• The Straight Civil Partnerships Question

    The question is this. If civil partnership is opened to straight couples then would someone in such a partnership be eligible to be considered for ordination?

    It is a simple question but carries enormous complexity with it and can help to illuminate where we are in the changing world of legal relationship states.

    I first raised this question in June 2013 in a series of 10 unanswered questions about marriage, most of which remain unanswered even now.

    The thing is, it is entirely possible that some straight couples within the different jurisdictions of the UK may soon achieve their hope to be in civil partnerships. I’m aware of both a legal challenge to the current law that is proceeding and also government consultations coming from both Holyrood and Westminster.

    Now, first of all I need to declare that I’ve always been against extending Civil Partnerships to straight people and thought that the best way forward was to turn all gay couples’ civil partnerships into civil marriages. However that has not happened and so we have a situation where there is a basic inequality – gay couples have the option of either marriage or civil partnerships. And lo, inequality is something that we can’t really tolerate in modern society and so something will need to be done. I can’t really see any alternative to opening civil partnership to straight couples. It seems to me to be only a matter of time and whether I like it or not, that is what will happen.

    So, will someone in a straight relationship who is in a civil partnership be eligible for ordination. In Scotland is it well established that someone in a same-sex relationship in a civil partnership is eligible for ordination.

    This is not merely a rhetorical question. All these kinds of questions affect real people. As individuals and couples try to work out the best thing for their own relationships they are currently left second-guessing how they are going to be perceived by the churches that they may belong to.

    I am aware of straight couples in the church who would be interested in entering a civil partnership rather than a marriage.

    But what’s that about.

    I’ve been opposed to civil partnerships continuing because I saw them as intrinsically products of discrimination. They were a legal confection devised to look like marriage and to onto which gay couples projected familiar signs and symbols to get as near as they could to the gold standard of marriage. However, things have now changed.

    It seems to me that straight couples looking for civil partnerships are clearly saying that they want something that is different to marriage and people like me probably need to get used to the idea that it is just different and not less than marriage now even though it once was.

    The church has not really caught up with modern sexual relations in so many areas. As I listen to people twenty years younger than me their presumption is that serial monogamy is a good thing. They believe in faithfulness. They don’t think cheating is acceptable. However, they also are entering into relationships which they themselves would acknowledge might not last forever. The permanence of marriage is not where they are at and I suspect that the civil partnership option might well appeal to such couples.

    The thing is, marriage carries with it a whole load of presumptions, not least that the end of a marriage is a Very Bad Thing. Divorce still carries stigma with it.

    I suspect that at least some of those seeking civil partnership rather than marriage are choosing to reject the possibility of divorce as they feel that the dissolution of a civil partnership carries fewer negative connotations than being divorced.

    But back to the straight civil partnerships question. Would someone in a same-sex relationship in a civil partnership (presuming that such things will soon become a reality) be able to be ordained in the Scottish Episcopal Church – or the other mainstream churches for that matter?

    If not, why not?

    So far as I can tell, Canon Law is silent on any relationships other than straight married ones.

10 responses to “Yesterday”

  1. David Avatar
    David

    Just to say the link to the BBC website is broken.

  2. asphodeline Avatar
    asphodeline

    The Sunday morning service on R4 is my regular church for now and it was brilliant to find it was with you yesterday.

    Loved the service and the music, as always, was wonderful.

  3. kelvin Avatar
    kelvin

    Thanks for the comments – the link is fixed now.

  4. Andrew Avatar
    Andrew

    Lovely to know that Bernard Porter is still about. One of the kindliest and most tolerant musicians this ex-tv producer ever worked with. He provided superb accompaniment to at least 4 major choral programmes, and an exuberant and beautifully played Voluntary in Holy Trinity, Ayr- in 1973. I can still hear it in my head.
    Thanks, Kelvin for a happy reminder.

  5. Victoria Avatar
    Victoria

    Just wanted to say how much I enjoyed listening to the service on BBC 4 on Sunday – meaty stuff with good quality music. Was pleasant listening when normally just want to reach for the ‘off’ button. But then I’m biased going to a SEC church myself with social justice and ecumenical concern at its centre and being a choral singer!

  6. Harry Monroe Avatar

    What a wonderful tribute to a real gentleman. Sang under him over 30 years ago at Diocesan Festivals. Minimum criticism and maximum praise seemed to be his maxim…. something we could all use as a way of life.

  7. Tom Allen Avatar

    Interesting review of Sunday morning here:
    http://irenelancaster.typepad.com/my_weblog/2008/02/the-bbcs-even-h.html
    from the increasingly fantasy driven adviser on Jewish theology to the Archbishop of Canterbury!

  8. Jay Vos Avatar
    Jay Vos

    Yes! I’m over in Vermont USA. Ain’t internet grand? It was to listen to the internet broadcast on R4. Thanks.

  9. Kenny Avatar

    So sorry I missed “BJ’s” do! I remember traipsing round Scotland with him and the choir, singing in all seven main cathedrals in 18 hours! Boy did we have stamina then!

  10. Dr. Irene Lancaster Avatar

    Hi, Tom! Glad to see that you haven’t changed. The fantasy is, as ever, all in your head! Although I’d be very pleased to take on this auspicious role at Lambeth Palace, as far as I know they have no plans to take on such a person as you suggest – for the present at least. All a figment of the imagination, then!!

    I’m also terribly sad to have to inform you that I’ve just been invited to talk on the subject of my blog (to which you’ve kindly directed bloggers) at one of Britain’s most distinguished universities in the next few days (alas, not in Scotland, although I have lectured before now at Edinburgh).

Leave a Reply

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

Previous Posts

  • College of Bishops

    +Gregor speaks on behalf of the College. Gives outline of typical agenda of the College Overnight meetings start at 1030 am and goes on until next day. 7 sessions of one or two hours each. Business agenda and other topics come up. This is what they do…. Paper on end of life issues Tisec library…

  • Personel Committee

    I ask whether the comittee will give advice on the implications of the Equality Act 2010 on church life, in particular noting that there are aspects which apply to office holders as well as employees. Answer that the Committee do review these matters and are happy to give advice.

  • Buildings Advisory Committee

    +Gregor speaks – his swansong as convener of this committee. “meetings have been infrequent but therefore never dull.” Canonical material is introduced to exempt minor works from canonical consent. (May mean you can put up a banner for a couple of months without asking permission from Diocesan Buildings Advisory Committee.

  • Finance Committee

    This is the one which is so badly named – it gives grants, does not discuss financial policy. David Bayne tells us this once again.