The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #601  
Old 02-03-2020, 11:00 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 12,843
Quote:
Originally Posted by CyrilVladisla View Post
When did marriage banns stop being announced at the church where the wedding is to occur?
I don't know.

I have only been going to CoE churches since the 1960s and have never heard the banns being read. Most weekends the various churches have hosted multiple weddings but no banns ever read.

The main reason they were read was to allow people time to object but with modern media that isn't an issue.
__________________

  #602  
Old 02-04-2020, 03:32 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Oxford, United Kingdom
Posts: 234
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
I don't know.



I have only been going to CoE churches since the 1960s and have never heard the banns being read. Most weekends the various churches have hosted multiple weddings but no banns ever read.



The main reason they were read was to allow people time to object but with modern media that isn't an issue.

Marriage banns are definitely read in CofE churches. I married in 2012 and mine had to be read in the church we were marrying and the parish we lived in. They had to be read 3 times and you get a certificate. Registry offices list marriage x weeks before too.
__________________

  #603  
Old 02-04-2020, 04:32 AM
Lilyflo's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
I don't know.

I have only been going to CoE churches since the 1960s and have never heard the banns being read. Most weekends the various churches have hosted multiple weddings but no banns ever read.

The main reason they were read was to allow people time to object but with modern media that isn't an issue.
Banns are read out in the CofE unless you are married by licence.

Here's the info about banns from the CofE:
https://www.yourchurchwedding.org/ar...ding-of-banns/

Common Licences:
https://www.yourchurchwedding.org/ar...mmon-licences/

Special Licences:
https://www.yourchurchwedding.org/ar...cial-licences/
  #604  
Old 02-04-2020, 05:21 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 739
I don't see why it can't be televised. There's always interest in royal weddings. If people aren't interested, or object to its being on TV, they don't have to watch!
  #605  
Old 02-04-2020, 05:25 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 12,843
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemon Lyman View Post
Marriage banns are definitely read in CofE churches. I married in 2012 and mine had to be read in the church we were marrying and the parish we lived in. They had to be read 3 times and you get a certificate. Registry offices list marriage x weeks before too.
Interesting

I have had friends ask for the banns to be read and been told - we don't do that anymore - in both the UK and Australia.

As I said I have only been going to CoE churches for the past 50 or so years and I have never heard any banns read.
  #606  
Old 02-04-2020, 08:10 AM
Helen.CH's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: May 2019
Location: Chambery, France
Posts: 305
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lilyflo View Post
Banns are read out in the CofE unless you are married by licence.

Here's the info about banns from the CofE:
https://www.yourchurchwedding.org/ar...ding-of-banns/

Common Licences:
https://www.yourchurchwedding.org/ar...mmon-licences/

Special Licences:
https://www.yourchurchwedding.org/ar...cial-licences/
Very interesting indeed, thanks.
Taken from the same website, see here
Reading of Banns
Most Church of England marriages will require banns to be published before the wedding can take place. You won’t need to arrange banns until about four months before your wedding date. Read more about what’s special and important about banns.

If there is not enough notice given for the banns to be read before the marriage is due to take place, or in the case of the marriage of people who are not nationals of a country within the European Economic Area, or if one or both of you does not live in England or Wales, it is recommended that the Licence procedure be used rather than banns.

And there is further information provided.
  #607  
Old 02-04-2020, 08:23 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 7,197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
I don't know.

I have only been going to CoE churches since the 1960s and have never heard the banns being read. Most weekends the various churches have hosted multiple weddings but no banns ever read.

