quote:

---

Originally posted by ChippedChalice:
Here's a thread for those of us who care more about what the Archbishop of Canterbury will be wearing than what the bride's gown will look like.

Does anybody know what channels in the U.S. are most likely to broadcast the wedding WITHOUT any annoying commentary -- so that we can appreciate the choral music, etc. uninterrupted?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by MrMusicMan:
I would expect the folks on NBC to be well prepped about the CofE. ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
Will the marriage service be from Common Worship or the 1662 Book of Common Prayer? Will it include a celebration of Holy Communion?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Saint Hedrin the Lesser-Known:
Will Canons be in scarlet and choir dress, or in copes? And how many bishops are expected?

---

• Dean of Westminster Abbey, The Very Reverend John R Hall
• The Bishop of London, the Right Honourable and Right Reverend Richard Chartres
• The Most Reverend Gregorious, Archbishop of the Greek Archdiocese of Thysteira and Great Britain
• The Archbishop of Canterbury and Mrs. Rowan Williams
• The Archbishop of York and Mrs John Sentamu
• Rabbi Anthony Bayfield
• Mr Anil Bhanot
• The Archbishop of Armagh, Cardinal Archbishop Sean Brady
• Primus of the Scottish Episcopal Church, The Most Reverend David Chillingworth
• The Right Reverend John Christie, Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland
• Mr Malcolm Deboo President, Zoroastrian Trust Funds of Europe
• The Right Reverend Doctor Norman Hamilton
• The Archbishop of Armagh, The Most Reverend Alan Edwin Harper
• Monsignor Philip Kerr, The Convener, Action of Churches Together in Scotland
• Commissioner Elizabeth Matear, Salvation Army
• The Archbishop of Wales, The Most Reverend Doctor Barry Morgan
• The Reverend Gareth Morgan Jones, President of the Free Church Council of Wales
• Cardinal Cormac Murphy-Connor
• The Archbishop of Westminster, The Most Reverend Vincent Nichols
• Cardinal Keith Patrick O’Brien, Archbishop of St. Andrews and Edinburgh
• Rabbi Alan Plancey
• Imam Mohammad Raza
• The Chief Rabbi (Lord Sacks)
• The Venerable Bogoda Seelawimala, Acting Head Monk, The London Buddhist Vihara
• Maulana Syed Raza Shabbarm, Muhammadi Trust
• Mr Natubhai Shah, President, the Jain Academy
• Dr Indarjit Singh, Director, Network Sikh Organisations (UK)
• Canon Christopher Tuckwell
• The Reverend Martin Turner

The Archbishops of Canterbury and York seem have been among the few who got a '+one' on their invitations.

[ 26. April 2011, 05:42: Message edited by: Chapelhead ]
 

---

Posted by Saint Hedrin the Lesser-Known (# 11399) on :
 
Thank you, Chapelhead!

Yes, the CofE Archbishops got to bring their spouses, it appears. Privilege, perhaps?
 

---

Posted by dj_ordinaire (# 4643) on :
 
Is Mrs. Williams not herself in Holy Orders, or else a doctor or something?
 

---

Posted by Helen-Eva (# 15025) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by TubaMirum:
Some of us are mighty curious about rumored music commissioned especially for the service.

Anybody know anything on that front? Who might composers be, what the pieces will be, etc.?

Inquiring minds are dying to know.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chapelhead:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Saint Hedrin the Lesser-Known:
Will Canons be in scarlet and choir dress, or in copes? And how many bishops are expected?

---

Choir dress, I'd have thought.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by +Chad:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chapelhead:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Saint Hedrin the Lesser-Known:
Will Canons be in scarlet and choir dress, or in copes? And how many bishops are expected?

---

Choir dress, I'd have thought.

---

I would think it will be cassock, surplice and cope. I would be very surprised if they're not coped up.

Something like this.

---

quote:

---

Is Mrs. Williams not herself in Holy Orders, or else a doctor or something?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by earrings:

I do get a bit irritated, though I know it is "correct" at Mrs Rowan Williams and Mrs John Sentamu - these women have names!

---

Of course they have names - one is Mrs Rowan Williams and the other is Mrs John Sentamu.

On a similar line, unless Branda dishes out a dukedom or somesuch, I believe the bride will become Princess William of Wales. Which might give the tabloids a decision as to whether to call her Kate or Princess WoW.
 

---

Posted by earrings (# 13306) on :
 
Chapelhead wrote

quote:

---

Of course they have names - one is Mrs Rowan Williams and the other is Mrs John Sentamu.

---

Chapelhead It's just my general irritation at such matters - not aimed at anyone in particular.
 

---

Posted by Low Treason (# 11924) on :
 
The Abbey Chapter will be coped up to the eyeballs, you can depend on it. I suspect they wear copes even for popping round the corner to the off-licence.....
 

---

Posted by MrMusicMan (# 16343) on :
 
The day comes that I'm ordained a clergyman in whatever denomination will put up with my antics, I'll definitely be wearing a cope to the liquor store -- just to cover my face so they don't know it's me!
 

---

Posted by +Chad (# 5645) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by earrings:
Jane Willams is a theologian, but not herself ordained. She doesn't appear styled as Dr anywhere I've seen.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Helen-Eva:

quote:

---

Originally posted by TubaMirum:
Some of us are mighty curious about rumored music commissioned especially for the service.

Anybody know anything on that front? Who might composers be, what the pieces will be, etc.?

Inquiring minds are dying to know.

---

There was a delightful piece in Private Eye soon after the wedding date was announced saying that the organist of Westminster Abbey (James O'Donnell) woke up that morning with an inbox full of emails from hopeful composers just busting to write something. But I've heard nothing more. I actually met a choir parent at the weekend but he said his son had been sworn to secrecy about the music list and hadn't said anything.

---

Thanks very much for this interesting tidbit!


 

---

Posted by Spike (# 36) on :
 
So what do people think about the way the beautiful Abbey Church is to be decorated?
 

---

Posted by +Chad (# 5645) on :
 
I know thw Abbey is always looking for new ways to make money, but I never thought they'd turn it into a garden centre.

Will there be patio furniture on the Cosmati pavement?

[ 27. April 2011, 11:00: Message edited by: +Chad ]
 

---

Posted by Ecclesiastical Flip-flop (# 10745) on :
 
I predict that +Rowan will be wearing cope and mitre; I don't think he is a great one for wearing the rochet, rather he will wear a vestment similar to the alb with narrow sleeves, plain at the cuffs. Other robed Anglican bishops I predict will wear choir dress, as will other visiting robed Anglican clergy. Clergy of other denominations will robe according to custom, unless they choose to wear lounge suits.
 

---

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ecclesiastical Flip-flop:
I predict that +Rowan will be wearing cope and mitre; I don't think he is a great one for wearing the rochet, rather he will wear a vestment similar to the alb with narrow sleeves, plain at the cuffs. Other robed Anglican bishops I predict will wear choir dress, as will other visiting robed Anglican clergy. Clergy of other denominations will robe according to custom, unless they choose to wear lounge suits.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spike:
So what do people think about the way the beautiful Abbey Church is to be decorated?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ecclesiastical Flip-flop:
I predict that +Rowan will be wearing cope and mitre; I don't think he is a great one for wearing the rochet, rather he will wear a vestment similar to the alb with narrow sleeves, plain at the cuffs. Other robed Anglican bishops I predict will wear choir dress, as will other visiting robed Anglican clergy. Clergy of other denominations will robe according to custom, unless they choose to wear lounge suits.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by MrMusicMan:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ecclesiastical Flip-flop:
I predict that +Rowan will be wearing cope and mitre; I don't think he is a great one for wearing the rochet, rather he will wear a vestment similar to the alb with narrow sleeves, plain at the cuffs. Other robed Anglican bishops I predict will wear choir dress, as will other visiting robed Anglican clergy. Clergy of other denominations will robe according to custom, unless they choose to wear lounge suits.

---

Hmmm... let's just say that the other Anglican clergy on the guest list vest instead of wear choir dress. Will Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor be allowed to wear his pallium? Will the Orthodox bishop wear his omophor? And will they be confused by all the virgers and their bowing and sheepdog-like behaviors?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nick Tamen:

quote:

---

Originally posted by MrMusicMan:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ecclesiastical Flip-flop:
I predict that +Rowan will be wearing cope and mitre; I don't think he is a great one for wearing the rochet, rather he will wear a vestment similar to the alb with narrow sleeves, plain at the cuffs. Other robed Anglican bishops I predict will wear choir dress, as will other visiting robed Anglican clergy. Clergy of other denominations will robe according to custom, unless they choose to wear lounge suits.

---

Hmmm... let's just say that the other Anglican clergy on the guest list vest instead of wear choir dress. Will Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor be allowed to wear his pallium? Will the Orthodox bishop wear his omophor? And will they be confused by all the virgers and their bowing and sheepdog-like behaviors?

---

And here I am, just wondering what the Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland will wear.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oreophagite:
The Anthem is "This Is the Day" by Rutter.

Not my favorite composer, but he's entirely capable of writing something that will soon be sung by all choirs in Christendom, plus the occasional Reform Temple.

It might even be pretty good.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ecclesiastical Flip-flop:
I cannot speak for Eastern Orthodox bishops and I will leave it to others more knowledgeable than me to post about that.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Charles Read:
Despite what the Telegraph says, this is not BCP - Series 1 I think (haven't time or inclination to check).

---

quote:

---

Don't these papers have any staff who are educated?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spike:
So what do people think about the way the beautiful Abbey Church is to be decorated?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by MrMusicMan:
I would expect that the non-CofE affiliated clergy will simply dress in their choir dress/cassocks.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oreophagite:
"What about that "Ubi Caritas"?"

Mealor writes in a Whitacre-Lauridsen style. (Again, not my cup of tea, but much better than Jolly Rutterkin's writing in the "Shepherd's Pipe Carol" bubblegum style.

Some of Mealor's music has been recorded by the Con Anima Chamber Choir. One is called "Now Sleeps the Crimson Petal."

I look forward to hearing the new piece.

---

Yes, I see what you mean; I found his Locus Iste online. I like that style, myself.

If you don't favor the Parry "Procession of the bride" piece, I must add that I don't have any idea what your taste could be, though!



[ 28. April 2011, 17:03: Message edited by: TubaMirum ]
 

---

Posted by Oreophagite (# 10534) on :
 
My guess is that the Mealor will sound fabulous in the acoustic of the Abbey.

