Wedding of William and Catherine: Suggestions and Musings

[Isabella]

Nancy Reagan represented the USA at Prince Andrew's wedding so why not invite Michelle Obama to William's wedding?

I think William and Kate perhaps just wanted to have a different kind of wedding. Yes, first ladies have attended such events in the past, but that doesn't mean they have to be included now.

Besides, the Obamas will be on a state visit to the UK the following month, so they'll be over there for other reasons not too long from now, anyway.

 

[Royal_Eagle]

William isn't an heir apparent. He won't be until his father is King. Heirs/Heiresses apparent are the next-in-line to the throne, not the next-in-line's eldest child.

Keeping that in mind, it would make no sense to make William's wedding a state occasion. His position, while an important one, doesn't demand all the pomp and circumstance the BRF can muster just yet.

Pardon me, but I beg to differ. Prince William IS Heir Apparent, since nothing can usurp his claim to the Throne. He just will succeed his Dad to the Throme. The only way he wouldn't succeed to the Throne is if he pass away before his Dad or he becomes Catholic. In other word, a Heir Apparent is guaranteed to succeed to the throne eventually, regardless of birth of other people who can push him down the succession list.

In any case, I agree with you that it didn't really make too much sense to make the wedding a State Ocassion.

Sorry if I got a bit offtrack here.

 

[PrincessKaimi]

I think an invitation to the First Lady would have been appropriate, yes.

But, it is their wedding. Are they good friends of the Beckhams? I was curious. (Maybe I should read back a few more pages).

 

[PrincessKaimi]

I don't know how much store we can set by expectations; wasn't Sarah Ferguson expected to receive an invitation?

There's a link upthread somewhere - Sarah talked to the press on the day the invitations were sent and said she did not expect to be invited nor would she attend, if invited.

Should her style be Lady Sarah?

 

[Osipi]

There's a link upthread somewhere - Sarah talked to the press on the day the invitations were sent and said she did not expect to be invited nor would she attend, if invited.

Should her style be Lady Sarah?

As Sarah was not a daughter of a peer, she was not Lady Sarah when she married Andrew. After the divorce, the only style she is permitted to use is Sarah, Duchess of York which denotes a divorced wife of peer. Should she remarry, she would then lose the style Duchess of York and take whatever address she would use from her husband.

 

[PrincessKaimi]

Thank you, Osipi. That's exactly what I needed to know. Lady Sarah didn't sound right, because it isn't.

 

[texankitcat]

Nancy Reagan represented the USA at Prince Andrew's wedding so why not invite Michelle Obama to William's wedding?

This is about William and Kate's wedding....not the Obama's. The Obama's aren't invited and neither are other heads of state. End of story.

 

[Tiggersk8]

Pardon me, but I beg to differ. Prince William IS Heir Apparent, since nothing can usurp his claim to the Throne.

I hate to break it to you, but you're wrong. Charles is the Heir Apparent. William is not due to being the son of the Heir. Same as Crown Prince Fredrick is the Heir Apparent of Denmark while Prince Christian is only his son and the Heir to the Heir.

Why is this so hard for you to understand? I'm honestly puzzled.

 

[Sister Morphine]

Pardon me, but I beg to differ. Prince William IS Heir Apparent

No he's not.

In a hereditary system governed by some form of primogeniture, an heir apparent is easily identifiable as the person whose position as first in the line of succession is secure, regardless of future births.

William is not first in line. His father is. Charles is an heir apparent. CP Victoria is an heiress apparent. CP Frederik is an heir apparent. All these people have one thing in common; their mother or father is the current sovereign of their country, meaning upon their death they will become the next sovereign.

Upon the Queen's death, the only thing William becomes or inherits is the Duke of Cornwall. Heir/heiress apparent has a specific meaning that applies to just one person.

 

[Jaya]

Royal Wedding: Diana's friend Sarah, Duchess of York is not invited by Prince William - Telegraph

Sarah, Duchess of York, who was close to Prince William's mother Diana, Princess of Wales, has been left off the guest list for his marriage to Kate Middleton.

