by Rick Johnson 
PO Box 40451
Tucson, Az.
85717
RikJohnson@juno.com
Return to the Home Page.
Return to the Writings page.
One of the most important rituals within the lives of a person is their wedding. In
most cultures this ritual provides a public statement that the couple involved are now a
family unit in the eyes of the Law as well as those of the Gods.
Though many people now cohabit as an alternative to marriage, there are still
certain legal, social and psychological advantages to a legal marriage.
The psychological advantages to marriage are that the couple involved now have
a certain amount of security in their relationship. Each partner knows (in the usual case
one would hope) that his/her spouse will remain in the family through the rough times
and not leave simply because the couple had an argument. Marriage will give a reason to
remain and work out the differences. There is also the knowledge that the two of you
have exchanged vows of some sort and so each knows what is expected of them in
certain situations. Some of these vows may include sexual fidelity (an important
consideration in this age of sexually transmitted disease) or openess, economic
contributions, who will do what jobs, raising of children, if there will be children, length
of marriage and so on. In other words, Security.
Plus there is the economic reality that it is just too difficult being a single parent in
today's world. As a single father, I know that I, by myself, simply cannot give my
children all that they deserve on one pay check. As a result, I sacrifice myself for my
children. I rarely date because that one evening would take a week's food from my
children's mouth. I eat top raman at work to afford milk for my kids. I work two jobs to
make up for the mother's refusal to give child support and I worry about how I can, just
barely meeting bills today, afford to send my children to college. Reality check; one
paycheck don't cut it and a wife to help out would be really useful to my children,
especially as I have two girls and there are 'things' at which a mother is better inthat
situation.
The social taboos against cohabitation are beginning to break down in the
modern world where children are no longer labeled as 'bastards' and bear no social stigma
for being 'born out of wedlock', Yet, in some families and cultures, it is still vitally
important for their children to be married to avoid the disgrace felt by their parent's
culture.
One couple I know cohabited for a number of years until one of the person's
surviving parent began to die. To make that parent happy in their last few months, they
agreed to have a wedding and so to be, in the eyes of the parent, now a 'decent'
couple.
Many businesses have determined that a family person is more likely to remain
on the job than one who simply 'lives with someone'. To these businesses, the idea that a
person is willing to make that kind of commitment is an indication that s/he will also
commit themselves to the company. In some companies, you cannot become promoted
to a position of responsibility unless you are married. This rule is unwritten, but
nevertheless true. After all, the statistics show that a happily married person will live far
longer than a bachelor, and be more productive.
And in the military, marriage brings extra pay and benefits (such as medical) that
are not givento co-habitants.
The legal implications are the most important of all. Though cohabitation is
useful for a couple who may decide to split-up and have no property and/or children (here
they simply say 'good-by' and leave), but, if there is property or children involved, the
legal implications are quite complicated.
By law, any child born within a legal marriage has been fathered by the husband
unless specifically indicated otherwise. Even then, the law may automatically proscribe
that the husband IS the legal father and require monetary support even though he may not
be the biological father.
One recent case in Tucson occurred when a woman, pregnant during marriage
by a man not her husband, divorced her husband. The courts decided that, even though all
parties involved (biological father, biological mother and legal husband) knew and
admitted in court the truth of the child's paternity, the husband was the only father the
child had ever known and so therefore he was given adequate visitation and required to
pay child support. The biological father received nothing in this case and could not even
see his own child.
But in many other similar cases, the married wife must acknowledge in court that
she had been cheating on her husband and that her husband was not the father of her
child. The state then files a paternity suit against the biological father who often had no
idea that the mother was pregnant.
If a child is conceived out-of-wedlock, even if the biological father is listed on
the birth certificate and the biological father cohabited with the mother during the entire
term of the pregnancy, before and after, and even though there is no doubt of the
paternity of the child, the woman STILL must file a paternity suit to prove that the man is
the father. The idea being that a woman can put any name on the birth certificate and, in
fact, in England it was the custom for an unwed mother to list the local Lord as the father
even if he wasn't. The reason being that the girl's father would be hesitant to disown her
if he had a grandchild by the nobility but if his daughtor became pregnant by the local
miller's son, all **** would break loose.