I adore Parry's "I Was Glad," and (of course) "Jerusalem." A bit less fond of "Blest Pair."

Walton's "Crown Imperial" is a solid choice.

I've been singing "Bread of Heaven" all morning - adding the obligatory "WANT-NO-MORE" etc.

Sartorially, my guess is that anyone with the right to be coped, will be coped. I wonder who will have the largest set of bands.
 

---

Posted by Triple Tiara (# 9556) on :
 
The RC clergy, I am reliably told, will be wearing abito piano, not choir dress.

Only reigning Metropolitan Archbishops wear the pallium and then only over Mass vestments.

The RC clergy are not taking any leading part in the service (prayers or readings or the like). They are simply in attendance in the congregation.

One other RC cleric who will be there is the Apostolic Nuncio, but as one of the Diplomatic Corps rather than as a church leader.
 

---

Posted by Amazing Grace (# 95) on :
 
For a few minutes after I saw the music list, I said "Two of those hymns are to the same tune" but then I looked it up and found I was concatenating "Hydrofyl" and "Cwm Rhondda" (which are the tunes I know for those hymns, and two of my favorites). If this is one of those things where the commonly-used tune in the UK is different, please let me know.

I have about ten minutes here to decide when to set my alarm! I think I'll set it for the early hour and then decide if I want to stay up and watch. Start time is 3 am in my time zone! Nighty night!
 

---

Posted by Mamacita (# 3659) on :
 
Amazing Grace, I've gathered from other discussions in Eccles that Blaerwern is the common tune for "Love Divine" in the UK. It is in some Protestant denominations in the US as well. Like you, I'm used to it being to Hyfrodol and prefer it that way.
 

---

Posted by Chorister (# 473) on :
 
It said on the news that Mealor's Ubi Caritas was premiered by St Andrews University Choir last year.

Talking about St Andrews University Choirs, here's an enjoyable little titbit while you wait for the wedding to start. It's a tribute to Kate and William unusually linked to from the (usually much more dry and academic) university front page.
 

---

Posted by +Chad (# 5645) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oreophagite:
Sartorially, my guess is that anyone with the right to be coped, will be coped.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Photo Geek:
Who were the young boys in front of the choir, wearing the red uniforns??

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mamacita:
This is a serious question and not intended to be snarky, but, why in the final prayer before the blessing do they pray for the wife to be faithful, and not the husband as well? Also, what is the origin of the prayer -- has it been in the liturgy since forever, and is it said in normal marriages or just royal ones?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Photo Geek:
Who were the young boys in front of the choir, wearing the red uniforns??

---

The choir of the Chapel Royal.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chapelhead:
Gosh, I was impressed with the way James Middleton read the lesson - as though it meant something, and wasn't just a text to get through. He largely seemed to be doing it from memory as well; he hardly seemed to look down at the words at all.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by LQ:
Nice to see such a prominent place given to representatives of the Sisters of the Church - I wonder what the significance of that placement is.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evensong:
But for the life of me I couldn't figure out what the first reading was.

It sounded like Paul but it wasn't quite right.

An FB friend said Romans 12.

Looked it up. Indeed it was there, but heavily edited.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evensong:

Did anyone catch the second reading?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Episcoterian:
Argh. I woke up exactly one hour too late to see anything.

If/when somebody knows of some place I can watch the whole ceremony unedited and not commented, could you please post it?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oreophagite:
The Rutter? Well. Back to his 1980's style.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Autenrieth Road:

A tangent to the ecclesiantical regalia, but is Catherine's tiara a duchess' tiara, or just a tiara with no significance beyond beauty?

---

I think they said it was made for the queen in 1936 and lent for the occasion. Do you think that counts as "something borrowed" or "something old"?
I agre with Chapelhead that James Middleton did the reading particularly well. Berkshire's only just up the road from me, do you think he could be persuaded to come and read the lesson at my church?
 

---

Posted by Evensong (# 14696) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chapelhead:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evensong:
But for the life of me I couldn't figure out what the first reading was.

It sounded like Paul but it wasn't quite right.

An FB friend said Romans 12.

Looked it up. Indeed it was there, but heavily edited.

---

It was Romans 12:1-2, 9-18. It wasn't really edited, they just left out a bit in the middle about being different members but one body, which seems less relevant to a wedding.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evensong:

Did anyone catch the second reading?

---

There wasn't one.

---

Thanks Chapelhead.
 

---

Posted by Japes (# 5358) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evensong:

quote:

---

Originally posted by LQ:
Nice to see such a prominent place given to representatives of the Sisters of the Church - I wonder what the significance of that placement is.

---

I noticed this too. Who were they?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evensong:

quote:

---

Originally posted by LQ:
Nice to see such a prominent place given to representatives of the Sisters of the Church - I wonder what the significance of that placement is.

---

I noticed this too. Who were they?

---

quote:

---

The bells of the Abbey Church are rung by the Westminster Abbey Company of Ringers in a peal of Spliced Surprise Royal comprising 5,040 changes, conducted by David Hilling.

---

 

---

Posted by Ascension-ite (# 1985) on :
 
Got up early to watch, and was able to see the whole thing before leaving for work. Thought it was very beautiful, the best of Anglicanism. Was happy that it was allowed to play without any comments from idiot talking heads, very unusual for US journalists to give up the opportunity to natter on. Not sure about the trees as the people in the forest, probably really felt out of it, but they did lighten up the Abbey. James Middleton did an outstanding job reading, made me sit up and actually listen. Loved seeing the Sisters next to William and Kate, that was a nice touch and the music was generally very good. Well done all around.
 

---

Posted by Pearl B4 Swine (# 11451) on :
 
I watched the BBC U-Tubes, and chose The Entrance, first. From the first 2 notes of the processional ("I Was Glad") I decided then and there, that the whole thing was just fine. I can't get the exit procession one to play . I assume from an earlier post it was the Walton piece. Great!
 

---

Posted by mrs whibley (# 4798) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chapelhead:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mamacita:
This is a serious question and not intended to be snarky, but, why in the final prayer before the blessing do they pray for the wife to be faithful, and not the husband as well? Also, what is the origin of the prayer -- has it been in the liturgy since forever, and is it said in normal marriages or just royal ones?

---

It's from BCP 1662, and also in the proposed 1928 book (which is largely what the service was). The 1549 book had something similar, but asked that the woman should be loving and amiable as Rachel, wise as Rebecca and and faithful and obedient as Sara.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pearl B4 Swine:
I watched the BBC U-Tubes, and chose The Entrance, first. From the first 2 notes of the processional ("I Was Glad") I decided then and there, that the whole thing was just fine. I can't get the exit procession one to play . I assume from an earlier post it was the Walton piece. Great!

---

Walton's Crown Imperial. I was playing 'air cymbals' all through it, embarrassingly, as that was my part in the school orchestra .
 

---

Posted by jugular (# 4174) on :
 
My friend and I spend a lot of time trying to work out who the Sisters were, particularly as they spent a lot of time in shot.

I'm assuming that one of them was Sister Judith CSC. Neither of them was Linda Mary , the Mother Superior.
 

---

Posted by FatherRobLyons (# 14622) on :
 
I do have to ask, not being all that flamiliar with the royal bits (seeing as I live in the states), if it is normal to turn the Lord's Table into a curio cabinet for fine metalware for royal occassions.

I am sure the stuff displayed has royal signifigance, but my sense of liturgical snobbery wanted to scream "If it isn't a Eucharist, than nothing should be upon the Altar except a cross and two candlesticks!!!"

Rob+
 

---

Posted by mrs whibley (# 4798) on :
 
We had a short discussion on whether they were going to take up the collection using those plates!
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
As well as the trees there was plenty of greenery in evidence along the rood-screen too.

I thought the whole thing was cool. The Anglicans still do this sort of thing very well.

I wasn't sure whether the Orthodox Metropolitan (Bishop Gregorios?) was signing along to Cwm Rhondda as I couldn't discern whether his lips were moving beneath his beard.

I tend to feel a bit sorry for the RCs, Orthodox and the various representatives of other religions - the Chief Rabbi etc - on these occasions as they have little to do but look decorative. But then, it's an Anglican service after all ...
 

---

Posted by Chapelhead (# 21) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by FatherRobLyons:
I do have to ask, not being all that flamiliar with the royal bits (seeing as I live in the states), if it is normal to turn the Lord's Table into a curio cabinet for fine metalware for royal occassions.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gregory's Girl:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Autenrieth Road:

A tangent to the ecclesiantical regalia, but is Catherine's tiara a duchess' tiara, or just a tiara with no significance beyond beauty?

---

I think they said it was made for the queen in 1936 and lent for the occasion. Do you think that counts as "something borrowed" or "something old"?

---

quote:

---

The earrings were the bride's "something new". For her "something blue", a blue ribbon was sewn into the interior of her dress, while her "something old" was the traditional Carrickmacross craftsmanship used to create the bridal gown.

---

So I'm assuming the tiara is the "something borrowed", but am I the only one who finds it finds it a bit strange for the "something old" to be a technique rather than a physical item?
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
Arrggghhh!!!

Must edit my posts.

I meant 'singing along', not 'signing along.'


 

---

Posted by Nick Tamen (# 15164) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I tend to feel a bit sorry for the RCs, Orthodox and the various representatives of other religions - the Chief Rabbi etc - on these occasions as they have little to do but look decorative. But then, it's an Anglican service after all ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Japes:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evensong:

quote:

---

Originally posted by LQ:
Nice to see such a prominent place given to representatives of the Sisters of the Church - I wonder what the significance of that placement is.

---

I noticed this too. Who were they?

---

I can't comment on the placement, but one of the Sisters is Chaplain to the Abbey.(The Community of the Sisters of the Church are an Anglican Community)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oreophagite:
I think the praecentor's bands were wider than his collar gap.

I did like the Ubi Caritas, in that acoustic and with those choirs. I think our choir would have intonation difficulty, and I think our basses might have trouble with the low notes. A D perhaps, or even a C.

The Rutter? Well. Back to his 1980's style.

The fanfare before the National Anthem was from the Coronation. I don't think the Coronation fanfares were ever published.

I loved the last stanza of Cwm Rhondda, and hope that it becomes available.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mrs whibley:
Walton's Crown Imperial. I was playing 'air cymbals' all through it, embarrassingly, as that was my part in the school orchestra .

