Two million husbands and wives are not lawfully married because of a Church of England blunder, it was revealed yesterday。
昨日有消息透露，由于英國(guó)國(guó)教會(huì)的一個(gè)失誤，200萬夫婦都未能成為合法夫妻。
Their church weddings are legally invalid because the vicars who married them used the wrong form of words, CofE lawyers admitted。
英國(guó)國(guó)教會(huì)律師承認(rèn)說，在他們的教堂中舉行的婚禮在法律上是無效的，因?yàn)橹鞒只槎Y的牧師念的結(jié)婚公告詞有誤。
The error affects more than a million weddings celebrated over the past 30 years in churches across England。
這一錯(cuò)誤造成的影響波及了過去30年在全英國(guó)的教堂中舉行的100萬場(chǎng)婚禮。
It opens the prospect that marriage partners heading for divorce may try to deny their spouse maintenance, support or even a home on the grounds that they were never really married - the trick tried by Mick Jagger when he claimed his Balinese Hindu wedding to Jerry Hall was never a real marriage。
這將在以后造成這樣的局面：將要離婚的夫婦可能會(huì)試圖拒付配偶的贍養(yǎng)費(fèi)，甚至?xí)雅渑稼s出家門，理由是他們從來不曾真正結(jié)過婚。滾石樂隊(duì)的主唱米克 賈格就曾經(jīng)嘗試過這一詭計(jì)，他宣稱自己和杰瑞 霍爾在巴厘島上舉行的印度教婚禮從未構(gòu)成真正的婚姻。
The latest difficulty to hit marriage law comes in the wake ofthe Supreme Court’s prenupjudgement in the case of heiressKatrin Radmacher, which means many couples marrying now must consider taking out prenup deal to protect their assets against divorce, and the Government’s move to end legal aid for divorce, which is likely to force people to take out divorce insurance。
婚姻法面臨的這一最新難題是在最高法院對(duì)女繼承人卡特琳 拉德馬赫的婚前協(xié)議判決案件之后浮出水面的。這意味著現(xiàn)在即將結(jié)婚的許多情侶必須考慮通過婚前協(xié)議來保護(hù)他們的財(cái)產(chǎn)，以規(guī)避離婚的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。另外，政府終止對(duì)離婚的法律援助的舉動(dòng)也可能會(huì)迫使人們購(gòu)買離婚保險(xiǎn)。
It may also mean the marriage of Prince William and Kate Middleton will be unlawful, unless legal changes approved by the CofE’s parliament, the General Synod, yesterday win Royal Assent and pass into law before the wedding day next April。
這也可能意味著威廉王子和凱特 米德爾頓的婚姻將是不合法的，除非英國(guó)國(guó)教會(huì)總會(huì)議昨日通過的法律變更能夠獲得皇室的同意并在明年四月婚禮舉行前成為法律。
The Church’s blunder involves the wording of the banns, which must be read out in church three times in the weeks before a wedding. The banns ask if anyone knows of any good reason why the marriage should not be allowed。
英國(guó)國(guó)教會(huì)的失誤涉及的是結(jié)婚公告的措辭。結(jié)婚公告必須在婚禮舉行前幾周在教堂里宣讀三次。公告中要發(fā)問是否有任何人知道不該讓這場(chǎng)婚禮進(jìn)行的任何正當(dāng)理由。
Under the Marriage Act of 1949, the wording of the banns must be that set out in 1662 the Book of Common Prayer. This asks the congregation‘if any of you know cause, or just impediment, why these two persons should not be joined together in Holy Matrimony.’
根據(jù)1949年的婚姻法，結(jié)婚公告必須依照1662年的公禱書上寫的詞句來宣讀。這一版本中向會(huì)眾發(fā)問的措詞是：“如果你們當(dāng)中的任何人知道任何理由或阻礙，認(rèn)為這兩個(gè)人不應(yīng)該以神圣的婚姻之名結(jié)合在一起，(請(qǐng)指出來)。”
However, in 1980 the Church brought in a new prayer book, the Alternative Service Book, with a new marriage service and a new form of wording for the banns. The modern wording has continued to be used in the CofE’s latest prayer book, Commons Worship, adopted in 2006.
然而，1980年英國(guó)國(guó)教會(huì)引進(jìn)了一本新的祈禱書《非傳統(tǒng)禮儀書》，同時(shí)也引進(jìn)了一套新的婚禮程序和新的結(jié)婚公告詞。這一現(xiàn)代的結(jié)婚公告詞繼續(xù)被用于英國(guó)國(guó)教會(huì)在2006年最新采用的祈禱書《眾拜書》中。
But when the new prayer books were approved, as is legally necessary, by Parliament, Church lawyers forgot to change the 1949 Marriage Act so that it included the new wording of the banns. This asks if anyone knows a ‘reason in law’ to stop the marriage。
但是，當(dāng)新的祈禱書獲得國(guó)會(huì)批準(zhǔn)時(shí)，在法律上有必要對(duì)1949年的婚姻法做出改動(dòng)，使之包含新的結(jié)婚公告詞，而英國(guó)國(guó)教會(huì)的律師卻忘記做這件事了。新版本的發(fā)問措詞是：是否有任何人知道可以阻止這一婚姻的“法律上的原因”。
As a result, no wedding conducted under the form prescribed in the newer prayer books is lawful。
因此，所有在新祈禱書規(guī)定的這一形式下舉行的婚禮都是不合法的。
聯(lián)系客服
