Living Vicariously Through William and Catherine

The Royal Wedding may have been days ago, but the analysts aren’t done with it yet. They’ve moved on from the wedding dress, the guests, the fashion, the pageantry, and the tradition to the cost of the affair.

Although costs of the wedding are unknown, what is known is the price for security. That stands at $11 million (approximately 6.5 million pounds). In these tough economic times, many are wondering if this expense is a wise outlay of cash. Protesters let the world know they were thoroughly displeased with the lavish affair, believing that costs far outweigh the benefits.

However, in an Associated Press article written by Sylvia Hui, it is estimated that England’s economy would benefit from the wedding with a 1 billion pound sales surge (retail sales, hotel bookings, and hospitality sales). However, Hui also confirms that public holidays typically cost “the economy 6 billion pounds in lost productivity—leaving a 5 billion pound shortfall.”

Other commentators argue the wedding cannot be measured in monetary costs alone. Emma Mustich is one who believes the wedding will give more than it takes. In her article at Salon.com, she notes the boost in national pride will be “a welcome and rare occasion for Brits to indulge in their own uniqueness.”

All this hubbub has me wondering what is the core of this issue. Is it the money spent on a wedding when a court justice could officiate for a negligible fee? Is it an issue of fairness, because most people could never have such a wedding, and therefore, no one should?

Whatever the question might be and all the nuances that surround it, I’m wondering . . . who gets to decide what a reasonable wedding budget should be?

William and Catherine could have spent more on their wedding, but they chose a few cost-cutting measures. Even so, compared to a typical wedding for regular folks, the royal wedding was the epitome of opulence.

Most of us cannot imagine the need for $11 million of security, which makes a position of judgment easy to take. We would never spend that sort of money on a one-day affair.

But what constitutes a typical wedding for regular folks? In our egocentrism, we assume that what is familiar is what is normal. But there is a whole big world out there, and most of the people do not live like we do.

What if we compared a typical wedding in the States to those in third-world countries? The money we spend on a one-day affair might cover food for the entire village for months.

Does that mean we should never spend money to celebrate special occasions? There are no clear-cut answers here, but it is well documented in the Gospels that Jesus attended the lavish wedding celebrations common in Jewish communities. He did not boycott these celebrations or command the money be given to the poor instead. In fact, in another celebratory moment, when Mary poured perfume on Jesus’ feet, Judas was the one who suggested the perfume could have been sold to feed the poor. And Jesus did not agree with Him.

Our celebrations should be mindful of those around us with needs, but the concern should not be limited to this one day. The poor will always be with us. Are we concerned about the poor when we daily buy things we don’t need and treat ourselves to another gadget or another purse or another book or another car?

I find the balance tenuous between celebrating and criticizing events like the Royal Wedding (or the Super Bowl or Christmas). Somehow it is possible to celebrate with judgment, to be mindful of the poor without scowling at the decisions of others. And now that the Royal Wedding is past and William and Catherine are married, we can go about living our own lives (instead of trying to live their lives for them).