Status
Not open for further replies.

Travis Fentiman

Puritan Board Freshman
Some of the early puritans refused to wear wedding rings as Romanism in their day had caused wedding rings to bear a commonly superstitious meaning. To wear them was to affirm that meaning, and was hence scandalous. Some persons today teach that it is wrong to wear wedding rings.

However, as wedding rings in many cultures do not bear that superstitious meaning today, nor is it even known that they ever did bear that meaning, to prohibit wedding rings on this account is to revive the knowledge of idolatry, which is contrary to the purpose of Scriptural teaching.

It should also be noted that numerous of the reformers and puritans did approve of wedding rings, and made frequent positive allusions to them, such as the Westminster divine, Samuel Rutherford.

Learn more about this subject and what Scripture and the Westminster documents have to say about it, here:

Feel free to debate the matter below, if you so desire.
 

NaphtaliPress

Administrator
Staff member
This is why the Dec 25th tree is not an idol (necessarily), why we use the names of the days of the week, and conversely why ongoing corrupt RCC practices remain monuments of idolatry to be handled like poison, such as this whole 'holy' week.
 

Bill The Baptist

Puritan Board Graduate
This is why the Dec 25th tree is not an idol (necessarily), why we use the names of the days of the week, and conversely why ongoing corrupt RCC practices remain monuments of idolatry to be handled like poison, such as this whole 'holy' week.

I agree. We must focus our energies in fighting the genuine paganism of the RCC and not phony paganism such as wedding rings.
 

Pergamum

Ordinary Guy (TM)
The Puritans didn't wear wedding bands because the rings just broke when they did dead-lifts and heavy squats.

That's my theory gained from personal experience.
 

Travis Fentiman

Puritan Board Freshman
What was the superstitious meaning?

He is the superstitious Romanist ritual (it is often adapted and truncated in modern Romanist weddings):


Then the Priest sprinkles them with holy water. The Priest then blesses the rings which have been placed on a small salver saying:

Priest: Our help is in the name of the Lord, who made heaven and earth, O Lord hear my prayer and let my cry come unto thee, the Lord be with you, and with thy Spirit.

Priest: Bless the Lord. O Lord, this ring and this man we bless in your name. Give him unbroken loyalty in that it is to be a husband in peace and obedience to thy will and may their mutual love live forever, through Christ our Lord.

Then the Priest sprinkles the rings with Holy Water in the form of a cross and holds one of them out to [Groom’s name]. Then [Groom’s name] says to [Bride’s name]:​

Groom: With this name, I wed you:

In the name of the Father ([Groom] places the ring on the [Bride’s] left thumb)
and in the name of the Son (he moves it to her index finger)

and in the name of the Holy Spirit (he moves it to her middle finger)

Amen (he places it on her ring finger and leaves it there)

Then [Groom] places gold and silver coins into [Bride’s] hand saying:

Groom: This gold and silver I give you, tokens of my worldly goods.

[The Bride] then places the other ring on [Groom]’s finger...​
 

SavedSinner

Puritan Board Freshman
On the continent, in Germany, the reformed wore the ring on the opposite hand as the Lutherans. Also Reformed say the name of the Lord's Prayer backwards from the Lutherans and Rome: Reformed "Our Father" instead of Lutheran "Father Our".
 

TylerRay

Puritan Board Graduate

Regi Addictissimus

Completely sold out to the King
I will be honest. I haven't gotten around to reading it. I put it on here so those interested would have access to the material being referenced. Did I really link to Anglican without verifying he was a Puritan!? The horror! No wonder I had never heard of him.
 

TylerRay

Puritan Board Graduate
I will be honest. I haven't gotten around to reading it. I put it on here so those interested would have access to the material being referenced. Did I really link to Anglican without verifying he was a Puritan!? The horror! No wonder I had never heard of him.
It's a good sermon--he's certainly an evangelical Calvinist, just not a Puritan, technically. Of course, some people will say that Spurgeon, Ryle, and Chalmers are all puritans.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top