# Marriage License



## Bladestunner316 (May 1, 2006)

If one could not afford a typical wedding and decided to get married legally and save for a marriage would that be ok from a biblical viewpoint? 

blade


----------



## Scott Bushey (May 1, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Bladestunner316_
> If one could not afford a typical wedding and decided to get married legally and save for a marriage would that be ok from a biblical viewpoint?
> 
> blade



Nathan,
Marriages are not expensive; the license is cheap and a pastor can do the ceremony for no cost.


----------



## blhowes (May 1, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Bladestunner316_
> If one could not afford a typical wedding and decided to get married legally and save for a marriage would that be ok from a biblical viewpoint?
> 
> blade


Is this just a hypothetical question, or...


----------



## Bladestunner316 (May 1, 2006)

hypothetical.

I was just thinking about it I have no idea the costs of a wedding.


----------



## blhowes (May 1, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Bladestunner316_
> hypothetical.


Drat!


----------



## LadyFlynt (May 1, 2006)

People overdo the "wedding" portion. Keep it simple and in your price range...ditto the license and minister.


----------



## Bladestunner316 (May 1, 2006)

well yeah I would want the minister. 


bare with me here. 


The reason I asked was because I was thinking if a couple could not afford a traditional wedding but yet did not want to put off their natural desires for a year or more to save for a traditional wedding and did not want to do anything before marriage would it be ok biblically to have a small ceremony license plus minister and then save up for a nice formal wedding.

blade


----------



## LadyFlynt (May 1, 2006)

It's actually considered a bit strange (raised eyebrows from others type strange) and more than a bit tacky...take it from someone who was in a "wedding" where the couple had eloped the month before (hubby even tried to get me to the courthouse the week before our wedding). I really don't think it's a good idea.


----------



## Bladestunner316 (May 1, 2006)

So wait until you can ahve a nice wedding then?


----------



## LadyFlynt (May 1, 2006)

Or just get married and let it be that.

I don't believe in long engagements...I had one...it was torture...


----------



## Bladestunner316 (May 1, 2006)

long engagements sound like torture indeed.


----------



## BaptistCanuk (May 1, 2006)

I don't see anything wrong with it personally. What's wrong with getting married and then later on renewing your vows in the big ceremony that you want?


----------



## gwine (May 1, 2006)

> _Originally posted by LadyFlynt_
> Or just get married and let it be that.
> 
> I don't believe in long engagements...I had one...it was torture...



Debbie and I met on April 2nd and we were married July 1st . . . the same year.

That was 27 years ago.


----------



## BaptistCanuk (May 1, 2006)

That's great Gerry. 

My fiancee's name is Debbie. We're getting married when God and U.S. immigration say so.


----------



## gwine (May 1, 2006)

> _Originally posted by BaptistCanuk_
> That's great Gerry.
> 
> My fiancee's name is Debbie. We're getting married when God and U.S. immigration say so.



My nephew married a girl from Romania. They were married here in the states (Indiana) and a few months later went over to her homeland to be married again.

Of course, he is Roman Catholic and she is (I think) Greek Orthodox so maybe this is different, but I don't see why two weddings is improper. It sure would have been hard for her family to come over or _vice versa_.

(Added as an afterthought)

My aunt married a Canadien and eventually (after about 20+ years) became a Canadien citizen so she could vote and what not. They have 3 boys - 2 stayed in Canada and married up there and 1 came to the states and married an American girl. 

[Edited on 5-2-2006 by gwine]


----------



## Bladestunner316 (May 1, 2006)

Thank you for the comments!!!


----------



## py3ak (May 2, 2006)

I think having a big wedding is almost certainly a sin. So small is definitely my recommendation.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (May 2, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Bladestunner316_
> long engagements sound like torture indeed.


Big time. My wife and I should have heeded Paul's advice...


----------



## LadyFlynt (May 2, 2006)

> _Originally posted by SemperFideles_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Bladestunner316_
> ...



 Wish hubby had pushed harder for that elopement a year earlier...come to find out, so did my parents.


----------



## Mike (May 2, 2006)

I do not think that an expensive ceremony or even a legal marriage are necessary for marriage in God's eyes. In cases where either cannot be afforded (the latter being the case in many developing countries), I still believe two people can commit and enter into the covenant of marriage.


----------



## gwine (May 2, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Mike_
> I do not think that an expensive ceremony or even a legal marriage are necessary for marriage in God's eyes. In cases where either cannot be afforded (the latter being the case in many developing countries), I still believe two people can commit and enter into the covenant of marriage.



