Nevertheless, a simple look at the Catholic Encyclopedia provides us with this: “Further in many places it ultimately became and still remains the custom for bride and bridegroom to present each other mutually with rings as a pledge of fidelity, and this is in fact the symbolical meaning attached to the ring in the modern ritual of the Church, as the form for its blessing plainly signifies. Perhaps the first trace of the use of two rings occurs in the early Spanish Ordines.”
—
In fact, any simpleton who knows the history of Catholic customs in the Iberian peninsula and in Latin America knows the ancient practice of the use of two rings throughout Souther Europe — uncommon in northern Europe, and, consequently, in North America. Trent, as always, was perfect.

From:
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2005/is_4_36/ai_104635088

A “Real Man’s Ring”: Gender and the Invention of Tradition - American Double Ring Ceremony, 1920s Male Engagement Ring
Journal of Social History, Summer, 2003 by Vicki Howard

In 1944, a Catholic priest turned to the American Ecclesiastical Review for advice on whether the “double ring” marriage ceremony was permitted. If it was allowed, he asked, “is the prayer for the blessing of the ring, as found in the Ritual, said in the plural number, and do groom and bride successively place a blessed ring each on the finger of the other, saying the accustomed words, ‘With this ring, etc.?’” Among Catholics and others prior to World War Two, most marriage vows took place with one wedding band. The Roman Ritual called only for the blessing of the bride’s ring. The Catholic journal concluded that as the groom’s ring was a matter of custom and not legislation, “it is custom which will govern the manner in which it is to be carried out.” In 1951, the issue was taken up again, only now the journal concluded that “no objection can be set forth against the blessing of the second ring along with the ring of the bride,” even though the Roman Ritual made no provision for the practice. By 1956, the jo urnal’s Catholic authorities once again addressed the question, stating finally that the Congregation of Sacred Rites permitted the double ring ceremony and that the blessing was to be said only once but in the plural. As this extended discussion in the American Ecclesiastical Review suggests, everyday consumer practices transformed religious ritual.

(1) Journal of Social History, Summer, 2003 by Vicki Howard

(1.) “The Double Ring Ceremony,” American Ecclesiastical Review (October 1944), 311. “The Double Ring Ceremony Again,” American Ecclesiastical Review (February 1947), 146. “Double Ring Ceremony,” American Ecclesiastical Review (September 1951), 225-6. “Double Ring Ceremony,” American Ecclesiastical Review (May 1956), 351-2.

I have the Rituale to back up my statement. Please back up yours that “double-ring ceremonies” were customary throughout Catholic Europe, in many different regions…

“If, however, in any provinces, other laudable customs and ceremonies are in use besides the foregoing in the celebration of the Sacrament of Matrimony, the holy Council of Trent desires that they should be retained” (see Decree on the Reformation of Marriage)

“Double-ring ceremonies” were customary throughout Catholic Europe, in many different regions…

NYC is all screwed up in my opinion (no offense to the good souls there); but you’re probably viewed *everywhere* as crazy with a letter to the editor like that.

It was good the “Wyman’s” take it as a joke to some degree instead of being too serious or widesweeping, perhaps similar to the posts on this blog by Ambrosius “Williamson”; otherwise it would merit a response from a “faithful” Catholic like myself…haha.

However, the apparent lack of cooperation in obtaining the traditional wedding/Mass must have been a source of suffering to some extent; but you were fortunate to get the marriage of your life done in such a manner.

We’re pretty happy about the whole thing — and yes, that was a phrase suggested by the WSJ people.

Iacobus: what would you have had us do?

“In 1988, a sympathetic Pope John Paul II asked that bishops provide ‘wide and generous’ access to the traditional liturgy. But stingy clerics, who regard devotees of the Old Mass as retrograde, often ignored this request, a form of defiance that the current pope is obviously well aware and determined to correct.”

I have a friend in the St. Joseph’s Seminary(Dunwoodie) for the Archdiocese of New York. He is extremely positive about the Tridentine Rite. I have gone to many Tridentine masses with him and every time he comments on the reverence and the beauty of the mass. He is very positive about the old mass and the community that often surrounds it. I think the above quote is true when it mentions “stingy clerics” because many of the young priests in the regular diocesan seminaries that I know are very open to the use of the Old Mass. (At least St. Paul, MN and Dunwoodie NY). In addition Most of the newly ordained priests in St. Paul, MN do not oppose a broader use of the Traditional Latin Mass.

I think there is hope in the younger generation of priest. Maybe you won’t have to think twice about walking near a NYC chancery at night in a few years.

Another far less informed article on things Trad in NYC here.

(Of course, my heart was gladdened they invited me to rouse the rabble with them.)