Writes Ms. Mary Kochan of Catholic Lane:
There was no pretending that this marriage was merely about the two young lovers and their “feelings.” Despite the fairy-tale aspects and all the Cinderella references, this wedding anchored their marriage into a familial and social order that goes way beyond them in time and geography. Contra the modern conception of the atomized individual, both families were present and involved as though “t]he future of humanity passes by way of the family” (Familiaris Consortio), because indeed it does. Human beings do not create themselves; they do not create their own identities. They discover who they are and for (blessedly, still) most that discovery takes place in a family context, where roles of son or daughter, nephew or niece, brother or sister, weave the texture of life.Further:
Just as human beings do not create themselves, they do not create marriage. Marriage is an estate given to man by his Creator and human beings stand under the judgment of God regarding how seriously they take it. There was no mincing of words on that score and everything attending the ceremony underscored the sacred nature of the proceedings. The couple did not use the wedding to showcase their hobbies or any other frivolity. They married in a sacred place, the most opulent and venerable space available to them given their station in life. Their wedding was presided over by the highest ranking clerics available to them. And the ceremony was accompanied by beautiful sacred music, some traditional and some composed especially to mark the occasion – but composed, as was their own prayer, in accord with the religious tradition they both inherited and assented to, screwed deeply into the sacred history of that heritage and thus timeless. Timeless the music, timeless the readings, timeless the prayers, and even the dress, for it is by such timelessness that we celebrate what is transcendent.
Woman then is a gift to man in a special way, something for him to “unwrap” and treasure. Hence the handing over of her by her father; hence the veil; hence the virginal white of the gown. And here come the cynics to remind us that they have lived together already for four years. Yes, but they did not on that account forgo the ceremonial giving and rightly so, for while the gift may have been opened illegitimately before, the giving here was still real – some things are honored even in the breach and you could see it in her eyes. They no longer live a lie, but William has in the old, but so true, terminology, “made an honest woman of her” — they tell the truth now, to each other and the world. The woman is given to the man and the world should pause and ponder.
Among other things, this means that there was no pretending that this man and woman could have been interchangeable with two men or two women. Imagine for a moment that Prince William had announced at 17 that he was “gay” and taken up with another young man. Would there have been a royal wedding and perhaps a new heir gotten by means of a lesbian surrogate and a turkey baster? No. It would not be. And we don’t say, “It would not be” with a proper British accent and a tone that indicates we simply mean “It just isn’t done.” No, we mean it would not exist. In the face of the homosexual agenda and all its propaganda, this wedding proclaimed the truth of marriage and showed homosexual pretense up for the play-acting absurdity that it is. Marriage is something, the lifelong union of man and woman, and marriage has ends – purposes – the chief among them being the procreation of children.
H/T: Tea at Trianon