Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-17-2011, 06:05 PM
robert_columbia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 8,791

"If any of you know cause as to why these two should not be wed..." in real life


In the stereotypical wedding, the officiant addresses the audience and asks that if any person knows any cause as to why the couple should not be wed, they should "speak now, or forever hold their peace."

1) Is this as common as pop culture says it is?
2) When is it socially appropriate to actually speak up and give a reason to stop the wedding? The message I have gotten from living in society is that this phrase is primarily a rhetorical question and/or for formality's sake, and if someone were to actually raise their hand and say, "Yeah, the groom has a criminal record. I'm afraid he's going to become abusive.", then that person has committed a major social faux pas and is second-guessing the entire process, since hopefully the couple will have already discussed this with each other and perhaps with a marriage counselor. Or possibly, is this really only for raising impediments to the marriage? E.g. someone standing up and saying, "Stop the wedding! I was a nurse who took care of the bride when she was a baby, and I actually swapped her for another baby. She's actually the groom's sister!"
  #2  
Old 12-17-2011, 06:13 PM
Inner Stickler's Avatar
Inner Stickler is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 15,133
My understanding is that it's pretty much been made up out of whole cloth to provide writers with a dramatic and neat method to derail a Bad Marriage. (I'm basing this on the fact that my mother says it wasn't part of her wedding and I don't remember it at any of the admittedly few weddings that I've been to.)
  #3  
Old 12-17-2011, 06:23 PM
Fake Tales of San Francisco is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 868
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inner Stickler View Post
My understanding is that it's pretty much been made up out of whole cloth to provide writers with a dramatic and neat method to derail a Bad Marriage. (I'm basing this on the fact that my mother says it wasn't part of her wedding and I don't remember it at any of the admittedly few weddings that I've been to.)
Not my experience. I've heard it at Church of England and registry office marriages alike. It's definitely in the Book of Common Prayer (which is COE). Don't know about other denominations.

http://justus.anglican.org/resources/bcp/marriage.pdf - page 424.

It is pretty much rhetorical, and yes, in real life people would probably just not say anything. The only reason I can think of is that one of them is already married, or yeah, if they're siblings.
  #4  
Old 12-17-2011, 06:27 PM
Skald the Rhymer is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 27,555
I've heard it said at every straight wedding I've ever gone to, though (perhaps not curiously) not at the gay or lesbian ones.

My oldest brother claims that he once stood up and protested at a female friend's wedding because he judged her non-Xtian husband unworthy of her. I do not know if this was true; I did not witness it myself. But I can believe he'd seize on such an opportunity to be an ass.
  #5  
Old 12-17-2011, 06:33 PM
Mithras is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 721
I don't believe it was said at any of the dozen or so weddings I remember attending. Most of those have been Jewish or Catholic. Most have also been within the last ten years.
  #6  
Old 12-17-2011, 06:48 PM
Polycarp is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: A better place to be
Posts: 26,718
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inner Stickler View Post
My understanding is that it's pretty much been made up out of whole cloth to provide writers with a dramatic and neat method to derail a Bad Marriage. (I'm basing this on the fact that my mother says it wasn't part of her wedding and I don't remember it at any of the admittedly few weddings that I've been to.)
Yo the best of my knowledge it's a legal requirement that it be asked in some jurisdictions. This dates from before requirements for marriage licenses, and served to ensure that opportunity to raise valid legal objections to the proposed marriage have opportunity to be raised.

That said, you're no doubt right that the majority of actual objections take place in dramatic performances, and it would be the greatest social faux pas to speak up unless you know of a legal impediment that would invalidate the marriage just being joined into ()an extraordinarily rare event).
  #7  
Old 12-17-2011, 06:49 PM
Mijin's Avatar
Mijin is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 9,096
My understanding is that it used to be a formal part of a christian wedding, but is usually skipped nowadays.

