Time to make it civil, Harry

The bridegroom’s father got married in a civil service second time round, followed by a church blessing, and as far as I know, neither of the Happy Royal Couple are regular worshippers.

Not that I am against religious weddings, having had one myself.

But I am against the way the marriage laws in this country distinguish between religions.

Getting married in a Church of England church with a Church of England priest presiding does help in matters regarding Government bureaucracy - something that matters when the bride is a US national.

As I understand it, the wedding will make Miss Meghan Markle entitled to permanent residency in the UK as the spouse of a British citizen, and, in due course, naturalisation to become a British citizen herself.

So the Home Office will scrutinise her marriage certificate.

Even the most sceptical immigration official operating under a “hostile environment” will be unable to find fault with vows heard by the Archbishop of Canterbury at St George’s (Church of England) Chapel, Windsor Castle.

Church of England marriages have special status under the Marriage Act 1949, along with those conducted with Jewish rites or by Quakers.

The civil authorities automatically accept their marriage certificates for all purposes.

It gets more complicated if you are a Methodist, Baptist, Presbyterian, Catholic, Muslim, Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist, Jehovah’s Witness, member of the Church of Latter Day Saints, indeed any religious group of community other than the three on the special status list.

For the great majority of believers in this country, whether they like it or not, the marriage registry office has to be involved in some way.

At best the happy couple has to make sure that the chosen religious leader has been specially authorised by the civil authorities to conduct marriages and can complete the civil marriage paperwork.

At worst, they may have to have a second, civil wedding with a marriage registrar presiding.

If they don’t do one or the other, they may be informed after years of “wedded bliss” that as far as the British authorities are concerned, they are not married at all and aren’t entitled to any of a spouse’s rights, such as a widow’s/widower’s pension, share of the matrimonial home, right to remain in the UK, British citizenship for the children etc.

Not getting the marriage paperwork right could lead to major problems many years later, such as deportation, poverty, etc.

There is a solution.

I have two marriage certificates, no three, because I married abroad, with one ceremony.

After the civil marriage registrar declared us eligible to marry, we had the church ceremony.

Then we took our religious certificate to the registrar, who gave us the civil certificate, the only one accepted by the local bureaucrats.

Then we went to the British Embassy to get an officially translated one for the British authorities.

That was in a country that up to three years earlier didn’t acknowledge any religious ceremony.

Such a system in England would ensure that the same organisation checks every couple regardless of community or religion to make sure they aren’t having a forced, fake, bigamous or otherwise illegal marriage.

The Marriage Act of 1949 is not set in stone.

In 1949, homosexuality was illegal.

Today, single sex marriages are legal because the requirement that a wedding is between a man and a woman has been removed.

So why not remove the special status list and make it compulsory for all marriages, regardless of religion, to involve the registry office.

A Royal Wedding is an ideal opportunity for the Royal Family to lead the way and show that the law should be the same for everyone.

If only Harry and Meghan had rung up the superintendent registrar of the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead instead of the Archbishop of Canterbury.