Pre-Wedding Information for Victoria and Daniel's Wedding


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
No, Mette Marit wasn`t escorted by his father down the aisle;)
 
No, Mette Marit wasn`t escorted by his father down the aisle;)

You are quite right, Mette Marit was not escorted by her father although that is the custom in Norway.

I think this had more to do with Mette Marit's troubled relation to her father and his unfortunate babble to the press, in particular Se & Hør (See & Hear) a notorious gossip magazine in Norway.
 
That's what I'm saying. they should be free to choose what they want, how they want their wedding. Wasn't Diana, Fergie, Marie, Mary, Mette-Marit escorted by their fathers down the aisle?
Of course Diana and Sarah were walking down the aisle with their fathers! After all, they were English girls, marrying in England: They followed the English tradition. It would be strange to choose otherwise, wouldn't it? I am not sure if this giving away thing is traditional in Denmark (I doubt it, but maybe some Danish posters could clarify?). But as far as I know it is a tradition in France, where Marie comes from, and it certainly is in Mary's homeland Australia. So in these weddings the tradition of the bride's culture was honoured.
But my point is: Why should a Swedish woman, marrying a Swedish guy in Sweden follow a tradition which is completely un-Swedish? That would be as unusual as (hypothetically!) Kate insisting on walking down the aisle with William instead of with her father.
And Victoria is not just a normal Swedish bride who can have the kind of wedding she wants. Unfortunately for her, it is a fairly official state occasion. Actually I was quite surprised that she wishes to stray from the traditions of her beloved homeland, since she usually makes it clear that she makes Sweden her first priority, and that she honours the Swedish customs and traditions.
But another question: how do we know that she wants the king to escort her to the altar? I somehow missed this bit. Is this proven information, or might it just be another press-hype, trying to make some well-selling headlines?
 
Excellent question! I seemed to have missed that bit also.
 
Of course Diana and Sarah were walking down the aisle with their fathers! After all, they were English girls, marrying in England: They followed the English tradition. It would be strange to choose otherwise, wouldn't it? I am not sure if this giving away thing is traditional in Denmark (I doubt it, but maybe some Danish posters could clarify?). But as far as I know it is a tradition in France, where Marie comes from, and it certainly is in Mary's homeland Australia. So in these weddings the tradition of the bride's culture was honoured.
But my point is: Why should a Swedish woman, marrying a Swedish guy in Sweden follow a tradition which is completely un-Swedish? That would be as unusual as (hypothetically!) Kate insisting on walking down the aisle with William instead of with her father.
And Victoria is not just a normal Swedish bride who can have the kind of wedding she wants. Unfortunately for her, it is a fairly official state occasion. Actually I was quite surprised that she wishes to stray from the traditions of her beloved homeland, since she usually makes it clear that she makes Sweden her first priority, and that she honours the Swedish customs and traditions.
But another question: how do we know that she wants the king to escort her to the altar? I somehow missed this bit. Is this proven information, or might it just be another press-hype, trying to make some well-selling headlines?

It´s also a tradition her in denmark that girl walks beside her farther up to the waiting groom and some times it happens that ther totaly scilence in the churtch when the bride is walking with her farther (It happend at the last wedding i was attending)
 
If Victoria wants her father to walk her down the aisle, it's her wedding, she can do what she wants. If she wants to walk down the aisle with Daniel, it's her wedding, she can do what she wants. This notion that if her father walks her down the aisle, he's "giving" her to Daniel as though she was his "property" is completely ridiculous. That is absolutely not what it means anymore. Maybe 400 years ago, but it's 2010. Some of you are totally twisting the idea and concept of this action, and turning it something dehumanizing. Which is shameful. Really shameful, actually.

Maybe Victoria wants to do something different. Is it going to offend anyone? Will there be riots in the streets afterward? I hardly think so.
 