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Evensong:
Did anyone catch the second reading? I was out having a smoke.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by daisymay:
a couple of things I didn't like were the using the Lord's Prayer missing out the end bit most of us use, and not saying, Holy "Spirit" which IMO is more sensible than "Ghost". Going backward to years ago? Or did the two getting married choose these phrases?

---

The 'for thine is the kingdom.....' isn't in the 1928 wedding service, nor is it in Morning and Evening Prayer at that position, as part of the responses.

'Holy Spirit' didn't come in until Series 2 in the 1960s.
 

---

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 
When they returned from the signing of the registers, the couple did not bow to the alter (representing Christ) but they DID bow/courtsey to the Queen.
 

---

Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on :
 
I set my cable box to record the whole thing before going to bed last night, and watched it after breakfast this morning.

Lovely!

Pretty much what everyone above said. I was surprised, though, that the visiting clergy sat outside the quire.

The music was grand. I like Rutter's Requiem* -- have sung it -- but I haven't found anything else of his that I like, including the piece they did today.

"Guide Us O Thou Great Jehova" -- oops, I mean "Redeemer" -- was thrilling.

_______________

* Adventuresome arrangers of choir music please note: "Jesus Joy of Loving Hearts" fits the tune and mood of the Pie Jesu movement perfectly.
 

---

Posted by TE Brown (# 11920) on :
 
I too, got up to watch (it wasn't too much earlier than usual anyway), and thoroughly enjoyed myself. I thought the choirs sounded very good, and really liked the Mealor. The Rutter sounded, unfortunately in my opinion, like Rutter at his cheapest, most crass. Sugar-pretty at first hearing but no real substance. Which was disappointing, as I think some of his stuff is quite good. But choirs here in the States will no doubt rush to buy copies. My choir, however, will be attempting the Mealor next Maundy Thursday!

And I also thought James Middleton's reading of Romans was stellar. He really understood the idea of proclaiming the reading, not just mumbling it out loud. It came alive to me. And the sermon was definitely one of the better wedding sermons I've heard (and I've heard many). Short, sweet, to the point, and contemporary, but without falling into the trap of common ("and when you hurt each other, as you inevitably will..." blech.)

Here's an important thing to nit-pick over: What was up with Beatrice's/Eugenie's (don't know who's who) hat?!

Much good pomp and circumstance - I'm still wallowing!

TEB
 

---

Posted by FatherRobLyons (# 14622) on :
 
One thing I will say is that, from my perspective, this may wind up being one of the greatest events of Christian evangelism in the history of the world.

The Liturgy itself was filled with elements of the Gospel call, and the sermon by Bishop Chartes was amazingly prepared.

The press has stated that nearly 2 billion people worldwide were projected to watch the ceremony on TV. How wonderful that it was a moment of Christian worship, uninterrupted by talking heads.

Rob+
 

---

Posted by TubaMirum (# 8282) on :
 
Quoth Og of Bashan:

quote:

---

Yesterday, I was trying my best to explain to the Queen of Bashan why Anglican music snobs like myself instinctually sniff when we hear the name “Rutter.” The best I could do was say that Rutter is to us what Oasis is to rock snobs. He writes some fine melodies, and is quite accessible, but he doesn’t do much that is particularly interesting. The piece did a better job of explaining his style than I could. I am sure that it will have a long life of performances in diverse settings, but if I never sing it, I will not feel that I am missing something.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chapelhead:

quote:

---

Originally posted by FatherRobLyons:
I do have to ask, not being all that flamiliar with the royal bits (seeing as I live in the states), if it is normal to turn the Lord's Table into a curio cabinet for fine metalware for royal occassions.

---

Apparently yes. Something similar happened at Charles and Camilla's bash in St George's, Windsor. You get a pretty good view from about 2.18 in this clip (if it works in your location).

---

quote:

---

Rutter is to us what Oasis is to rock snobs

---

to the quote file
Genius
 

---

Posted by Chapelhead (# 21) on :
 
Not part of the wedding service itself, but something that I was pleased to note...

On the way to and from the Abbey, sitting in the car and carriage, Princes William and Harry very properly acknowledged the salutes they received (from the guards bands, for example), and returned the salutes. They also, very properly, saluted the Cenotaph. Which is what one would expect of them.

What was perhaps less expected was that the Duchess of Cambridge also acknowledged the salutes (I believe there were some occasions when she failed to notice a salute, which is perhaps understandable). In her case her smiley face became a serious face and she nodded her head in acknowledgement.

Given the excitement of the moment and novelty of her situation, this was perhaps one in the eye for those who seem to think that the Middletons are a bunch of chavs with no idea how to behave (as was James's reading of the lesson).
 

---

Posted by NatDogg (# 14347) on :
 
I saw that too, Chapelhead! I thought it was very appropriate and nicely done.

And I thought her brother's reading of the lesson was magnificent. If only all readers did such a job!

[ 29. April 2011, 18:24: Message edited by: NatDogg ]
 

---

Posted by Gamaliel (# 812) on :
 
They did well, both of them. And Harry too, looking after the nippers after the service. I used to have my doubts about him but he seems to have turned out alright.

I thought the salutes and the bowing of the head at the Cenotaph etc were nicely, and I'm sure, sincerely done.

But then, I'm turning into an old softee ...
 

---

Posted by Chorister (# 473) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by TE Brown:
Here's an important thing to nit-pick over: What was up with Beatrice's/Eugenie's (don't know who's who) hat?!
TEB

---

I expect you mean Beatrice. The hat (or at least the Tinky-Winky contraption on top) made the very loud statement: 'For once the biggest thing about me is not my eyes'.

I expect Kate's mother was very nervous. But it looked for all the world as if she was turning her back on the Abp. who very much wanted to talk to her as well as shake her hand.

Goodness, it must be one of the hardest things to walk into the Abbey and act normally with 2bn people the world over watching you.
 

---

Posted by Oreophagite (# 10534) on :
 
Amanda write, "I like Rutter's Requiem* -- have sung it -- but I haven't found anything else of his that I like, including the piece they did today."

Do check out "I Will Lift Up Mine Eyes" and "The Lord is My Shepherd." Many an oboist has made car payments from playing the latter in church. Also, "God Be in My Head" and (perhaps) "The Lord Bless You and Keep You." (To me, the latter is the best of his treacle compositions.)

More on topic, I covet the Archbishop's and Dean's golden copes and stoles. They probably didn't come from an online vestment shop.

And, we do need to put out the best silverware on the altar for the next Evensong.

I don't think we need to line the nave with trees, though. Gotta wonder whether that was one of the Prince of Wales's Druid-things.
 

---

Posted by Spike (# 36) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by daisymay:
... a couple of things I didn't like were the using the Lord's Prayer missing out the end bit most of us use, and not saying, Holy "Spirit" which IMO is more sensible than "Ghost". Going backward to years ago? Or did the two getting married choose these phrases?

---

Both of these are correct in the Prayer Book setting. If you're going to use trad language, then it needs to be done properly
 

---

Posted by Nick Tamen (# 15164) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Oreophagite:
Amanda write, "I like Rutter's Requiem* -- have sung it -- but I haven't found anything else of his that I like, including the piece they did today."

Do check out "I Will Lift Up Mine Eyes" and "The Lord is My Shepherd." Many an oboist has made car payments from playing the latter in church.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by FatherRobLyons:
I do have to ask, not being all that flamiliar with the royal bits (seeing as I live in the states), if it is normal to turn the Lord's Table into a curio cabinet for fine metalware for royal occassions.

I am sure the stuff displayed has royal signifigance, but my sense of liturgical snobbery wanted to scream "If it isn't a Eucharist, than nothing should be upon the Altar except a cross and two candlesticks!!!"

Rob+

---

quote:

---

For a few minutes after I saw the music list, I said "Two of those hymns are to the same tune" but then I looked it up and found I was concatenating "Hydrofyl" and "Cwm Rhondda" (which are the tunes

---

quote:

---

Amazing Grace, I've gathered from other discussions in Eccles that Blaerwern is the common tune for "Love Divine" in the UK. It is in some Protestant denominations in the US as well. Like you, I'm used to it being to Hyfrodol and prefer it that way.

---

[PEDANTIC NITPICK] It's Hyfrydol, not 'Hydrofyl' (?Rolls-Royce brake fluid), or 'Hyfrodol' (?royal wedding anti-hysteria sedative), or even 'Hydrofoil'. [/PEDANTIC NITPICK]

 

---

Posted by Morlader (# 16040) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:

Adventuresome arrangers of choir music please note: "Jesus Joy of Loving Hearts" fits the tune and mood of the Pie Jesu movement perfectly.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TubaMirum:
Quoth Og of Bashan:

quote:

---

Yesterday, I was trying my best to explain to the Queen of Bashan why Anglican music snobs like myself instinctually sniff when we hear the name “Rutter.” The best I could do was say that Rutter is to us what Oasis is to rock snobs. He writes some fine melodies, and is quite accessible, but he doesn’t do much that is particularly interesting. The piece did a better job of explaining his style than I could. I am sure that it will have a long life of performances in diverse settings, but if I never sing it, I will not feel that I am missing something.

---

I've had the opposite experience. The first thing I ever heard (and sung) by Rutter was the Requiem - and I really loved it. I think it's just about perfect, actually - perfectly expressive without bombast. Very beautiful, in fact.

And ever since, with the exception of "What Sweeter Music," I've been disappointed. I can't figure out how a guy who can write such wonderful - occasionally even transcendent - music can also write such schlock at times.

It's a puzzlement to me, really. An odd phenomenon to say the least....

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nick Tamen:

quote:

---

"The Lord is My Shepherd." Many an oboist has made car payments from playing the latter in church.

---

Though orginally written separately I believe, Rutter's "The Lord is My Shepherd" is part of his Requiem.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Morlader:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:

Adventuresome arrangers of choir music please note: "Jesus Joy of Loving Hearts" fits the tune and mood of the Pie Jesu movement perfectly.

---

[tangent]
To make such an arrangement would be illegal, being a violation of Rutter's copyright, unless either you get permission or Rutter does that adaptation himself (and you buy the copies thereof).

I don't hold a brief for JR (or his music), but he's a commercial animal and can pay lawyers to "look after his interests". [/tangent].

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TE Brown:
Here's an important thing to nit-pick over: What was up with Beatrice's/Eugenie's (don't know who's who) hat?!