...which is a shame. A few seconds of nervous silence would probably be the highlight of the wedding for me. It would be great to stand up...only to adjust my trousers and sit down again
  #8  
Old 12-17-2011, 06:55 PM
The Lovely Margo Lane is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 453
This isn't an answer, but a piggybacking idea:

I've come to think of that phrase almost representing the opposite: The "forever hold your peace" part being a binding command on all in attendance to respect the contract that the couple is entering into and let go of animosity or desires that might lead them (members of the audience) to try to break the marriage up later. The idea being that the marriage is a social unit, part of the larger social group represented by the families and friends in attendance and just as the couple has a responsibility to each other, the loved ones in attendance have a duty to support them in their relationship, or at least not actively sabotage it. Sort of "if you sat here and witnessed this marriage, you have to respect it as long as it holds".

Of course that depends on the audience all looking at the officiant as a person of authority, and on notions of marriage as a social contract that not everyone holds.

Did I make this up out of whole cloth?
  #9  
Old 12-17-2011, 07:02 PM
UltraVires is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 15,782
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lovely Margo Lane View Post
I've come to think of that phrase almost representing the opposite: The "forever hold your peace" part being a binding command on all in attendance to respect the contract that the couple is entering into and let go of animosity or desires that might lead them (members of the audience) to try to break the marriage up later. The idea being that the marriage is a social unit, part of the larger social group represented by the families and friends in attendance and just as the couple has a responsibility to each other, the loved ones in attendance have a duty to support them in their relationship, or at least not actively sabotage it. Sort of "if you sat here and witnessed this marriage, you have to respect it as long as it holds".
This. It's a social construct that all in attendance be in agreement. If you aren't, and you sit on your hands and keep your yap shut, then you can't bitch about it later. By your silence (and your attendance) you agree to support the union.
  #10  
Old 12-17-2011, 07:41 PM
panache45's Avatar
panache45 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: NE Ohio (the 'burbs)
Posts: 47,330
Everyone who has seen a particular episode of Everybody Loves Raymond knows that it's not always taken rhetorically.
  #11  
Old 12-17-2011, 07:51 PM
jjimm is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 28,707
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mijin View Post
My understanding is that it used to be a formal part of a christian wedding, but is usually skipped nowadays.
I've heard it at all the Church of England weddings I've been to in the last few years. Possibly a variant of it in Catholic ceremonies. I can even quote it verbatim (from the top of my head so I may have something wrong):

If anyone knows of any just cause or impediment why these two people may not be joined together in holy matrimony, speak now or forever hold your peace.

Last edited by jjimm; 12-17-2011 at 07:51 PM.
  #12  
Old 12-17-2011, 07:57 PM
joyfool is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: East Texas
Posts: 9,813
Anecdotal I know, but when my step-son got married in October, they didn't say it. I know because my husband was just waiting for his chance....
  #13  
Old 12-17-2011, 08:29 PM
Rocky Dog is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 8
I usually know the Bride and Groom in weddings I attend. If I knew something disreputable about either of them I would have spoken to the other one before they had got this far along.
Thats why I don't get invited to many weddings!
  #14  
Old 12-17-2011, 08:51 PM
Exapno Mapcase is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY but not NYC
Posts: 31,615
Quote:
Originally Posted by Polycarp View Post
Yo the best of my knowledge it's a legal requirement that it be asked in some jurisdictions.
Can you give any specifics? I've never heard of a state mandating wording for a wedding. I don't even see how it could be legal.
  #15  
Old 12-17-2011, 09:00 PM
Dewey Finn is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 28,924
From a prior thread here (although I can't remember which thread), I think it's related to publishing the banns of marriage, which are meant "to enable anyone to raise any canonical or civil legal impediment to the marriage, so as to prevent marriages that are invalid. Impediments vary between legal jurisdictions, but would normally include a pre-existing marriage that has been neither dissolved nor annulled, a vow of celibacy, lack of consent, or the couple's being related within the prohibited degrees of kinship."

I'd think that the biggest reason that one would object is if one were aware that either the bride or the groom was already married.
  #16  
Old 12-17-2011, 09:09 PM
Cazzle's Avatar
Cazzle is offline
Friend of Cecil
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Victoria, Australia
Posts: 7,749
Here, when you apply for the licence (no less than one month and one day before the ceremony), you sign off on a statement that says you know of no legal impediments to the marriage, and that takes the place of the callout in the vows.