And Victoria is not just a normal Swedish bride...
Exactly. She is the great granddaughter of someone, who was leading his daughter and some of his granddaughters down the aisle.
I find the explanation of the court´s spokeswoman quite plausible
It has a larger dimension, it is not a father leaving his daughter to another man. The symbolism is that the king is leading the country's successor to the altar - and the man who has been accepted, "said palace spokeswoman Nina Eldh to Aftonbladet.
With all the awful articles the press had written about the king not liking Daniel, this does seem like a nice gesture (which got ruined by the archbishop)

But another question: how do we know that she wants the king to escort her to the altar? I somehow missed this bit. Is this proven information, or might it just be another press-hype, trying to make some well-selling headlines?
One can read it out of the bishop´s statement and of the statements the spokeswoman of the court was making. She was though saying, it isn´t decided yet (I guess the court is keeping a backdoor, if the protests would get worse)
 
Of course Diana and Sarah were walking down the aisle with their fathers! After all, they were English girls, marrying in England: They followed the English tradition. It would be strange to choose otherwise, wouldn't it? I am not sure if this giving away thing is traditional in Denmark (I doubt it, but maybe some Danish posters could clarify?). But as far as I know it is a tradition in France, where Marie comes from, and it certainly is in Mary's homeland Australia. So in these weddings the tradition of the bride's culture was honoured.
But my point is: Why should a Swedish woman, marrying a Swedish guy in Sweden follow a tradition which is completely un-Swedish? That would be as unusual as (hypothetically!) Kate insisting on walking down the aisle with William instead of with her father.
And Victoria is not just a normal Swedish bride who can have the kind of wedding she wants. Unfortunately for her, it is a fairly official state occasion. Actually I was quite surprised that she wishes to stray from the traditions of her beloved homeland, since she usually makes it clear that she makes Sweden her first priority, and that she honours the Swedish customs and traditions.
But another question: how do we know that she wants the king to escort her to the altar? I somehow missed this bit. Is this proven information, or might it just be another press-hype, trying to make some well-selling headlines?


I don't consider it all that she's 'straying" from Swedish traditions because she wants her father, even though he's King, to escort her down the aisle. Whats the problem with that?:bang::bang: This is the year 2010, not 1610. This is her once in a lifetime chance to go all out for her big day. I don't think this has anything to do with her love for Sweden. I've seen Victoria work very hard for the country, and it looks like she would give her life for the country, so why not give her this chance? To have something her own way. One can still love their country while changing something up a bit. Someone said Victoria is "Americanized" because she's watching the movies. Having your father escorting the bride down the aisle is not only an American tradition, but many other countries do it as well. The Archbishops should seriously calm down and give her the chance to do it her way. If she wants to be "Americanized" on her wedding day, then I say why not? A lot of American weddings have Asian, Jewish and Indian themes and we do not say they're "straying". It's what they want.

Don't get me wrong. Nothing is wrong with traditions, but when it stops someones free will, then it's a problem:flowers:.
 
^^
The problem is that this is not a common wedding but an official state wedding. And moreover she is not simply a swedish princess but the crown princess.

Imo she should follow the tradition if this is what people expect of her, that's what they are paying for.
 
^^
The problem is that this is not a common wedding but an official state wedding. And moreover she is not simply a swedish princess but the crown princess.

Imo she should follow the tradition if this is what people expect of her, that's what they are paying for.

Of course it not a "common" wedding, but that doesn't mean she shouldn't get what she wants. Now if it will be a problem with Swedish people then she should very well do it the traditional way. I feel sorry for her. To have people dictating how your wedding day, even her life should be, has to be exhausting. It's almost like the people have a hold on these royals because they "pay" for them to reign. But are the Swedish people really that upset about it?

It sounds like most of us want Victoria to have what she wants. Guess we'll see soon enough.
 
^^
But she was educating knowing that, she is the crown princess. If she doesn't like she knows what she can do :king3:.

