occasion. To enact a ceremonial function they do not themselves generally observe is imo, a particularly inconsiderate undertaking. To 'perform' that function as though they understand perfectly well it's significance on a personal level, and that it's something which has been instilled in them their entire lives and is commonplace throughout their interactions both privately and officially, could be regarded as suggesting that being Christian's is not enough.

I'm sure they would be of the very best intentions, but let's face it, William and Catherine are (for all intents and purposes) Christian's. They are being married in a Christian Abbey, in a Christian ceremony, in the 'eyes' of the Christian lord and into a church he is someday expected to become the titular head of. Too a great many I'm sure that will be regarded as a most significant occasion. The pure fact it is being celebrated in the Christian faith, and in the presence of the Supreme Governor, her Primates, her Diocesan bishops and representative bodies should not be compromised in any way.

No one would expect the son of an Arab Crown Prince to incorporate a Christian observance into his wedding ceremony and infact, I'm sure a good many would take quite the offence with even having it suggested to them. Are there no Christian's throughout the Arab world? Do you think those state's, their customs and cultures would be willing to incorporate Christian observances, however small, into any such occasion, let alone weddings? I should certainly think not and that's something which is expected to be respected. In as much, the sanctity of a Christian marriage should also be respected.

I'm all for multiculturalism, and for the embracing and learning of different faiths and cultures but they all have their place, respectfully.

It is to be a Christian service and as far as I'm concerned, that's exactly how it should remain in all things.

 

[MRSJ]

Well said.....I am not Christian but believe your point is excellent and universally applied to all religions.

You're right nothing is confirmed yet so we shall see on April 29th but I personally will lose some respect for them should this be true (for reasons I and others have stated). Hoping it is not true as it will dampen my wedding joy a bit if so

 

[soapstar]

Yeah, I don't mind it myself. I don't know this couple personally but if true this could be something very important to them. I would be interested in knowing why they would choose those particular additions to their ceremony. I do see how religion touches a nerve with some people. I just like the idea that the couple would do something different in a royal wedding which is usually quite predictable. So I hope it would be received well, people opening their hearts to other ceremonies is a good thing to me. Shows tolerance and empathy I think.

This is the way I see it too.

Well if it's all right with the Archbishop of canterbury, then it's certainly all right with me. It's unlikely that the AofC would allow these tiny observances if they were offensive to him. So why should we find them objectionable?

I didn't even think about this aspect, but you're right.

Honestly though, I don't see this happening. I doubt the article is true. I don't think William or Kate will want to deviate from the standard royal ceremony.