Humanists added to Register of Solemnisers

doriansmith · 30-06-2013 11:00PM

Brian never mentioned anything to us about having to do anything indoors to make it legal. I just said to him that we'd like to get married outdoors & he said that was fine. The only thing he mentioned was that we might need to sign the cert inside if we had no table to lean on for writing outside. But he didn't say anything about this being a legal requirement, just that we might need to do it for practical reasons.

lazygal · 30-06-2013 11:04PM

He actually married us too - but it was before humanist weddings were legal so we did a quick civil ceremony the week before.

The reason the venue thing stuck with me was that a friend of mine wanted to get married outside but was told no way, no how, so when registering intent I asked about it, and it was a firm no, these are the venue requirements regardless of who legally marries you. Maybe some registrars are more laid back about it or don't follow up on it. I also remember around the time Amy Huberman and Brian O'Driscoll got married a journalist commented on the church being closed to the public as she walked up the aisle, and that this contravened the 'accessible to any member of the public requirement' of all marriage ceremonies. We had just started wedding planning around then, so it stuck with me.

doriansmith · 30-06-2013 11:11PM

Yeah I had thought the same thing - that it had to be in a fixed structure regardless of who married you. There seems to be so much conflicting information online, I remember searching a while back and seeing a post by Tom Colton on some website where he confirmed that he can do the full legal ceremony outside.

Then when I said it to Brian he didn't mention anything about there being a problem with it. I'm not sure why it's possible when go ireland says you can't do it tbh, maybe it's just that only the HSE celebrants strictly enforce it.

Addle · 30-06-2013 11:41PM

So the ceremony was inside and show outside?

I'd be checking as to the legal status of some of your marriages!

pooch90 · 01-07-2013 12:06AM

Our humanist celebrant said the only legal requirement was the part about objections.
AFAIK the regs about being indoors apply if getting married by HSE registrar. Up until now as HAI weren't legal then, yes, couple would have had to made other arrangements to get legalities done by a HSE official indoors/on another day.

That's my interpretation of it anyway.

doriansmith · 01-07-2013 08:48AM

Addle wrote: »

So the ceremony was inside and show outside?

I'd be checking as to the legal status of some of your marriages!

No, the full ceremony was indoors as the weather was bad. However, I was told that it would be legal to have the full thing outside.

beans · 01-07-2013 08:56AM

We only last week booked our wedding with the local council in London before we have our humanist ceremony in Dublin in September.

Unbelievable! Oh well

doriansmith · 01-07-2013 09:13AM

pooch90 wrote: »

Our humanist celebrant said the only legal requirement was the part about objections.
AFAIK the regs about being indoors apply if getting married by HSE registrar. Up until now as HAI weren't legal then, yes, couple would have had to made other arrangements to get legalities done by a HSE official indoors/on another day.

That's my interpretation of it anyway.

Yeah our celebrant said the same about the only legal requirement being the objections part. I think you're right that the legal requirement about being indoors only applied before the HAI became registered, that makes sense.

Gatica · 01-07-2013 12:16PM

lazygal wrote: »

The requirement that the marriage be solemnized in a fixed structure that is open to the public precludes marriages being solemnized in the open air, a tent, marquee or other temporary structure, or a private dwelling.

http://www.groireland.ie/guidelines_for_venues.htm

Found this on the gro website. It does say it applies to civil marriages, but I am almost certain we were told this is a general requirement for all marriages (eg Catholic/Spiritualist union ceremonies couldn't be conducted outside either).

The building information on that site ONLY applies to HSE proper "civil" ceremonies. The building is usually pre-inspected and pre-approved by the HSE for the ceremony.

pooch90 wrote: »

Our humanist celebrant said the only legal requirement was the part about objections.
AFAIK the regs about being indoors apply if getting married by HSE registrar.

We were married outside by Tom Colton, whole ceremony was done outdoors. Signed papers and all. We were informed there were only 2 legal requirements to marriage:

declaration of no known impediment to our marriage
the knowingly taking of each-other in marriage

tatli_lokma · 01-07-2013 01:14PM

Gatica wrote: »

We were informed there were only 2 legal requirements to marriage:
declaration of no known impediment to our marriage

the knowingly taking of each-other in marriage

I think the opportunity for people to object on one of the listed acceptable grounds is also a legal requirement, and this is why it is one of the things that MUST be included in the ceremony wording. And in order for people to have an opportunity to object then they must have access - therefore inside or outside it has to be open to the public.

