The Law Commission’s review of wedding ceremonies proposes wide-ranging changes to the rules and regulations governing weddings in England and Wales.
Among the principle changes proposed is to allow religious organisations other than the Church of England and the Church in Wales to nominate officiants who can legally conduct ceremonies. The Evangelical Alliance sees the shift from the venue being registered for weddings, to the officiant from an authorising body, as one which will benefit a wide range of churches, particularly those who do not have their own building and currently cannot hold wedding ceremonies.
Aspects of the process for churches (and other religious groups) to nominate officiants will require greater clarity. We will want to see reassurance that measures are in place that prevent people from being registered as an officiant with multiple groups – religious or otherwise – and the challenge this could pose to the integrity of beliefs around marriage.
Throughout the consultation document the Law Commission are keen to ensure that the ‘dignity and solemnity’ of ceremonies and beliefs about marriage are maintained. This phrase is not defined and is both something we would want to affirm and also challenge. We firmly believe it is vital that a biblical view of marriage is treated with a high level of seriousness and dignity. We believe that it affords such treatment because it is rooted in scriptural teaching and Christian tradition. Where we want to challenge the complexity of the Law Commission’s text is that what for one person undermines dignity and solemnity is the expression of it for someone else. In particular, we have in mind wedding ceremonies from different cultures and traditions that are especially exuberant.
We recognise the concern that has been expressed about the lapsing of restrictions on location leading to weddings taking place in contexts that do not afford dignity and solemnity. No doubt if these proposals are introduced there will be headline-grabbing weddings in bizarre locations, however the dignity and solemnity of marriage is not granted by the location where the vows are taken but by the commitment of the couple and the foundation of their relationship. We consider that the benefits to diverse Christian traditions outweigh concerns about removing restrictions on location.
In addition, there is the benefit that the proposals would allow religious material to be used in civil wedding ceremonies. This was a restriction initially introduced to ensure clarity between religious and civil weddings, however, in practice it has led to challenges and couples going to lengths to circumvent the rules.
How to respond to the consultation
The easiest way is to respond is via email to weddings@lawcommission.gov.uk The deadline for submissions has been extended to 3 January 2021.
The key issues and relevant questions are below
The proposals suggest that “for religious organisations other than the Church of England or the Church in Wales, the relevant governing authority of the organisations should be responsible for nominating officiants at weddings”.
They further propose that “religious organisations … should be able to nominate officiants if the body has: (1) at least 20 members who meet regularly for worship or in furtherance of their beliefs, (2) a wedding service or a sincerely held belief about marriage.
We would encourage you to respond setting out how nominating officiants would work in your denomination or church network. We would also value input to the consultation on how the different levels of governing authority, local congregation, governing charity, denomination and membership body might interact in this regard. We also consider it important that an officiant can only be registered by one governing body. This is primarily because of the risk that different bodies with different beliefs around marriage may undermine the legally backed freedom of churches and denominations not to take same-sex wedding services.
For churches, the primary benefit of the proposal that wedding ceremonies will be allowed to take place anywhere is that churches without their own building will now be able to hold wedding ceremonies. This will benefit many newer churches and networks as well as church plants and multi-site congregations. It will also remove the usual requirement for churches who are not part of the Church of England or Church in Wales to have an officiant separate from the person leading the wedding service. On balance we think this is a positive change.
In responding to this question it would be helpful to highlight the variety of buildings that churches meet in, so providing examples illustrates this.
We recognise the concern around some locations potentially undermining the dignity and solemnity of the ceremony, so this may be an appropriate point to note that. The second part of Question 48 explicitly asks whether ceremonies should be able to take place on water, in the air, in private homes or generally outdoors.
Question 50 looks at the potential for overlap between religious, non-religious and civil venues, and civil and religious weddings.
The concepts of dignity and solemnity crop up in two different contexts in the consultation. First, in Question 35, there is a proposed duty on officiants to uphold the dignity and solemnity of marriage. While we agree that this is important, the lack of definition renders it somewhat meaningless. Dignity and solemnity are also somewhat culturally specific so what is appropriate in one context would be considered inappropriate in another.
We also consider that there is a deeper understanding of dignity and solemnity which is rooted in beliefs about marriage rather than the conduct of a ceremony and in this regard the consultation does not offer any view.
Second, in Question 52, the proposed deregulation of location requires that the location be safe and dignified. It is suggested in the guidance that the General Register Office will produce guidance on how to judge this. The criteria of safe and dignified is difficult to comment upon in the absence of this guidance. It could be that this threshold will guard against the trivialisation of marriage by choice of ceremony location, or it could be a very low threshold which enables virtually all locations to comply.
There are a couple of general questions towards the end of the consultations which ask for opinions on whether the current law discourages marriages and the difference the proposals might make. Question 86 also looks at the impact of various aspects of the current law, including the costs of marrying in a place of worship.
We would encourage you to respond on the vitality of marriage to society and the importance of protecting and promoting Christian teaching on marriage. While it is important that there are not cost or logistical barriers to couples getting married, it is also important that it is a considered decision and not one that can be entered into and subsequently exited without due seriousness.
