By Kim Griggs.
It’s official — New Zealanders can now tie the noodle knot in a legally recognised Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster wedding ceremony.
The church, which believes the existence of a god made of spaghetti and meatballs is just as likely as the existence of other gods, has just had its first marriage celebrant approved by the New Zealand Government.
Now weddings of church members, who call themselves “Pastafarians”, and anyone else, will be perfectly legal, and different.
The head of the church, Karen Martyn, has been dubbed a “Ministeroni”, or marriage celebrant.
“We have swords, we have noodles and pasta involved in the ceremony. It’s a bit of fun,” Dr Martyn says.
New Zealand’s Department of Internal Affairs late last year approved The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster’s request to be able to solemnise weddings.
Now, the department has approved Dr Martyn as a marriage celebrant.
Although it may seem unorthodox for the New Zealand Government to sanction what many consider a spoof church, the law says any group that “upholds or promotes religious beliefs or philosophical or humanitarian convictions” can obtain the right to perform marriages.
Jeff Montgomery, the Registrar-General of Births, Deaths and Marriages, says the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster demonstrated “a consistent presentation of their philosophies” when he approved the church last year.
Church leader: ‘We’re not a parody’.
Top Comments
I think the biggest difference is that the Pastafarians don't believe in their god (in general).
Most Catholics, Christians, Druids, etc do believe in their religion (as far as I am aware).
Of course, you don't need a religion to get married so it doesn't really make much difference, but I do think there are substantial differences between Pastafarians and the more traditional religions.
There's a fair amount of legal precedent though to the effect that Governments are not permitted to inquire how sincere the beliefs of those who claim a religious belief actually are. Most religious beliefs will appear utterly absurd to outsiders and most tolerant societies have decided there's no point trying to determine whether they are true or sincerely held just that they are important to most people and unless there's a compelling societal interest in overriding them (such as stopping human sacrifice or discrimination) you should let people uphold the tenets of their (claimed) faith.
True. As I said, I can't see it makes much difference.