I think the inside/outside thing is a gray area. I really wish the GRO website would be very clear as to what is acceptable and what constitutes a) a religious ceremony b) a civil ceremony and c) a secular ceremony. Far too much ambiguity IMO.

I know I have been told that priests cannot marry outdoors either - at least that is what a friend was told in the past when enquiring about a religious ceremony outdoors - same reasoning as the HSE requirement of it being a permanent structure, wheelchair accessible and open to the public etc etc. But then again, as I said, this whole question seems to have different answers depending on who you talk to.

lazygal · 01-07-2013 01:42PM

On the accessable to the public thing, friends of ours had a random passerby sit in at their civil ceremony in a hotel. The HSE celebrant said there was nothing they could do, even though it wasn't an invited guest, as the rules stipulated any member of the public must be able to access a legal wedding ceremony. I wonder how this applies to non HSE weddings, like can a couple refuse entry to people who wish to enter a church or room where a ceremony is taking place? As I said, I remember this when the Huberman-O'Driscoll wedding was on, that the church was closed but the rules say anyone is allowed to access the ceremony.

I do think it depends on who you talk to - which is not right - but the woman registering our intent was very black and white about the rules, which she said applied to all legal marriage ceremonies.

Gatica · 01-07-2013 02:10PM

as you said it's different depending on who you talk to, so one should go by what's written in their rules (admittedly though they could make mistakes on the website too, but it's less likely to be person-to-person dependent). The strict list of rules at http://www.groireland.ie/guidelines_for_venues.htm are specifically for HSE civil registrar weddings. It's even linked from under the "MARRIAGE BY CIVIL CEREMONY" heading:
http://www.groireland.ie/getting_married.htm#section2

Click here to read guidelines for venues for civil marriages

The fact that it has to be accessible to the public has been discussed on another thread, which you pointed out, I believe. It still stipulates it under "MARRIAGE BY RELIGIOUS CEREMONY or SECULAR CEREMONY" heading.

All marriages, civil, religious and secular, must take place at venues which are open to the public.

However, it doesn't say anything about indoors outdoors. It simply says:

Marriages by religious ceremony or secular ceremony are performed according to the beliefs, rites and ceremonies of the religious body or secular body which is carrying out the ceremony...

However, all the civil requirements set out in Section 1 must first be complied with

Section 1 does not mention anything about the venue in addition to accessibility.

Under the "THIS APPLIES TO ALL MARRIAGES" heading it says:

To contract a valid marriage in this state the parties to the marriage must:
have the capacity to marry each other;

freely consent to the marriage; and,

observe the marriage notification process as required by the laws of this State (detailed below).

I've mentioned the first 2. I think the last one is kind of self-evident if you already know that you've to give 3 months notice to get your marriage registration form.
It's a tradition and maybe that's why we still think that's the norm, but there really doesn't seem to be anything about anyone having the right to object. Maybe it is one of the reasons for the 3 months notice and the public accessibility, but I'm only speculating.

Little Ted wrote: »

I think the inside/outside thing is a gray area. I really wish the GRO website would be very clear as to what is acceptable and what constitutes a) a religious ceremony b) a civil ceremony and c) a secular ceremony. Far too much ambiguity IMO.

I don't see what's ambiguous about it. They explain what marriage by civil ceremony entails and give the rules. The religious is self-explanatory (and Tom Colton's would've fallen under the religious category) and now that Humanists are allowed, then that's the secular ceremony. I agree though on the point that the term secular is not explained and for someone who's not been following the registration of the Humanists it may be a "new" term.
Inside/Outside is not mentioned, except in the civil ceremonies, so again it's not a grey area. It simply does not seem to apply to any other ceremonies. The part that applies to all ceremonies is already mentioned, i.e. open to the public.

tatli_lokma · 01-07-2013 02:11PM

No - even churches are public places and (unfortunately) you can't stop people coming for a sticky beak.

Personally, as long as they are not disruptive I wouldn't care. Quite flattering really when you think about it.

As for the Huberman-Drico wedding - we can't be sure they didn't have a seperate 'paper filling' ceremony, so we can't be sure the rules were bent for them.