I don't know if they are upset or not I don't read the swedish press (well I can't :lol:), so that's why I said if they are expect this, she should do it. People expect their royals to act accordingly to their roles, they have a lot of privileges so they also have a lot of pressure to act as the royals they are.
 
Why should a Swedish woman, marrying a Swedish guy in Sweden follow a tradition which is completely un-Swedish?

Traditions have to start somewhere. Every "tradition" was started by someone willing to do something a little bit different than what's been done before. How to you think so many American traditions came into being. From all the Swedish, German, Italian, Irish, Scottish, French etc. families bringing their traditions and throwing them into the melting pot. Victoria is the first female heir to the throne to be married in Sweden. Why not allow her to start a few traditions of her own?
 
At the end of the day, if a crown princess of all people cannot be allowed to decide who walks her up the aisle with on her own wedding day, then I'm afraid there's no hope for any bride! I cannot imagine many Swedish people will take offence to Victoria's wishes, in the same way that few British people would take offence if, say, Prince William walked Kate up the aisle instead of her father - it would be different from what people are used to but most brides would still want their fathers to walk them up the aisle here. As for tradition, I think this is instilled in the actual marriage vows that couples make, rather than the technical aspects of the wedding.
 
This is strange. I'm an American and walking a daughter down the isle is not viewed the same by everybody. Some find it too old fashioned and think it's all about giving away a woman like property. Others, like myself, see it as simply a father and daughter sharing a nice sweet moment. To symbolize a certain part of your life ending. Some even have their mother and father walk them down the isle. The feminist response to this is baffling to me. If you're a feminist shouldn't you believe that woman has a right to maker her decisions? To do what she pleases without hurting anyone?

I fully understand that as a royal Victoria is a symbol and most of her life is not her own. She has to get approval to do things I would consider just normal everyday things. But a wedding should be a moment where the personal preferences of the two main people involved are allowed to shine through.
 
At the end of the day, if a crown princess of all people cannot be allowed to decide who walks her up the aisle with on her own wedding day, then I'm afraid there's no hope for any bride! I cannot imagine many Swedish people will take offence to Victoria's wishes, in the same way that few British people would take offence if, say, Prince William walked Kate up the aisle instead of her father - it would be different from what people are used to but most brides would still want their fathers to walk them up the aisle here. As for tradition, I think this is instilled in the actual marriage vows that couples make, rather than the technical aspects of the wedding.


Absolutely. Victoria could roller skate down the aisle to "You Make Me Feel Like Dancing" by Leo Sayer and it wouldn't make a hill of beans difference, as long as the vows her and Daniel make to one another are heartfelt and loving.

Someone else put it well also; these "traditions" all start somewhere and most of them are either made up at the time and then become what they are now or are slight changes to already known behaviors. Take the white wedding dress, for example. Before Queen Victoria married Prince Albert in 1840, it was not the custom for brides to wear white. They usually wore their best dress, something they would wear to church on Sunday. However after Victoria wore a white dress for her wedding -- suddenly that became the thing to do. Every bride copied her by wearing a white wedding dress. She even brought the German tradition of a Christmas tree to England, which then got exported around the world. Now it's the exception to the rule for a bride to not wear a shade of white. Other cultures have their own rules, of course -- I know for Indian weddings, the bride usually wears red.

Walking the bride down the aisle NOWADAYS, as in TODAY IN THIS CENTURY doesn't mean what it used to. Some brides are escorted by both parents, some by a brother or a close friend....whomever they want. Continuing to bang on this drum that it means the bride is property the father is handing off to the husband, that it's a symbol of ownership.....it's bunk, pure and simple.
 