One might be "married" in God's eyes but to eschew a legal piece of paper is not a good idea. The couple would not have the benefits that our society confers to married people - insurance, taxes, property, children and medical all come to mind. Try going to a hospital and signing papers for treatment for your "wife" - you would be fortunate to see her, much less make a decision for her.


----------



## BaptistCanuk (May 2, 2006)

> _Originally posted by gwine_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by BaptistCanuk_
> ...



Hey that's cool Gerry. Have you been to Canada at all? My fiancee lives in Indiana.


----------



## gwine (May 2, 2006)

Now that is interesting. We are from Indiana (Fort Wayne area) and have been up the the Sault Sainte Marie area quite a bit - that's where my aunt and uncle live (and my maternal grandparents lived before they died.) So I went up there once or twice a year when I was younger, but we haven't been up there for a few years now. Soon we will need a passport to get up there.

Whereabouts is your fiancee from? Are you moving to the States after you get married?


----------



## BaptistCanuk (May 2, 2006)

Hey Gerry, I'd love to go up to the Soo sometime. I've never been there.

My fiancee is from Goshen, IN. Yes, I will be moving there if I'm allowed to. I have family up in Wisconsin as well.


----------



## Ambrose (May 2, 2006)

> _Originally posted by gwine_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Mike_
> ...



I'm not sure that I've EVER needed a marriage license to prove that I was married - not at a hospital, not for taxes, not for anything.


----------



## LadyFlynt (May 2, 2006)

As a female, I will need my birth cert and my marriage license to get a driver's license in this state. My birth to prove I exist...my marriage license to prove that I am the person on the birth cert and that is why my other license has a different surname, etc.


----------



## gwine (May 2, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Chad Degenhart_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by gwine_
> ...



Once again I am at a loss for how to answer you. But I am certain that a couple living together and not married would eventually get found out if they tried to claim they were married.


----------



## Ambrose (May 2, 2006)

> _Originally posted by gwine_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Chad Degenhart_
> ...



I would expect that their sin would find them out. 

But I am not talking about anyone claiming to be married when they are not, just that a state certificate is not required for a marriage. Two couples were married in our church within the last couple of years that did not obtain a state license, and are managing just fine without it. The women have driver's licenses and all the conveniences of the modern mobile society. My point is simply that it is not necessary to have the state license to be married and function in society as a married couple.


----------



## satz (May 2, 2006)

> _Originally posted by py3ak_
> I think having a big wedding is almost certainly a sin. So small is definitely my recommendation.




How so?


----------



## VictorBravo (May 2, 2006)

Chad, things vary by state. You are right that people can act and be married without a license from the state, but if you are in a position to ask the state to adjudicate something that depends upon the validity of a marriage, then the problems start.

In Montana, for instance, common-law marriage is recognized by statute. The problem comes up often in the case of widow's benefits to a state or private pension. A common law wife may obtain the benefits, but she will have to prove in court that she was a common law wife. If she had the license recorded in a county, a certified copy would solve the question.

In Washington State, on the other hand, a common law marriage is not recognized. But, ironically, Washington will recognize a marriage that was recognized in another state; so common law marriages that are formed in Montana are legal marriages in Washington. But, if a situation arose as stated above, the surviving spouse would still have to prove in court that they were married according to Montana's laws.

I'm not saying it is the right thing to have a state officially recognize marriage, only that this is what we have. 

Vic


----------



## Ambrose (May 2, 2006)

> _Originally posted by satz_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by py3ak_
> ...



I plan on keeping my daughters' festivities down to no more than 7 days of feasting and dancing. I do want to save some money for their dowries.

[Edited on 5-2-2006 by Chad Degenhart]


----------



## Puritanhead (May 2, 2006)

Who cares anyway? The bride's family picks up the tab. 

I like my father-in-law already, and I have never met him, and I am willing to bet he will drop a cool ten grand on the big wedding.

Sucker.


----------



## gwine (May 2, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Puritanhead_
> Who cares anyway? The bride's family picks up the tab.
> 
> I like my father-in-law already, and I have never met him, and I am willing to bet he will drop a cool ten grand on the big wedding.
> ...



Not always so. My wife's mother's first comment when we told them we were getting married was "we can't afford it." So I said I would pay for the wedding.

Actually it ended up with them helping a bit on the reception.

And I know you're being tongue-in-cheek.


----------



## Ambrose (May 2, 2006)

> _Originally posted by victorbravo_
> Chad, things vary by state. You are right that people can act and be married without a license from the state, but if you are in a position to ask the state to adjudicate something that depends upon the validity of a marriage, then the problems start.
> 
> In Montana, for instance, common-law marriage is recognized by statute. The problem comes up often in the case of widow's benefits to a state or private pension. A common law wife may obtain the benefits, but she will have to prove in court that she was a common law wife. If she had the license recorded in a county, a certified copy would solve the question.
> ...



