I’m totally down with a pink peep cosmo as a specialty wedding drink. In fact, it being easter and all, I’d also love a s’meep (smore + peep), a shirt that said “I’m hangin’ with my peeps”, and a larger than life peep. We might need these at our wedding.
If your first anniversary is paper, what’s your -1 anniversary?
I’m gonna say it should be a paperclip.
It’s 11 am in the morning here in New York City. One year from now, I’ll be busy at my church organizing the reception setup for my wedding that should start at around 1 pm. T minus 365 to the big day! AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.
Though, honestly, several large parts of our wedding planning are already done. We have 1 year till our wedding and we’ve already nailed the ceremony and reception venue, the wedding bands, her dress, our photographer, and we already know what kind of food we’re going to have. The big things are already lined up. All that’s left is the little details like decorations, what kind of socks I’ll wear, the invitations, how I’ll be sneaking Chula (my cat) and Twinkie (her dog) into the wedding reception, gifts for the bride and groom, book the honeymoon and setup any pre-arranged ransom payments so we won’t be kidnapped by drug lords or mad scientists (since my fiancee is a superhero), and all that jazz. It should be fun. I’m actually excited about the cake toppers. They won’t be the bird ones, they’ll be slightly different but I’m excited. Now we just need to get around to ordering them.
Sigh. Rick Warren did an interview with Christianity to Today to talk about gay marriage, the inauguration, the recession, and himself. In fact, it was mostly about him talking about himself. He is, after all, a personality. His churches and ministries are a mixture of a cult of personality and charisma that he reinforces through his speaking tours, his interviews, and his constant attempt at weaseling himself out of being labeled and being called out for what he does. He walks the fine line between integrity, commitment, and being a charlatan. His actions, and his mouth, tend not to agree with each other and he demands, and expects, that “others” will give any statement or action he does the benefit of any doubt. Everything he does is a positive gray and if it’s not seen as such, it is his detractors who are at fault, who are misinterpeting him, who are flawed. A rock is never just a rock it seems.
Rick Warren and I stand opposed on quite a few issues. We look at the same scripture, at the same religious traditions, at the same beliefs, at the same Trinity and His history with all people, and we come to different conclusions. That’s fine; Christianity is bigger than both Rick Warren and I. Where he sees literalism as religious tradition, I see cultural behaviors interfering with the work of the Holy Spirit. Where he sees a war between secularism and religion, I see a cultural struggle between science, the evolution of society, and the struggle with other. Where he sees persecution and reverse discrimination, I see a failure to approach oneself as critically as Scripture demands. Where he sees the story of the community of John’s expulsion from the synagogue as a required constant in the proclamation of the Gospel, I see a belief and faith structure that doesn’t realize that it is the synagogue. Where Rick Warren sees seekers as the primary mode of human existence, I see a failure to remember the young man who fled naked from the garden.
And on this day before Good Friday, I’m reminded of Peter’s 3 denials which I think Rick Warren, and his ilk, would do good to remember. Peter, standing tall, had no problem telling Jesus that Peter would not deny Jesus even if it lead to Peter’s death. Rick Warren always falls back on what “love” is. He, like many of the evangelical right, come under the misguided notion that “love” is less action and more a righteous of statement. He is right that we are commanded to love but he is wrong in believing that just by saying that, he does love. He is wrong when he believes that he is outside the political system when he brings presidential candidates to his church. He is wrong when he tries to act independent from his cultural surroundings when he, in reality, is merely an expression of it. He is wrong in embracing diversity while caught in a lie about his support for Proposition 8. He is, in a sense, trying to falsify who he is, where he stands, and what makes him who he is and how he is viewed on a national stage. His mind is turned toward human things.
Rick Warren comes out and lies, saying “You can discuss any issue except sexuality. That’s off the table. It’s the one area that is taboo.“. Coming from a member of the evangelical right, I find that to be very funny. Proposition 8, the gay marriage bans in 26 states, the fight against feminism, and even today’s attempt in Iowa of republicans in the state house trying to strong arm a gay marriage amendment, shows that sexuality is not off the table. It never has been and never will be. For almost 2000 years, Christian churches have been talking about sex. For 10,000 years, modern civilization has as well. We, as a species, like talking about sex. What Rick Warren is really saying is that sexuality is taboo because people disagree with him and they won’t shut up about it. For someone who believes that disagreements are not a sign of an inability to love, that is a very curious statement to make.