TEB

---

Darllenwr thought it was bunnies ears.
 

---

Posted by Chorister (# 473) on :
 
Apparently there's a whole group on Facebook discussing (i.e. dissing) Beatrice's hat - word on the street says it's a uterus.
 

---

Posted by TE Brown (# 11920) on :
 
A friend of mine thought it looked like a cat toy. That and Beatrice's eye makeup together gave me the giggles. Good thing I lost my invitation and couldn't go, or I would have disgraced myself.

TEB
 

---

Posted by Mamacita (# 3659) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by mettabhavana:

quote:

---

For a few minutes after I saw the music list, I said "Two of those hymns are to the same tune" but then I looked it up and found I was concatenating "Hydrofyl" and "Cwm Rhondda" (which are the tunes

---

quote:

---

Amazing Grace, I've gathered from other discussions in Eccles that Blaerwern is the common tune for "Love Divine" in the UK. It is in some Protestant denominations in the US as well. Like you, I'm used to it being to Hyfrodol and prefer it that way.

---

[PEDANTIC NITPICK] It's Hyfrydol, not 'Hydrofyl' (?Rolls-Royce brake fluid), or 'Hyfrodol' (?royal wedding anti-hysteria sedative), or even 'Hydrofoil'. [/PEDANTIC NITPICK]

---

quote:

---

Extract from The Book of Common Prayer, the rights in which are vested in the Crown,
is reproduced by permission of the Crown’s patentee, Cambridge University Press.

---

quote:

---

Alternative Services Series One: A Form of Solemnization of Matrimony from Common Worship: Pastoral Services
is copyright © The Archbishops’ Council 2005 and is reproduced here with permission.

---

And no, I don't understand it either. Why not use one or the other?
 

---

Posted by St. Punk the Pious (# 683) on :
 
I do not think cartwheels are liturgically correct. And I think I recognize the guilty verger. He led a tour of the Abbey I was in a few years ago.

Yes, he was, and apparently still is, rather exuberant.
 

---

Posted by Spike (# 36) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spiffy:
And the award for Best Vicar in the Anglican Communion Of The Day goes to this guy.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anselmina:
... Good sermon from the Bishop of Chartres ...

---

[another pedant alert]
I think his surname is Chartres and he's the Bishop of London.[/pedant alert OFF]

Another yea and amen for Mr. Middleton's reading of the lesson and a huge for Princess Beatrice's hat. British Shippies of A Certain Age might have thought it was inspired by the Vision On logo.
 

---

Posted by Spiffy (# 5267) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spike:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spiffy:
And the award for Best Vicar in the Anglican Communion Of The Day goes to this guy.

---

He's not a vicar

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chorister:
Apparently there's a whole group on Facebook discussing (i.e. dissing) Beatrice's hat - word on the street says it's a uterus.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alex Cockell:
One person on a DigitalSpy Wedding-watch thread asked about the possibility of current music etc in a Royal Wedding.

Do you think it might ever be likely that we could see Tim Hughes or whoever leading worship at a Royal Wedding in the future?

You know - like HTB, Kingsgate, Hillsong...?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ChippedChalice:
I'm certain that the Duchess of Cambridge's wedding dress will inspire many imitators -- but I wonder, how many couples will now want to decorate their wedding churches with small trees?

In a building the scale of the Abbey, I thought they looked quite pretty -- especially this time of year when the new leaves are such a vibrant green. (And they stood out nicely against the red carpet.)

If I were a wedding planner, I'd buy a couple dozen saplings now to meet the coming demand.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Laurence:
Er... current music? How about the three pieces of music written within the last year or so, including two pieces specifically written for the service itself? [/QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by piglet:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anselmina:
... Good sermon from the Bishop of Chartres ...

---

[another pedant alert]
I think his surname is Chartres and he's the Bishop of London.[/pedant alert OFF]

[/URL]

---

Yeah, I know. I don't know why I wrote him like that. Slip of the synapses.
 

---

Posted by Gracious rebel (# 3523) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jigsaw:
Forgive my ignorance, but can anyone tell me why Archbishop Rowan removed his mitre for certain prayers and put it on again for other parts of the service?

Even after 5 years as a Christian there are still some things I haven't got to grips with. I suppose that one's Christianity, like one's garden, will always be a work in progress.

Thanks.

---

I see no one has answered this one. I'm probably as ignorant as you about all things Anglican, but I assumed that it was simply that while praying men should have their heads uncovered (Yes I may be fairly clueless about Anglican traditions, but I was a Brethren girl, so I know all about what 1 Corinthians says about head coverings for the different sexes!!)
As to why a bishop wears a head covering in church anyway, I haven't a clue, hopefully someone more knowledgeable will elucidate. (I noticed William collecting his own hat on the way out of church by the way, I think his gloves must have been inside the hat: - all these little touches that had to be organised and went so smoothly!)
 

---

Posted by Ancient Mariner (# 4) on :
 
Pippa's buttons.



If there were 39, surely we should be told.
 

---

Posted by Lucia (# 15201) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alex Cockell:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Laurence:
Er... current music? How about the three pieces of music written within the last year or so, including two pieces specifically written for the service itself?

---

I think the person who asked is more attuned to charismatic worship. So while choral works would have been written - it was still a Trad Service.

But my question does hold - would be interesting to see a Royal Praise-Up... [/QB]

---

Or even something like this?

[ 30. April 2011, 10:19: Message edited by: Lucia ]
 

---

Posted by Oreophagite (# 10534) on :
 
Spiffy, the fellow doing the cartwheels appears (to me) to have on a black cassock and white bow tie. I don't think he's wearing a dog collar.

Hence, probably a verger.

As for clerical headgear, the rules can be intricate, especially in Anglo-Catholic circles. They are indeed worn indoors, and taken off and put back on again at certain times.

For non-Anglo-Catholic clergy, the easiest thing is to go hatless. For bishops, the pointy hat is expected. I think ++Rowan was the only mitered bishop at the wedding. By the time one gets to his position, one would know when to put it on and take it off.

<tangent>There was a flap last year when the US presiding bishop, who is female, visited London and presided at a Eucharist at Southwark. She was allowed to carry her miter in a service, but not to wear it.</tangent>
 

---

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
We don't get many weddings at our place (for reasons too numerous to mention), but there is one planned for August. I now await the request to bring trees into the church........in fact, we do have room for a couple, so who knows?

The whole thing seems to have been done extremely well, and one is happy for Wills and Kate. What a pity that much of the subsequent comment on TV has been about trivia, slebs* etc., but such is the way of the world.

Ian J.

*the correct spelling of the diminutive of 'celebrities', I am told.
 

---

Posted by TubaMirum (# 8282) on :
 
I've been reading some comments on other (non-religious) boards. People were struck by the wrapping of hands in the stole, BTW; some found it beautiful. I'm sure they'd never seen it before, or even thought of it. Nice to have that kind of symbolism and ritual make a worldwide appearance.

Same for Rowan's removal of the miter, I think. Wasn't there a thread here recently about when bishops removed the miter - that it symbolized their humility before God, and was a ritual enactment of the "abdication" of worldly power as a symbol of submission to God?

Anyway, I was glad for Rowan being Archbishop and for doing things like these....
 

---

Posted by Mechtilde (# 12563) on :
 
I'm not sure about the rules for episcopal headgear either, but I noted with appreciation that with ++Rowan, a serious case of mitre-head doesn't seem to make much difference.
 

---

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mechtilde:
I'm not sure about the rules for episcopal headgear either, but I noted with appreciation that with ++Rowan, a serious case of mitre-head doesn't seem to make much difference.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chapelhead:

quote:

---

Originally posted by FatherRobLyons:
I do have to ask, not being all that flamiliar with the royal bits (seeing as I live in the states), if it is normal to turn the Lord's Table into a curio cabinet for fine metalware for royal occassions.

---

Apparently yes. Something similar happened at Charles and Camilla's bash in St George's, Windsor. You get a pretty good view from about 2.18 in this clip (if it works in your location).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:
When they returned from the signing of the registers, the couple did not bow to the alter (representing Christ) but they DID bow/courtsey to the Queen.

---

Just as one would expect loyal Anglicans to do.
 

---

Posted by sebby (# 15147) on :
 
A bow to the altar would have been lovely, however the bow and curtesy to The Queen after the signing of the registers was the best bit for me. I had to stand up at that point.
 

---

Posted by LQ (# 11596) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Inanna:
The Daily Mail is speculating that the taller of the two nuns was, in fact, a decoy body guard in disguise....

Ninja Nun

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angloid:

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:
When they returned from the signing of the registers, the couple did not bow to the alter (representing Christ) but they DID bow/courtsey to the Queen.

---

Just as one would expect loyal Anglicans to do.

---

I don't think it's yet compulsory for all Anglicans to reverence an altar - or even bow to the Holy Table . But it probably is required somewhere for the newly married royal couple to do civil obeisance to Grandma.

Wouldn't agonize over it too much though. Brenda would probably be the first to say she herself is the servant of the King of kings. So I don't think she was trying to diddle God out of his dues!
 

---

Posted by Oreophagite (# 10534) on :
 
Review of the video shows that the Praecentor appears to have on a black tonsure-style shirt (possibly a collarette) with dog collar (and a narrow gap), and a red cassock with the correct collar gap for his bands, which hang over his white surplice (the neck of which is a bit hiked up). The bands are shorter than those of the Dean.

What's the medal that the Dean is wearing in lieu of a cross?

At the Marriage, ++Rowan's assistant wears a gold stole priest-wise with a simple dark blue cope, later serving as the Abp's crucifer.

Some others standing in the chancel had no part in the service, but were wearing copes and bands. They processed out at Blest Pair of Sirens.

The lace bands on the boys of the Chapel Royal choir are very nice looking.

David (Buller) Cameron had on a light grey double-breasted waistcoat.

I mostly like the fast tempo of the abbreviated opening of Crown Imperial.

Finally, to the ringers of the Abbey, a quote from Christopher Smart:

And let the lads of gladness born,
The ringers be renewed;
And as they usher’d in the morn,
Let them the day conclude.
 

---

Posted by dj_ordinaire (# 4643) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chapelhead:
Not part of the wedding service itself, but something that I was pleased to note...