The main reason they were read was to allow people time to object but with modern media that isn't an issue.
Im a churchgoer and often hear banns being read.. Most people are married by banns.
  #608  
Old 02-04-2020, 09:09 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 5,207
According to the DM (yes I know but sometimes they get it right) the wedding will be May 29.
A reception at BP, but still no venue for the ceremony.
  #609  
Old 02-04-2020, 09:15 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 2,918
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirabel View Post
According to the DM (yes I know but sometimes they get it right) the wedding will be May 29.
A reception at BP, but still no venue for the ceremony.
Wouldn't it be more usual to select the venue for the ceremony first?
  #610  
Old 02-04-2020, 09:23 AM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 12,122
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
Wouldn't it be more usual to select the venue for the ceremony first?
I'm sure they have...but if they are doing a private wedding they may not release much info at all..they sure haven't as of yet anyway!


LaRae
  #611  
Old 02-04-2020, 10:34 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 739
If the Queen's said they can have the reception at Buckingham Palace, that is really kind and supportive of her. It's very hard luck for Beatrice that what should be a happy time for her is being affected by the goings-on with Prince Andrew, and also with Harry and Meghan.

There are all sorts of rumours flying around the internet! Beatrice has had to postpone the wedding because of everything else that's going on. The Palace wants the wedding to be a big deal as a show of royal unity. Believe what you will :-) . It's never spoken about, but there must have been plenty of words spoken behind the scenes over the decision not to ask either the Duke and Duchess of Windsor or Prince Philip's sisters to the Queen's wedding, so she'll know that wedding planning can be difficult.
  #612  
Old 02-04-2020, 11:16 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 7,565
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemon Lyman View Post
Marriage banns are definitely read in CofE churches. I married in 2012 and mine had to be read in the church we were marrying and the parish we lived in. They had to be read 3 times and you get a certificate. Registry offices list marriage x weeks before too.
I've been married twice, decades apart but both times in Australia. On both occasions I married in a CofE service and both times the banns were read. We were there when they were read. And that was certainly since the 1960s!

However, as far as Beatrice and Edo are concerned I'd be very very surprised if, like other members of the BRF, they aren't going to be married by special licence.
  #613  
Old 02-04-2020, 11:43 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 739
There used to be a prestige value to having a special licence, although that was presumably because most people couldn’t afford one. Mrs Bennet in Pride and Prejudice insisted that Elizabeth and Mr Darcy “must and should be married by special licence” – presumably to prove a point to everyone that her daughter had caught a very rich man with aristocratic connections. Either that or because she wanted the wedding ASAP in case he changed his mind. That idea's a bit outdated now :-) , but I'd still assume that Beatrice would be married by special licence.
  #614  
Old 02-04-2020, 11:49 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 5,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alison H View Post
Mrs Bennet in Pride and Prejudice insisted that Elizabeth and Mr Darcy “must and should be married by special licence” – presumably to prove a point to everyone that her daughter had caught a very rich man with aristocratic connections. Either that or because she wanted the wedding ASAP in case he changed his mind.
Very unlikely.
In those days a woman could break an engagement, but no gentleman could offer such an insult to a lady.

(It did happen, but a man like Darcy wouldn't do so).
Mrs. Bennet just wanted to show off.
  #615  
Old 02-04-2020, 12:03 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 7,197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pranter View Post
You'd have to ask the Queen why...if Andrew is to be believed, he pretty much said in that interview the Queen determined where Eugenie married.



LaRae
in the present circumstances a big showy wedding would look awful.
  #616  
Old 02-04-2020, 12:44 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Mokane, United States
Posts: 644
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23 View Post
If the public is not paying for it, it can and should be as grand as the bride and groom want it to be.

