What is in Kelvin's Head?

  • So, let me get this right…

    Let me be sure I’ve understood this.

    From sometime next year or the year after, a gay couple will be able to get a Civil Partnership, then come to a Scottish Episcopal Church for a blessing from a Scottish Episcopal priest, make promises to one another, exchange rings, have them blessed, sing hymns and have a Eucharist celebrating their union. And then they will be able to convert it to a marriage soon after (what a day later?) by filling in a form and paying a small fee. Or maybe they will not even need to go through the Civil Partnership bit and just be able to come for the whole blessing thing after getting married.

    And that’s going to be OK with just about everyone. Admittedly not absolutely everyone but not far off.

    And we are now currently insisting in submissions to the Scottish Government that the same Scottish Episcopal Church is opposed by virtue of our doctrine to same-sex couples getting married.

    And we expect government (and the general population) to take us seriously.

    Have I understood that correctly?

    , ,

4 responses to “Book Review”

  1. Peter O Avatar
    Peter O

    I think you miss the point of the book Kelvin. It’s meant to be a guide to listening to *all* sides of the debate, not just those you agree with. That’s what makes the last section so good, because it forces us to deal realistically not just with the genuine evidence on the causality of homosexuality, but also the fact that some people *do* see remarkable change in their sexual orientation (and that others don’t).

    I wrote my own review here.

    Reply
  2. Avatar
    Anonymous

    We were not called by the last Lambeth Conference to listen to all sides in the debate.

    Reply
  3. ryan Avatar
    ryan

    Ruth Gledhill has posted a PDF of the whole thing, for those interested:
    http://timescolumns.typepad.com/gledhill/files/Final.pdf

    Reply
  4. Rosemary Avatar
    Rosemary

    I’ve now read the ‘scientific’ section – thanks for the link ryan – and I thought it was mixed. I thought Glynn Harrison made a serious attempt at dispassion. I think it is a fair point that any person must decide their own priorities, and the final argument must be between theologies, not sciences. I was not so impressed by David de Pomerai – though one could hardly quarrel with his conclusion that we simply do not know exactly what makes one person homosexual and the next heterosexual. However his whole argument was bedevilled by assumptions that, e.g. homosexual men will be more effeminate than straight ones. Anecdotal evidence instantly produces examples where it is the straight male siblings who are drama queens and run from spiders, while gay ones take it all in their stride.

    It must be accepted that both gay and straight people live with voluntary or enforced celibacy with no ill effects – and that some people can change their sexual orientation and live happily with the change. What I found truly heart rending were the desperate attempts and the high cost to those who actually did succeed in changing orientation – however much Harrison denies the skin colour analogy, it reminded me painfully of those endless jars of skin lightener which encrust Sri Lankan chemists, where beauty is measured in skin tone. Because whether or not genetic, orientation is not a simple free choice. But I suppose the answer would be: ‘And what is?’

    The final point, though, is always the same. Is Christianity a religion of an authoritative book, or an authoritative Person?

    Reply

Leave a Reply

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

Previous Posts

  • Sermon – 6 February 2005

    The gospel reading that we have this morning tells us a great deal about the relationship that Christians are coming to have in the world. At one time, it could be assumed that the world was basically a Christian kind of place and that everyone in it was a person of faith, to a greater…

  • Off to Dundee now

    Off to Dundee today for a Chaplaincy awayday.Having been racing around the country quite a bit this week, I would much prefer to stay here and catch up o­n things.My meeting at the Anglican Communion Office in London along with leaders from other Inclusive Church groups was an interesting o­ne o­n Tuesday. I'm sure that…

  • Sermon – 30 January 2005

    I want us to meditate on the first of the readings this morning (Micah 6:1-8) and you might want to keep that text in front of you whilst I am talking. ?Hear what the Lord says:? Do we believe that we can hear what the Lord says? How easy it is to think that what…

  • To Dunblane

    To Dunblane this afternoon to meet with Bishop Bruce, the Primus of the Scottish Episcopal Church. I'm helping to convene this meeting which hopefully will include a discussion of a policy document that I have been working o­n this week – A Scottish Response to the Windsor Report.The document itself can be seen o­nline at…