The Royal Wedding Sermon

Well. That was, without doubt, the best wedding sermon I have ever heard. The Bishop of London is to be commended. Complete with a quotation from St Catherine of Siena “whose feast day it is”, and ending with the Maundy Thursday motet “Ubi caritas”, signifying service in love.

A fine service in every way. Beautiful music, majestic hymns, dignified language. May what has begun so promisingly, be blessed by God and brought to joyful conclusion at the great wedding feast to come.

PS. Anyone know who the two nuns were?

About Schütz

I am Catholic, married to Cathy, father of Maddy & Mia. Since 2002, I have been the Executive Officer of the Ecumenical & Interfaith Commission of the Archdiocese of Melbourne. I was once a Lutheran pastor, but a "year of grace" and soul-searching led me into the Catholic Church. It was a bumpy ride, but with the support of my (still Lutheran) wife, I was finally confirmed on June 16, 2003.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to The Royal Wedding Sermon

  1. Stephen K says:

    Hear! Hear! Loved all the hymns and motets. Loved the sermon etc. As you say. Hear, hear!

    • Schütz says:

      I’m watching the Beeb’s commentary at the moment and rather surprised to see they have replaced the pre-wedding fashionistas with some chaps who really know something worth knowing, including historian Simon Shama, who remarked positively about the solemnity of the occasion: “Solemnity is for the people”. Well said.

  2. Matthias says:

    Yes I agree Hear hear and the Lord (Anglican) Bishop’s sermon was spot on. Loved the hymns too. ?Nonsense =sorry i must be thick

    • Peter says:

      I suspect our intrepid host means the two nuns.I would love to know as well.
      And yes,an excellent homily.What better way to start than with a quote from one of the three female Doctors of the Catholic Church.

      • Schütz says:

        Yes, sorry. That was a typo produced by the spell checker on my iphone. I did mean “the two nuns”. Apologies for the confusion and any offense caused.

  3. Hannah says:

    Just finished watching it all ..beautiful, reverent and we wish them a happy future together with many blessings. Indeed even my non believing husband thought it was reverent and the words “just perfect”
    H

  4. Clara says:

    The link to the sermon is: http://www.officialroyalwedding2011.org/blog/2011/April/29/The-Bishop-of-London-s-Sermon
    I thought it was so appropriate in every way – and my being a republican!

  5. PM says:

    Yes indeed – the C of E at its best. It may, one hopes, also help put the new Catholic Missal translation into perpsective: who said more elevated language is impossible for ordinary people to understand?

    • Schütz says:

      Interesting comment that Deacon John has on his blog that the Anglican Ordinariate might be a source of interest for Catholic brides-to-be, as that is where they will find the closest approximation of the ceremony they saw last night.

  6. Tony Bartel says:

    It was a disappointment to many that the Bishop of London was not made Archbishop of Canterbury the last time that See was vacant.

  7. David,

    You do yourself no favours by your dismissive descriptor of the Sisters of the Church who were in the Sanctuary during the Royal Nuptials.

    The Community of the Sisters of the Church was founded by Emily Ayckbowm, the daughter of a Chester vicar, in 1870, and now has houses in England, Canada, Australia and the Solomon Islands.

    One of the sisters I presume to be the Australian-born Sr Judith who was appointed as Chaplain to the Abey in 2007. Perhaps she brought along a companion for a semblance of gender balance in the sacred space!!!

    There, just a bit of google research with no nonsense!!!

    Tony

    • Schütz says:

      Oh dear, I have gotten myself into some trouble here that was entirely unintended. I made this entry on my iPhone and it appears that the spellchecker changed my word “nuns” to “nonsense” in my original post. I couldn’t understand what you were getting so angry about -nor the other comments in this regard. No offense was meant. On the contrary, I found their presence added to the dignity of the situation. Humble apologies for the error.

  8. John Nolan says:

    The music was in fact rather disappointing. The Rutter piece was in his usual saccharine style and the Ubi Caritas wasn’t a patch on Durufle. Parry’s I Was Glad is a splendid anthem and was used at the centenary Mass at the London Oratory back in 1984 (the Mass setting was Beethoven in C).

    • Schütz says:

      Oh, I think I might call that being “niggardly” too, John. Not at all disappointing, in view of what might have happened. For instance, it was good that Sir Elton John kept his place in his seat and wasn’t given a grand piano to play on…

  9. Dear David,

    I would like to give you the benefit of the doubt even though your original post had the word nonsense in parenthesis which suggests it was quite intentional.

    Tony

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *