Tradition expects a wedding ceremony
to include an exchange of rings, or at least, a
ring being put on the bride's finger. Exchanging
rings during the ceremony is, for most couples, a
must. However, being ringless on the
day will not create a problem with the legality of
your marriage. Despite lingering folklore, "
With
this ring I thee wed" is not a legally
required statement. And exchanging rings is not a
legal requirement. In fact, the Marriage Act
doesn't mention wedding rings at all.
So why do we still regard the exchange of ring to
be a central moment in both civil and religious
(Christian) wedding ceremonies? And why is it
generally expected that, by the time a
heterosexual couple is declared married, the bride
will have a ring on her finger, but the groom may
or may not?
History has a lot to do with it. And so has the
human habit of attributing new ideas to an origin
long ago and far away in order to convey an
impression of rock-solid provenance!
The Egyptians had nothing
to do with it
Ancient Egyptians did make and wear rings. And they
may well have given their lovers and spouses rings
made of precious metals or other materials. But no
evidence survives of any ceremony or ritual,
involving rings related to marriage in ancient
Egypt. It would seem that wedding rings were not an
ancient Egyptian custom.
Nonetheless, I've lost count of the number of times
I've read that wearing a ring as a visible sign of
the wearer's married status is a tradition that
dates back to ancient Egypt, an uncritically
repeated but unsubstantiated 'factoid' that's often
embellished by the suggestion that wedding rings at
that time were made of plaited grass, leather, or
other materials unlikely to survive.
There is also no evidence to suggest that ancient
Egyptians believed that a vein (supposedly
subsequently named
vena amoris - literally
vein
of love - by the Romans)
ran from the left ring finger directly to the
heart. Does such a vein even exist? No, The
blood vessels in both hands are pretty much all the
same, and there isn't one vein in them that is
linked directly to the heart. In fact, the whole
story probably originated in medieval times,
demonstrates the fairly common desire to credit an
ancient origin fo custom, despite the fact that in
many countries the wedding ring is worn on the right
hand.
Rings
in Ancient Greece and Rome
In Ancient Greece and Rome, the giving of a
ring to the bride seems to have been a pledge as the
earnest of the future fulfilment of the groom's side
of the marriage contract. It wasn't part of any
ceremony of marriage.
The Catholic
Church
It was the early Christian
church that first approved rings as a sign of
commitment to marriage. In the 12th century, Pope
Innocent III decreed that that a groom was required
to give his bride a ring as part of a formal
proceeding during which a bride was required to
promise to obey the groom and to thereafter, as a
wife, submit to her husband.
The ceremony, however, was not originally a marriage
ceremony as we understand it today. When we look at
liturgical books used throughout Europe in the early
middle Ages, the ceremonies that involved exchanges
of wedding rings were betrothals, regarded to be
legally binding although they marked the period of
engagement.
It was the Council of Trent (1545-1563), called to
affirm basic Catholic doctrines against statements
made by members of the Protestant faith, that made
the giving of a wedding ring during the marriage
ceremony, compulsory.
The Council codified the rite of marriage. In doing
so it made clear the Church's view that the
betrothal was a private, family agreement, while
marriage was a sacrament. What had been the
betrothal ceremony was incorporated in the rite of
marriage in the form of the consent questions asked
of the couple before they take their vows. The "I
do/I will" questions.
The Council also decreed a specific ritual for the
placing of a ring on the bride's finger, thereby
making the giving of a ring, compulsory. What had
earlier been a symbol of earnest, became a symbol of
the marriage, and specifically a symbol of the role
and commitment of the bride as a wife. In modern
terms, the bride was tagged as a married woman!
The Church of
England
In 1559 the Book of Common Prayer
mentioned a ring as part of the marriage rite. The
ring was consecrated (as the essence of the marriage
bond), and linked by the words spoken by the groom
to the bestowal of ‘earnest money’. This was a nod
to Anglo-Saxon custom, where a ring was originally a
pledge given to the bride, along with gifts, before
the marriage took place.
The 1559 service required the groom to say '
With
this rynge I thee wed' as he placed
the ring on the bride's finger, followed by
'this
gold and silver I thee give’ as he handed her
a purse filled with gold and silver coins, before he
continuing, ’
with my body I thee worship, and
with all my worldly chatels I thee endow.’
The
Puritans cancelled
wedding rings
When James I was on the way to his coronation,
he was petitioned by Puritans to remove the giving
of a marriage ring from the marriage service on the
grounds that it was "popish" and not mentioned in
the Bible. Their petition failed in England, but in
Colonial America marriage ceremonies were pared down
to the consent question. Instead of a wedding ring,
it became the custom for a man to present his
intended with a thimble, being an object of
practical use.
The Groom
finally gets a ring
The double-ring ceremony, where both
the bride and groom receive a ring, is a recent
innovation. The jewellery industry started marketing
wedding rings for men in the 19th century,but it
didn't really start to catch on until World War II.
And it did not become virtually universally accepted
until quite late in the 20th century, largely due to
the global marketing efforts of the manufacturers of
rings.
Wedding
rings in the modern
civil ceremony
The exchange of rings, with or
without ring vows, remains a much-loved and central
part of both religious and civil ceremonies. It is
so engrained that, perpetuating the idea that you
can't get married without rings, celebrants often
carry a set of cheap rings to substitute when and if
the couple forgets to
bring their rings.
In religious ceremonies the rings are blessed. In
civil ceremonies the rings may be passed around the
guests in a secular blessing ritual,
warming of the
rings. The celebrant will often share some
thoughts about the symbolism of the rings,
mentioning endless circles, precious metals,
fidelity, love, and a symbolic representation of the
vows made by the couple.
It's your
choice
Go with the tradition
or forge your own tradition. It's your choice in a
civil ceremony.Rings or no rings. Ring vows or a
silent exchange or exchange of rings during your
legal vows. Substitute something else that's
meaningful to you both. Be pragmatic, as several of
my couples have been, and forgo exchanging rings in
the ceremony because you plan purchase your rings
duty free as you leave for your overseas honeymoon,
or buy them overseas where they are cheaper.
Whatever you decide, it's fine!
Thanks for reading!