At present, only if at least one of the couple lives in the Ecclesiastical Parish, is there an automatic right to marry in their Parish Church, even if they are not baptised. This system has been in place for centuries and is connected to calling of the Banns of Marriage. Originally the Banns of Marriage (publication of intent) were nailed on the door of the Church in the communities and villages where the individuals lived. In other words John from Farnborough who wishes to marry Mary from Green Street Green must have this intention publicised for three weeks, so objections can be raised if there are any.

Over the years this system has seemed more archaic and frustrating. Names are read out at a service, but for many they might as well be out of a telephone directory. Since our Parish is now 19,000 strong, would anyone really know if there was any just cause or impediment why a particular couple should be prevented from getting married?

In recognition of this, the Church is beginning to make the process more ‘user friendly’ by widening the criteria by which a couple may qualify, to marry in a particular Church. Couples now need to fulfil just one of six criteria:

• Couples can marry in a Parish Church if one of them was baptised or confirmed there

• If one of them has ever lived in the Parish for six months or more

• If one of them has at any time regularly attended public worship there for six months or more

• The right to marry in a Parish in which one of the parents has lived for six months or more in the child’s lifetime

• The right to marry in a Parish Church where the parents have regularly attended worship in the child’s lifetime

• Couples can also marry in a Parish Church where their parents or grandparents were married.

This development seems infinitely sensible to me, and will help to avoid some of the bewilderment and damage that the Church’s previously archaic practices have caused.

Previously, people were very limited as to where they could get married, but now a wide range of buildings and places are available for civil ceremonies. If too many sticks and hurdles are placed before couples, then they may well vote with their feet, opting to marry in the local country club or castle. In this case, an important opportunity for connection with the Church and the Christian message is lost.

At St. Giles, we value all the couples who come to us for marriage and we have an important part to play in helping them to celebrate their love, while preparing them for the challenges and commitments of Christian marriage. I welcome this new legislation and commend it to the Parish.

Matthew Hughes