Wearing a poppy is actually a plot point in The Unpleasantness at the Bellona Club* by Sayers.
Yes, and Mrs. Markle was holding back the “Amens” as well. I thought the homily was well chosen. Quite a few so-called Christians need reminding of what Jesus’s most basic message was. I hope the whole US Congress was watching.
He did drag on way to far with the fire analogy though. That had me cringing. This was a sophisticated and well educated audience, he didn’t need to drive the point in seventeen ways. By the time he got to the resolution he’d lost most of us. Which is a crying shame because he had an excellent point to make.
I’m so glad that Meghan didn’t let the day become about her dress. I’ve always felt that was a mistake on Diana’s part. The dress got far more attention than she did at that stage.
The cakewas a disappointment to me. From the description - lemon curd flavored cake with elderflower icing - it sounds delicious. But it was just nothing like the towering confection I was expecting.
I do appreciate Meghan’s simple and elegant aesthetic. But that went to the point of looking like an uneven crumb coat waiting for the fondant. Even the flowers appeared to be just real ones arranged on the plate rather than anything requiring confectionery artistry. (If they weren’t real, then I take it all back and declare it a masterpiece.)
You know, come to think of it, I don’t recall seeing the Obamas there. It was rumored they would come. Did they?
They were not invited since it was not an official state event, and even though the Obamas are personal friends with Harry, it would have been awkward since other political figures were not invited.
Yeah, the only political figures that I saw there were Nicholas Soames MP - a grandson of Winston Churchill and a family friend - and former PM John Major, who was appointed special guardian of William and Harry’s legal interests after Diana died.
I thought she was stunning, as well. What a combination of brains, beauty, and accomplishment.
I was up at 2:30 a.m. to watch, and sobbed intermittently. Why I care, I don’t know. I watched Diane and Charles’ wedding at a very impressionable age, though. So Diana was a figure all my life, and I/we all saw her sons born, grow, lose their mother with us, and now find their own loves. Public figures are like that.
There is something very moving to me, of course, in that Meghan Markle is biracial. In a time when division and hate seem to be surging back, let love bring us together. (Amen to the preacher.)
Also: dress! castle! pageantry! history! horsies! flowers!
It was just a lovely, lovely thing to watch in a world I find so depressing a lot of the time.
That’s definitely dialed back; he’s dialed up to about where your average white Southern preacher is on any given Sunday.
The black ones really get into it compared to Bishop Curry- check out Dr. Cosby of Houston’s Wheeler Avenue Baptist Church for an example.
I’m with the crowd that says that the Anglican preachers must be deathly dull if Curry was “hollering” or overly animated in any way.
During the bit when “God Save The Queen” was being sung, the camera was on Harry and Meghan. Both seemed to be mouthing it. He, of course, would be familiar with the lyrics but I wonder how familiar she is with it? It’s one of a long list of things that she’s likely not to be familiar with, given that she wasn’t raised in the UK.
I feel the same. Diana was only 2 years older than me, and watching her life play out made a big mark on me as well.
I am happy to see her boys are finding their own paths and doing so well without her. She gave them good life tools.
I already said this upthread, but I really dislike all the media comparisons between Diana/Kate/Meghan. There’s no comparison. For one thing, Diana was so very young when she married and in many ways really did not even “find herself” until she was about 27, which is about the age Kate was when she married William, and Meghan is older now than Charles was when he married Diana. Diana’s sons and their wives are all much more mature self-assured people as they enter into marriage, and thankfully seem to be doing it for love. They have made their life mistakes already, and because of their mother, had a little more room to do that. That’s the tragedy that is Diana, that her husband was never in love with her and her mistakes were on full display. 
I hope it’s not an ill omen that the wedding took place on the anniversary of Anne Boleyn’s execution… 
Anyway, here’s hoping that Harry’s marital career will be far more tranquil and more successful than another red-haired royal named Henry (which is, after all, Harry’s real given name).
It’s not like the lyrics are complicated or anything…
I’m curious what religious implication you think dress color has? In my nearly 50 years I’ve never heard of a religious leader caring what color a wedding dress (or suit) is.
My apologies! I saw the size of the church and assumed (like I said, I only really saw Presiding Bishop Curry’s sermon because it was being linked all over the place on my Facebook page).
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
It is probably just a cultural thing for me, having grown up Baptist in The South and taught to respect my Elders. Much was ingrained in me about what was proper and not proper by some very staunch women. So, not so much a religious leader, as it is just religious culture where I am from.
