What is in Kelvin's Head?

  • My own response to the government

    Phew, just finished writing my own response to the current round of consultation on changes to marriage law in Scotland.

    This one is not about the principle of introducing marriage for same-sex couples but about how such proposals will be implemented.

    It is more complex than you think because marriage law is more complex than you think!

    Anyway, here is my response, if anyone is interested:

    Consultation response Kelvin Holdsworth – March 2013

    To save you time wading through it, here’s the most interesting thing I’ve said:

    I believe that if someone is authorised to conduct a straight couple’s marriage then they should automatically be authorised to conduct marriages of same-sex couples. The law should apply equally to people and what has been proposed is not equality. For these reasons, I do not support the current proposals for determining who can and who can not conduct the marriage of a same-sex couple.

    If churches wish to limit the ability of a celebrant to conduct a marriage then they should continue to be able to do that through their own internal disciplinary procedure.

    I look forward to being able to celebrate marriages for same-sex couples one day in my congregation (St Mary’s Cathedral, Glasgow). I note with interest that once the state licenses marriages for same-sex couples, my own denomination (The Scottish Episcopal Church) will automatically have an authorised liturgy for blessing such couples – the service of Benediction, which is explicitly authorised in Canon Law for use with couples whose marriage is legal but which has not been performed according to the rites of the church.

    The consultation closes on Wednesday. More details here:
    https://consult.scotland.gov.uk/family-law/marriagebill

    , ,

5 responses to “A gap”

  1. Kirstin Avatar
    Kirstin

    You are indeed right.
    Although it could be argued that a permanent artifical arrangement might be a canon 35 matter.

    Reply
  2. Kimberly Avatar
    Kimberly

    Canon 35 for artificial flowers? Clever.

    One might also argue that they fit under canon 22 — on Worship.

    Or even Canon 28 — on pastoral breakdown??

    Reply
  3. Stewart Avatar
    Stewart

    Oh dear – surely the Canon which says the Priest-in-Charge has absolute authority (to which I can not remember the number) in his church is the one that applies.

    Reply
  4. Steve Hayes Avatar
    Steve Hayes

    No, church flower arrangers are a law unto themselves.

    Reply
  5. gail Avatar
    gail

    – so opportunities for an opening salvo and subsequent broadsides, eh ? Hoist the mainsail and hard a-starboard….

    ……..(now where did I put that powder and shot……. no…. that’s just compost and pots……)

    Reply

Leave a Reply

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

Previous Posts

  • Pic on church website

    Someone asked me today what the pic o­n the church website is of as it looks familiar. It is the centre of the altar cross.www.saint-saviour.org

  • Events

    Bat Day is tomorrow – with sunset bat walk. Bishop David is coming on Sunday and Sue White will be licensed as a Lay Reader. The Flower Festival starts next week on Thursday and lasts until the following Tuesday. (ie 26-31 May 2005) The church website should be relaunched this weekend with a rather more…

  • Affirming Lay Liturgies

    That last entry had scarcely been uploaded more than 2 minutes before the doorbell rang and my colleague from Stirling said, “Do you want a liturgy for licensing a Lay Reader?” Almost enough to make me believe in divine intervention. Almost.

  • Odd

    It strikes me as odd that in a church which is supposedly celebrating variety of ministries we appear to have no liturgy for recognising a lay ministry.