Last edited by Cazzle; 12-17-2011 at 09:10 PM.
  #17  
Old 12-17-2011, 09:12 PM
Elendil's Heir is offline
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: my Herkimer Battle Jitney
Posts: 85,594
The Episcopal Church, the American offshoot of the Church of England, has the same question - but it is asked not only of the congregation, but of the happy couple themselves. I've heard this done many times. From the Book of Common Prayer, Celebration and Blessing of a Marriage, p. 424:

Into this holy union [names of the bride and groom] now come to be joined. If any of you can show just cause why they may not lawfully be married, speak now; or else for ever hold your peace.

Then the Celebrant [bishop or priest] says to the persons to be married

I require and charge you both, here in the presence of God, that if either of you know any reason why you may not be united in marriage lawfully, and in accordance with God’s Word, you do now confess it.

Last edited by Elendil's Heir; 12-17-2011 at 09:13 PM.
  #18  
Old 12-17-2011, 09:24 PM
Der Trihs's Avatar
Der Trihs is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: California
Posts: 38,882
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lovely Margo Lane View Post
I've come to think of that phrase almost representing the opposite: The "forever hold your peace" part being a binding command on all in attendance to respect the contract that the couple is entering into and let go of animosity or desires that might lead them (members of the audience) to try to break the marriage up later. The idea being that the marriage is a social unit, part of the larger social group represented by the families and friends in attendance and just as the couple has a responsibility to each other, the loved ones in attendance have a duty to support them in their relationship, or at least not actively sabotage it. Sort of "if you sat here and witnessed this marriage, you have to respect it as long as it holds".
I always got the impression that it started out as an opportunity for some offended parent or busybody to stand up and demand that the marriage be stopped because "she's a wanton slut!" or "he's a filthy Protestant/Catholic" or some such objection, and over time it evolved into what you say.
  #19  
Old 12-17-2011, 09:39 PM
The Lovely Margo Lane is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 453
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Trihs View Post
I always got the impression that it started out as an opportunity for some offended parent or busybody to stand up and demand that the marriage be stopped because "she's a wanton slut!" or "he's a filthy Protestant/Catholic" or some such objection, and over time it evolved into what you say.
And, it is important for community cohesion that improper marriages not take place, as having a couple unit come together and then break apart is destabilizing (compared to the couple never marrying in the first place) so, again assuming that we're considering the social contract aspect here rather than true love etc, it's pretty important for objections that are known beforehand to be voiced beforehand, rather than waiting till there are kids in the picture and such to say "Oh wait, actually he's got another wife two towns over - I just couldn't find the right time to tell you before you jumped the broom! Sorry about that..."

So the question in the ceremony is like a last chance - is what you know a dealbreaker? If so speak up, if not forget about it and do your best to help your loved one's marriage work, for the sake of your community. It's like a pre-emptive admonishment to meddling in-laws.
  #20  
Old 12-17-2011, 11:05 PM
obbn is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Orlando, Florida
Posts: 2,459
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skald the Rhymer View Post
I've heard it said at every straight wedding I've ever gone to, though (perhaps not curiously) not at the gay or lesbian ones.

My oldest brother claims that he once stood up and protested at a female friend's wedding because he judged her non-Xtian husband unworthy of her. I do not know if this was true; I did not witness it myself. But I can believe he'd seize on such an opportunity to be an ass.
I sure wished that someone would have stood up at my first wedding and warned, begged and pleaded with me to not do it. In fact they should have brought up a full length mirror to the alter. I would have looked at it and seen my bride had no reflection and saved myself a hell of a ride. But no one had the stones to do so. Hmmmppphhhhh
  #21  
Old 12-18-2011, 12:56 AM
Fiendish Astronaut's Avatar
Fiendish Astronaut is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: London - England
Posts: 1,162
In practice what would the registrar/cleric have to do if somebody stood up and raised an objection?
  #22  
Old 12-18-2011, 01:31 AM
UDS is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 8,930
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiendish Astronaut View Post
In practice what would the registrar/cleric have to do if somebody stood up and raised an objection?
If it was a valid legal objection - e.g. one of the parties is already married, and not divorced - then he would stop the ceremony and wait until the matter was clarifed, most probably by the courts.
  #23  
Old 12-18-2011, 03:39 AM
Tim@T-Bonham.net is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 15,030
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Trihs View Post
some offended parent or busybody to stand up and demand that the marriage be stopped because "she's a wanton slut!" or "he's a filthy Protestant/Catholic" or some such objection,
But neither of those are legal impediments to a marriage. (There would be far fewer marriages if they were!)
  #24  
Old 12-18-2011, 03:56 AM
Lynn Bodoni is offline
Creature of the Night
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
Posts: 20,803
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dewey Finn View Post
From a prior thread here (although I can't remember which thread), I think it's related to publishing the banns of marriage, which are meant "to enable anyone to raise any canonical or civil legal impediment to the marriage, so as to prevent marriages that are invalid. Impediments vary between legal jurisdictions, but would normally include a pre-existing marriage that has been neither dissolved nor annulled, a vow of celibacy, lack of consent, or the couple's being related within the prohibited degrees of kinship."

