Yuck. I love learning stuff, honestly, but there are still many things I'd rather Not Know.

What always intrigued me about the whole Charles/Camilla thing is that we normally think of the husband cheating on the somewhat plain, middle-aged woman with the younger, glamorous woman. It's interesting to see that whole dynamic turned around.

and who was paul addressing?

Paul was addressing the specific early Christian communities to which he was writing. Like, Corinthians -- written to the early Christian community in Corinth. Ephesians -- to the community in Ephesus. And so forth. It would be, more or less, like him writing to St. Andrew's Episcopal church, or Holy Name Catholic church, etc., today.

tampon? WTF?

I don't give very much of a stuff about the Royal Family, but I think it's nice that they're getting hitched. The Charles/Diana marriage was, as far as one can gather, a case of him having to get wed and beget sprogs and basically going ahead and marrying a nice young woman of good family who didn't have any ex-lovers hanging around to create a scandal. As bases for marriages go, it's not the best - but infinitely worse for them in that they were living under such enormous press scrutiny 24/7. They do not appear to have been particularly well suited, and evidently neither of them was happy in the match. I actually think it's rather nice that he continued to be in love with this older, much less glamorous woman. I have no particular interest in either of them, nor do I wish to be privy to any of their intimate secrets, but I wish them both well in a vague 'good for you' kind of way.

I was just coming in to wish Charles and Camilla the best. And I'm sure Edward VII (is it VIII?) is jealous as anything wherever he is.

we normally think of the husband cheating on the somewhat plain, middle-aged woman with the younger, glamorous woman. It's interesting to see that whole dynamic turned around.

Yeah. The whole thing makes me feel vaguely sorry (not THAT sorry, because they made the choices that created the situation, and he is a future king and all, but still slightly so) for all three of them -- Charles probably would have been much happpier if he had just married the person he wanted, instead of the person who fit the right image, and Diana would have been happier if she was married to some Lord Whoziwhatsis herself.

Also, re: yesterdays discussion -- first, I'm sorry for flouncing off. It was time for me to take a break.

Second, I told my husband about the conversation when I got home (there may have been a touch of ranting) and Patrick laughed and said "Welcome to my world." I think Catholicism looks different from inside (even if you only have one foot in the door, like me, or consider yourself an atheist, like Patrick) than outside. Which will make me stop and think the next time I'm tempted to be judgmental about Southern Baptists, anyhow.

(Though, just to tie a bow on the discussion, it is worth pointing out that the more extreme "purity" movements in the U.S., including the ones Steph and Susan were involved with, are Protestant.)  

I Camilla, take thee, Charles Arthur George Whatever, to be my lawfully wedded tampon.

Isn't it Charles Phillip Arthur George, or am I repeating Diana's mistake (I'll google after I post)? I totally heard her saying the name from the wedding in my head.

ETA: Nope, that's the right name. Weird, the stuff that gets fixed in your skull.

tampon? WTF?

It was <sarcasm> terribly romantic. He said something about needing her all the time, she suggested he live in her knickers, he said something to the effect that that would make him a tampon, and then there was some discussion of flushing.

I don't know why I remember this.

• so* embarrassing.

How on earth do we know this? I mean, I presume they didn't make an official announcement to the effect that he should live in her knickers?