Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 3 4 5 6

Original poster

To think that this is another stupid example of how religion has a crazy amount of influence in everyone's eyes?

139 replies

Thistledew · 05/04/2013 15:34

DP and I are atheist. We are having a civil wedding ceremony. The rules of a civil ceremony are that we are not allowed to have any religious references as part of the ceremony.

One of my favourite pieces of music of all time, by my favourite composer Handel is a piece that he wrote for the Coronation of King George I .

I have just had a call from our Registry Office to say that just because this piece of music mentions the words 'priest' 'god' 'amen' and 'hallelujah' I am not allowed to have it played at my wedding ceremony.

AIBU to think that if it were not for the stupid influence that religion has in our society, this piece of music would be judged solely on its artistic merit and the lyrics would have no more significance than Ba Ba Blacksheep?

FYI the lyrics in full are:

Zadok the priest,
And Nathan the Prophet,
Anointed Soloman, King.

And all the people
Rejoiced.

And all the people (Alleluia)
Rejoiced, and said
God save the King!
Long Live the King!
God Save the King
May the king live forever,
Alleluia, Alleluia, Amen.
Amen, Amen, Amen, Alleluia Amen.

God save the king,
long live the king,
may the king live forever,
amen amen alleluia alleluia amen,
Amen, May the king live,
may the king live,
forever, forever forever,
Alleluia Amen, Amen.
Alleluia Alleluia Amen.
Amen Amen, Amen Amen,
Alleluia Amen.

Long live the king,
God save the king,
long live the king,
may the king live,
may the kinge live,
forever, forever, alleluia alleluia amen,
amen, amen, amen alleluia amen,

Alleluia, alle amen, alleluia!

OP posts:

DumSpiroSpero · 05/04/2013 17:35

Have listened to it now - it's lovely & I recognised it although didn't realises that was what it was called.

It was based on the text of the King James bible so there's really no room for manoevre on the religion front.

The UEFA Champions League theme is also based on it!

TheCraicDealer · 05/04/2013 17:52

Of course it doesn't, but Handal was trying to mirror the coronation of George I with that of Solomon who was known as a wise and fair ruler. In the bible. People during the early Georgian period didn't know about Solomon (if they did at all) because of their extensive knowledge of Judaic sovereigns- they recognised him as a religious figure, talking about splitting babies and all that. Which is why Handal used the imagery for a religious coronation ceremony, in a cathedral.

Original poster

Thistledew · 05/04/2013 18:00

Handel used those words because they had been used as part of the coronation ceremony of English monarchs since 973. I am not trying to dispute that it has religious imagery but I do dispute that nowadays that religion is its only frame of reference.

OP posts:

Altinkum · 05/04/2013 18:02

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Absy · 05/04/2013 18:03

YABU but a gentle unreasonable as it probably is very annoying.

It's not religion having a level of influence - the civil ceremony is designed to be completely a-religious so that non-religious people can have a legal form of marriage or, put differently, so that there is a form of wedding ceremony that is not religious and open to anyone. The piece of music you have chosen is a) based on a religious text and b) has references to G-d and other religious elements, which is not allowed under the civil ceremony requirements that were not set by any particular religious group. I don't see how you can blame "religion" in general for that. It would be like if you were having a church wedding and the church had said that they you shouldn't have Muslim writings or songs at the service, and you went a chose a nice Hadith for someone to read. It's not Islam's fault that the church is prohibiting you from doing something.

flatmum · 05/04/2013 18:04

Virtually all music written before this century has a religious element, because virtually everybody was religious. Religion has massively declined in the West. So are atheist not supposed to listen to any music not written in this century? How ridiculous.

startwig1982 · 05/04/2013 18:06

Yabu, I'm afraid. It's a religious piece of music and that's not allowed. Thems the rules.
Btw, I'm still giggling at 'Nathan the profit'

Flisspaps · 05/04/2013 18:12

Register Office

Not Registry

Absy · 05/04/2013 18:14

It's not saying that atheist's are not supposed to listen to any music not written in this century - it's saying that it can't be used in a completely secular wedding ceremony. It's made clear when you register for one that those are the requirements (for e.g. you can't have any reference to "for better for worse, for richer or for poorer" as that's in the english common book of prayer).

