Mormons have special temples which only active members of good standing may attend. Nonmembers and nonqualified members may not enter so both the groom and bride must be active, full-tithe paying, nondrinking, church attending members.
Nonmember family members or those who are not worthy may not attend the wedding.
In England, the Anglican church is the established church: it is part of the government. All citizens have (had?) the right to get married in an Anglican church.
Established by law sometime in the mid-20th century, since some sections of the church were (and are) less happy about the compromises required by being in bed with the Government.
I think the question wouldn’t come up for most people in West Germany, because they still have a system of government registration of religion: I would imagine (I’m going out on a limb here) that in return for the benefits of being a state religion, they’d have to make provision of some sort for state-registered members.
Strictly speaking, you only have a legal right to marry in the church of the parish in which you or your spouse reside. Other Anglican churches may or may not welcome you, but they have no legal obligation to.
Plus, of course, the right only extends to being married by the incumbent of the parish, or his or her curate, according to the rites of the Church of England. You don’t have a legal right to bring in your own minister, or celebrate a non-Anglican rite in an Anglican church.
(And the UK has legalised gay marriage, with carve-outs which mean that you don’t have a right to have a same-sex marriage celebrated in church.)
I don’t know whether German civil law explicitly gives a church-tax-payer the right to be married by the church to which he pays taxes. I suspect not, if only because compulsion is unlikely to be necessary; the canon law or practice of the church concerned probably gives church members the right to be married by the church.
But of course that will be subject to the church’s own rules; a divorced taxpaying Catholic is legally free to marry but presumably the Catholic church can decline to celebrate his marriage if that would conflict with their own discipline or theology. Or a taxpaying Catholic can’t necessarily insist on being married in the church building of his choice; if he wants to be married outside his parish he needs a dispensation, just like a Catholic in a country with no church tax.
On edit: To add to that, in Germany you have to have a civil marriage to engage legal recognition; you can have a church marriage as well if you wish. But the fact that the state requires everyone, church member or not, to have a civil marriage makes it less likely that they impose any marriage celebration obligation on churches.
And only if you have no living ex-spouses.
The Church in Wales is also required to marry people even though it hasn’t been established for nearly a century.
huh. Most of the Jewish weddings I’ve been to were in a synagogue the wedding party affiliated with. I know it’s not required, but in my experience, it’s common.
Do you have a cite for this? Please note that I am not saying what “should” happen - I am asking for case law that says “a pastor must marry anyone who asks her”.
Regards,
Shodan
An Episcopalian friend (who officiates at weddings) was joking just last night, saying “sh*t, you want to marry that salt shaker, I’ll marry you to it. Hell, we’re hardly even Christian.”
All in jest of course, but the various denominations (and congregations) certainly do have a wide variety of rules.
It is my understanding that OH’s law says that no one who is empowered to conduct weddings (justice of the peace, clergy, etc.) is in any way obliged to do so. Some only marry members of their congregations. Other dropins might be too drunk, etc. Most require at least some expectation that the marriage may last for a while. Most do not offer the service for a fee - the gift is up to the couple. The church may expect that fees for cleaning and for musicians are not optional. Difference between expectations of church and minister. Use of a building is optional - multitudes have been married in the parsonage living room.
Good luck getting a full blown Roman Catholic Mass type Wedding in a Conservative Jewish Synogogue.
I don’t think that’s right. If you’re in the business of renting out a venue where people can get married (and can bring in their own celebrants and conduct ceremonies of their own preference) then you can’t refuse to accommodate a same-sex couple (or a mixed-race couple, or . . .). And you don’t get to do that just because you happen to be also in the religious ministry business. And it doesn’t make any difference if some of the couples who rent your premises engage you as their celebrant.
But if, in the exercise of a religious ministry, you celebrate weddings, that’s the exercise of religion, and the state cannot compel you to engage in it, either generally or in any specific case.
If you rent out your premises to couples to whom you/your church are not ministering, then you have to do that on a non-discriminatory basis. But you can be as selective as you like regarding who you will minister to.
You might want to read the court cases cited above for a clearer take on the relationship between churches and the public in instances of renting property.