Of course Diana and Sarah were walking down the aisle with their fathers! After all, they were English girls, marrying in England: They followed the English tradition. It would be strange to choose otherwise, wouldn't it? I am not sure if this giving away thing is traditional in Denmark (I doubt it, but maybe some Danish posters could clarify?). But as far as I know it is a tradition in France, where Marie comes from, and it certainly is in Mary's homeland Australia. So in these weddings the tradition of the bride's culture was honoured.
But my point is: Why should a Swedish woman, marrying a Swedish guy in Sweden follow a tradition which is completely un-Swedish? That would be as unusual as (hypothetically!) Kate insisting on walking down the aisle with William instead of with her father.
And Victoria is not just a normal Swedish bride who can have the kind of wedding she wants. Unfortunately for her, it is a fairly official state occasion. Actually I was quite surprised that she wishes to stray from the traditions of her beloved homeland, since she usually makes it clear that she makes Sweden her first priority, and that she honours the Swedish customs and traditions.
But another question: how do we know that she wants the king to escort her to the altar? I somehow missed this bit. Is this proven information, or might it just be another press-hype, trying to make some well-selling headlines?

Part of it is that it was in the BErnaddotte Family otherwise most of the times. When the futurre King Gustaf VI. Adolf married OPricness margfaret of Connaught she was escorted the aisle by her father as the Wedding took place in Windsor. But also at the Wedding of Princess Ingrird and the future King Frederik IX. where the Wedding took place at Stockholm and the Weddings of Princess Margaretha and Princess Désirée who all married in Sweden the brides where escorted by their father/grandfather. Only at the Wedding of King Carl XVI. Gustaf and Silvia and Pricness Christina the swedish ttradtion was followed. So one can say it's more a tradtion in the Bernadotte-Family to ghave the bride walking down the aisle with her father.
 
Absolutely. Victoria could roller skate down the aisle to "You Make Me Feel Like Dancing" by Leo Sayer and it wouldn't make a hill of beans difference, as long as the vows her and Daniel make to one another are heartfelt and loving.

Someone else put it well also; these "traditions" all start somewhere and most of them are either made up at the time and then become what they are now or are slight changes to already known behaviors. Take the white wedding dress, for example. Before Queen Victoria married Prince Albert in 1840, it was not the custom for brides to wear white. They usually wore their best dress, something they would wear to church on Sunday. However after Victoria wore a white dress for her wedding -- suddenly that became the thing to do. Every bride copied her by wearing a white wedding dress. She even brought the German tradition of a Christmas tree to England, which then got exported around the world. Now it's the exception to the rule for a bride to not wear a shade of white. Other cultures have their own rules, of course -- I know for Indian weddings, the bride usually wears red.

Walking the bride down the aisle NOWADAYS, as in TODAY IN THIS CENTURY doesn't mean what it used to. Some brides are escorted by both parents, some by a brother or a close friend....whomever they want. Continuing to bang on this drum that it means the bride is property the father is handing off to the husband, that it's a symbol of ownership.....it's bunk, pure and simple.


The point is totally being missed her. CP Victoria is not any ordinary Swedish woman who can do whatever she likes on her wedding day. She is the heiress to the throne. She is one of only 4 people in Sweden where the law states they must belong to the Swedish Lutheran Church.

Now the head of the Swedish Lutheran church having agreed to marry Victoria in accordance to the Swedish Lutheran church's traditions is annoyed as Victoria is choosing to ignore one of those traditions. She's not in a position to pick and choose!

An analogy would be a Jewish woman who agrees to marry in the synagogue with the Cheif Rabbi as celebrant. That then same woman decides that she doesn't want to follow one of the Jewish wedding traditions in that ceremony.

With the 'who will Victoria walk down the aisle with" is not a debate on feminism, cultural clashes (Anglo-Saxon background people can't understand why it's such as issue for Victoria's father to walk her down the aisle. Europeans who never had this tradition see it as insulting in this day and age) but the debate is about church traditions and if you choose to marry in that church about being faithful to their traditions.
 
She can do who she likes, it would be nice for her to walk down the aisle with her father. If she doesn't want to, she shouldn't have to follow in the her mothers footsteps if she doesn't want to.
 