The GRO website states this:

The venue for a religious marriage or a secular marriage is a matter for the authorities of, the religious or secular body under whose auspices the marriage is being performed.
All marriages, civil, religious and secular, must take place at venues which are open to the public.

My reading of that is that a) a religious or secular solemniser can in theory approve a wedding outdoors provided they have no objection to that due to their own beliefs/rights of the ceremony. AFAIK catholic church doesn't officially allow this, hence why probably a lot of priests would not allow it.
As to b) I think that is quite clear - any wedding, of any sort, or any denomination must be open to the public.

tatli_lokma · 01-07-2013 02:12PM

Gatica - you beat me to it!

garglegar · 10-07-2013 09:24AM

We've booked our humanist solemnizer for next year and she emailed us letting us know that she will be able to carry out the legal part of the ceremony.

Our ceremony will be held in an upstairs barn-like venue with no wheelchair access. She said that there is no problem it is only civil ceremonies that need to be held in HSE registered venues. We also have the option to have the ceremony outside if we want to.

BizzyC · 10-07-2013 11:01AM

We've booked a Humanist off the back of the news.

Important to note though that Bridget Carlin of humanism.ie will still not conduct a legal marriage.
She'll still require you to do the legal part separately to the humanist ceremony.

We contacted her first due to proximity to our venue, but decided to go with Mary McKay as we wanted to be legally married on the day.

tatli_lokma · 10-07-2013 11:02AM

garglegar wrote: »

Our ceremony will be held in an upstairs barn-like venue with no wheelchair access. She said that there is no problem it is only civil ceremonies that need to be held in HSE registered venues.

I do find that strange mainly because there is a legal requirement of all types of ceremony to be open to the public. By the fact that a venue is not wheelchair accessible, you are eliminating the possibility of a disabled member of the public from attending. I am not sure if this is again one of those gray areas that the HSE just haven't fully addressed yet, and probably it will take someone making a challenge to it for it to be clarified. Hopefully there will be no last minute issues for you, but if it were me, just to cover myself I would be getting confirmation of this in writing from both my solemniser and the HSE. It would be better than being told a week before the wedding that the venue won't be acceptable.

mailforkev · 11-07-2013 11:46AM

Little Ted wrote: »

I do find that strange mainly because there is a legal requirement of all types of ceremony to be open to the public. By the fact that a venue is not wheelchair accessible, you are eliminating the possibility of a disabled member of the public from attending. I am not sure if this is again one of those gray areas that the HSE just haven't fully addressed yet, and probably it will take someone making a challenge to it for it to be clarified. Hopefully there will be no last minute issues for you, but if it were me, just to cover myself I would be getting confirmation of this in writing from both my solemniser and the HSE. It would be better than being told a week before the wedding that the venue won't be acceptable.

If the HSE are not involved in the ceremony then, as it stands, the only person who has to approve the venue is the humanist celebrant. It can't be in a private house but anywhere else is ok. I have confirmed this with the HAI.

So basically you only need wheelchair accessibility if you have a guest that requires it.

tatli_lokma · 11-07-2013 02:32PM

I'm not disagreeing with you I'm just saying I find it strange. Even churches have to be wheelchair accessible. As I said, I think it is purely down to a lack of definitive guidelines being issued and until/unless a challenge is made to it, it will sit unaddressed. I can see in time however a wheelchair user possibly raising a complaint against it or challenging it. It is discriminatory at the end of the day as it prevents disabled members of the public attending a wedding.

lazygal · 11-07-2013 03:22PM

Little Ted wrote: »

I'm not disagreeing with you I'm just saying I find it strange. Even churches have to be wheelchair accessible. As I said, I think it is purely down to a lack of definitive guidelines being issued and until/unless a challenge is made to it, it will sit unaddressed. I can see in time however a wheelchair user possibly raising a complaint against it or challenging it. It is discriminatory at the end of the day as it prevents disabled members of the public attending a wedding.