Yet this works both ways. In the case of cohabitation, the father must file legal
proceedings to guarantee that he will be allowed to see his child if the couple breaks up.
One case a few years ago occurred when a couple lived together, she became
pregnant and then they separated. The man was willing to pay child support and
expected reasonable visitation as well as having a say in the raising of his daughtor. The
mother refused him and even denied that he was the father. The man was forced to file a
paternity suit against the mother and prove, in a court of law that he was the father. He
did so, the court awarded him visitation and her child support, he paid half of her medical
bills and was happy. Had they been married, the legal and emotional trauma and expense
would not have been necessary.
If property is involved, it may become vital to have the legal status of marriage.
If a couple marries, builds up some financial security and property then one of them dies,
the spouse is awarded the dead spouse's property. But if they cohabit, build up the same
property and one dies, the dead persons parents receive the property of their dead child.
If the parents like the person who lives with their child, they may turn it over to her/him,
but if they had disapproved of the relationship, the surviving cohabitant gets nothing.
One woman I knew moved out from her husband, left her children and moved
in with a person who got her pregnant and hooked on drugs. She rarely saw her children
or husband and ignored all efforts of her husband to reconcile. Finally she filed for
divorce. Just before it was final, she died by 'accident' in the presence of her cohabitant.
By law, her property went to her husband despite the pleas of her lover to at least give
him the towel that she had recently used because it smelled like her. Her husband was
understandably angry with the man who had broken up his marriage, taken his children's
mother away from them and had been responsible for the death of the woman he still
loved and was legally allowed to refuse the request and he took back everything she
owned and to had all photos of her and her lover destroyed.
Thus if some form of legal wedding is desired for whatever reason, it becomes
important to determine that the wedding is, in fact, legal.
There are Churches that will sell a mail order Divinity Degree to anyone with the
required $25 under the impression that the purchaser is now a legal minister qualified to
perform marriages and form churches with tax exempt status. In most states, this is not
true, and some members have even been cited and sued for fraud and tax evasion.
Some churches, which are actually legal churches, can not, or have not been
performing legal marriages simply because they feel that the will of their god should
supersede the will of the State. The islamic mosques in Tucson are legal churches; but,
until recently, none have been performing legally valid marriages.
Generally, the situation was for a woman to fall in love with a moslem, marry
him in the mosque and not bother to get a marriage license because they are being
married "in the eyes of god" and this is more important than the eyes of the state.
Unfortunately, the moslems have also been getting a moslem divorce which states
that the man goes to his wife, says, "I divorce thee, I divorce thee, I divorce thee" and she
has to get out with her daughtor while he keeps the son. And when the ex-wife then
applies for child support, there is no record of her marriage with the state, therefore she
wasn't legally married, therefore her child has no legal father and she has to file a
paternity suit against her former husband who simply denies the situation and leaves the
country. And as usual in these misiahanic, male-dominated, monotheistic, religions, it
was the woman and her children who suffered. However, some underground and
possibly illegal and definitely unofficial pressure was applied by the author and now the
problem, for now, has been rectified.
In Wicca, as in other religions, the couple simply has a Justice of the Peace
perform the legal wedding and later they have a religious ceremony to seal the bond
before their Gods and family.
However, the Witches involved have begun to ask, "If the xians (christians) can
have a legal marriage in their church, why can't we have a legal Handfasting in our
Circles?" Some Covens, in fact have gone to the effort to establish themselves as legal
churches in their own states. Examples of these are the Georgian Church and New
Wiccan Churches of California, Circle of Wisconsin, and School of Wicca in North
Carolina to mention just a few. In the case of Circle, they advertise that they will, for a
fee, come to your state and marry you in a Handfasting, irregardless of that states laws.
Each of these have the same things in common. They are large in numbers and
have filed corporate status papers according to the laws of their state following the laws
of their states to become a legal church. Thus not all Covens are legal churches, and so
few may perform a legal Handfasting. Be aware that each state has different
requirements for legal status.
Legal corporate status is not very involved in some states, more so in others and
the advantages are worth mentioning. The main reason a church will incorporate is not
to be able to perform marriages, but to get tax exempt status. In other words, churches
incorporate for money and not for the will of their god.
