A royal and Christian wedding
After last week’s royal wedding, I was disappointed not to see William wheel Kate through the streets of London in a barrow. So much for the modern monarchy.
Despite what you may think of me for that misgiving, I am culturally within my right to comment on things royal because my background is directly Canadian and Scottish. So the British monarchy, by heritage, is mine.
The most encouraging thing to note about the wedding is how traditional and thus how Christian it was. Elton John did not perform a special rendition of “Your Song.” The assembled guests sang the old Welsh hymn, “Guide Me O Thou Great Redeemer,” and Charles Wesley’s “Love Divine, All Loves Excelling.”
The service featured a Scripture reading, and a powerful one: Romans 12. It captures much of the spirit of Christian marriage.
“Let love be genuine; hate what is evil, hold fast to what is good; love one another with mutual affection; outdo one another in showing honor. Do not lag in zeal, be ardent in spirit, serve the Lord. Rejoice in hope, be patient in suffering, persevere in prayer. Contribute to the needs of the saints; extend hospitality to strangers. Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse them. Rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep. Live in harmony with one another; do not be haughty, but associate with the lowly; do not claim to be wiser than you are. Do not repay anyone evil for evil, but take thought for what is noble in the sight of all. If it is possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all” (9-18, RSV).
There was no Muslim prayer, nor reading from the Quran, from the Bhagavad Gita, or even from a contemporary secular poet. It was a traditional Anglican service of worship that named the Lord Jesus Christ without reservation and presented the inspired Word of God as central. The Archbishop of Canterbury even mentioned the Day of Judgment.
That in 2011 we should see a British public event of this importance lodged so squarely in the Christian tradition is a sign of hope. Prince William, the future British king (God willing) and now the Duke of Cambridge, appears to be drawn in two opposite directions. He is steeped in popular culture. Royals are far from immune to this. This includes everything from rock and roll to relativism. His father, Prince Charles, has suggested that Parliament change the monarch’s title from Defender of the Faith to the defender of merely “faith,” putting Christianity on a level with all other religions. Yet William is also tied into the noble history and traditions of British royalty, and within that grand tradition is a Christian tradition. Friday’s wedding demonstrated that William’s world includes a powerful Christian influence. The royal lad’s heart is not beyond the ordinary means of God’s grace.
The Apostle Paul tells Timothy to pray “for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a peaceful and quiet life, godly and dignified in every way” (1 Timothy 2:1-2). When William one day ascends the throne, he will not have direct political authority. But the way he conducts himself will have profound influence over his people for good or ill. Will he be an example of “whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure” (Philippians 4:8), or will he be a modern blend of aristocratic moral dissolution and democratic vulgarity? Will he grow into a mirror of Christian kingship or of the tyranny of passion in the seat of privilege? “The king’s heart is a stream of water in the hand of the LORD; he turns it wherever he will” (Proverbs 21:1).

















Click to Print
Include Comments











back to top13 Comments to “A royal and Christian wedding”
I wonder about Will’s self esteem shaped as it has been by the abandonment issue he must still grapple with from his mum’s death.
And certainly one hopes William knows Christ as Lord and Savior.
I realize his education was largely one-on-one with tutors, hence no Young Life, no Campus Crusade, no Navigators.
Given what we know about Prince Charles, it would appear the lad has not had a good father role-model. And of course a child will form the concept of a heavenly father from what he sees or fails to see in an earthly father.
Report comment to moderator
Actually Sawgunner, we all may have to eat a few words as to what kind of father Prince Charles has been. He seems to have stepped up to the plate after Princess Diana’s death. It also came out in reports that Prince William is very close to Prince Phillip. It was reported that at Princess Diana’s funeral Prince William did not think he could walk behind the funeral cortege and Prince Phillip walked it with him to give him support. I think he has had quite a few good male role models and has learned from the mistakes of the past.
We are all a product of our times whether we like it or not.