The “cases cited above”, unless I have missed some, deal with a “boardwalk pavilion” at a church-owned campsite. While the campsite did include chapels and the like, the pavilion was not a chapel or place of worship; there is some discussion of this in the judgments. In those cases, the church was found to be providing a “public accommodation” by running the campsite and renting out the pavilion, and couldn’t discriminate by letting it to opposite-sex couples but not to same-sex couples. Presumably the finding might have been different if couple had been seeking to rent a a chapel, sanctuary or the like. (Otherwise why the discussion of whether the building was a place of worship or not?)
The cases didn’t discuss whether the church or its ministers could be obliged to officiate at a same-sex ceremony if they officiated at opposite-sex ceremonies - presumably, because the couple concerned weren’t seeking to have the church officiate. But in light of the free exercise and freedom of speech clauses I don’t think there can be much doubt about how such a claim would be decided.
Since you specified Episcopal I will say that this is not necessarily true - it is up to the individual priest in charge to decide whether or not they will permit a marriage to occur in the church, and most often (but not always) they will require that at least one of the marriage partners have some kind of connection to the church. I once had a priest who required that one of the couple attended our church or another Episcopal church; another priest merely required that “the family” attend - so he would commonly marry the children or grandchildren of attendees. But I’ve never known one who would let strangers come in and get married.
I heard about one church in a rural area that was phoned by a man who wanted to be married there in an Islamic service, since there was no mosque nearby. He explained that all the crosses in the sanctuary would need to be removed for the service. The minister said no.
FWIW, I was married in the very conservative Diocese of Arlington (VA) 22 years ago.
As I was unbaptized, not only did I have to get a dispensation from the bishop (which as I recall required a form signed by a priest saying I was a respectable heathen), but I had to, as a public part of the wedding ceremony, affirm that our children would be raised as Catholics, and that I wouldn’t interfere with my wife’s religion.
We also had to meet half dozen times with the priest (who didn’t especially approve of me or of the planned marriage), go to a weekend retreat, and attend a four-week natural family planning class. The couple teaching it had three children all under the age of five, which didn’t give me great faith in the technique. I think, though, that these were required of the faithful, as well.
I would have preferred getting married by an insurance salesman, as my parents did, but doing it this way made Mrs. Ispolkom happy, so I grinned and bore it.
Remarkably, the parish hall was dry, so we had to have the reception at a Serbian Orthodox church hall.
In the Twin Cities, I’m under the impression that you have to be a member of the parish for at least a year to get married in a Catholic church, but special arrangements can be made in exchange for a substantial donation.
Since this is still GQ, perhaps you can provide a cite for your impression.
Regards,
Shodan
Just yesterday, our (Evangelical Lutheran Church in America) presiding bishop sent a letter to members.
TLDR, it’s up to the individual ministers and congregations.
Only that I’ve heard it so claimed. From the Cathedral of St. Paul’s Web site, I find this exception for persons who are not parishioners:
“In exceptional cases, with the consent of the canonical pastor who is responsible both for providing marriage preparation and administering the sacrament, a wedding ceremony may be celebrated here at the Cathedral. An offering for the use of the Cathedral in the amount of $2,000 (which includes a security person, wedding coordinator, organist, and cantor) will also be required.”
As wedding prices go, though, that’s probably pretty reasonable for the services of the four people, but there’s the odd word “offering.”
Not the ones that actually believe in and follow the words of Jesus Christ.
:dubious:
It also says
"For parishioners who have been registered and actively supporting the parish for a minimum of six (6) months prior to beginning the marriage preparation process, an offering for the use of the Cathedral in the amount of $1,000 (which includes a security person, wedding coordinator, organist, and cantor) will also be required. "
and
“If you live within the Cathedral Parish boundaries, but are not registered as an active parish member (or have not been active for at least one year), a member of the Cathedral clergy will be happy to meet with you to discuss your marriage plans.”
If you are a baptized Catholic and live within the parish boundaries, they will have to allow you to get married there as that is your home parish (and in fact, you will need permission from the pastor to marry in a Catholic church where neither party resides or is a member) but it is not uncommon for various fees to depend on whether a person is an active,registered parishioner who financially supports the parish, if he or she simply lives within the boundaries, or if there is no connection to the parish at all.