How would the state of Washington regard a certificate of marriage from a Church - signed by both parties, the minister, and witnesses?


----------



## gwine (May 2, 2006)

> _Originally posted by BaptistCanuk_
> Hey Gerry, I'd love to go up to the Soo sometime. I've never been there.
> 
> My fiancee is from Goshen, IN. Yes, I will be moving there if I'm allowed to. I have family up in Wisconsin as well.



What a small world indeed. I had distant relatives in the Goshen area. And, it's kind of on our way back to visit the moms.

I do hope you will be allowed to move there. Your wife would get pretty lonely.


----------



## LadyFlynt (May 2, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Chad Degenhart_
> The women have driver's licenses and all the conveniences of the modern mobile society. My point is simply that it is not necessary to have the state license to be married and function in society as a married couple.



It may be true in IL (where we just moved from)...particularly if the women were married in that state, etc. But I am someone who was born in one state, got married and my license in another, and now have to get a new license in a third (after I aquire my birth cert from the original state). Therefore, I and others entering THIS state HAVE to prove who we are and why and how our name has changed.


----------



## LadyFlynt (May 2, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Puritanhead_
> Who cares anyway? The bride's family picks up the tab.
> 
> I like my father-in-law already, and I have never met him, and I am willing to bet he will drop a cool ten grand on the big wedding.
> ...



Well, I can tell you won't be marrying any of my daughters


----------



## py3ak (May 2, 2006)

Because it is self-indulgence and bad stewardship. I made a profit on my wedding.


----------



## VictorBravo (May 2, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Chad Degenhart_
> 
> How would the state of Washington regard a certificate of marriage from a Church - signed by both parties, the minister, and witnesses?



Chad, Washington will certainly honor such a certificate of marriage. But they still want a license and they want the certificate filed:

RCW 26.04.140
Marriage license.

Before any persons can be joined in marriage, they shall procure a license from a county auditor, as provided in RCW 26.04.150 through 26.04.190.


RCW 26.04.120
Marriage according to religious ritual.

All marriages to which there are no legal impediments, solemnized before or in any religious organization or congregation, according to the established ritual or form commonly practiced therein, are valid, and a certificate containing the particulars specified in RCW 26.04.080 and 26.04.090, shall be made and filed for record by the person or persons presiding or officiating in or recording the proceedings of such religious organization or congregation, in the manner and with like effect as in ordinary cases. 
[Code 1881 Â§ 2389; RRS Â§ 8448.]

On the positive side, WA has a statute that specifically prohibits recognizing "marriages" from other states that violate its definition of marriage. That includes homosexual marriage. So WA will not grant "full faith and credit" to one of those Canadian or Massachusetts decrees. But the statutory definition is being challenged by the homosexual lobby. A WA Supreme Court decision is expected any day now.

If you want to read up on all the marriage statutes in WA, here is a link:

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=26.04

Vic

[Edited on 5-2-2006 by victorbravo]


----------



## Ambrose (May 2, 2006)

> _Originally posted by victorbravo_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Chad Degenhart_
> ...



Thanks for the link. Its interesting because they require a license, but the sanctions are applied to the minister. So if I produced a church certificate, they might find my minister and fine him. 

Yet I could get married by an Elvis impersonator in Las Vegas (who was also licensed to officiate) and that would be cool with them. 

I do appreciate the requirement for public notice prior to the wedding, though.


----------



## ServantOfKing (Jul 9, 2006)

> _Originally posted by Bladestunner316_
> If one could not afford a typical wedding and decided to get married legally and save for a marriage would that be ok from a biblical viewpoint?
> 
> blade



So here are a few random thoughts...
From a socially appropriate standpoint - it depends on who you ask. Some people think it's fine while others would think it was inappopriate. The whole topic of weddings brings up all kinds of social etiquette rules, stupid traditions, and dumb rituals. Just ask an older woman in the south if it's okay for a bride to wear ivory instead of stark white. She'll likely tell you that it means the bride isn't "pure." In the Victorian times brides wore colorful dresses and that was considered socially acceptable. So it depends on who you're talking to.

I would say, why not just have a really small wedding. I helped my friend pull one together in less than a month. They didn't spend alot and it was beautiful. If you don't have alot of money but want to get married and want to have the "typical wedding"- just compromise and do a smaller wedding. 

Another thought. It's not wrong to have a big traditional wedding by any means - if you can afford it. As I have been planning my own wedding (in December) I've had to question my own motives. Am I having this wedding to "show off" or out of pride? Humility and a desire to exalt Christ, not ourselves, should be at the forefront. Just something to think about!


----------