You are probably going to hate that you asked, because this is some real Old Guard Junior League Garden Club stuff that was still in play even up to the 90s, so here goes.
Social rules dictate that a first time bride can wear what ever color she chooses, most often white-white or one of the many versions of off-white (candlelight, ivory, eggshell). The most common reason a first time bride might opt for an off-white shade is that white-white is too stark for the complexion of some people and washes them out.
However, it is not acceptable for a second timer to wear white-white. White-white is for unsoiled women ;). Veils for second time brides are also frowned upon, flowers in the hair or a hat are the way to go. Veils signify purity and innocence, and if you have been married before, well… Many second time brides will wear a dress suit or coat dress and off-white is acceptable, but a pastel shade of blue, green, pink or yellow is best. With matching closed-toe shoes, of course. And always hose. Like the Brits, going bare-legged to Church is vulgar.
No wedding gown, whether you are getting married for the first time or the fifth, should ever be “sexy”. If it looks like a nightgown or lingere, it is for the wedding night.
I do not own a pair of red shoes, and if I did I would never, ever wear them to church. Oh, I have lingered longingly over more than one pair at the store, but all I hear is my Grandmother’s voice in my head saying “Red shoes are for streetwalkers and children”…:o
I know all this has gone by the wayside in most places now, but there are aspects of these rules that I feel should still apply, and I like it when I see it, it shows a certain respect for tradition. I am not sitting here trying to force my thinking off on anyone else, but I can say what I like and don’t like to see on a formal occasion. You can hit a point where you throw too many rules of decorum out the window.
It’s worth noting that white wedding dresses never had anything to do with the bride’s virginity. Queen Victoria wore white at her wedding and it started a trend that’s eventually spread throughout Western civilization. Originally the only thing it signified was that the bride’s family was rich enough to afford a widely impracticable dress that she’d never wear again (at least not without having it dyed another color). Personally I think white (any shade) wedding dresses are kinda boring and get impressed anytime a bride where’s a different color. Red is very popular in most Asian cultures (it’s considered wildly 
inappropriate in the West though).
Yes, I am aware of this. I probably should have noted that the Wedding Etiquette Rules I was discussing above evolved in the early and mid 20th Century, and obviously, pre-feminist movement. There’s a whole lot more to the Southern Wedding Belle Sorority Sister Culture, too, especially once you get into the whole who-is-supposed-to-fete-the-bride-with-a-shower thing, and what is an acceptable gift, duties of the Maid/Matron of Honor, it goes on and on, and can get quite dizzying. It all comes from a time when a woman’s world was quite limited, especially if you lived in a small town. Dictating proper behavior and grooming the next generation of young women in all things ladylike was really about they had to pour their energy into. I find a lot of it mostly amusing today, but it isn’t all necessarily bad.
I have a little book someone gave me years ago called A Southern Belle Primer: Or Why Princess Margaret Will Never be a Kappa Kappa Gamma. It contains an amusing anecdote about Princess Margaret on an American Tour sometime in the 1950s, and all the Southern society women were horrified that she smoked on the street and wore chiffon in the middle of the day, so common! A Kappa Girl would nev-ah commit such a faux paus! LMAO!!
So that’s where I am coming from. 
I appreciate your honest response and don’t hate that I asked at all!
I hate arbitrary social rules made up to control the economic and sexual behavior of women throughout history in the name of religion and tradition. I hate that women are trained from early years to judge each other’s looks and possible social status instead of support each other. I hate that women (though not men, never men) are still expected to wear their sexual history or lack thereof so others can see it and judge her on what should be the best day of her life thus far.
It’s only 29 words, and she would have known the cameras would be on her.
Sometimes there’s a second verse (“Thy choicest gifts in store” most of the time, and occasionally “Not in this land alone” at Commonwealth observances), and there’s a sudden flutter as most of the people in attendance start trying to find the words in the order of service.
Yes it is amusing that actual royals ended up being more relaxed about those things than petty bourgeoisie with aspirations (i.e. “Old Guard Junior League Garden Club”). Then again when you are marrying into royalty you only have to care if it will really upset the Queen, and she’s pretty much seen everything (which may be why she always looks unimpressed).
An export version with the steering wheel on the left, I noticed – and converted to electric, from the reports. Quite evocative of the mix of new with traditional.
Right! I do agree with you, and we have to be able to laugh at ourselves. Us Americans still have many factions among us who seem determined to create our own versions of fake Royalty. 