Religious marriage but not legal?

[janette]

Is this possible?

Say you were deeply religious so living together is out of the question but because of legal / financial reasons it is complicated to be married.

If you have a wedding in a church would you have get a marriage certificate?

This is an older couple so no issues with children etc; no one is planning to change names and they plan to keep finances separate.

Just wondering if anyone has heard of or done anything like this.

 

[Honu]

I would guess it would be up to the church if they'd do the ceremony without a license. My BF got married in a catholic church in Italy and it's not recognized as a legal marriage in the US.

 

[Mrs.Toad]

I know a few same-sex couples who were married in their churches with no legal marriage license. I guess it depends on the church whether they would agree to do it, but there isn't any legal reason why they couldn't have a religious ceremony without a legal license.

 

[froglady]

Most mainstream religions would probably not do anything that could make the state question the legality of other marriages they have performed, but more socially progressive churches might perform a ceremony that is identical to a wedding, except there is no legal standing.

They might also just find a well spoken friend to emcee a ceremony at home, in a park, etc and invite friends and family to witness it. It happens all the time in states that do not recognize the legality of same sex marriages.



AHA! The amphibians have spoken as one!

 

[Mouse House Mama]

I know of 2 instances where people did this. One was where the bride needed a double lung transplant and if she got legally married she would lose her health benefits. They had a huge wedding with all the trimmings (it was on the news!) but it wasn't legal. Another was a friend of my family that had a son with CP who got married to a girl who also had developmental delays and again if they got legally married they would lose alot of benefits and not be able tp afford to live. His Mom threw a big wedding for them ceremony and all.

 

[RoyalCanadian]

Regardless of whether one gets a marriage license or not for a "religious" wedding ceremony the whole issue would become rather moot when common-law is taken into consideration.

In the province of Ontario in Canada a couple is considered legally married under common-law if they cohabitate for 3 years. Common-law marriage has the same financial, legal and taxation ramifications as a marriage performed with a marriage license or through the publication of banns.

I often find couples who have been living together for a long time are quite surprised when they come to me to plan their wedding and I have to tell them that they are already considered to be legally married in the eyes of the province of Ontario.

 

[janette]

I often find couples who have been living together for a long time are quite surprised when they come to me to plan their wedding and I have to tell them that they are already considered to be legally married in the eyes of the province of Ontario.

Wouldn't that only be an issue if it is contested in a court? I can see it being an issue if they split and one sues the other or a family sues for some reason but I don't think the IRS would be coming after them for the extra taxes they might owe if they were filing as married.

 

[RoyalCanadian]

I would guess it would be up to the church if they'd do the ceremony without a license. My BF got married in a catholic church in Italy and it's not recognized as a legal marriage in the US.

You bring up a very important point of consideration -- whether the Church would be willing (or even able) to perform the ceremony without a license. In Ontario the credentials to perform a marriage are issued by the province -- not by the church. I'm a Lutheran minister registered to officiate at marriages under the Ontario Marriage Act. My bishop provided the province with my bona fides and the province issued me with a license to officiate at weddings.

Each marriage license that is presented to me carries with it an authorization to perform the marriage. Without that authorization I cannot officiate at the marriage. (I'm also able to officiate at weddings under the authorization of the publication of banns, but that is a whole other issue.)

If I were to officiate at a service that did not satisfy the requirements of the Ontario Marriage Act, then I'm guessing that I could face legal action by the province that may result in the revocation of my license.

Now, if I were to officiate at a service that didn't satisfy the requirements of my particular Christian tradition then I could face disciplinary action by my church that may result in being removed from the roster -- effectively defrocked.

As for Italy -- I know that many European countries have removed the authorization to perform weddings of a legal standing from the churches. "Legal" weddings are more often performed by civic authorities and the "church" wedding is for religious needs. Without the necessary civic registration, the wedding is not considered valid in other jurisdictions.

 

[RoyalCanadian]

Wouldn't that only be an issue if it is contested in a court? I can see it being an issue if they split and one sues the other or a family sues for some reason but I don't think the IRS would be coming after them for the extra taxes they might owe if they were filing as married.

You are right in suggesting it might only become an issue if separation and/or divorce proceedings ensue -- however, I have found the government to be rather eager to collect the taxes they are due, as well as social service agencies eager to pay out benefits only according to scale.

 

[m&m's mom]

Hey Janette!
Bill and I lived together for 11 years before we finally bothred to get married and no one ever came to look for any extra taxes.
I think it would be very nice for a church to provide a "commitment" service. I personally do not believe you have to have a legal certificate to be married in the eyes of God.
This reminds me of my cousins funeral. He was gay and I was shocked to learn the funeral was going to be at a BAPTIST church. Turns out the minister was a close friend and neighbor of cousin and his partner and did not hesitate to offer his church for the service.
I like it when clergy can look at the big picture.

Coral

 

[janette]

I've never heard of any issues with a government agency as long as you aren't filing for assistance like food stamps or AFDC.

Thanks Coral for that verification.

It is the eyes of God matter to this person; it is just sometimes pretty complicated to try to work out the legal part. It isn't an effort to not pay taxes and there aren't benefits that would be lost.

 

[janette]

You bring up a very important point of consideration -- whether the Church would be willing (or even able) to perform the ceremony without a license. In Ontario the credentials to perform a marriage are issued by the province -- not by the church. I'm a Lutheran minister registered to officiate at marriages under the Ontario Marriage Act. My bishop provided the province with my bona fides and the province issued me with a license to officiate at weddings.
.

It sounds like only the minister would be able to answer fully. Thanks for explaining why they might not be able to do this even if they wanted too.

 

[MAKmom]

This is a problem for some senior citizens. If they get married they loose some of thier benefits & can not afford to live. What religion are they?If they are catholic they will not preform the ceremony without a license. Maybe the Italy route would work for them.

 

[pfishgirl]

Wiccans / Pagans have Hand Fastings ALL the time.. but there are few states that say it is a Legal Marriage..

 

[barkley]

just as an fyi-i've known people to do it in reverse (as in legal in the eyes of the law but not their church). this was in the circumstance of young members of the mormon church. because in their church religious marriages are 'sealed' for beyond death, if they were'nt 'sure' if the person they were interested in was their destined 'eternal partner' they would marry in a legal manner but not in a religous. that way 'the church' did not reccognize it as a true marriage, and a subsequent legal divorce was not an issue (the town i grew up in that had a large mormon population commonly referred to these as 'practice marriages').

dh and i were of different christian faiths when we married and looked to a variety of christian churches to hold our wedding in-none would perform the ceremony without a governmental wedding certificate for the officiant to sign. in order to hold the service we had to provide, within so many days prior to the religious ceremony, the governmental forms to show that we were legaly able to become man and wife (so the declaration that we were not legaly married to another person).

oh, and btw-as far as u.s governmental benefits go- a person that marries another is not legaly obligated to support them or their children (so no issue for an adult or a child re. public assistance), and, social security regulations were revised some time ago to eliminate the provision wherein a person (most often a woman) is disadvantaged regarding survivor benefits if they choose to re-marry (current regulations look to the duration of a former marriage vs a current-so a re-married can receive a higher benefit if they meet the period of matrimony requirements wherein a former marriage affiliation entitles them to more).

 

[Keli]

Personally I don't see how it is possible to be married in the eyes of God but not in the eyes of the gov't.
Either you are married or you are not.
I don't think too many mainstream churches would hold a 'committment ceremony" for a couple.

 

[RoyalCanadian]

On a side note -- a somewhat humourous one at that.

Friends asked me to officiate at their wedding in New York State. I'm authorized to officiate at weddings in Ontario and can easily get authorization for other Canadian provinces, if necessary. However, I knew I was not registered in New York State and had to find out how to get the authorization to perform the ceremony.

I checked the New York State website that dealt with marriages -- nothing much of note there, so I called the appropriate office in Albany and explained the situation -- wedding in Youngstown, NY; friends; ordained; and what form would I have to fill out to get the authorization in New York State and to whom shall I send the form with my bishop's assurance that I was indeed an ordained minister.

