Well, that has led to a bifurcation in the quality of marriages, as there are increasingly "higher" (sacramental) and "lower" (concubinage). Which can be determined, statistically.
The word "marriage" has gotten watered down from misuse. That's why people now often add qualifiers like "I was married in the Catholic Church", to signify that they've got the gold-plated edition.
Still, you can't take your husbands name, if you've got 'only' married in a church.
You're not 'legally' married, you're basicly missing all your family-rights.
For them (statists) it's the same like doing an online marriage by a pagan grain-worshipping cult somewhere in the far east.
They don't accept it, it's not a 'real' marriage, it's 'just a religious one'.
This is the sad truth.
Yeah, but that's the way it is, with separation of Church and State. Most have state marriages as a prerequisite to church marriages, to deal with that problem, but it's a messy solution.
In the end, tho, the State will always want to jump in, once it's about kids and money, like inheritances and custody.
The state even using the term marriage is an affront. Should at most be a matter of familial incorporation. And if you call it that, I imagine people would be less fussy about same sex or even polyamorous arrangements.
Naming the civil contract after a religious sacrament is just asking for trouble.