I'd think that the biggest reason that one would object is if one were aware that either the bride or the groom was already married.
Yeah, this seemed to mostly be aimed at people who were already married, but with some of the other stuff, too. For instance, there's the Crazy Wife In The Attic. She counts as a living wife, and the husband couldn't divorce her. And there's the STDs. Those were pretty much not curable in centuries past.
  #25  
Old 12-18-2011, 04:09 AM
WhyNot is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Sweet Home Chicago
Posts: 33,500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lovely Margo Lane View Post

Did I make this up out of whole cloth?
I'm not sure, but lots of us have made the same thing up, if so - at least according to conversations I've had with other clergy from many faiths. The way you state it is how I use it when performing marriages and handfastings, with a few words added in about the importance of social support in the whole marriage and family business just to make it perfectly clear. Put up or shut up, y'all.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiendish Astronaut View Post
In practice what would the registrar/cleric have to do if somebody stood up and raised an objection?
If it was a legal objection, yes, I'd stop the ceremony and get some clarity about the situation. If it was an emotional objection or Family Drama, I'd try to gauge the reaction of the people being joined, and take my cue from them. I might try to address the concern in a clergyish way, or I might nod at one of my goons - er, I mean, assistants - to escort drunken Uncle Mike out to the coffee table and try to sober him up.

While I've given it some thought, just in case, it's only come up for me in reality once in 10 years. Dad of one of the brides had a bit of a meltdown, but I was able to work with it and made it part of the ceremony and it ended up being really awesome.
  #26  
Old 12-18-2011, 07:34 AM
Pai325 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 3,644
I've never heard it at a wedding, and it certainly wasn't said at mine 40 years ago. I've only heard it in TV and movies.
  #27  
Old 12-18-2011, 08:28 AM
LSLGuy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Southeast Florida USA
Posts: 21,035
See http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/...d.php?t=493991 from 2 years ago.
  #28  
Old 12-18-2011, 09:19 AM
psychonaut is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 5,982
Quote:
Originally Posted by Exapno Mapcase View Post
Can you give any specifics? I've never heard of a state mandating wording for a wedding. I don't even see how it could be legal.
In England the state does indeed mandate the wording for the wedding, at least for civil ceremonies. All sorts of restrictions are attached to the ceremony: the registrar reads from one of three officially prescribed scripts, chosen by the couple, from which he may not deviate; the wedding must take place indoors at an officially recognized venue (each council normally having three or four to choose from); and while background music and additional wedding vows spoken by the couple are permitted, they may not be religious in nature.
  #29  
Old 12-18-2011, 09:43 AM
KneadToKnow is offline
Voodoo Adult (Slight Return)
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Charlotte, NC, USA
Posts: 26,569
A coworker's sister recently was to have been married in the UK, and the groom's ex-wife showed up (I think not literally at the moment in the ceremony this line gets said, but as I understand it, on the day of the wedding nonetheless) to announce that she had never actually processed the divorce papers he'd sent her and as such they were still married.

It was quite a scene, I'm told.

