What is in Kelvin's Head?

Church of Scotland rejects biblicist position on sex and marriage

21/05/2014

It is going to be important not to underestimate the significance of the votes in the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland today. A last ditch attempt was made to get that church to commit to the idea that sex belongs only between a married heterosexual couple. That idea was comprehensively rejected.

People with widely differing opinions never thought we would see this day. Though the legislation that the Church of Scotland is now consulting on accepting is a dreadful mess, and a long way from equality for LGBT people, today was a huge and historic boost for those who reject the ideas of those who claim the Christian tradition to be by definition narrow and anti-gay in character.

It seemed to me, as I watched the debate, as though those seeking to promote an anti-gay view had made a huge strategic mistake by going for an all or nothing approach and trying to get the Assembly to affirm only their view.

Generosity won the day in Edinburgh today. Generosity that has divine fingerprints all over it.

Church of Scotland, gay, LGBT

7 responses to “C of E Border Crossing”

Eamonn

15/07/2010

I’m fizzing too! It’s not helped, either, by those of our own members who refer to us as ‘the English Church’.

Reply
agatha

15/07/2010

That is completely outrageous! Maybe the SEC should have talks with the Muslims and then we could declare Fatwas.

Or is this the CoE’s off the wall attempt to solve the women bishops/gay bishops question by moving to nae bishops?

Reply
FrPaulB

16/07/2010

As an English Anglican I’m pretty embarrassed. So much for the “Anglican Communion” we’re supposed to be busy preserving by setting up covenants and writing letters.

Reply
Martin Ritchie

16/07/2010

Well, maybe this is a good thing for the SEC? At least we are not being lumped in as “Church of England” which is perhaps a step forward. The future for “state” churches in the UK seems to me to be shaky to say the least, so perhaps it’s to the benefit of the SEC to not be part of that! It is rather surprising that there is no mention of the SEC in the “history” part of the paper, other than a cursory reference to the continuing episcopalian element after 1690. Maybe all this means that we should feel completely free to reject the Anglican covenant as totally irrelevant and a hindrance to the mission of the SEC?

Reply
fr dougal

16/07/2010

I’m heading for the West Port to saddle up! Bring back Clavers and the dragoons!

Reply
John Lindsay

21/07/2010

The CofE CofS meetings have been going on for a very long time as two national churches. The recent report is actually designed to include the SEC – check facts with ICRC or read the report itself!

Reply
kelvin

21/07/2010

Hi John, nice to hear from you.

I’ve read the report and was not impressed by it. I suppose I am glad that the SEC is to be included next time, something that I acknowledged above that was to happen.

I’m entirely unimpressed with the C of E appointing one of their bishops as an emissary to the C of S though. Very much border crossing. Very inappropriate.

Reply