Sign of the Times

From the Associated Press:

LONDON – The once hidebound royal family seems to have caught up with Britain's tolerant public in the three decades that separated Prince Charles' marriage to Diana Spencer from the wedding of their first born.

Few people — royal or otherwise — seem bothered by the fact that Prince William and his fiancee, Kate Middleton, have been living together off and on during the course of their eight-year romance, which began in university days.

That's a marked turnaround from the days preceding Charles and Diana's 1981 marriage. At that time, there was a general expectation that Diana would not have dated before her engagement to the heir to the throne, and her own uncle came out publicly to declare her a "bona fide" virgin.

It's sad that cohabitation has become so normalized within a generation or two. That which was once considered a grave scandal is hardly afforded a yawn these days. It's all the more frustrating that this change is presented as enlightened progress, and the alternative as "hidebound". It's also sad that the Church of England's standards are so low, as they evidently could care less about proper marriage preparation and about encouraging abstinence until marriage. Sad, but not at all surprising, given the state of that communion.
_____

Here's another shallow take, featured on MSNBC: For modern royal bride, virginity doesn't matter.

To read an articulate presentation of the case against cohabitation, check out this article from Relevant Magazine:

Research has found that unwed couples who choose to live together have less reverence for the institution of marriage and less confidence that it will last. Lower expectations weaken a couple's resolve to stay together, even after they make the transition from cohabitation to marriage.

Research also shows that the high rate at which cohabitors break up reinforces the notion that intimate relationships are fragile and fleeting. Those who have already experienced the collapse of an intimate cohabiting relationship generally have less hope that their marriages will last and more quickly accept divorce as a way to address marital turmoil.

Perhaps relevant as well is a couple's understanding of the link between commitment and intimacy. For those who marry first, the decision to give lifelong care and love to one's partner comes before the pleasures of married life, including sexual intimacy. The couple promises, in effect, not to seek the gratification of their strongest desires from one another until they commit to a life of mutual service and faithfulness.

Postponing intimate life becomes a way for the couple to express their devotion to one another. From the outset, commitment to the well-being of one's partner is given priority over personal satisfaction. The couple who marries first understands that devotion does not stem from the joys of intimate living, but serves as the foundation for those joys.