The Royal Wedding: No Ring, No Submitting

Tomorrow is the day many have been anticipating since Prince William proposed to the beautiful Kate Middleton. It will be one of the biggest events of the year, televised world-wide with millions viewing this special wedding day.

We’re all curious to see the bridesmaid dresses, the grand entrance, the celebrities attending, and especially Kate’s wedding dress.

As the two spouses-to-be stand in Westminster Abbey and say their  vows to each other, they will both break away from tradition.

1. Prince William will not wear a wedding ring.

While William is following in the steps of his grandfather who chose not to wear a ring either, some have scoffed at the thought that William will reject the public symbol of his marriage to Kate. Some think it’s his way of holding on to the bachelor life. Some find the tradition of wearing rings old-fashioned and think if he doesn’t want to wear a silly piece of gold then it’s his right.

2. Kate will not vow to “obey” or “submit” to her husband.

The future Mrs.Prince William is following in the footsteps of Princess Diana who, in1981, omitted the “obey” part of her vows to Prince Charles. Kate will instead promise to ‘love, comfort, honour and keep’ her husband and not keep  to the traditional vows of ‘love, honor, and obey.’

What do YOU think?

Are William and Kate just going with the changing times and showing the progression in our society of equality and freedom of choice? Are you proud they aren’t contributing to the oppression and degradation of women by having to vow to “obey” a man?

Or, Do you think William is just trying to not be tied down with a weddding ring? Are William and Kate going against what you believe are biblical mandates that should be included in wedding vows?

Advertisements

12 thoughts on “The Royal Wedding: No Ring, No Submitting

  1. I have more concern over whether they really see the vow of “as long as we both shall live” as a covenant made with each other before God (and a few billion people). Like Rachel said, the royal record on that score isn’t so great. Would his willingness to signify his pledge to her by wearing a ring help? Maybe. Would her acknowledgment of her biblical marital role help? Maybe.

  2. Well, I personally would like to know more about why they made these choices. Maybe William just doesn’t like to wear rings. . . I know alot of people men and women who have trouble keeping their rings on just because it feels “funny”. I’m not condoning the act or saying that it is ok, but it definitely depends on the context of his decision. On to Kate: I do not dislike her vows. The Bible never said that a woman had to “obey” her husband. Submission is different. Obedience implies that the person is compliant, and has no choice other than to do what is commanded. Submission is an act of humility, but still provides for a “no” to be given. I could very submissively refuse to make my husband a sandwich and wait on him hand and foot everyday of our lives together, if I’m obedient then I might need a new outfit and a tray. Perhaps Kate if saying she won’t listen to William, that she will be strong willed and independent with or without him, but to omit “obey” doesn’t really bother me after I think about it further.

    • I with you. the passage in Colossians 3 says “wives submit…,” “husbands love…,” “children obey…,” and “slaves obey….”

  3. From Yahoo News April 5, 2011…”There may be a simple and practical reason why Prince William will not be wearing a wedding ring. On the job safety as a military pilot is probably the main reason he’s shunning a wedding ring for the time being. As a helicopter pilot at RAF Valley, Prince William is on active military duty conducting sea and land rescues in Sea King helicopters. As a pilot, Prince William will be responsible for inspecting the aircraft before it takes off, opening and closing cockpit doors and operating complex machinery. The chances of getting a wedding ring snagged on equipment are part of the job as an aviator. As such, fingers can literally be ripped off by rings and even a simple wedding band may be an occupational hazard.”

    From: http://ph1.cerosmedia.com/1B4db9637e64402583.cde
    Kate’s vow to William: “Wilt thou have this man to be thy wedded husband, to live together according to God’s law in the holy estate of Matrimony? Wilt thou love him, comfort him, honour and keep him, in sickness and in health? and forsaking all other keep only unto him, as long as thou both shall live?” (and we can agree that submission IS “according to God’s law in… Matrimony”. the whole ceremony was quite biblical and Christ-honoring-which I hope is not only based on tradition, but shows a change in direction from their living arrangements prior to marriage)

    So… I see nothing inherently wrong in either “Will Not”!

    As a believer, I “will not” get sucked into the world’s distractions. I “will not” look for things to criticize or critique. I “will not” judge people or situations about which I have no first hand knowledge.

    How about… I WILL pray for these newly weds as they embark on a difficult high profile marriage. I WILL positively promote truth and encouragement for women to embrace godly Christian ideals. I WILL set an example of God’s grace which is available to all who will believe (through repentance and faith) in Jesus Christ.

    In His Love…

  4. This is news because ommitting the word “obey” is unusual in Royal Wedding vows.

    With Scott, I worry as much about the unwillingness of the Groom to wear a ring as I do about her commitment to a traditional christian relationship. Both are indicators of our own ideas and our own personal values being more important than God’s.

    This became interesting enough to me that I actually created a post on it to be published tomorrow morning.

  5. I with you. the passage in Colossians 3 says “wives submit…,” “husbands love…,” “children obey…,” and “slaves obey….”

  6. When I heard that Kate would not be vowing to obey or submit, I had assumed that it was not necessarily related to her views on marriage–though it is obviously not a popular view anymore–but more to her maintenance of personal rights in her marriage to the future king! Royal weddings, unlike most weddings, require one individual to nearly entirely give up his or her prior life to be absorbed into the royal family. Perhaps her decision (if it was an intentional decision) to omit the part about obedience to her husband was an effort to maintain a little more of her own identity.

  7. Seems everyone is missing something. They don’t share your particular set of beliefs. Why in the world would they plan a wedding according to your dictates? It’s a totally unreasonable e & illogical expectation.

    Just as you presumably would consider a burkha to be unnecessary, perhaps oppressive, and not binding on how you should live your life, so to your views on wifely obedience/submission and wedding ring = legitimate husband are presumably unneceessary, oppressive, and not binding for how they live their lives. Leave them alone.

    The judgmental critiquing is most unattractive. Why can’t this group of people simply be happy for these 2 individuals, that they have found what appears to be very genuine love?

  8. Honestly, it’s pretty much none of our business. Although a ring is a symbol of marriage, it surely doesn’t make someone “married”.
    I applaud the Duchess for taking that out of her vows. Has anyone ever thought that maybe she rookie out because she knew it was something that she wouldn’t able to keep?
    I am an independent, fundamental Texas raised baptist Christian girl, and I see absolutely nothing wrong with the obey part being replaced with ‘to submit’. I actually might do it myself. The bible does say, “wives, submit to your own husbands,” and says nothing about them obeying. Congrats to the Duch and Duchess of Wales!

  9. Since the practice of husbands wearing a wedding ring did not become popular until the 20th century, I would have to say it has very little to do with the Bible. Maybe a lot to do with our sense of tradition which goes back just a few decades!

  10. Hi — The idea for married men to wear a wedding ring is a very modern and western idea. Having men wear a ring in the UK and Europe is not something that was ever considered until the last 15-20 years – made popular by American pop culture and Hollywood movies. And today, especially among the upper class in the UK, the idea of men wearing rings is not something even considered among the more genteel society – it is seen a bit gauche in the sense that it is showey because it is jewelry.

    There is no other reason behind men not wearing a ring other than it is something that is simply not done (except in most recent modern times) and traditionally considered tasteless for men of a certain class to wear any jewelry at all, other than a watch. Jewelry is for woman.

    It is right for Prince William to keep with the tradition of not wearing a ring, as it would seem too lower class if he did. Everyone knows who he is and who he is married to. He is a prince for goodness sake.

  11. The futurence to ‘love, comfort, honour and keep’ her husband and not keep to the traditional vows of ‘love, honor, and obey.’

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s