“She will not be attending the wedding,” confirms a spokesman for the former wife of the Duke of York. “She never expected to be invited or to attend. She will be overseas at the time.”

That is cruel and truly petty gesture towards Sarah..Just as the one towards the Obamas.

 

[Princess of Durham]

I'm sure the Obamas do not feel it as being "cruel", in fact, I would bet that they had no expectation of being invited. They really are quite grown up about invitations.

As to Sarah, I rather doubt that she expected an invitation either.

Not inviting a person/or persons to a wedding is far from a cruel act ... unless it might be one of the parents or siblings.

 

[PrincessKaimi]

I thought, that upon the Queen's Death, William also becomes Prince of Wales. Not true?

 

[Princess of Durham]

I don't think I have seen this article posted here.

Yvonne Yorke: Kate's Royal Wedding Look: The Dress, The Veil, The Tiara and More

 

[MARG]

I can't believe the whining about President and Mrs Obama not being invited to the wedding of someone they have never met! President Sarkozy isn't invited either and I don't see the French throwing their toys out of the cot.

The "official" part of this wedding includes British politicians, senior Defence personnel and Heads of State and or Governor's General of Commonwealth countries.

Foreign royalty includes family, friends, and Heads of State.

Whilst President Obama and his wife have met the senior royals and may even have cordial relationships with them, this is not a "State Wedding" and they are neither family nor friends of either the bride or the groom.

 

[Madame Royale]

Aptly stated, MARG.

 

[Mermaid1962]

The title Prince of Wales isn't automatic. Assuming Prince Charles becomes King on the death of his mother, Prince William will become Duke of Cornwall. However, it'll be up to his father to declare William to be the Prince of Wales.

I thought, that upon the Queen's Death, William also becomes Prince of Wales. Not true?

 

[Kataryn]

Whilst President Obama and his wife have met the senior royals and may even have cordial relationships with them, this is not a "State Wedding" and they are neither family nor friends of either the bride or the groom.

This is William and Catherine's wedding and at their current situation as second in line the need to interact with actual Heads of State is minimal. Till William becomes king, the Obamas are long forgotten. So why should they invite an American couple that due to their current position will take a lot of the limelight from them (at least with the American media) when there is neither personal contact nor political interest for them at the moment?

 

[Kataryn]

As Sarah was not a daughter of a peer, she was not Lady Sarah when she married Andrew. After the divorce, the only style she is permitted to use is Sarah, Duchess of York which denotes a divorced wife of peer. Should she remarry, she would then lose the style Duchess of York and take whatever address she would use from her husband.

Well, she could call herself Mrs. Sarah Mountbatten-Windsor, but of course Sarah, Duchess of York has a better ring to it.

 

[Lumutqueen]

David and Victoria Beckham to be invited to William and Kate's wedding | Mail Online

 

[Kataryn]

A question to English native speakers:

the invitation invites the guest "to the marriage" of William and Catherine. In a comment to this article someone wrote that the invitation should have been "to the wedding", as it is the actual service but not "to the marriage" because the marriage only starts at the wedding?

Which wording is correct?

 

[Jacknch]

A question to English native speakers:

the invitation invites the guest "to the marriage" of William and Catherine. In a comment to this article someone wrote that the invitation should have been "to the wedding", as it is the actual service but not "to the marriage" because the marriage only starts at the wedding?

Which wording is correct?

The invitation is correct not least of all because it is inconceivable that the wrong wording would be used for a wedding invitation issued by the British Royal Family! But in all seriousness, both words could be used, it's just that the word "marriage" is more traditional and derives from the latin for "to wed, marry, give in marriage".

People will be witnessing the marriage ceremony as well as the wedding.

 

[Kataryn]

The invitation is correct not least of all because it is inconceivable that the wrong wording would be used for a wedding invitation issued by the British Royal Family! But in all seriousness, both words could be used, it's just that the word "marriage" is more traditional and derives from the latin for "to wed, marry, give in marriage".

