{English Bishops, Registry Office Weddings}[16th October 1989]

[Redbook6:324-325][19891016:1169c]{English Bishops, Registry Office Weddings}[16th October 1989]

.1169

[continued]

During my interview with the Archbishop of [...], which on the whole (and given the short time available) went very well, he did say two things that bothered me.

One was as I was leaving, and in relation to a portrait of Archbishop Laud and to his absentee habits, about English bishops not being popular.*

The other, which has continued to bother me, was about my marriage in a Registry Office, which evidently disappointed him: he made a remark about people thinking that one was not married in the sight of God. I am not certain whether he thought that himself or not.

Now, quite apart from the logic that if God is omniscient all marriages happen in his sight, I am disappointed that the Church should still put so much emphasis on form (ritual and sacrament) and so little on substance (meaning and inner sense). The major reason we got married in a Registry Office**(and I have not managed to tell any cleric this yet) was because I thought that a Church wedding would be at worst, secular; at best, formalistic; and in both cases, not holy enough for our marriage.*** The Registry Office ceremony was holy: the surroundings were conducive, the atmosphere was sympathetic, and the holiness came from within.****

*{ie in Wales}

**Has this been covered above?

Ref... [] ?

***Also, because we had been living together as if married for years and I felt that the Church did not approve; also, because I felt that the Church did not like marrying non-attenders; also, because we wanted to get married quickly and quietly....

****Not, of course, from us, but through us.

[continues]

[PostedBlogger13082020]