Another lovely interview.
Love the last question to Daniel on how ppl will see him after the wedding ceremony
"stiff and bitter" :p
 
With the 'who will Victoria walk down the aisle with" is not a debate on feminism, cultural clashes (Anglo-Saxon background people can't understand why it's such as issue for Victoria's father to walk her down the aisle. Europeans who never had this tradition see it as insulting in this day and age) but the debate is about church traditions and if you choose to marry in that church about being faithful to their traditions.

Even if it is church tradition, religious officials do not need to make an issue over this. CP Victoria's decision to have her father walk her down the hall should not be made into a religious issue. If she were violating Scripture or breaking church doctrine, that's a completely different matter. The priests and archbishop should be focusing their attention on more important church matters.
 
An analogy would be a Jewish woman who agrees to marry in the synagogue with the Cheif Rabbi as celebrant. That then same woman decides that she doesn't want to follow one of the Jewish wedding traditions in that ceremony.


Not necessarily. I've been to many religious weddings (Catholic, Jewish, Protestant) where certain aspects of what a "traditional" wedding in that faith would entail, were not performed. Either because the person they were marrying was not in that faith and they wanted the service to be more encompassing of their spouse and in-laws or because they just didn't want to.

My parents are Catholic, but were married at City Hall. No religious wedding, no communion, no nothing. One of my closest friends is Jewish and they chose not to have a chuppah at their wedding. The rabbi who married them didn't seem to care. They did break the glass at the end though, although it took Michael a couple tries to get it. :lol:

Even if it is church tradition, religious officials do not need to make an issue over this. CP Victoria's decision to have her father walk her down the hall should not be made into a religious issue. If she were violating Scripture or breaking church doctrine, that's a completely different matter. The priests and archbishop should be focusing their attention on more important church matters.


I agree. To the best of my knowledge, the Swedish Lutheran Church is not like the Church of England, where the head of state is also the head of the church. Meaning, if Victoria chooses to walk down the aisle on her father's arm rather than Daniel's, she's not violating religious tenets by doing so and neither is her father. If it was written down somewhere that Carl Gustaf is head of the Swedish Lutheran Church and as such, part of Church doctrine is that the bride walks down the aisle with the groom, then yes.....they would be violating that. However I haven't seen anyone here, Swedish or otherwise, say that. Therefore, the fact the archbishop and priests are getting involved is rather ridiculous, to say the least.

As someone else pointed out, it's not common in the Bernadotte family for the bride to walk down the aisle with the groom. More times than not, the bride is escorted down the aisle by their father or another family member if the father is not alive. I know two of the King's sisters were walked down the aisle by their uncle as their father died when they were young. So if Victoria chooses to have her father walk her down the aisle, that's her family's tradition she is going with -- not necessarily what other brides in Sweden would do.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Victoria should simply play a bit of hardball with the Swedish Lutheran Church by using an old trick from the book when dealing with obstructive clerics: threaten to take your wedding to another Church. The Norwegian Sailor's Church in Stockholm would be most willing to help her out, wouldn't they? :D

Such a move would cause quite some embarrasment for the Swedish Lutheran Church and the mere threat would be sufficient to make them back down.
 
I believe this quote from Victoria sums it all up:

"- We have tried to seek an alliance between history and contemporary wedding day while still should feel personal, "says the Crown Princess

I couldn't have said it better myself:flowers:.
 
Looking around the royal courts site I found this:

We would like to welcome representatives from the media to an information briefing about the Royal Court's preparations ahead of The Crown Princess Couple's imminent wedding on Saturday 19 June.

The briefing will be attended by:
Nina Eldh, Director of the Information and Press Department
Håkan Pettersson, Wedding Coordinator
Lars-Hjalmar Wide, First Marshal of the Court
Carin Bergström, Director of the Royal Collections
Lars-Göran Lönnermark, Chaplain to The King
Göran Alm, Head of the Bernadotte Library

Claes Jernaeus, Head of the Ministry for Foreign Affairs Press Centre, will also be attending.