Last edited by KneadToKnow; 12-18-2011 at 09:43 AM.
  #30  
Old 12-18-2011, 11:14 AM
robert_columbia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 8,791
Quote:
Originally Posted by UDS View Post
If it was a valid legal objection - e.g. one of the parties is already married, and not divorced - then he would stop the ceremony and wait until the matter was clarifed, most probably by the courts.
The way I'm seeing it is that there are two categories of objections:

1) Evidence or allegations that that the marriage itself would not be lawful (e.g. would be null and void or perhaps annulable) either under civil law or under church/canon law. Examples could be that one party is currently married to someone else, the couple are too closely related (e.g. long-lost brother and sister), etc.
2) Evidence or allegations that the union would be a bad idea for social or practical purposes (e.g. warning the bride that her parents will disown her for marrying Boy, warning that a study by the National Institutes of Health in 2006 indicates that 85% of all couples with the same demographic backgrounds as the about-to-be-married couple split up within 5 years, one of the parties has a history of domestic violence, etc)

It seems that the only socially acceptable objection is one that falls under #1 above.
  #31  
Old 12-18-2011, 11:46 AM
ZPG Zealot is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 4,003
I've seen it happen a few times. All in highly religious communities where premarital chastity at least by the bride was an issue.
  #32  
Old 12-18-2011, 12:20 PM
Elendil's Heir is offline
SDSAB
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: my Herkimer Battle Jitney
Posts: 85,594
Quote:
Originally Posted by Exapno Mapcase View Post
Can you give any specifics? I've never heard of a state mandating wording for a wedding. I don't even see how it could be legal.
Remember that the Church of England is the official state religion of the United Kingdom. Since the days of Henry VIII, the monarch is the Supreme Governor of the church and Defender of the Faith. All archbishops and bishops are appointed by the monarch (nowadays, on "advice" of the prime minister). There is no separation of church and state there.
  #33  
Old 12-18-2011, 12:25 PM
OldGuy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Very east of Foggybog, WI
Posts: 5,451
Quote:
Originally Posted by obbn View Post
I sure wished that someone would have stood up at my first wedding and warned, begged and pleaded with me to not do it. In fact they should have brought up a full length mirror to the alter. I would have looked at it and seen my bride had no reflection and saved myself a hell of a ride. But no one had the stones to do so. Hmmmppphhhhh
Is that you son?

-- Daddy?
  #34  
Old 12-18-2011, 04:28 PM
Tim@T-Bonham.net is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 15,030
Quote:
Originally Posted by KneadToKnow View Post
A coworker's sister recently was to have been married in the UK, and the groom's ex-wife showed up (I think not literally at the moment in the ceremony this line gets said, but as I understand it, on the day of the wedding nonetheless) to announce that she had never actually processed the divorce papers he'd sent her and as such they were still married.
Is that accurate, in the UK legal system? Seems like that would make it possible for either party to stop a divorce, by just refusing to respond to the legal papers!

In the US, I believe that if one party is non-responding (or unknown location) the other party has to publish notice of the divorce action, and wait a specified time -- if the other person does not respond after that, the court will proceed with the divorce.
  #35  
Old 12-18-2011, 04:32 PM
KneadToKnow is offline
Voodoo Adult (Slight Return)
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Charlotte, NC, USA
Posts: 26,569
No idea. Second-hand story. But I know I wouldn't consider going forward with a second marriage if I couldn't lay my hands on my copy of my divorce decree anytime I wanted to. But then, I try to keep things like that organized. Perhaps the groom-to-be simply lost track of the fact that he should have gotten a piece of paper at some point that said "You are now divorced."
  #36  
Old 12-18-2011, 05:19 PM
typoink is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 2,788
I'd have to track down our copy of the Judge's words to be sure, but I believe it was asked at my wedding. I remember a vague moment of unease really, really hoping nobody had cause to object.
  #37  
Old 12-19-2011, 08:31 AM
Northern Piper is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: The snow is back, dammit!
Posts: 29,714
In my jurisdiction, the marriage licence has a box to tick if either one of the prospective spouses has ever been married and divorced before. If either one answers "yes", then the licence can't issue until they provide a divorce certificate. That goes far to eliminate the chance of there ever being a legal impediment to the marriage.

I once had a couple turn up at my office at 3.45 on a Friday, needing help to get a divorce certificate, so they could get their marriage licence for the wedding the next day! nothing like leaving things to the last minute...

Fortunately, it turned out that the guy had got divorced at the court-house just down the street from my office, so I called the local registrar and explained the situation. He chuckled, and although the office normally closed at 4, he agreed to keep the door open for them to come right away and he would issue a certified copy of the divorce certificate. I sent them off to the courthouse and wished them good luck.
  #38  
Old 12-19-2011, 08:56 AM
Candyman74 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inner Stickler View Post
My understanding is that it's pretty much been made up out of whole cloth to provide writers with a dramatic and neat method to derail a Bad Marriage. (I'm basing this on the fact that my mother says it wasn't part of her wedding and I don't remember it at any of the admittedly few weddings that I've been to.)
Not at all. It's a required part of a wedding in the UK and has been part of every wedding I've ever been to. It was said during my wedding (though the phrasing wasn't exactly the same - I think there's some leeway there).

I've never seen anyone respond to it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exapno Mapcase
Can you give any specifics? I've never heard of a state mandating wording for a wedding. I don't even see how it could be legal.
It's completely legal. It isn't so much "state mandated wording" as "certain things need to be said in some manner". The wording isn't specific.

A civil (as opposed to a religious) wedding in the UK has a form you fill out selecting which options of wording you prefer. It makes sure all the legal bases are covered. I'm not sure if a religious wedding has the same - I've only gotten married once, and it wasn't religious.

Quote:
Is that accurate, in the UK legal system? Seems like that would make it possible for either party to stop a divorce, by just refusing to respond to the legal papers!
No. If you refuse to respond, you eventually get served. The best you can achieve is to delay the inevitable if the other party is set on it.

Last edited by Candyman74; 12-19-2011 at 08:58 AM.
  #39  
Old 12-19-2011, 09:00 AM
Candyman74 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by psychonaut View Post
the wedding must take place indoors at an officially recognized venue (each council normally having three or four to choose from).
We had dozens and dozens and dozens to choose from. Pretty much every large hotel, castle, old building, town hall, etc. within 50 miles seemed to be licensed for marriages.
  #40  
Old 12-19-2011, 09:10 AM
Son of a Rich's Avatar
Son of a Rich is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Barsoom
Posts: 4,303
Quote:
Originally Posted by panache45 View Post
Everyone who has seen a particular episode of Everybody Loves Raymond knows that it's not always taken rhetorically.
Also Family Guy: "GENITAL WARTS!"
  #41  
Old 12-19-2011, 09:12 AM
psychonaut is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 5,982
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northern Piper View Post
In my jurisdiction, the marriage licence has a box to tick if either one of the prospective spouses has ever been married and divorced before. If either one answers "yes", then the licence can't issue until they provide a divorce certificate.
Sheesh—Saskatchewan sure doesn't want its widows and widowers to remarry, does it?
  #42  
Old 12-19-2011, 09:15 AM
psychonaut is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 5,982
Quote:
Originally Posted by Candyman74 View Post
We had dozens and dozens and dozens to choose from. Pretty much every large hotel, castle, old building, town hall, etc. within 50 miles seemed to be licensed for marriages.
Hm… I was extrapolating based on my experiences with London councils. Evidently licensed venues are considerably more common in some English jurisdictions.
  #43  
Old 12-19-2011, 09:17 AM
Mangetout's Avatar
Mangetout is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: England
Posts: 57,932
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjimm View Post
I've heard it at all the Church of England weddings I've been to in the last few years. Possibly a variant of it in Catholic ceremonies. I can even quote it verbatim (from the top of my head so I may have something wrong):

If anyone knows of any just cause or impediment why these two people may not be joined together in holy matrimony, speak now or forever hold your peace.
It's part of the C of E ceremony, as well as the Banns (the same wording is used). I asked a vicar once if he'd ever had anyone raise an objection - he hadn't, although there is a prescribed procedure to be followed (which consists of pretty much what you'd expect - halt the ceremony, talk to the objector in private and determine whether there is a genuine impediment, or if it's just some sort of revelry, then resume or postpone the service as appropriate)
  #44  
Old 12-19-2011, 09:21 AM
SanVito is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Bristol, UK
Posts: 4,756
Quote:
Originally Posted by Exapno Mapcase View Post
Can you give any specifics? I've never heard of a state mandating wording for a wedding. I don't even see how it could be legal.
It's a legal contract, so how could it not be legal to have certain mandated statements as part of the ceremony?