FWIW, for ours we had a piece of music by a former Beatle and it was quite embarrassing as the registrar was from Liverpool and the office we married at is one that a former Beatle got married at. It gave the impression that we were a bit Beatle obsessed (we're not)

zwischenzug · 05/04/2013 18:29

Seems rather silly, I'm all for reducing (and eliminating) the influence of religion where it has no right to be - such as schools, house of lords etc. But a wedding ceremony had no influence on anyone except those who chose to turn up, and it's only a song.

TheCraicDealer · 05/04/2013 18:34

Gah, just realised I've spelt Handel incorrectly, hardly bolsters my argument....

Anyway- no, I don't disagree it's not the only point of reference. However, if you're listening to a piece of music and it includes the words "king Solomon", "Amen", "Alleluia" and, er, "God", I think religious imagery is probably the first thing people will think of.

From your other posts it looks like the fact that a civil service is secular was an important point for you in deciding on the type of ceremony you had. Totally agree you should go for a ceremony that suits your beliefs, even if you have none. It just seems that getting cross at the church because you're not allowed to include religious imagery in a secular service, which you picked, is slightly hypocritical.

Absy · 05/04/2013 18:38

I wonder if you would be allowed to have G-d Save the Queen, if you were that way inclined.

BegoniaBampot · 05/04/2013 18:50

I don't understand why you can't have the music you want, it's just music and a piece of music played at the registry office doesn't turn it into a religious service. I'm atheist but still love some hymns and carols.

juule · 05/04/2013 18:58

"My friend wasn't allowed a poem that mentioned having 'faith' in the other person "

That's crazy. Faith doesn't only relate to religion.

So, no hymns or religious music even if the couple marrying are religious?

LeeCoakley · 05/04/2013 19:08

Would 'Hallelujah' by Alexandra Burke not be allowed? I'm getting interested in what a Register Office would allow.

JamieandtheMagicTorch · 05/04/2013 19:16

Lee

Hallalujah by Jeff Buckley should be allowed. Not AB for Gawd's sake!

PumpkinPositive · 05/04/2013 19:19

In the words of the great Tim Minchin, some of the hymns that they sing have nice chords but the lyrics are dodgy?

I'm a die hard agnostic with an iPod full of all my favourites hymns from childhood. Wouldn't go so far as to play any of them at a non religious ceremony though.

Original poster

Thistledew · 05/04/2013 19:21

I went to listen to the piece recommended by whistleahappytune upthread at 16:29:15.

I looked up the lyrics, and ironically, as it references the god Jove, rather than the Christian god, it would probably be allowed.

It doesn't have the exuberance of Zadok, for me though whistle but thanks for the suggestion anyway. Zadok also has a very subtle play on words for me that I can't describe without outing myself.

OP posts:

FairPhyllis · 05/04/2013 19:43

YABU. It is a setting of a Bible verse, it was written for a religious service, and is still often used as an anthem in Anglican churches. It is still best known for being played at coronations, which are religious services. Of course it is a religious piece.

I don't know how I feel about religious music being banned from registry offices - I don't think I really care one way or the other - but them's the rules if you want a civil service. Suck it up - plenty of people aren't allowed to have Jerusalem at their church weddings despite loving it.

LRDtheFeministDragon · 05/04/2013 19:46

Given how strongly influenced registry office weddings are by Christian ceremonies, I think it is a bit OTT.

But I also think it is blindingly obvious that is a strongly religious piece of music about the Bible and, erm, yeah, religious.

It's not just convention - it is religious.

LRDtheFeministDragon · 05/04/2013 19:51

I do think it's disrespectful to say the music is not religious just because you are not religious.

saycheeeeeese · 05/04/2013 19:55

I think you are BU to blame religion, I didn't blame atheists when my minister wouldn't let me have a secular song at my ceremony.

Sometimes in life we just have to accept that things are a certain way, this is one of those occasions and on the day you probably won't care to be honest. I don't think you are BU to be annoyed, when you are wedding planning everything has to be perfect.

LeeCoakley · 05/04/2013 19:55

at Jamie

Original poster

Thistledew · 05/04/2013 19:56

I am severely tempted to select a piece of my favourite Latin - American Baroque music. It is pretty all much religious, but as many of them are in nearly - extinct native languages, I reckon I could get away with them singing anything.

OP posts:

UnexpectedItemInShaggingArea · 05/04/2013 19:58

Could I suggest Arrival of the Queen of Sheba instead?

Flip

1 2 3 4 5 6

Swipe left for the next trending thread