On the way to and from the Abbey, sitting in the car and carriage, Princes William and Harry very properly acknowledged the salutes they received (from the guards bands, for example), and returned the salutes. They also, very properly, saluted the Cenotaph. Which is what one would expect of them.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gregory's Girl:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Autenrieth Road:

A tangent to the ecclesiantical regalia, but is Catherine's tiara a duchess' tiara, or just a tiara with no significance beyond beauty?

---

I think they said it was made for the queen in 1936 and lent for the occasion. Do you think that counts as "something borrowed" or "something old"?

---

Yes, I think it would qualify as both. It is known as the "Scroll" or "Halo" tiara and was made for the Queen Mother before she was Queen. Her present Majesty received it as a gift on occasion of her 18th birthday but has rarely worn it. Princess Margaret and the Princess Royal both borrowed it as young women before receiving other tiaras for their own use.

It was on my personal shortlist of "what tiara will she wear?" Definitely did not compete with the dress or her glorious hair.

[/tangent]
 

---

Posted by PaulBC (# 13712) on :
 
What I saw was splendid. The Church service was magnificent . The 2nd reading I believe was I Cor.13 . When they played the National Anthem I automaticaly came to attention, almost a plavonic response . And the outfits were beautiful both the military uniforms , formal dresses, and hats The Duke of Yorks daughhters proving they are their mothers daughters showing,slightly, over the top hats.
The Bride was exquiste a case of not too over the top or too common .Bet there will be many copies of that dress.
I thought HM the Queen looked fantastic & HRH the Duke of Edinburgh as well. Bet they were remembering their day in 1947 same place a very different England & London.
As for that verger doing cartwheels . That was either pure joy or total insanity . It looked fun any way it happened.
I see the Cambridges are heading back to RAF Valley he to return to operational duty as a pilot . Just taking a brief week end away nice touch . As oppossed to other Royals who went away on a certain now former Royal Yacht.
The whole wedding was tasteful, with decorum and very British >To the moanser who say why do it time of restraint ? I have an answer. This is a tight time fiscally BUT when HM the Queen married in 1947 it too was an time of austerity and rationing and it was decided people needed something to cheer about. Well that latter point still holds true to day.
So heres to the Duke & Duchess of Cambridge.
God Save the Queen
 

---

Posted by Japes (# 5358) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by PaulBC:
What I saw was splendid. The Church service was magnificent . The 2nd reading I believe was I Cor.13

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TonyK:
And no, I don't understand it either. Why not use one or the other?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mechtilde:
I'm not sure about the rules for episcopal headgear either, but I noted with appreciation that with ++Rowan, a serious case of mitre-head doesn't seem to make much difference.

---

Bishops REMOVE their hats to pray but put them on to BLESS.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PaulBC:
So heres to the Duke & Duchess of Cambridge.
God Save the Queen

---

So say we all.
 

---

Posted by Lyda*Rose (# 4544) on :
 
[very shallow tangent (because we really don't need another wedding fashion commentary)]

Okay. Here comes a bit of heresy: I wasn't wild about the dress.

On the one hand, I like simple and elegant; I also dislike this recent American craze for strapless gowns and blingity-bling-bling sewn all over wedding dresses. So far, so good. But. If you are going to go simple and elegant, it better be tres elegant from head to toe. Catherine's dress had a pretty shape, but the lace of the bodice seemed disjointed from the look of the rest of the gown. I went back to Grace Kelly's wedding dress: one part, one shape in the ensemble flowed into and enhanced the others. I didn't see that much in this wedding gown.

It certainly wasn't ugly. And it certainly proved how very beautiful the bride was, since she wore the bridal dress, it didn't wear her.

[/very shallow tangent (but then it could have been about hats) ]
 

---

Posted by TonyK (# 35) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by LQ:

quote:

---

Originally posted by TonyK:
And no, I don't understand it either. Why not use one or the other?

---

I'm not (as of 1955!) CofE so it's all very arcane to me, but does it not have something to do with Series 1 Marriage more or less being the (deposited 1928) "Book of Common Prayer" rite?

---

Reference also to Edward Green's post...

I haven't checked absolutely every word, but it seems to me that the whole service was ' Alternative Services Series One'. This being the case, why was the Book of Common Prayer mentioned at all?

Unless ( ) it was to appease the groom's father - whom, IIRC, is an ardent supporter of BCP!!
 

---

Posted by Spike (# 36) on :
 
I think you're right in your last sentence there Tony.

Series 1, which was published in the 60s, was basically the same as the 1928 Prayer Book which was never officially authorised. This is usually the form used today for people who want services in traditional language. If people ask for a BCP wedding or funeral, what they are usually getting is 1928 and they usually don't argue because they probably aren't aware of the fact that the two are totally different. All they know is that it uses thee and thou a lot so they are happy.

[ 30. April 2011, 22:43: Message edited by: Spike ]
 

---

Posted by piglet (# 11803) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by ChippedChalice:
... how many couples will now want to decorate their wedding churches with small trees?

---

That question was posed by our Dean with a very worried expression on his face; I suspect he was imagining the reaction of the president of the Altar Guild ...


 

---

Posted by Sacred London (# 15220) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by TonyK:

I haven't checked absolutely every word, but it seems to me that the whole service was ' Alternative Services Series One'. This being the case, why was the Book of Common Prayer mentioned at all?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TonyK:
Unless ( ) it was to appease the groom's father - whom, IIRC, is an ardent supporter of BCP!!

---

Do I remember correctly, too, that the Parry was quoted a few times as 'a great favourite' or 'favourite composer' or something of the Prince of Wales?
 

---

Posted by Spike (# 36) on :
 
Indeed.

If I was a cynic, I may be thinking that all that Parry at the wedding was a subtle way of publicising his documentary
 

---

Posted by Sacred London (# 15220) on :
 
The BCP [Coverdale] Psalter appears to have no copyright protection other than as part of the BCP itself. The only way to acknowledge use of a single psalm, therefore, would be to use the formula "Extract from The Book of Common Prayer, the rights in which are vested in the Crown . . . ".
.
 

---

Posted by Laurence (# 9135) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alex Cockell:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Laurence:
Er... current music? How about the three pieces of music written within the last year or so, including two pieces specifically written for the service itself?

---

I think the person who asked is more attuned to charismatic worship. So while choral works would have been written - it was still a Trad Service.

But my question does hold - would be interesting to see a Royal Praise-Up...

---

I take your point- I was just being a bit pedantic, really! But it's interesting that the division between "old" and "new" worship is blurring- there are new pieces written in a trad style, and I'm sure there must have been relatively free-form band-led worship twenty or thirty years ago.

Could that style ever be transported to a big state occasion? Hmm. I don't see why there shouldn't be different styles of music at state occasions, like at the funeral for Princess Diana. If Westminster Abbey can have an orchestra doing big Romantic music by Verdi, then Elton John, then unaccompanied Anglican chant, then there's no musical reason why they couldn't have a praise band.

(I suppose one objection might be that the over-riding tone at these state events is "solemn"- even when everyone's happy!)

So yes- I think it's likely that we'll get an increasingly wide range of musical influences at royal weddings, funerals etc., but still within a strict formal liturgical setting. Traddy with a twist, possibly.

[ 01. May 2011, 08:23: Message edited by: Laurence ]
 

---

Posted by Alex Cockell (# 7487) on :
 
So at some point, we might hear a count-in from a drummer before kickoff?
 

---

Posted by Spike (# 36) on :
 
Save that for the hotel room on the honeymoon
 

---

Posted by anon four (# 15938) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Laurence:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alex Cockell:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Laurence:
Er... current music? How about the three pieces of music written within the last year or so, including two pieces specifically written for the service itself?

---

I think the person who asked is more attuned to charismatic worship. So while choral works would have been written - it was still a Trad Service.

But my question does hold - would be interesting to see a Royal Praise-Up...

---

I take your point- I was just being a bit pedantic, really! But it's interesting that the division between "old" and "new" worship is blurring- there are new pieces written in a trad style, and I'm sure there must have been relatively free-form band-led worship twenty or thirty years ago.

Could that style ever be transported to a big state occasion? Hmm. I don't see why there shouldn't be different styles of music at state occasions, like at the funeral for Princess Diana. If Westminster Abbey can have an orchestra doing big Romantic music by Verdi, then Elton John, then unaccompanied Anglican chant, then there's no musical reason why they couldn't have a praise band.

(I suppose one objection might be that the over-riding tone at these state events is "solemn"- even when everyone's happy!)

So yes- I think it's likely that we'll get an increasingly wide range of musical influences at royal weddings, funerals etc., but still within a strict formal liturgical setting. Traddy with a twist, possibly.

---

Except for the acoustics which turn even the most percussed worship beat into soup by about the time it reaches the fifth pillar on the left....

 

---

Posted by Low Treason (# 11924) on :
 
It is at times like this my ADHD tendencies manifest themselves - did anyone else notice:

The armed policemen on the streets (sub-machine guns????)

The fact that none of the royal family was wearing a seat belt....
 

---

Posted by Alex Cockell (# 7487) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Low Treason:
It is at times like this my ADHD tendencies manifest themselves - did anyone else notice:

The armed policemen on the streets (sub-machine guns????)

The fact that none of the royal family was wearing a seat belt....

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sacred London:
The BCP [Coverdale] Psalter appears to have no copyright protection other than as part of the BCP itself. The only way to acknowledge use of a single psalm, therefore, would be to use the formula "Extract from The Book of Common Prayer, the rights in which are vested in the Crown . . . ".
.

---

Thank you, Sacred London.

One can always rely on a knowledgeable shipmate to provide a reasonable explanation, rather than one's paranoid imaginings.

I did rather like my explanation, though ...
 

---

Posted by Banner Lady (# 10505) on :
 
I loved the dressing of the abbey in greenery - it was a wonderful symbolism - the greening of the Royal family with a bit of ordinary common and garden variety British family.

I was wondering about why the Queen would choose to be dressed in primrose and saffron colours until I saw her, with Prince Phillip, being met at the door of the abbey by the clergy.

That photo moment was obviously choreographed extremely carefully by the designers working on the project. Think about it: the ecclesiastical party all dressed in red and gold copes on a red carpet. Phillip (like his grandson) in a bold red uniform. Brenda needed to be gold from top to toe to complement it all and to stand out against the red around her. As about a billion of the viewers were Asian, yellow, the colour of good fortune sends a strong message; and red and gold are imperial colours understood by everyone from Hogwarts to Beijing.