There was silence on the other end of the line and then this response, "Well, you're allowed to perform marriages there, right?"

My answer, "Yes."

Then her response, "then you can perform marriages in New York State."

No forms to fill out, no assurances that I was a pastor. Nothing. Just me saying I was a pastor who could perform weddings where I lived.

When I performed the wedding I had to fill out the information on the couple's marriage license. There was a place to sign my name -- no place to fill in any other information about who I was. Same for the witnesses -- just a place to sign their names, but no space for any other further information such as address or even a space to print the name.

The groom's step-father was a retired minister from another state -- he had never seen a NY state marriage license so he couldn't help much. One of the ushers was a NY state assistant district attorney. He didn't have any experience with such licenses either but couldn't believe how little information they required.

I filled it in and they mailed it in. Never heard anything back that it wasn't accepted as legit. Oh well -- in the eyes of God...

 

[Cool-Beans]

I don't think the Catholic church will marry you here without a license. They didn't do it 20 years ago, anyway.

Personally, I recognize all of them. If you got married in the church in Italy but the US government doesn't consider you married, I will. If you are gay and can't get legally married, but have your own ceremony, I consider you married. I'm not to concerned with what the government or the church accepts.

But the women who've lived with someone for 6 years and start calling the guy their "husband" even though there has been no ceremony...I don't count that. I wouldn't SAY so, of course, but I don't consider living together the same thing as married.

 

[TinkerbellMama]

But the women who've lived with someone for 6 years and start calling the guy their "husband" even though there has been no ceremony...I don't count that. I wouldn't SAY so, of course, but I don't consider living together the same thing as married.

But in Rhode Island (as well as a few other States), they WOULD be legally married in that case (assuming they are both free to marry). Just as married as someone who had procured a license and had the most lavish church wedding possible.

Common law marriage in the US is different than in Canada, apparently. Here, there are slight differences in the laws of the handful of States which still allow the formation of common-law marriages, but the essentials are generally:

1. The couple is legally free to marry. Meaning no one can be married to anyone else, they must be of age, and they must be of sound mind. Also, they must meet the requirements of that particular State in which the union is formed. In other words, if gay marriage is not allowed in that State, two men cannot form a common-law marriage there.

2. They must hold themselves out to the community as married. Legally, all this means is that they tell everyone they are married and refer to each other as husband and wife. They would not have to share a surname, pool finances, etc...but they SHOULD claim that they are married on all forms including tax returns and insurance paperwork. You can't pick and choose when to be married and when to be single. You're either married or you're not. If a couple tells Great Aunt Mary they are married because she is ultra-religious and will freak out that they're living together, but doesn't say they're married to anyone else, then they're not married.

3. Evidence may be required in court if the marriage is contested...generally things like cohabitation, proof of consummation (having a biological child together helps, lol), wearing wedding rings, possibly sharing a surname, pooling finances/owning property as husband and wife, and habitually and continually acting as a married couple. None of these is definitive, but taken together they may form a clear picture of the parties' intentions. Of course, if both parties admit they intended to be married all along, there is little question.

4. The seven years thing (that you are automatically married at common-law after 7 years of cohabitation--which most people believe to be true) is a falsehood. You can't just live with someone for seven years and suddenly be married if no marriage was ever intended. You can live with someone for 50 years if you want, pool all your resources, have ten kids, and still not be married, if that's what you desire!

Usually this stuff only comes up when someone dies or the couple divorces (yes, you have to file for a legal divorce if you were married under common-law), or when insurance companies deny benefits to the spouse.


I have a lot of other fascinating facts about common-law marriage to share, but it's very late (THANK YOU, RED SOX!!!!!!!!!!!! ) so I'll have to save those for tomorrow (errrrr, later today).

 

[Green Tea]

You can't have a true marriage without a marriage license. You can have any sort of committment ceremony someone is willing to perform. I'm sure some officient will come up with some committment certificate they could create on the computer, but that doesn't make it legal.