WHEN: Monday 24 May,10.00 a .m.

Link I got it from in case you want to see: Two briefings with different information on the Royal Court's wedding preparations - Sveriges Kungahus [NS4 version]


Now I know its a to early to start asking, but maybe someone can keep an eye out to see what, if any news about this meeting pops up.
 
Crown Princess Victoria works very hard for her country and if she can't have her perfect wedding, the one day in her life where she is marrying the love of her life, then I think that is very sad indeed.

It is her day. So much of her time is devoted to the country then surely she should be allowed the happiness of being escorted down the aisle by her dad
 
I agree. To the best of my knowledge, the Swedish Lutheran Church is not like the Church of England, where the head of state is also the head of the church. Meaning, if Victoria chooses to walk down the aisle on her father's arm rather than Daniel's, she's not violating religious tenets by doing so and neither is her father. If it was written down somewhere that Carl Gustaf is head of the Swedish Lutheran Church and as such, part of Church doctrine is that the bride walks down the aisle with the groom, then yes.....they would be violating that. However I haven't seen anyone here, Swedish or otherwise, say that. Therefore, the fact the archbishop and priests are getting involved is rather ridiculous, to say the least.

As someone else pointed out, it's not common in the Bernadotte family for the bride to walk down the aisle with the groom. More times than not, the bride is escorted down the aisle by their father or another family member if the father is not alive. I know two of the King's sisters were walked down the aisle by their uncle as their father died when they were young. So if Victoria chooses to have her father walk her down the aisle, that's her family's tradition she is going with -- not necessarily what other brides in Sweden would do.

There are only 4 people in Sweden that are required by law to belong to the Swedish Lutheran church, one of them is Victoria as the heiress. (The others monarch and spouse, heir(ess)'s spouse) So while the monarch is not the Head of the Lutheran church they are required to members of that church.

Keeping that in mind the Archbishop that is the Head of the church said he was being critical as Victoria is well aware of the church's teachings on equality and marriage. Therefore they have the tradition of both the bride and groom walking together as equals into the church. The Swedish Lutheran church was one of the first churches to ordain women and a female bishop will be one of the bishops officiating at Victoria's wedding.

If one chooses to marry in a religious ceremony in a particular church, temple, synagogue, mosque, then I believe one must be prepared to follow the tenets and traditions of that particular faith. Otherwise marry civilly. Not to follow the traditions of the church etc and yet marrying in their sacred spaces is both disrespectful and insulting.

Victoria is not just an ordinary woman who can choose what she wants for her wedding as Daniel pointed out in their recent interview, the wedding is a state occasion as the government made it so. She didn't have the choice.

It's not a Bernadotte tradition, certain Bernadotte brides from Princess Margaret of Conaught (A British princess and her wedding was in the UK) have been 'given away' Margaret's daughter Princess Ingrid was 'given away' as she followed British traditions, her daughters and grandchildren remember that she had English tea at 4pm each afternoon. Three of Carl Gustav's sisters were given away by their grandfather (not their uncle), but King Gustav Adolf himself married 2 British women Margaret of Conaught and Louise Mountbatten and so his experience would have made the 'giving away' acceptable. Carl Gustav's sisters and aunt (Ingrid) never had succession rights and were not inline to the throne so being given away wasn't as much of an issue, and keep in mind the different times and value systems of the 1930s and early '60s. We have moved on from then. In the 1970s both Carl Gustav's sister Christina and CG himself walked with their partners down the aisle together, in accordance with their church tradition.
 
The others monarch and spouse, heir(ess)'s spouse) So while the monarch is not the Head of the Lutheran church they are required to members of that church.
That´s new to me. As much as I know it´s just Monarch and heir(s)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom