• 10 Unanswered Questions about Same-Sex Marriage

    Last week, at the General Synod in Edinburgh, it was announced that the Scottish Episcopal Church is to undergo a process of discussing what were referered to as “same-sex issues”.

    I’ve written about this before, and no doubt will do so again.

    For today though, here are some of the questions that are running around in my mind, most of which I don’t think were asked last week during General Synod and which I don’t think we have any answers to.

    • Once the Scottish Parliament has completed its legislative process and marriage for same-sex couples is legal in Scotland, what will be the consequences of a priest blessing such a couple in church. (NB – I can already, in some circumstances, bless couples entering into a Civil Partnership)?
    • Will all priests of the Scottish Episcopal Church be subject to the same discipline in this area or will different rules apply in different dioceses?
    • Will a member of the clergy who enters a civil marriage with someone of of the same sex have equality of opportunity in the church or will they automatically be ruled out of some appointments? Will there be parity between dioceses in this area and will the bishops have agreed a common policy?
    • If the Scottish Government were to subsequently proceed to allowing straight couples the possibility of entering a Civil Partnership, what would be the consequence of a member of the clergy entering a civil partnership and living in church-provided accommodation with their partner? Is that an acceptable moral choice in the church?
    • If it is not an acceptable moral church in the church for straight couples to live in a Civil Partnership when they have the opportunity of getting married, what standards apply to same-sex couples who might have a choice much sooner as to whether they live within a civil partnership or get married?
    • Is it acceptable for any member of the clergy to live with someone without having a legally binding committment to that person or not?
    • Is it acceptable (or even legal) for a bishop to refuse a licence to a priest on the grounds of their marital or partner status?
    • Would it be acceptable for a bishop to insist that clergy in same-sex Civil Partnerships should get married to one another once the opportunity arises for them to do so?
    • Does the peculiarly Scottish moratorium against bishops attending Civil Partnership ceremonies still apply and does it extend to civil marriage for some clergy and yet not for others?
    • Would a bishop support a priest who came to the conclusion that as the church has not made up its mind about who may get married, the right thing to do would be to declare a moratorium on marrying anyone (gay or straight) until the process of discussion about what marriage is had been concluded?

    I don’t think that any of these questions is a hypothetical question.

    Anyone with more questions or any answers?

15 responses to “Listening. Talking. Discussing. LGBT”

  1. Kimberly Avatar

    Ryan, I think you are right on principle, and I know lots of churches that have made the switch in the States. It’s easy enough to do on paper, too. But somehow it is just so much easier to say LGBT than GLBT (though GBTL would be OK verbally).

  2. Kimberly Avatar

    p.s. — Kelvin, I find it a really helpful list. It seems like something that should be circulated beyond the readership of your blog (wide though that is). Clergy mailing, perhaps? Inspires? MU newsletters? My Weekly and The People’s Friend?

  3. Elizabeth Avatar
    Elizabeth

    I agree with Kimberley. It’s a very good list and has wide applicability for a number of justice issues I think. Six is a nice round number and the bolded captions are memorable with the resulting explanation clear and direct. I wonder if it could be re-worded to make a handy acrostic or is that just too kitschy? Will think more when my brain recovers from current struggle (marking).

  4. kelvin Avatar

    Thanks for all comments. (Particularly to Gina, who points us to an organisation that I previously did not know about).

    Kimberly – I’m happy for this to be reproduced with acknowledgement and happy for others to point towards it from other blogs.

    I’ve not been clever enough to make an acrostic. Personally, I think that I use chiasma more frequently when speaking in public than I use acrostics.

  5. Kimberly Avatar

    and presumably chiasm is the correct form for this discussion anyway.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous Posts

  • Sermon – 5 February 2006

    How do we pray and whom do we pray for? For the prophet Isaiah whom we have heard from this morning, his prayer was flying up there with the eagles. He does not seem to have been concerned about praying for anyone. He was lost in prayer. But Simon asked Jesus to come and pray.…

  • I’m having a few days off blogging.Back soon. 

  • Save the BBC Radio 4 Theme Tune

    There is a plot afoot to do away with the Radio 4 UK theme tune that wakes up the station at 0520 every morning. It has been getting earlier in recent years, but for over thirty years this medly of folk songs and maritime tunes has been played early in the day and now they…