If a member gives the church land and a building, the state will expect someone
to pay taxes on that land. To incorporate and to apply for tax-exempt status will remove
that problem. Also if a member of the church acting as a representative of that church
gets into trouble, corporate status will help avoid the legal complications.
Recently a xian faith healer pushed a member during a service as was their
custom. Unfortunately, this time, no one was there to catch her and she hit the floor,
breaking bones that the minister or his god was unable to heal. She sued the church and
the minister and won $100,000 from them. Had the church been incorporated, she
would have sued the church and the minister would not have had to pay out large sums
of money.
If the church or Coven does incorporate, its rules regarding marriages must be
written down in the papers. These include who can perform the ceremony, who may be
married, what the ceremony contains, who may attend and so on.
In Arizona, only a few Covens have the legal right to perform a marriage and
none have corporate status that I know of. Fortunately, it is not necessary to incorporate
as a church to be able to do a Handfasting. But is important to actually meet the legal
requirements for a church to avoid legal problems down the line (and they ALWAYS
catch you sooner or later)
One woman came into the courts because there was a problem on her marriage
license. It seemed that her husband had died recently and when she applied for Social
Security, the SS office noticed this 'problem' and decreed that she was not legally married
and so was not entitled to survival benefits. Her husband's insurance company heard of
this and decided that as the benefits went to their client's 'spouse' and he had no legal
spouse, they had no legal requirement to pay her his insurance and didn't.
The cost and time and effort in fighting these organizations was so great that she
couldn't afford any and gave up as was common and hoped for by the agencies involved.
As to why some Covens are legal and others is too complicated to explain in a
few words. It all relates to how the laws of Arizona define a church. I suggest that you
hire a good attorney to establish legality in your case.
Aside from the situation where in some countries and states, cohabitation is
illegal, (In Japan a woman may commit suicide if her family discovers that she is living
with a man and in Arizona living together is illegal, though it is rarely prosecuted) the
couple must decide for themselves if they want a Handfasting or not.
Morally, it isn't really anyone's business if the couple decide to live together, have
a non-legal religious Handfasting or a legal wedding followed by a Handfasting or a legal
Handfasting. The choice is entirely up to the couple involved. But, if the couple chooses
a Handfasting, by standard Craft tradition, the ceremony must be performed by both the
High Priest and High Priestess, both of whom will sign the marriage certificate (if
applicable). This is simply because the average Coven requires both a High Priest and a
High Priestess in order to operate. In Gardnerianism, a High Priestess is required and she
may choose any man of the required Degree to act as her High Priest.
Rings may or may not be exchanged, though the exchange of wedding rings is a
cultural and not a religious requirement, they probably will be. The Circle is generally
made of flowers with the Bride and Groom wearing Crowns of flowers and each
Covener, guest and member holding flowers as well. This is to symbolize fruitfulness,
beauty and love.
Traditionally, the couple exchange vows of some sort, have their hands tied
together (hence the term, Handfasting), may or may not have their finger or wrist pricked
to share blod and after the ceremony, they will jump a broom for fertility (if desired) and
leave the Circle to consummate the marriage, returning afterwards to rejoin the Coven
for the celebration and Cakes and Wine.
A Handfasting, unlike a xian marriage, lasts only for a year-and-a-day or until
love ends. Thus, there are no vows of loving each other until 'death do us part'. Often the
couple will renew their vows on their anniversary, either publicly or in private.
The idea behind a Handfasting is that this is a very special party where two
people declare their love before all the Coven, thus becoming a family unit. Thus the rite
should be fun, enjoyable, loving, sensual and sexual with feasting, games, a party, and so
on. This is one of the most enjoyable of all Wiccan rites and should be treated as such.
If the Handfasting is to be a legal wedding as well, the High Priest and High
Priestess must sign the marriage license provided by the state to the couple being
married. The license is returned to the state for registration and the couple may then
prove that they are, in fact, legally married.
To contact me or to request topics to be covered, send to RikJohnson@juno.com
by: Rick Johnson
PO Box 40451
Tucson, Az.
85717
Return to the Home Page.
Return to the Writings page.
