i was just wondering,at what era did the functions of a biblical priest include joining of couples for marriage? i need to know.
from my little knowledge of the bible, wedding ceremonies had nothing to do with the temple or the priests either in the old or new testament dispensations.i stand to be corrected.
Christ said, for this cause a man shall leave his parents and cleave to his wife. the two shall become one flesh. therefore what God has joined together, nobody should put asunder. he that findeth a wife findeth a good thing.
from the above it is clear that
a)it is God who joins the couple, not the priest or the society.
b)the society is only implored not to cause separation.
most of the conditions set for marriages in most institutions like the church,tradition,etc, more often than not, serves as a barrier and and thus, a separating factor to the prospective couples.
this explains the high rate of  unmarried population in Nigeria today.
some of this conditions include, prohibitive cost of wedding, bride price, abstenence before marriage, when, in fact, premarital sex, and abortion (in order to be seen as abstenent) are the order of the day.
adults should be allowed to cleave together as one flesh, without the debilitating bottlenecks.

Its true there are no elaborate discussion on the issue of marriage ceremonies in the bible but that does not rule out the fact that they existed as history will prove to us. I see your stance on this issue as a cry from on who wishes we could do the norm but has not been able due to circumstances to accomplish this dream
I am not trying to glorify or exalt the practice of extreme materialistic display exhibited in today's marriages, no but all I am saying is that society own the couple and as such has the right to approve or otherwise of any union its deems adequate. Abraham actually picked a wife for his Child Issac. Also Marriage is a special thing and one that calls for celebration and so if you would celebrate a new born child a birthday or a promotion then why not marriage.
Finally the value of a thing is the price placed on it, bride price is only symbolic, telling the parents of the child that you would value their daughter the way they have valued her and that value is represented in cash in our custom. Look at it how much do you think you could actually pay that would commensurate the worth of someone that could make you fall in love with her. The whites have lost value for marriage leading to indiscriminate break-ups because the woman has lost her price.

Your post is very sensible, winteric.

Marriage in the bible was more often than not a cultural issue. And so you see Jesus attending a wedding which, by the way, we are not told how it was conducted, but assume it was according to the Jewish tradition. The important thing in a marriage, as far as Christianity is concerned, is that the relationship has God's approval.

In theory, therefore, there is no need for any of the things usually done at wedding, receptions, etc. A simple prayer and exchange of vows in the presence of witnesses is acceptable. Note that the exchange of vows is particularly important, because when you make these verbal assertions before God, you are bound by them.

However, in any society or group of people, there is need for order and a prescribed way of doing things. Otherwise there would be anarchy. This is why the church as a whole, and local church assemblies in particular, has come up with certain guidelines aimed at making the process not only public, but transparent, reproducible and ordered. The presence of rules and a law would also make it possible to "encourage" faithfulness to the marriage vows.

If you consider the different cultural, social and family backgrounds of people in churches, as well as different individual dispositions you may agree that introducing some form of uniformity in the wedding process is not such a bad idea.

NB: Your assertion that the conditions imposed as prerequisites for marriage by certain institutions are responsible for the high unmarried population is at best a hazy conjecture. When you say "unmarried", do you take into account the widowed, divorced and those who have taken oaths of celibacy?

good talk these are,  but they hardly explain the scriptural bases for the practice of xtian wedding, as it is, in the church today. 
is this not one of the traditions of men which christ was speaking about when he claimed that it wasn't so at the beginning? (mathew 19:8 )
1 cor. 6:16 shows that two become one through the act of coitus.
Since God is love(1john4:8 ) a couple who is in true love is apparently sanctioned by Him.

marriage is just as much a secular institution as a religious one.

many people fail to realize this.

@ OP,your post is one of the most sensible I ever read on NL.Keep it up.
Marriage is a covenant not a jamboree.
Many have failed to realize this.