The first is the vow before God--not the latter.
I understand why you think all this; clergymen have so long been called upon to officiate at marriage rites that, with the fatherly assumption notable in the order all the world over, they have grown to regard themselves as the especial and heaven-appointed guardians of the institution.

It is all so grotesque when one remembers how ready they are to 'solemnize'-- save the mark!--marriage, no matter what the conditions.

Have the candidates to be known as right and fitting persons?
Is there even the simplest formula of preparatory examination?
None! Two wholly unsuited people may rush into marriage--and misery--any day by simply presenting themselves before a sleek-faced person who mumbles drowsily over their clasped hands, and calls it a vow before God!--as he hurries back to his dinner!" Still she was silent.
An errand boy trudging by whistled a few bars of the wedding march, doubtless heard that day at some open church door.
"Dear, there is a higher, holier law of the great Power, who made us what we are, than this one of slavish obedience to a tradition.

Why must our feet go in the burning ruts ?" "It is not the well-worn ruts that burn, but the by-paths," she answered, "and oh! _how_ they burn!" "Let me lift you in my arms and carry you over them, then, that your feet may not touch.

Do not be unjust to yourself.