Sheesh—Saskatchewan sure doesn’t want its widows and widowers to remarry, does it? 
Hm… I was extrapolating based on my experiences with London councils. Evidently licensed venues are considerably more common in some English jurisdictions.
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)
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.
For those still interested, the legal wording for civil partnerships changes only slightly:
Northern Piper said “married and divorced”. If your husband/wife dies you don’t need to divorce them!
That’s about the vows themselves though, isn’t it? (not the ceremonial obligations of the officiant).
I’ve been to dozens of weddings (mostly Catholic), and only once have I ever seen the officiant even ASK if anyone had objections.
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. 
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.
Why? I still have the 21 year old paperwork issued with my divorce. It is in the same bank deposit box as our wedding paperwork, the mortgage paperwork, the titles for all my cars [for some odd reason, like my availability during the day all our vehicles seem to be in my name … ] and a back up set of HDD for our computers. I had to show the clerk that issued our paperwork the divorce stuff, not that big a deal.
Well, presumably if your spouse died, you wouldn’t have the divorce paperwork, because you didn’t divorce them.
Would you have to produce the death certificate?
Fun* story ahead!
At our wedding (Episcopalian), the priest got to this part of the service and went through it really quickly. He basically asked the question (If anyone here knows reason..) and then immediately went on to the next part of the liturgy without waiting for an answer. I don’t remember much about my wedding service, but I remember being inwardly amused that he hadn’t really given anyone much time to object.
… Fast forward to a few weeks later, soon after we’ve returned from our honeymoon. My wife gets a long-distance call from her Uncle in Canada who wants to make sure everything is okay. She’s all 
? Uncle says that an old male friend of hers who had been at my wedding was going around telling everyone that I was a convicted scam artist, that I tricked her into marriage, and she was in desparate trouble. The Uncle didn’t believe it but wanted to make sure she was okay. The old friend, he said, had even talked to our priest before the wedding to express his concern.
So we called the priest. He said that this old friend had come to him the day before the wedding and warned him about me and my criminal past. I had just moved to the area so the priest did not know me very well, so he had asked us for our social security numbers that day saying that he needed them to file the state paperwork. He used it to make sure that I wasn’t the person the guy said I was (a real convicted criminal with an unusual name similar to mine).
The priest was satisfied that I was legit, but he told us that when he got to that part of the service he was very worried that this crazy guy would stand up and object, so he tried to rush through it without giving him the chance to say anything.
Also the Uncle said that this crazy dude was planning to come back down to our town from up in Canada and pick up my wife at work and “rescue” her, and take her back to Canada. :eek: We talked to the police but then we never heard from him again. Freaked us out for a while though!
*Actual fun not guaranteed
Love the disclaimer.
Isn’t it a criminal offence in England & Wales to raise false or frivolous objections to a a wedding? Back when Prince Charles married Camilla Parker-Bowles I remember hearing something about the general public being able to file objections with the local regisitrar (which IIRC is technically true of any marriage), but they could be prosecuted if their objections were found frivolous. I know there was some very public debate on the future Supreme Governor of the CoE civilly marring a woman he commited adultery with and also concerns about whether it was legal for him to marry outside the Church at all
I see what you did there.
In ALL jurisdictions. Not been here for a while? I’d be surprised if there’s a hotel in the country that doesn’t have a license these days.
Well, I can speak for Waltham Forest, which last spring had less than a half dozen venues to choose from, none of which as I recall were hotels. (There are hardly any hotels at all in Waltham Forest, as our guests found out.) A colleague of mine was married in another London borough last year (forget which one; somewhere in the west) and he found his choice of venues similarly limited.
I’m enormously intrigued. Can you expand on this? Sounds like a memorable wedding!