I see no reason whatsoever why it cannot be at WA. Beatrice is a born Royal princess, the granddaughter of a reigning queen.
My sentiments exactly. I do completely understand the perception factor and that so much is about how it will be perceived regardless of the actual facts behind who is paying, why things are handled a certain way, etc. but the fact remains that Bea and Edo should not be made to pay for the mistakes of her father and as both the granddaughter of the reigning monarch and the oldest royal princess of her generation a wedding at the Abbey would actually be highly appropriate. If they were to forgo the carriage procession, balcony appearance, etc. then the level of show and grandeur would be reduced to an acceptable level and, frankly, it would be a lovely gesture of support for Bea from the Queen given how difficult and overshadowed this has all been for her through no fault of her own.
  #617  
Old 02-04-2020, 12:53 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 739
The government in 1947 said that people wouldn't want the Queen and Prince Philip to have a big wedding, because of post-war austerity. They couldn't have been more wrong. OK, this is different, but there's no ill-will towards Beatrice, and people would have no right to complain about anything if the public weren't paying.
  #618  
Old 02-04-2020, 01:04 PM
ACO ACO is offline
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 3,284
I think Bea should have the wedding she wants. People will always complain regardless.
  #619  
Old 02-04-2020, 01:46 PM
Lilyflo's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,157
I'm going to say something that might sound harsh but I'm just trying to be realistic. I think whatever Bea & Edo choose, they need it to be something that requires minimal security because it's the British taxpayer who pays for it. There was grumbling over Eugenie's but this time it would be far more. This isn't against Bea, it's about her father. Think of how it looks: he's a man who stated publicly that he doesn't regret his friendship with a sex offender because it was useful to him personally. His own daughters weren't groomed, abused or trafficked because they were protected and privileged but he showed no empathy or concern for other people's daughters who were victims of his 'useful' friend.

As far as I'm concerned, Bea should have whatever kind of wedding she wants as long as I'm not paying for it and I'm not willing to pay for the security either. Prince Andrew should pay for it. He owns a £13 million Chalet for starters so he can afford it. If the British taxpayer is expected to stump up while he's sitting on a fortune, there will be more than grumbles.
  #620  
Old 02-04-2020, 01:51 PM
O-H Anglophile's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 3,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lilyflo View Post
I'm going to say something that might sound harsh but I'm just trying to be realistic. I think whatever Bea & Edo choose, they need it to be something that requires minimal security because it's the British taxpayer who pays for it. There was grumbling over Eugenie's but this time it would be far more. This isn't against Bea, it's about her father. Think of how it looks: he's a man who stated publicly that he doesn't regret his friendship with a sex offender because it was useful to him personally. His own daughters weren't groomed, abused or trafficked because they were protected and privileged but he showed no empathy or concern for other people's daughters who were victims of his 'useful' friend.

As far as I'm concerned, Bea should have whatever kind of wedding she wants as long as I'm not paying for it and I'm not willing to pay for the security either. Prince Andrew should pay for it. He owns a £13 million Chalet for starters so he can afford it. If the British taxpayer is expected to stump up while he's sitting on a fortune, there will be more than grumbles.
But as long as Beatrice's grandmother, Uncle Charles and cousin William attend her wedding, the public will be paying for security.
__________________

Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Engagement of Princess Beatrice of York and Edoardo Mapelli Mozzi: September 26, 2019 JessRulz The Duke of York, Sarah Duchess of York, and Family 153 09-29-2019 02:36 AM
Princess Beatrice: Relationships Musings and Suggestions Pranter The Duke of York, Sarah Duchess of York, and Family 520 09-26-2019 07:26 AM




Popular Tags
#royalrelatives #royalgenes abdication anastasia 2020 baby names baptism biography bridal gown british royal family brownbitcoinqueen canada carolin chittagong clarence house coronavirus diana princess of wales dna dubai duke of sussex dutch royal family earl of snowdon emperor facts fantasy movie future general news thread george vi hill historical drama history hochberg house of windsor hypothetical monarchs introduction jewellery languages list of rulers luxembourg mail mary: crown princess of denmark northern ireland norway palestine pless prince dimitri princess alexia (2005 -) princess chulabhorn princess dita princess eugenie princess of orange queen consort queen elizabeth ii queen mathilde random facts royal court royal dress-ups royal jewels royalty of taiwan royal wedding royal wedding gown settings stuart swedish queen thailand tips tradition uae customs united kingdom united states of america von hofmannsthal working royals; full-time royals; part-time royals;


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:45 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020
Jelsoft Enterprises
×