Rick Warren struggles with what we all struggle with, the idea that it is difficult to look past the film covering our eyes. Our cultural heritage, our language, our societal training, our parents, our families, our loved ones, our peers, and our little private worlds of individuality, all make it difficult to love as God loved us. Today, as Christians reflect on the Last Supper, it’s time to really embrace the new commandment that we were given. Look beyond our own private enterprise and turn to those that Jesus turned too – the rejected, the minorities, the outcasts, the sick, the poor, and the unrighteous. And not to make the mistake of Rick Warren and to miss the fact that us Christians, as the super majority religious belief system in the United States, are not just the persecuted but also the persecutors. We reject, we cast out, we separate, and we judge. And until we acknowledge that, believe it, and understand it, we will always make the mistake to create our own definition of love, a definition that falsely reflects human things at the expense of what comes from us above.
We’re not doing STDs.
I wonder if I’m the only one that has a really hard time seeing STD, STDs, STD on wedding boards and blogs and not automatically go back to 10th grade health class. Do you remember your STD lecture? I remember my STD lecture. And the slides. Those lovely lovely slides. They were very vivid and disgusting. I had that class right after lunch. Good times good times.
My fiancee and I decided to not do save the dates as a way to save money and also as a way to avoid waste and over exposing our friends to our wedding. As much as we are now “one of those couples that talk about their wedding all the time”, we try to avoid being like that too much. Sure, it’s a big part of our life right now but it’s not the only thing. We also have our cats, dogs, my job, uh….stuff we read on the internet, stuff we read on the news, my love for two ply tissue…um… Ok. I’ll think of some more stuff to talk about then.
Plus, most of our friends and family are on the internet. After telling our close friends and family about our engagement, we announced it on facebook. Everyone we’re going to invite is on facebook or knows someone who is. And if we’re not in normal communication with these people regularly, we decided to not invite them to our wedding. What’s the point in inviting your cousins that you haven’t spoken to in a dozen years to your big day only to ignore them again for another dozen years? That isn’t my style.
I understand the point of Save the Dates. I tend to book my flights and vacations many months in advance but if you need an extravagantly designed of cardboard to remind you that I’m getting married, booking a flight 3 months ahead of my wedding probably isn’t your style. You’ll still get the invitation six to eight weeks ahead of time which will probably work out just fine. And if not, then why don’t you log into your facebook and look at your news feed every once in awhile? We’ve only been talking about this on our wall for a year!
And yes, I know, blaming them is not the polite or smart thing to do and is also something I, and everyone else, wouldn’t try to do in real life but this goes back to my understanding of who should get invited to weddings. People should not be invited “just because”; that’s the easiest way to go completely broke while planning your wedding. Guests should consist of the active people in your life. Active, of course, is subjective and consist of the people you see every day or the people you think about every day but don’t see for years at a time. But, where cutting Save the Dates are a good way to save money, keeping your guest list trimmed this way is even better. That’s how I looked at my guest list even though my fiancee will then bring up the fact that I want to invite the Pope, the Queen, and the Obamas but, come on, they might come. You never know where they’ll be on a Saturday in April 2010.
My fiancee forwarded me a link to show me that engagement rings are getting artified.
And, of course, by artified, I mean that someone did a google image search on god awfully ugly rings and tried to come up with a statement on what an average bloke could buy on two months salary. Lee Gainer’s attempt at showing the differences in what you could get. The problem, of course, is that the rings exhibit no taste or design aesthetic and that, in my mind, actually detracts from what the artist was trying to get across to the viewer. Plus, the fact that it’s hard to distinguish each ring on the page from other rings shows, to me at least, that artist doesn’t understand where the expense in a ring comes from. And the part in their statement about the 3/4 carat ring in NYC ignores that fact that, in NYC, the overall prevailing wisdom is that if you’re going to get a traditional ring, you should aim for 1.5 carats if you have the type of job that lets you live in a trendy spot in Manhattan. That, of course, doesn’t fly in other parts of the country but, again, this is NYC after all. We’re kind of special here.
So what is this piece saying? From the artist’s statement, (and the comments from sites like Jezebel), I’m guessing that the overall point is to try and show one problem with materialism which can lead to the fact that overall value is associated with a paycheck and wealth. The problem, of course, is there is nothing in this piece that, at first glance, shows that. Sure, the A list actor rings are suppose to be larger but the rings are ugly and there is nothing about those diamonds that actually show where the cost differential lies. The 4 c’s aren’t apparent and anyone who has shopped for a diamond knows that is where the price difference comes in. I’ve seen plenty of big ugly diamonds being used in earrings or used as bling for wannabe rap stars. But I don’t know anyone who looks at those ugly ass diamonds and go “oooo”. I know that’s the effect that people who buy these diamonds try to get but it’s a fool’s errand. In my opinion, a more effective presentation, and way, for the artist to get their point across would be to attack the concept of “eye clean” or “ideal” right on its head. Because, and I hate to break it to you, it’s not only size that matters; sparkle and pretty matter too. Critics of diamonds always seem to forget about that last bit.