Not just the disabled. I'm heavily pregnant and was at a wedding recently where the ceremony room wasn't very accessible for me. It was held in a room with a steep flight of stairs and no lift access. I could easily see older people having an issue too. It was a ceremony conducted by a non-HSE celebrant but was the full legal ceremony, and its an approved HSE venue in addition to that according to the hotel's brochure. I wondered at the time how it was approved when it wasn't wheelchair accessible, and accessiblity was difficult for anyone with even slight mobility issues.

tatli_lokma · 11-07-2013 05:03PM

this issue has had be curious, so I sent an email to the GRO for clarification. This is the response I received:

gro@groireland.ie wrote:

A substantive requirement of a venue that is open to the public is that it must be open to any member of the public to enter at all reasonable times and especially on the day of the intended marriage to be solemnised, and therefore conform with Health and Safety requirements and provide access for persons with disabilities . The GRO is in the process of reminding all nominating bodies of these requirements and all solemnisers should receive an official note to this effect from this office in due course.

To me this makes it quite clear that actually yes, disability access is required. It has possibly not been enforced due to a lack of confirmed guidelines and regulations, but going forward this is more likely to be enforced.

So anyone having a secular wedding, please do not book unsuitable venues on the say so of your celebrant or you could find yourself in trouble later on. I am not sure if not being open to the public would warrant the marriage invalid, but I wouldn't like to take that risk.

lazygal · 11-07-2013 05:29PM

I also wonder if they will clarify the outdoor ceremony issue.

It shouldn't be a case of who you speak do determining what the rules are. The woman we dealt with when we were getting married was firm that the legal requirements were the same regardless of where you married or who married you in a legally binding ceremony. That was in Grand Canal in Dublin, which I imagine registers a large number of intents to marry. It wasn't an issue for us in the end because we did the quick legal ceremony and then had a humanist wedding, but I'm not sure our venue would have been approved as it wasn't open to the public, one of its features was that we had exclusive access to it on the day and no one who wasn't invited was permitted entry.

Gatica · 12-07-2013 09:20AM

no, it shouldn't be depending on who you speak to, but if the website is correct, then indoor/outdoor rules only apply to the HSE's civil weddings. If some registrar is giving their own opinion, then that's all it is. It's not in any rules anywhere.
I think that's pretty clear, what the issue is by the looks of it, is their staff doesn't seem to be properly trained.
The registrar we talked to couldn't get their head around a wedding that wasn't at a church or the registration office. She kept trying to write down a church name, when we said weren't getting married at a church she asked what registration office we were marrying in. Back for forth a few times before I explained that it was possible to have a wedding outside of those two. She had to go off and question someone else in the office before she finished filling out the form. Just because they work there, does not mean they're all well informed.

Addle · 12-07-2013 12:10PM

Gatica wrote: »

I think that's pretty clear

It's not clear though. This thread proves that.
And until it's clear, I'd be very cautious and check with the authority who gives the power to solemnise so as to ensure my marriage is valid.

Gatica · 12-07-2013 12:20PM

the fact that the website says only, "All marriages, civil, religious and secular, must take place at venues which are open to the public." means that those are the rules that apply to all marriages, as stated. It cannot list a whole list of things that do not apply as that could be inexhaustible/unending, e.g. it can be outdoors, it can be on an island, it can be in the middle of a field, etc...
It does say in the "guidelines for civil marriages", the rules that apply to civil ceremonies, which includes the rules about it having to be indoors. If it doesn't say it also specifically about other ceremonies, then they do not apply. I think if you read the website, it is clear.
The fact that people think this and that and offer their own opinions is what muddies the waters (I know that I'm also technically offering my opinion to all that :-/ ).

Addle · 12-07-2013 12:28PM

Gatica wrote: »

the fact that the website says only, "All marriages, civil, religious and secular, must take place at venues which are open to the public." means that those are the rules that apply to all marriages, as stated. It cannot list a whole list of things that do not apply as that could be inexhaustible/unending, e.g. it can be outdoors, it can be on an island, it can be in the middle of a field, etc...
It does say in the "guidelines for civil marriages", the rules that apply to civil ceremonies, which includes the rules about it having to be indoors. If it doesn't say it also specifically about other ceremonies, then they do not apply. I think if you read the website, it is clear.
The fact that people think this and that and offer their own opinions is what muddies the waters (I know that I'm also technically offering my opinion to all that :-/ ).

I don't get your point.
A legal humanist ceremony is a civil ceremony.

tatli_lokma · 12-07-2013 01:02PM

No its actually a secular ceremony.

Church/spiritualist = classed by HSE as religious ceremony
Wedding performed by the registrar = civil ceremony
Humanist ceremony = secular ceremony.

