Civil ceremonies and religious references

Hi there well as I understand it, you can not have any religious inferences/conatations within a civil ceremony. I've heard that you cannot even have the song Angels by Robbie Williams.

I guess it's down to the Registrars as they will want to vet all your songs and readings at least 6 weeks before your wedding and tbh I think a song that makes a one line reference to god will not be allowed.

HTH

thanks videogal I guess the search for songs goes on then! lol

I would say submit the song. If they don't like it they will get back to you and you could argue it is not a piece of worship but just an expression.

The song was obviously never intended as a piece of religious worship. Be prepared to have it rejected as some registration districts are reeeeally pernickety. We would accept it (as we would Angels)

I really like this song, but didn't go for it 'cos it actually has the words "I thank god" and "I prayed for someone like you" - which to me seems religious.

We're having it on our dvd instead, or you could have it as a first dance?

Our registrar said we could have Angels (if we really wanted it lol) and said it was a matter of common sense. I'd agree with brideseekingblush that 'prayed for someone like you' is a religious reference though. But there's no harm in asking!

I think it depends on the individual registrars. We were told by ours that we could not have anything with religious connotation. Hallelujah - by Alexandra Burke, Angels are all out. Sorry.

I do however, vaguely remember when we went to book our registrar, last year, a thread on here asking how strict registrars were and from reading it, it was very much dependent on where you were getting married and one bride on here was told she could have anything so long as it wasn't a hymn.

HTH.

Yikes not long till get married!

I understand as I posted a similar question a while ago. We want Holst's "Jupiter, the Bringer of Joy" from "The Planets" suite but because it is better known as its later incarnation in the form of the hymn "I Vow To Thee, My Country" there were arguments. I said that it was first a classical piece of music and also a rugby song (known as "World in Union", the anthem of the 2007 Rugby World Cup). Eventually I was allowed to use it as long as it is not in its I Vow To Thee My Country form.

My understanding is that you can't have any religious aspects of the legal requirement itself - such as 'I swear before God' in the legal declaration. The way I read the rules, music is not included in the exclusions.

Quote from the Kent rules:

"Our Ceremonies Teams are happy to discuss and offer advice about the ceremony content, which must be non-religious and include legally required vows and declarations of marriage.

It is important that the marriage ceremony chosen by the bride and groom is appropriate to them, their experiences and beliefs and their family and guests."

It might be differernt in other areas though, I'd check with the local registrars.

I personally think this whole 'civil v religious' argument is completely pathetic. The only part that the registrars need to concern themselves with is that the legally required vows are said so that you are legally married by the end of the ceremony - apart from that you should be free to have what you want.

We would have gone for a church service but the convenience of having all day in a licensed venue was easier all round - but that doesn't mean we want to exclude our faith from our day. We're getting over it by having a minister friend do a religious blessing service after the registrars are finished.

I'm told that the reason behind the restrictions is that it might "offend" (in our unfortunately PC world) registrars if they have to do include something of a faith/belief that is not their own personal beliefs - yet a strict Christian registrar who expresses concerns about doing same-sex marriages is told that their personal beliefs are not allowed to affect them in carrying out their registrar duties.

I can't figure out why there are seemingly contradictory rules in place.

The suggestion that all registrars need be concerned with is that the legal words are said and the couple are married at the end of the ceremony is ridiculous. The registrars must abide by the marriage act of 1949 and amended in 1995. Simply put, this states that a civil marriage should not contain religion. The suggestion that it may 'offend' the registrars and can not therefore be included is also laughable. The Act was agreed by Parliament, the General Register Office and the General Synod (Church of England/Wales) as the Established Church. This area of the Act is open to some interpretation which is why registration districts apply tougher or less stringent rules.

At the moment the point is that if you want a religious ceremony get married in a religious building but if you choose to get married in an approved premise then you are also making the decision to exclude religion from your ceremony. This does not stop you having a blessing after your civil marriage.

Maybe someone should write to the General Register Office requesting definitive guidance and copying their reply onto this forum.

The law allows you to get married in any approved building, not just a church. That is the key part here.

The law (or someone's interpretation of it) should not force you to remove any mention of your particular religion from your marriage, just because - for whatever reason - you are not getting married in a church. In fact, I'd be quite convinced that it is in fact a form of discrimination as covered by various pieces of legislation regarding the freedom to practice your religion - which, after all, Christianity is a mainstream religion not just in this country but worldwide - not some bizarre little obscure cult.

Whilst we are covered by having a separate blessing afterwards, it does seem wrong that a key part of what makes us "us" should be relegated to 'second place'.

I guess the law has just under a year to be corrected before our big day, because it's clearly wrong.

Perhaps I will take on the General Registry Office on behalf of everyone in the UK in our position. I'm sure there are plenty of places that would be happy to provide free legal assistance.

Thanks for that Civil Ceremonies - but what about the original question about music? Does this rule cover pop music like 'Angels' by Robbie?

Just phoned the GRO and all they want to do is quote various bits of law at you, rather than actually giving you information (apart from "write to your MP") about what to do about this clear discrimination that is in breach of article 9 of the human rights act (ability to follow your religion freely) - apart from various UK equality laws.

Apparently they are going to change the law to allow "civil partnerships" in religious buildings - but not the equally important religious service in non religious buildings.

So where do we go from here? I know that as an issue I'm sure a lot of people don't care about it - but I do, and I want the law corrected. Perhaps I should just sue the government instead and use the money to pay for the wedding...

I can understand how people feel about this discussion but as long as the law remains as it is there is nothing to be done and the Established Church carry a lot of clout in this area. The law differenciates between an authorised building (usually a church, chapel, religious meeting house etc) and an approved premise (hotel, castle, permanently docked boat etc). A religious ceremony may only be had in an authorised building.

I fear that the progression of the marriage laws, insofar as religious content goes ,is probably not high on anyones agenda, particularly in the current climate when the government is more bothered about slashing budgets. I certainly don't expect to see a change by next year - wishful thinking I'm afraid

As for the question on 'Angels' as mentioned earlier it all depends which registration district you are getting married in and their interpretatation of the law. Some accept it whilst others won't.

I'm sure that similar things as "as long as the law remains as it is there is nothing to be done" were said about apartheid in South Africa, gay rights, sexual equality etc and... well people that didn't like it got things changed.

It may not be on many people's agendas - so we need to make it appear on their agendas.

This is an issue that angers me greatly but I really don't want to end up ranting on the forum, starting arguments and getting myself banned or something.

It's only a law that needs changing because it should never have been introduced in the first place!

If you want to rant feel free - I'm not saying i disagree with you, but the fact remains at the moment it obviously isn't a priority. I'm not sure comparing it to apartheid is appropriate though.

However, playing devil's advocate, I am sure there are many people who feel strongly about only having a religious ceremony in a place of worship.