It was a powerful visual message to the world, as was the ancient and beautiful language of the liturgy. It makes me wonder how many brides won't just be wanting 'that dress' for their weddings, but 'that service' and in a church, no less!

Kate seemed to be far more engaged with what was being spoken over them than the groom; but I guess that would be fairly normal...
 

---

Posted by PD (# 12436) on :
 
From the bits I caught, the service sounded very like what Mrs PD and I used when we got hitched - which was Series One. The music was splendid - as expected. Kate Middleton's hair style and dress were lovely. It really was the whole establishment royalty thing at its best. Unlike 1981!

++Rowen was, for my taste, over-dressed as usual, but then I remembered it was the Abbey, therefore copes, if not wafer cakes are the order of the day. +Chartres did a good job on the sermon, which I expected. The poor Dean looked ready to shit a brick, but it isn't every day, etc....

I am a monarchist, but not really a royal watcher and decided from the bits I watched that everything had been done decently and in order. More remarkably Mrs PD and PD's mother agreed!

PD
 

---

Posted by Curiosity killed ... (# 11770) on :
 
We got Crown Imperial as the voluntary yesterday and the organist did reckon he was practising for the inevitable requests - but that it would need a lot of abbreviation.

We've also got space for trees in one of the churches - we're not sure we want to be braced for this.
 

---

Posted by PD (# 12436) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alex Cockell:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Low Treason:
It is at times like this my ADHD tendencies manifest themselves - did anyone else notice:

The armed policemen on the streets (sub-machine guns????)

The fact that none of the royal family was wearing a seat belt....

---

The Heckler & Koch MP5 variant CO19 use is a semi-auto version... but is still 9x19mm rounds...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PD:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alex Cockell:
The Heckler & Koch MP5 variant CO19 use is a semi-auto version... but is still 9x19mm rounds...

---

If I have read that right, that translates to 'looks inpressive; but bloody useless if the shit really hits the fan." Mrs PD used to carry a 9mm with 1 in the clip and two spare clips when she was working. Even with 39 rounds available her comment was "Not much use when the opposition has AK-47s. I's probably get shot dead reloading."

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Low Treason:
It is at times like this my ADHD tendencies manifest themselves - did anyone else notice:


The fact that none of the royal family was wearing a seat belt....

---

I'm guessing that, if challenged, the police would say the non-use of seat-belts is a consequence of security concerns - in the event of one of the cars being attacked, the occupants can more easily be removed from the situation if they are not wearing seat-belts. And it's not as though they were likely to be involved in a road-traffic accident. There was remarkably little traffic in central London, even for a Saturday.
 

---

Posted by PD (# 12436) on :
 
Beg to differ!

The Real IRA and other UK 'undesireables' are pretty well tackled up, so you an reasonably expect AK-47s and various automatics in any well orchestrated terrorist attack. The fact fact that one can get away with small capacity semi-automatics in most situations is thanks to MI-5, MI-6 and Counter-Terrorism Squad.

Sorry, I know most of you hate spooks, but they are the reason you can sleep in peace. On the other hand, I am all in favour of keeping the honest people honest - i.e. accountable - simply because I am not an optimist about human nature.

PD
 

---

Posted by Think² (# 1984) on :
 
There will have been snipers on the roofs, and there were plain clothes officers in the crowd.

You wouldn't want additional machine gun fire in a crowd. You'd want accurate fire, H&Ks have lazer gun sights.
 

---

Posted by Utrecht Catholic (# 14285) on :
 
I disagee with the judgement that Archbishop Rowan Williams was overdressed.I always admire his good liturgical taste.
Many Anglican bishops could learn a lot from him.
The Canons of the Abbey, who did not have any liturgical function, were certainly overdressed, they should have worn surplice with stole.
 

---

Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :
 
This may go some way to explaining the "Ninja Nun" story ...
 

---

Posted by Jengie Jon (# 273) on :
 
PD

Moving such weaponry around in the run up to the Royal wedding would almost certainly result in a quick arrest under anti-terrorist legislation. Yes they are well tackled, yes they can surprise us with attacks, but in order to do that they have to times when we are not expecting attacks. British police count it a failure if they have to use force on the day for anything but minor pickpocketing.

Remember the last time a major event was subject to a terrorist attack was in 1984 almost twenty years ago. I suspect that it was only successful because party conferences were not seen as major event by security in those days. Since then the ones that have happened either weren't at major events (e.g. bombs at stations, firing missiles at business building) or were the lone activist.

Recently Liberals had a party conference in Sheffield. I happened to want to catch a train during it. It is a walk through the back streets of Sheffield to the train station from my flat. While walking there and going nowhere near the party conference I passed half a dozen policemen just standing around. I suspect their job was to check out anything they thought suspicious. That was just the visible security.


When you realise that they were doing this on just searches, do you really imagine all traffic into and out of quite a wide area around there has not been monitored, all known suspects of connections with terrorism checked out and any unusual activity at ports of entry noted in the last three months or so. It would not surprise me if security services actually knew who the majority of people were in the crowd.

The biggest risk is indeed the lone activist or the semi-spontaneous action, large planning activities will have been spotted long before. The problem with AK47s and such is you have to get them into a controlled area and doing that is likely to give away the notion of the attack.

Big planned terrorist attacks are far more likely to succeed if they can find somewhere routine and not particular supposed to be a target but which will catch the public eye. That is why train stations and such are so popular. Attacks on Royals are more do-able when they are going around doing their normal business.

Actually if I was a terrorist organisation I would do something like try and blow up Balmoral during the pageant. It would make the headlines and maybe slightly easier than usual as security eyes will be directed elsewhere.

Jengie
 

---

Posted by Twangist (# 16208) on :
 
The service (Series 1? my ASB is in the loft) wasn't that differant from 1662 - following along in the BCP it seemed like they'd just edited out the "carnal passions" and "brute beasts" etc.
Would 1928 (again my copy in the loft) have beeen designed to make the service seem somehow more sacramental?
 

---

Posted by Spike (# 36) on :
 
Series 1 and 1928 are pretty much the same thing. It has much more emphasis on the love between husband and wife than the 1662 which seems more like a "contract" between two people and, of course, all the stuff about "brute beasts" and "satisfying man's carnal lust"
 

---

Posted by +Chad (# 5645) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by PD:
++Rowen was, for my taste, over-dressed as usual, but then I remembered it was the Abbey, therefore copes, if not wafer cakes are the order of the day.

---

quote:

---

+Chartres did a good job on the sermon, which I expected.

---

quote:

---

The poor Dean looked ready to shit a brick, but it isn't every day, etc....

---

I think that's his normal look

quote:

---

Utrecht Catholic opined:
The Canons of the Abbey, who did not have any liturgical function, were certainly overdressed, they should have worn surplice with stole.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by +Chad:

quote:

---

The poor Dean looked ready to shit a brick, but it isn't every day, etc....

---

I think that's his normal look

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spike:
Series 1 and 1928 are pretty much the same thing. It has much more emphasis on the love between husband and wife than the 1662 which seems more like a "contract" between two people and, of course, all the stuff about "brute beasts" and "satisfying man's carnal lust"

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by +Chad:

quote:

---

Originally posted by PD:
++Rowen was, for my taste, over-dressed as usual, but then I remembered it was the Abbey, therefore copes, if not wafer cakes are the order of the day.

---

Precisely - copes are the nominal rig at the Abbey. I think that may have been an Abbey cope. Thankfully, he didn't wear his yellow number.

---

The cope was a custom piece made by Watts & Co. They have a brief snippet about it up on their homepage.

Nothing like a royal wedding to boost business

Rob+
 

---

Posted by Ophicleide16 (# 16344) on :
 
Funnily enough, I was in Cambridge when I saw the wedding. We went to a hotel where they had set up a fancy screen outside and had coffee while we watched, and then left without paying for the coffee, as you do.

The Parry was good, except for Jerusalem which I dislike intensely, and I'm not keen on Rutter either. The descants were excellent though. I feel they should have lined the central aisle with trees properly, not just the few they had.
 

---

Posted by stonespring (# 15530) on :
 
I read something that seemed to indicate that the now-Duchess of Cambridge's bouquet was not placed on the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier until after the wedding service, but I do not know whether she returned to the Abbey to place it herself or whether someone else took it there. I definitely did not see her place it there as she walked out of the Abbey with the now-Duke of Cambridge after the service. All of which leads me to ask:

What has become the traditional time and manner of a royal bride placing her bouquet on the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier? I believe that the Queen Mother, who I think started the practice, was the only one who placed her bouquet on the Tomb as she walked into the Abbey at the beginning of her wedding, and that all subsequent royal brides who have been wed at the Abbey have left their bouquet at the end of the wedding. Prior to seeing this wedding (the first I have watched), I thought that the bride would actually place the bouquet on the tomb herself as she walked out of the Abbey at the end of the ceremony but since that did not appear to be the case in this wedding I am wondering exactly what the sequence of events has been in previous royal weddings at the Abbey.

Note: I know this is not exactly a liturgical question, but I hope it is permissible to discuss it on this thread.
 

---

Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chapelhead:
Not part of the wedding service itself, but something that I was pleased to note...

On the way to and from the Abbey, sitting in the car and carriage, Princes William and Harry very properly acknowledged the salutes they received (from the guards bands, for example), and returned the salutes. They also, very properly, saluted the Cenotaph. Which is what one would expect of them.

---

Ah, he did do that! I was trying to work out where the salutes were directed and wondered if one might have been to the Cenotaph. I am glad to hear it!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by stonespring:
I read something that seemed to indicate that the now-Duchess of Cambridge's bouquet was not placed on the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier until after the wedding service, but I do not know whether she returned to the Abbey to place it herself or whether someone else took it there. <snip> I thought that the bride would actually place the bouquet on the tomb herself as she walked out of the Abbey at the end of the ceremony but since that did not appear to be the case in this wedding I am wondering exactly what the sequence of events has been in previous royal weddings at the Abbey.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by stonespring:
I read something that seemed to indicate that the now-Duchess of Cambridge's bouquet was not placed on the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier until after the wedding service, but I do not know whether she returned to the Abbey to place it herself or whether someone else took it there. I definitely did not see her place it there as she walked out of the Abbey with the now-Duke of Cambridge after the service. All of which leads me to ask:

What has become the traditional time and manner of a royal bride placing her bouquet on the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ecclesiastical Flip-flop:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
And here I am, just wondering what the Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland will wear.