All I know is that confirmation, from the powers that be (i.e the people who register ALL weddings, regardless of type) have said in an email to me that the rules regarding access and being open to the public aplly to all weddings, regardless of type. This information will be clarified to all solemnisers in due course. Thankfully its not an issue for me as we are already married, but if I were planning a secular wedding I would be making sure that my venue is open to the public and has disabled access.

As I say, I think the lack of clarity is simply due to lack of forsight by the HSE and GRO and they only really give proper consideration and put formal regulations in place once a lot of people start asking.

IrelandsMedium · 08-08-2013 12:43AM

Hi all,
I thought I would shed some light on this matter as there seems to be a lot of confusion around it. The legislation states

"2.2 MARRIAGE BY RELIGIOUS CEREMONY or SECULAR CEREMONY
Marriages by religious ceremony or secular ceremony are performed according to the beliefs, rites and ceremonies of the religious body or secular body which is carrying out the ceremony and a registered solemniser may only solemnise a marriage according to the beliefs, rites and ceremony of a religious body or a secular body if he/she is a recognised member of that body.
However, all the civil requirements set out in Section 1 must first be complied with and the couple must have been issued with a Marriage Registration Form by a Registrar which they must show to the person solemnising the marriage. The solemniser must also be a registered solemniser, nominated by his or her religious or secular body, and it is the responsibility of the couple to ensure that the person they wish to solemnise their marriage is on the Register of Solemnisers.

The venue for a religious marriage or a secular marriage is a matter for the authorities of, the religious or secular body under whose auspices the marriage is being performed.
All marriages, civil, religious and secular, must take place at venues which are open to the public."

The key section is the second one

The venue for a religious marriage or a secular marriage is a matter for the authorities of, the religious or secular body under whose auspices the marriage is being performed.
All marriages, civil, religious and secular, must take place at venues which are open to the public."

It is therefore up to the body performing the ceremony to decide the location for the ceremony, on the proviso that it is open to the public and easily identifiable by an address. In other words you couldn't get married in the middle of Roundwood forest for example where in the forest will you be getting married, it has to be easily identifiable for anyone who wishes to make an objection. It cant be in a private house. It cant be on a beach as where on the beach are you getting married unless the beach is attached to a hotel venue such as the beach area at the Marine Hotel in Sutton, it is easily identifiable where the marriage is taking place, the Marine Hotel grounds..

The only reason why the HSE do not do outdoor ceremonies is down to insurance and liability. When they were drafting the legislation they looked to the UK and one of the councils were sued by a person attending a ceremony after they fell over a rock at an outdoor venue, so this is the reason why the HSE will only do it in the 4 walls and a roof and it has to be fixed, i.e not a marquee as this could fall down leaving them liable. The outdoor venues we have done ceremonies on are all attached to hotel venues or wedding venues which have a permanent address. We have done some on OPW owned sites too once the couple have got the permission to do so. Some of them require that you take out insurance for public liability.

I hope this cleard up the indoor/outdoor legal thing.

Tom Colton
Spiritualist Union of IReland

tatli_lokma · 08-08-2013 12:35PM

The indoor/outdoor issue is clear enough from the website, however the disabled access is not. I feel that in time the guidlines will be made more robust in relation to these issues, and a lot of the confusion and misinformation is due to the HSE and GRO not yet addressing issues which may/may not apply to the different types of ceremonies that are now legally permitted.

I remember when I was getting married, civil ceremonies off site had only just been approved and there was a lot of uncertainty even amongst GRO staff as to what could/couldn't be permitted. In time, as this type of ceremony became more popular the GRO and HSE responded by making things more clear and practical. I am sure the same will happen with secular ceremonies, but until the GRO realise the popularity of these weddings and the need for clarification nothing will be done. They are very much a 're-active' government body rather than a pro-active one in regards to these issues.

Nicman · 19-08-2013 11:56AM

Hey lads,

Not sure if the outdoor/indoor dilemma has been ironed out or not there and sorry to go off-course but I have a question on the ceremony:

What are the differences between a civil and a humanist ceremony? Have any of you been to one or the other?

We were going with a standard civil ceremony and they're booked out until almost a year after our date (well they have Thursdays but dont fancy it) so now have to either go for humanist or church ceremony or else change the date completely

Humanists added to Register of Solemnisers

Comments