However, I've hunted around on UK government websites and, although the phrase in the OP is said at Church of England weddings and some civil ceremonies, it doesn't appear to be one of the mandated phrases which must be read at all weddings. The words that must be recounted are thus:

Quote:
Declaratory Words
I do solemnly declare that I know not of any lawful
impediment why I, [your full name], may not be
joined in matrimony to [your partner's full name].

Contracting Words
I call upon these persons here present to witness that I,
[your full name], do take thee, [your partner's full name],
to be my lawful wedded wife [or husband].
There are a couple of slight variations on this that the couple can choose, and all else is up for grabs. This wording, BTW, must be recounted by people whether they are having a civil, jewish, catholic, quaker, musilm or whatever wedding. The CofE gets to do its own thing, except that these phrases apparently have their origins in the CofE's Book of Common Prayer, so it's a moot point.
  #45  
Old 12-19-2011, 09:27 AM
SanVito is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Bristol, UK
Posts: 4,756
For those still interested, the legal wording for civil partnerships changes only slightly:


Quote:
I DO SOLEMNLY DECLARE / THAT I KNOW NOT / OF ANY LAWFUL REASON / WHY I FULL NAME / MAY NOT BE JOINED / TO FULL NAME / IN CIVIL PARTNERSHIP

(I GIVE YOU THIS RING / AS A SYMBOL OF OUR LOVE AND COMMITMENT AS WE FORM A CIVIL PARTNERSHIP) / AND I CALL UPON / THESE PERSONS HERE PRESENT / TO WITNESS THAT I / NAME / DO TAKE NAME / TO BE MY LIFELONG PARTNER.
  #46  
Old 12-19-2011, 09:37 AM
Canadjun is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Alberta Canada
Posts: 4,482
Quote:
Originally Posted by psychonaut View Post
Sheesh—Saskatchewan sure doesn't want its widows and widowers to remarry, does it?
Northern Piper said "married and divorced". If your husband/wife dies you don't need to divorce them!
  #47  
Old 12-19-2011, 09:48 AM
Mangetout's Avatar
Mangetout is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: England
Posts: 57,932
Quote:
Originally Posted by SanVito View Post
It's a legal contract, so how could it not be legal to have certain mandated statements as part of the ceremony?

However, I've hunted around on UK government websites and, although the phrase in the OP is said at Church of England weddings and some civil ceremonies, it doesn't appear to be one of the mandated phrases which must be read at all weddings. The words that must be recounted are thus:



There are a couple of slight variations on this that the couple can choose, and all else is up for grabs. This wording, BTW, must be recounted by people whether they are having a civil, jewish, catholic, quaker, musilm or whatever wedding. The CofE gets to do its own thing, except that these phrases apparently have their origins in the CofE's Book of Common Prayer, so it's a moot point.
That's about the vows themselves though, isn't it? (not the ceremonial obligations of the officiant).
  #48  
Old 12-19-2011, 09:58 AM
astorian is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: austin tx usa
Posts: 35,294
I've been to dozens of weddings (mostly Catholic), and only once have I ever seen the officiant even ASK if anyone had objections.
  #49  
Old 12-19-2011, 10:12 AM
Skald the Rhymer is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 27,555
Quote:
Originally Posted by obbn View Post
I sure wished that someone would have stood up at my first wedding and warned, begged and pleaded with me to not do it. In fact they should have brought up a full length mirror to the alter. I would have looked at it and seen my bride had no reflection and saved myself a hell of a ride. But no one had the stones to do so. Hmmmppphhhhh
Maybe, but you're not taking into account how big an asshole my eldest brother is. Imagine me with all my online faults, PLUS being a fundamentalist Christian.
  #50  
Old 12-19-2011, 10:50 AM
Enlightening Meditation is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: North coast USA
Posts: 424
I have attended approximately 150 wedding ceremonies as either a guest or photographer in the midwest and southeast regions of the USA since 1999. At least ten of those wedding featured the question of "why these two should not be wed?" and most of those were either Episcopal or fundamental Christian (Baptist typically). I never witnessed an objection to the union of the bride and groom unless you can count a cough or two.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:13 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017