---

With Scottish Presbyterian moderators, robes are de rigueur and I think will be present fully robed. A free church minister who is unaccustomed to robing, I don't think will be required to do so.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mrs whibley:

quote:

---

Originally posted by stonespring:
I read something that seemed to indicate that the now-Duchess of Cambridge's bouquet was not placed on the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier until after the wedding service, but I do not know whether she returned to the Abbey to place it herself or whether someone else took it there. <snip> I thought that the bride would actually place the bouquet on the tomb herself as she walked out of the Abbey at the end of the ceremony but since that did not appear to be the case in this wedding I am wondering exactly what the sequence of events has been in previous royal weddings at the Abbey.

---

I agree with the theory already advanced on this thread that the Duchess needed the bouquet directly after the ceremony for the official photos (or portraits, being Royal). Of course, it should not have been beyond the wit of man to have provided a duplicate! I don't think she would go back later to place it herself - on honeymoon one is generally assumed to be too Busy for that sort of thing!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:

quote:

---

Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chapelhead:
Not part of the wedding service itself, but something that I was pleased to note...

On the way to and from the Abbey, sitting in the car and carriage, Princes William and Harry very properly acknowledged the salutes they received (from the guards bands, for example), and returned the salutes. They also, very properly, saluted the Cenotaph. Which is what one would expect of them.

---

Ah, he did do that! I was trying to work out where the salutes were directed and wondered if one might have been to the Cenotaph. I am glad to hear it!

---

Salutes to war memorials by uniformed servicefolk are customary. I see it all the time in Confederation Square in Ottawa. One even sees a (very) occasional man in civvies remove their hat in passing.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by FatherRobLyons:

quote:

---

Originally posted by +Chad:

quote:

---

Originally posted by PD:
++Rowen was, for my taste, over-dressed as usual, but then I remembered it was the Abbey, therefore copes, if not wafer cakes are the order of the day.

---

Precisely - copes are the nominal rig at the Abbey. I think that may have been an Abbey cope. Thankfully, he didn't wear his yellow number.

---

The cope was a custom piece made by Watts & Co. They have a brief snippet about it up on their homepage.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by sacerdos:
[QB] I, too have always failed to understand the CofE's cult of the alms dish...QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by sacerdos:
I, too have always failed to understand the CofE's cult of the alms dish, and the cluttering of its altars with irrelevant "bling".

One wonders how many of those invited to state functions must wonder why CofE churches HAVE an altar at all. Indeed I suspect the majority of merely nominal anglicans in these islands see the altar as merely a shelf for a cross and two candlesticks - if not just for the exposition of that Sacred Alms Dish!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:

Doesn't help that "offertory" and "offering" are such similar words. I wouldn't be surprised if every single worshipper in our parish thought they meant the same thing. Probably including the clergy.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:
So, when dressed up in my reader's tat while the vicar is getting on with getting ready to celebrate, I have to stand at the front of the church holding a big plate, the people who have collected the money process up and put it on the plate, and I say a little prayer over it before handing it to a churchwarden (who goes and locks it away in the safe). And lots of people would be upset if we didn't do that. A classic example of a functional act becoming a ritual one - the people who have collected the money have to take it somewhere, after all.

---

Do you mean you don't elevate it? shocking.
 

---

Posted by Pearl B4 Swine (# 11451) on :
 
People at my place firmly believe that "Praise God from Whom all blessings flow" (Old 100th) is an immutable part of the Ordinary of the Mass. And yes, the money basin is lifted up.
 

---

Posted by Martin L (# 11804) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by LQ:
I once remarked that my sister, a staunch atheist, is so averse to Mass attendance that she'll probably take the Judas walk at the offertory at my own wedding, having seen the relevant legal bits. My mother, chagrined, replied, "You're not going to have an offering at your wedding, surely?"

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fr Weber:
Supposedly non-liturgical churches have all kinds of little ceremonies that have developed because, when you get down to it, people *like* ceremonies. And if you've excluded a number of liturgical practices because they look "Catholic" to you or your church, then at some point vacuum-abhorring Nature will rush to fill the void. Hence the Consecration of the Cash, the Solemn Lighting of the Unity Candle, the Charismatic Manual Acts, etc.

---

I played at a wedding at a low, low Episcopal Church in the mid-South some years ago. The Rector was known for celebrating the Eucharist in swimming pools for the parish youth group. At the wedding, there was a Eucharist, with Rector in cassock and stole, and dialogue and preface omitted. But as I left the ceremony, I noticed the sexton was vested.
 

---

Posted by Ger (# 3113) on :
 
I would remind shipmates concerning the money that they are in effect criticising a modern (post WW2, if not post-1962) practice.

The 1662 Communion service clearly differentiates between "the money" and "the bread and wine". The "money" was dealt with in the prayer for the "Church militant here in earth" having been collected by "the Deacons, Churchwardens, or other fit person appointed for that purpose" during the sentences recited immediately before that prayer. The "decent bason" is placed "upon the holy Table."

Having placed the decent bason only then "the Priest shall then place upon the Table so much Bread and Wine, as he shall think sufficient." The bread and wine then have to wait until the Invitation, Confession, Absolution, Comfortable Words and so on have been said/sung before the Prayer of Consecration. In other words, "Cranmer" and the boys clearly differentiated between money (alms) being collected and the bread and wine.

I have been unable to find any "1662 rubrics" supporting the taking up of money during Mattins and Evensong. Certainly in one significant anglican parish church and the pro-Cathedral here in Wellington NZ they seemed pass the hat from about 1847. There were interminable and inconclusive debates about using bags or plates.
In the pro-Cathedral, where the choir was in a transept gallery, the bag was put on a long pole and passed up to the singers. It was noted in the Vestry minutes that on more than one occasion the bag came back down somewhat lighter than when it went up!

In other words the modern liturgist has managed to confuse the "bread and wine" with the "alms and oblations".
 

---

Posted by LA Dave (# 1397) on :
 
Back to the music.

The Rutter was banal and tedious and reminded me of Disney movie music not written by Alan Menken.

The choirs were tremendous, though, and the setting of Ubi Caritas was spectacular.
 

---

Posted by NatDogg (# 14347) on :
 
Yes, I totally agree. The Rutter was absolutely lacking in any imagination or refinement. Terribly boring, it was.

The other music was spectacular--the descants on the hymns especially.

I liked "I Was Glad" better than I liked the later Parry piece, but I'm partial to anything played at a Coronation.
 

---

Posted by Quam Dilecta (# 12541) on :
 
When the 1662 Prayer Book was adopted, there was no need to take a collection at Matins. The standard Sunday routine was Morning Prayer, Litany, and Ante-Communion, treated as a single service. In the USA, permission to use these three components as separate services was first given in the 1892 edition of the Prayer Book, but I suspect that the Prayer Book was only catching up with actual parochial practice.
 

---

Posted by Hooker's Trick (# 89) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by FatherRobLyons:
I do have to ask, not being all that flamiliar with the royal bits (seeing as I live in the states), if it is normal to turn the Lord's Table into a curio cabinet for fine metalware for royal occassions.

I am sure the stuff displayed has royal signifigance, but my sense of liturgical snobbery wanted to scream "If it isn't a Eucharist, than nothing should be upon the Altar except a cross and two candlesticks!!!"

Rob+

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin L:
As for your sis, why bother leaving? If she's atheist, then she doesn't believe anything relevant is going on anyway, so she might as well just sit there to avoid distracting her brother.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ger:

In other words the modern liturgist has managed to confuse the "bread and wine" with the "alms and oblations".

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by LA Dave:
Back to the music...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hooker's Trick:
It's an old tradition to display the plate on state or other significant occasions. Here's the Abbey decked out for Queen Victoria's coronation and the Chapel Royal for George III's wedding both showing the sideboards of plate.

As someone mentioned upthread, you often get a similar display at patronal feasts. Exeter Cathedral heaves uot seemingly every gilt and silver vessel they have for the Feast of the Dedication.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by +Chad:
Our bling comes out on high days and holidays. When it's all out, we can cover the High Altar and Lady Altar,

The present building is the third church on the site since the 13th Century, so we've accumulated a substantial collection (for a Parish Church) of mediaeval, Jacobean, Georgian, Victorian and 20th Century plate.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by dj_ordinaire:

quote:

---

Originally posted by +Chad:
Our bling comes out on high days and holidays. When it's all out, we can cover the High Altar and Lady Altar,

The present building is the third church on the site since the 13th Century, so we've accumulated a substantial collection (for a Parish Church) of mediaeval, Jacobean, Georgian, Victorian and 20th Century plate.

---

Back when I was in Norwich, we would mark special occasions by recovering the best plate from the Cathedral treasury (where it was normally displayed) and place it on the altar in like manner. In our case, this consisted of several ewers and chalices, so was more overly Eucharistic - there was an alms-dish, but I don't believe this was used.

---

Ours are almost entirely Eucharistic vessels. There's a silver alms bason and a silver trowel from the foundation-stone-laying ceremony , other than that it's chalices, communion cups, patens, flagons - most of which are in regular use through the year.
 

---

Posted by David Powell (# 5545) on :
 
For me, it was a glorious mixture of Anglican ritual and military pageantry, but also displayed a moving intimacy. By the way, full marks to the BBC for its unobtrusive coverage. I could have wished for less Parry, but rather some Purcell and Handel, whose bones lie very nearby. My three favourite hymns, with a nice Welsh bias.
It would be nice to think a lot of viewers might think, (literally), OMG there's actually an awful lot that is good about Christianity.
How good to believe this is a young couple who will embody notions of honour and service. There are a lot of very rich people in the world who seem to do precious little for their fellow human beings.
 

---

Posted by Ecclesiastical Flip-flop (# 10745) on :
 
I duly watched the proceedings on television and got a good impression that way.

I have it on good authority that the bellringers were confined to the north-west tower for eight hours from 8.00 to 16.00 hours. After doing the ringing they had to do before the service, they rang the peal of three hours or more after the service, having to wait during the service. They had a bucket for necessary relief!
 

---

Posted by Oreophagite (# 10534) on :
 
The fabric for ++Rowan's cope is called "Pugin Gothic Tapestry."

The original 19th century Pugin cope, with a different hood, is in the Victoria and Albert museum.

Some internet searching will teach you more than you need to know about Pugin and his fabric design. He was from Kent, so ++Rowan made a wise choice from that perspective.