People will be witnessing the marriage ceremony as well as the wedding.

Thank you for the information. German has different words: "Hochzeit" or "Heirat" mean the actual wedding service, "Ehe" is the marriage in its length.

 

[texankitcat]

That is cruel and truly petty gesture towards Sarah..Just as the one towards the Obamas.

Please. Sarah has stated herself that she has not been part of William or Harry's life since before Diana's death and she did not expect to receive an invitation.

How is the Obama's not being invited "petty"? They are not personal friends of the RF, nor is this is a state wedding where Heads of State would expect to be included. No Heads of State have been invited.

 

[Skippy]

A question to English native speakers:

the invitation invites the guest "to the marriage" of William and Catherine. In a comment to this article someone wrote that the invitation should have been "to the wedding", as it is the actual service but not "to the marriage" because the marriage only starts at the wedding?

Which wording is correct?

That is something I have always wondered about, actually.

The invitation is correct not least of all because it is inconceivable that the wrong wording would be used for a wedding invitation issued by the British Royal Family! But in all seriousness, both words could be used, it's just that the word "marriage" is more traditional and derives from the latin for "to wed, marry, give in marriage".

People will be witnessing the marriage ceremony as well as the wedding.

Thank you for the information. German has different words: "Hochzeit" or "Heirat" mean the actual wedding service, "Ehe" is the marriage in its length.

In my eyes; the wedding ceremony (the "Hochzeit") is what is being witnessed by the guests, while the actual marriage (the "Ehe") officially starts as soon as the bride and groom are being pronounced husband and wife.

In that way, I guess, the guests will also witness the earliest moments of the marriage but to me it is still part of the wedding day. A couple's actual marriage (thus when the ceremony and all post-activities have been closed) starts on the next day - imo. And, while thinking about it, I suppose it starts as soon as the couple is pronounced married but then everyone is still in wedding attire so to me it's still the wedding and not the marriage yet.

Perhaps I have a much too detailed look into things like these

 

[4Pam]

What does the KG stand for in the invitation?

 

[Skippy]

Please. Sarah has stated herself that she has not been part of William or Harry's life since before Diana's death and she did not expect to receive an invitation.

How is the Obama's not being invited "petty"? They are not personal friends of the RF, nor is this is a state wedding where Heads of State would expect to be included. No Heads of State have been invited.

I am getting tired of stuff like this as well, but some posters (will) find fault with whatever William and Catherine do.

What does the KG stand for in the invitation?

Knight of the Garter, has been mentioned a couple of pages back .

 

[texankitcat]

I am getting tired of stuff like this as well, but some posters (will) find fault with whatever William and Catherine do.

Yes, that is very true. It really is ridiculous to be so negative over every detail.

 

[Mirabel]

I can't believe the whining about President and Mrs Obama not being invited to the wedding of someone they have never met! President Sarkozy isn't invited either and I don't see the French throwing their toys out of the cot.

I think it's because US Presidents and/or their wives have been invited to royal weddings in the past, and so now many people simply expect it.

But in previous cases, those people invited had some sort of relationship to either the Queen or the Prime Minister- which the Obamas don't.

Besides, it's William's wedding, why should he have to forego having some of his friends in order to invite people he hasn't met or (yes, I'll be the one to say it) may not particularly like?

 

[Sister Morphine]

I think it's because US Presidents and/or their wives have been invited to royal weddings in the past, and so now many people simply expect it.

But in previous cases, those people invited had some sort of relationship to either the Queen or the Prime Minister- which the Obamas don't.

Those wedding were state occasions. This is not. Heads of State do not belong at functions that are not state occasions.

 

[Mirabel]

Those wedding were state occasions. This is not. Heads of State do not belong at functions that are not state occasions.

I doubt that many people will make that distinction. Even if they do, they might point out that Prince Andrew's wedding wasn't a state occasion.