Report comment to moderator
Mr. Innes, as a proud conservative, should know that the title “Defender of the Faith” that he refers to as the Prince of Wales wanting to change to defender of faith, was actually a royal title conferred on Henry VIII by the Holy Father in Rome in recognition of Henry’s, up until then, defense of the one true faith – Roman Catholicism – from the inroads being attempted to be made by heretical protestants across the Channel on the mainland of Europe.
I always find it odd how supposedly devout protestants are so intolerant of new cultural trends when it was they themselves that refuted the authority of the true church, to in essense, do their own thing including getting divorced.
Also, one other thing, what’s with the protestants calling themselves “Christians” these days as if they are the only Christians in the world? Just asking.
Report comment to moderator
I don’t think Charles was a bad father at all. He was far more sensitive than Philip was to him. Charles also had Lord Mountbatten, and I doubt the Diana fiasco would have occurred if he had not been killed.
I do disagree that the RCC is the “true” church, though how the Anglicans came into being is an excellent point. Luther, even Savonarola who preceded him, wasn’t out to destroy the church but rather wanted it to follow the Bible, as I recall.
Report comment to moderator
This was not the marriage of Muslims or Hindus. Why would you expect a Muslim prayer?
Report comment to moderator
Christian wedding? I don’t think so. They were fornicators. Christian weddings involve chastity before the wedding.
Report comment to moderator
Lighten up, NYCman! Who said anything about Protestant or Catholic? I am sure most of us Protestants would prefer a believing Catholic to an ambivalent Protestant. I shed no tears when Tony Blair became a Catholic, hoping that that would be an endorsement of Christianity in an otherwise indifferent culture.
I appreciate the history lesson, but it seems you are living in the past.
Report comment to moderator
NJL – exactly, I don’t think Luther was pushing for divorce, but for the issue of justification by faith alone, and for Scripture alone being able to bind the conscience. Thus, NYCMAN’s assertion that “it was [Protestants] themselves that refuted the authority of the true church, to in essense, do their own thing including getting divorced” seems a bit off. Getting divorced may have been a motivator for Henry VIII, but I don’t believe he is considered a theological reformer in a league with men such as Luther and Calvin.
Report comment to moderator
I appreciated seeing how tradition is still honored in such ways. I too hope the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge come to follow God in a living way. Perhaps Prince William will join his father on one of Prince Charles’ pilgrimages to Mt. Athos soon; there is a peace and wholeness to be found in going somewhere not rooted in the things of this world. Many years, William and Kate!
Report comment to moderator
Well written Dr. I. Good to hear William Williams embraced by the establishment in 2011. A bit late maybe, but I’m sure he smiled.
Report comment to moderator
Bianca, Christian weddings are supposed to involve chastity before the wedding (and by God’s grace I wish that for myself, and have careful interactions with men), but Christian weddings involve sinners, and sinners do sin. Now, a long-term situation of living together is indeed contrary to how Christian marriages are supposed to begin, but the idea that sinners cannnot have a “Christian” wedding isn’t true. It’s only sinners who can have a Christian wedding.
Report comment to moderator
Thank you, Cheryl D. Perfectly stated…
Report comment to moderator
“Getting divorced may have been a motivator for Henry VIII, but I don’t believe he is considered a theological reformer in a league with men such as Luther and Calvin. ”
Certainly not! What people tend to overlook is that Henry’s actions did, and were intended to do, no more than establish a fully theologically and formally Catholic, but independent, Church in England. At the same time, beginning somewhat before Henry and continuing for the next two centuries, there were real Reformers in Britain who were responsible for the Anglican church becoming genuinely Protestant (though there have always been Anglo-Catholic factions.) Henry took the political action that precipitated a split, but reform and various types of reforming churches would have come to Britain fairly soon anyway, had he not done that. As a matter of historical fact, it’s undeniable that Henry split the English church from the Roman one. As a matter of theological reality, he didn’t found the Anglican church that we have today in any meaningful sense.
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDmag.com's Community section to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!