Watts have the fabric, and I'm sure they will make up a very nice vestment set at their customarily small price, just as Princess Kate's wedding dress is now being copied.
 

---

Posted by MrMusicMan (# 16343) on :
 
On a semi-tangent, after hearing The Crown Imperial at the wedding, I decided that my band would play it this year at Graduation for the faculty's procession into the ceremony.

Having downloaded the official wedding version on iTunes, I say, a splendid version was done for the wedding, and I hope we can play the Bocook bastardization with somewhat the same pomp and nobility.
 

---

Posted by Nick Tamen (# 15164) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by MrMusicMan:
On a semi-tangent, after hearing The Crown Imperial at the wedding, I decided that my band would play it this year at Graduation for the faculty's procession into the ceremony.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:
Did they play Crown Imperial?

Damn! I like that music. I vaguely intended to buy a CD with it on. Now if I do they'll think I heard it on the TV wedding and I'll be too embarrassed to buy it!

---

quote:

---

I did my undergrad at UW, so the platform party processed in to some goofy fanfare-y thing. There was no procession out, but immediately following the ceremony, if the crowd begged for it, Mike played You've Said it All.

---

For us in college, it was Crown Imperial in and Clifton Williams' The Sinfonians out. Some of us were particularly partial to the latter choice.
 

---

Posted by ken (# 2460) on :
 
Of course being a Brit I have no idea at all what a procession at a college commencement is. Or even a college commencement, really. We don't do that stuff here.
 

---

Posted by Sandemaniac (# 12829) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ecclesiastical Flip-flop:
I have it on good authority that the bellringers were confined to the north-west tower for eight hours from 8.00 to 16.00 hours.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:
Did they play Crown Imperial?

Damn! I like that music. I vaguely intended to buy a CD with it on. Now if I do they'll think I heard it on the TV wedding and I'll be too embarrassed to buy it!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:
Of course being a Brit I have no idea at all what a procession at a college commencement is. Or even a college commencement, really. We don't do that stuff here.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by MrMusicMan:
The Sinfonians... Wisconsin didn't have a Sinfonians Chapter when I was an undergrad, so I never had the chance to join.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sandemaniac:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ecclesiastical Flip-flop:
I have it on good authority that the bellringers were confined to the north-west tower for eight hours from 8.00 to 16.00 hours.

---

Serves the buggers right... making all that noise!

Slightly more seriously, having discussed what they might ring, I was amused on the news that evening to discover that they rung rounds as the bride arrived (well, if people are going to book their weddings after I've booked my holiday in the Lakes, they've got to expect me to be yomping round the hills somewhere!).

AG

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:
Of course being a Brit I have no idea at all what a procession at a college commencement is. Or even a college commencement, really. We don't do that stuff here.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:
Weird. It sounds like the begining of a thing not the end.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by TubaMirum:

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:
Weird. It sounds like the begining of a thing not the end.

---

It is. It's the first day of the rest of your life....

(Really, that's the idea.)

---

And specifically the first day of your life as something other than a student. You begin to work.

Unless, of course, you head to grad school of some kind.
 

---

Posted by Oblatus (# 6278) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:
Weird. It sounds like the begining of a thing not the end. We have graduation ceremonies of course, and wear robes at them. They are fun. But neither of the ones I've been to involved any martial music or processions.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:
Of course being a Brit I have no idea at all what a procession at a college commencement is. Or even a college commencement, really. We don't do that stuff here.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hooker's Trick:

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:
Of course being a Brit I have no idea at all what a procession at a college commencement is. Or even a college commencement, really. We don't do that stuff here.

---

Methinks ken doth protest too much.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ken:
Weird. It sounds like the begining of a thing not the end. We have graduation ceremonies of course, and wear robes at them. They are fun. But neither of the ones I've been to involved any martial music or processions.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by LQ:
Okay, I'm going to be the one to ask. "It is convenient ["fitting" in 1962] that the new-married persons should receive the holy Communion at the time of their Marriage, or at the first opportunity after their Marriage," sez the BCP. Does the royal family keep to this? We know they can't do it with us plebs milling about (at least not after they're crowned) but can they get +Richard to pop by with a portable Communion set (special effects by the Moderator of the Church of Scotland)? Inquiring minds want to know (or ought that to be enquiring - my trans-Atlantic circuits are overloading!)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
And she only communes in private, I believe. Frankly this all seems to be so much royal neuroticism.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Think²:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
And she only communes in private, I believe. Frankly this all seems to be so much royal neuroticism.

---

My guess is that may be a security provision.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Forthview:
So,if the Ruling Elder decides that they are not fit to receive the Lord's supper,how does that square with the idea of the Lord's table being open to all who claim to love the Lord ?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by LQ:
That's how you know it was good!

---

Former Dean Giles and I don't see eye to eye on many things, but I have to give him props for being a good preacher and a decent man.

However,

Dean Giles could have taken the time to point out the great efforts that were taken to make Westminster Abbey look less like a crypt and more like a garden, with impressive results.

He could have complimented the use of choir seating in the nave that the royal family rarely fails to employ.

He could have acknowledged that the bold (and uncustomary for the royal family) move to begin the liturgy with a hymn was perhaps a selfless attempt to show that what was taking place was, above all, not a worship of the royal family, but of the Lord.

He could have conceded that, due to security, the young royals were severely limited on venue, and that, like it or not, Westminster Abbey is a family church.

He could have assumed the best--that the young couple themselves chose the old words (from Common Worship, not Prayer Book, I think..?)--rather than jumping to conclusions about parental influence.

He could have understood the politics behind the hymn choice, and appreciated the sentimental feeling that accompanies those hymns that were sung at Diana's funeral, too.

He could have resisted wishing that the service would be an advertisement for contemporary worship of his preference.

...But he didn't.

As an aside, I have attended a number of weddings in contemporary, praise-band-all-the-time non-denom happy clappy churches, and every single wedding fell in the realm of "traditional." Nary a tambourine in sight. Seats arranged to face forward. One service even had communion.

If Dean Giles has a daughter, I wonder if she had to march up the aisle to "Hey, Mr. Tambourine Man" to show how withit she is!
 

---

Posted by Hooker's Trick (# 89) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Magic Wand:
Apparently Fr Richard Giles really didn't care for it.

---

quote:

---

All the more disappointing therefore was the fact that the wedding rite seemed so far adrift from people of their age group

---

made me reflect that every CofE wedding I've attended in the last 15 years was BCP language.

I realise this may have more to say about my circle of friends than "people of their age group" in general, but the people I know who wanted to be married in church wanted the full-octane version (one even had the brute beasts).
 

---

Posted by anon four (# 15938) on :
 
But it wasn't BCP - it was series 1..... (ie: 1928 authorised).

And having taken a few hundred bog standard C of E weddings in the past 15 years, only one couple chose to have traditional words for the vows alone (an option in Common Worship)and all to a bride and groom decided against BCP or Series 1. These in a variety of settings from council estate to the leafy lanes of southern English Villages.

And no - I didn't push them that way......
 

---

Posted by Pre-cambrian (# 2055) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hooker's Trick:
Reading this

quote:

---

All the more disappointing therefore was the fact that the wedding rite seemed so far adrift from people of their age group

---

made me reflect that every CofE wedding I've attended in the last 15 years was BCP language.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hooker's Trick:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Magic Wand:
Apparently Fr Richard Giles really didn't care for it.

---

Reading this

quote:

---

All the more disappointing therefore was the fact that the wedding rite seemed so far adrift from people of their age group

---

made me reflect that every CofE wedding I've attended in the last 15 years was BCP language.

I realise this may have more to say about my circle of friends than "people of their age group" in general, but the people I know who wanted to be married in church wanted the full-octane version (one even had the brute beasts).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mamacita:
In case anyone missed this.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pre-cambrian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hooker's Trick:
Reading this

quote:

---

All the more disappointing therefore was the fact that the wedding rite seemed so far adrift from people of their age group

---

made me reflect that every CofE wedding I've attended in the last 15 years was BCP language.

---

Let alone another example of someone who, going by his picture, is in advanced middle age thinking he knows far better what "people in their age group" want and appreciate.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Spiffy:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mamacita:
In case anyone missed this.

---

Photoshopped. Cinderella's a blonde, the prince is a brunette, and the stepsisters wore green and red.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Manipled Mutineer:
Which is indeed what my wife and I chose when we got married nine years ago. She even promised to "obey" me, which becomes more and more amusing with each passing year...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by sacerdos:
I've never understood how the British "Royals" can be Anglicans when in England and become Presbyterians as soon as they cross into Scotland.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Utrecht Catholic:
It well known that the late Queen Mother, who was a member of the Scottish Episcopal Church . . .

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Martin L:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Manipled Mutineer:
Which is indeed what my wife and I chose when we got married nine years ago. She even promised to "obey" me, which becomes more and more amusing with each passing year...

---

Who was it that came up with this gem:
"I promised to obey, but I never said how often"?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sacred London:

quote:

---

Originally posted by sacerdos:
I've never understood how the British "Royals" can be Anglicans when in England and become Presbyterians as soon as they cross into Scotland.

---

The Queen is an Anglican even when she is in Scotland. She takes an oath to defend the constitutional arrangements in Scotland whereby the Church of Scotland is 'self-governing' (i.e. free of state interference) rather than 'established'. She is represented at the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland and occasionally attends the local church at Balmoral.

it strikes me this could be a model for a future Church of England if the monarch were to be no longer Anglican but still Supreme Governor and Fid. Def..

---

quote:

---

In the United Kingdom, The Queen's title includes the words 'Defender of the Faith'.

This means Her Majesty has a specific role in both the Church of England and the Church of Scotland.

As established Churches, they are recognised by law as the official Churches of England and Scotland, respectively. In both England and Scotland, the established Churches are subject to the regulation of law. . . .

---

quote:

---

In Scotland, there is a division of powers by which Church and State are each supreme in their own sphere. The Church is self-governing in all that concerns its own activities. . . .

The monarch takes an oath to preserve the Church of Scotland at the meeting of the Privy Council immediately following his or her accession.

The Crown is represented at the Assembly, sometimes by the monarch in person, but more often by a Lord High Commissioner appointed each year by The Queen.

Provided that it acts within the law of the land, the Assembly has the power to pass resolutions which can have effect without Royal Assent.

---

© Ship of Fools 2016


UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0