• Coupled Together

    Perhaps one of the most unexpected things that could have happened this year in religious terms is that in the last days of the year, both the Church of England and the Roman Catholic Church have moved to similar positions on same-sex couples.

    Now, precisely what those positions are is complex, almost falling into the realm of holy mystery. However, it is clear that some form of prayer is going to be allowed in each of those churches for which the context of those prayers is a public recognition of such a couple. Both churches seem to want to have their wedding cake and eat it however and seem to be saying that whilst such love is the context for such a blessing, it is not the fact of that love or the union, partnership or marriage which is being blessed. It is a position that isn’t easy to understand, not least because it is nonsense. However, that’s where each church seems to be.

    In the Church of England this comes after an enormously long and expensive process which has resulted in the bishops of the Church of England publishing a set of prayers and commending them to that Church. These can be used during already existing services but not as yet in stand-alone services. This is a curious position as it seems to stand a good chance of annoying just about everyone. Generally speaking, my view has been that the best answer to people who don’t approve of same-sex marriages/partnerships/blessings/hand-fastings/broom-leapings or whatever is that they simply shouldn’t enter into them and they don’t have to go to them. However the Church of England bishops by insisting that their pseudo-blessings have to take place during pre-existing kinds of services are basically insisting that those who go to church regularly and who don’t approve of such ceremonies are going to have their noses rubbed in them. Cue maximum offence all around. The pseudo-blessings are not really what the vast majority of what people who want same-sex couples to be treated with dignity and respect want to happen and they are going to be force-fed to at least some of those who don’t approve of them at all. The texts of the prayers themselves don’t seem particularly innovative either – they seem pretty much to be texts of the kinds of prayers that C of E clergy have been able to do all along.

    Meanwhile, in the Roman Catholic Church there’s also been a process of introspective reflection going on for the last few years. The Synodal process is far less like a decision making process that Anglicans are familiar with but there is more than a whiff of change in the air. Today’s announcement from the Pope that in some circumstances those in same-sex coupledom may be blessed by priests is a wonderful Christmas surprise for those in that church who find a blessing in the Pope’s emphasis on mercy and pastoral care. Again, it is not the coupledom that is being blessed but the people in the couple being blessed. But again, the very fact of the coupledom of the couple is the only context that gives rise to such blessings. Once again, much like with the Church of England, it is difficult to make much sense of this without an extensive knowledge of the church as a political animal with leaders trying to bring about change whilst also being buffetted by forces that are not within their control, forces whose own leaders have a completely different vision for the future. Again, the suggestion is being made that what the Pope is saying can happen is no different from what Roman Catholic priests have been able to do in the past. All he seems to be doing is making that position a matter of public record.

    I am reminded of the Roman Catholic priest that I know who claims that on the day that the Roman Catholic Church first ordains women as priests, the liturgy will begin with the words, “As the Roman Catholic Church has always taught…”

    All of this seems a world away from the position of the Scottish Episcopal Church in which same-sex couples can just get married in exactly the same way as opposite-sex couples. Indeed, we’ve largely stopped talking about this and moved on since it simply became a matter of conscience after our General Synod in 2023. It isn’t a controversy any more and it is difficult to think that the position that we’ve come to is not the one that others will come around to in the end. Respecting everyone’s consciences is the only place that the Church of England can logically end up on this issue but respecting conscience isn’t to be underestimated within Roman Catholic thinking either.

    A curious and unexpected thing is how closely the positions of the Church of England and the Roman Catholic Church are at the moment. At least in the UK, they are both quite a long way behind public opinion. They are also significantly behind the position of those who claim to be their members. People are often surprised that the Roman Catholic Church has been shown in a number of social attitudes surveys to have a membership that is more strongly behind same-sex marriages than the other churches in this country.

    These two churches seem unexpectedly coupled together in offering blessings that fall a long way away from what those they want to bless seem to want. However, the most curious thing of all is that despite moving to the same position, it feels as though the Church of England is moving backwards whilst the Roman Catholic Church is moving forwards.

    Neither has ended up with a stable position that will stand the test of time. I wouldn’t like to place a bet on which one moves to a more inclusive position first.

11 responses to “The Columba Declaration – where are we now?”

  1. Ben Avatar
    Ben

    Has any of this been caused by the 2011 census where it might have been the first time that the CofE realised they have quite a big constituency in Scotland, and a lot more people in Scotland claiming an affiliation with the Church of England than the SEC. It says here that 67,000 people said they were C of E, compared to just 8,000 Scottish Episcopal Church? (though probably need to add the 20k who answered as generic ‘episcopalians’):

    http://www.scotlandscensus.gov.uk/documents/censusresults/release2a/rel2A_Religion_detailed_Scotland.pdf

    I.E. apart from the rudeness and cack-handedness, are there any legitimate arguments for them to do ‘brand management’ in another jurisdiction if there are so many of their affiliates here? Like, if the aim was to enable some of those 67k to feel they have more options is that a good possible outcome from this?

    1. Ben Avatar
      Ben

      I didn’t mean good possible outcome, I meant good possible intention if it had been handled better.

    2. Kelvin Avatar

      Actually, I don’t think the C of E is trying to establish itself in Scotland and I’d be surprised if the census was a factor in any way.

      There are big issues from the census for Scottish Episcopalians to think about – the C of E is probably more concerned with the large drops in allegiance south of the border than any stated Church of England members north of it.

      I wrote a bit about the census here:
      http://thurible.net/2013/09/30/i-d/

  2. Fr Terry Taggart Avatar
    Fr Terry Taggart

    Thank you for this update Kelvin. I’ve been struggling to get anything of substance regarding who said what to whom and when it was said !! A committee!!! Well that should sort it 🤔

  3. Hugh Foy Avatar
    Hugh Foy

    We have been Offended throughout our history at people referring to us as the ‘English Church’ in Scotland in complete ignorance of our history. This sad sttempt at faux ecclesial imperialism does nothing to help us consolidate our Scottish identity in public space in post referendum Scotland. Kelvin is absolutely correct in identifying the issue is Jurisdictional and the pain and insult emerges from this. However at a political level it’s simply a pathetic attempt at establishment power consolidation but it addresses no significant issues in our divergent Eucharistic Theology and Theology of Ministry. In a time of Church decline it allows the Church establishment to speak with one voice to the political establishment. A delusional codependent alliance that allows clerical gatekeepers to believe they still matter in a post post Christendom society to the State. I find out acquiescence here both disturbing and saddening.

  4. Father Ron Smith Avatar

    This high-handed treatment of the Episcopal Church of Scotland – with an attempt to achieve ecclesial unity on its own provincial ground between the Church of England and the Presbyterian Church of Scotland, without local consultation with SEC – must indeed seem, not only a snub but also a deliberate sidelining of our Anglican partner Church in Scotland – the Church whose episcopate was instrumental in providing the basis for an episcopal (Anglican) presence in North America – when the Church of England had refused to provide such a provenance.

    A very good reason, one might suspect, for SEC to join TEC in a new brand of Anglican presence in the world – in common with those provinces of the Communion who wish to go forward on the matter of Same-Sex Unions and the banning of sexism & homophobia

    Father Ron Smith, Christchurch, new Zealand

  5. John Neal Avatar
    John Neal

    Our Church of England community in Tours, France uses the protestant Temple. As such, the Reuilly Declaration between the Eglise reformée and the Church of England (2001) has particular significance for us. The second of the acknowledgements is this:

    “We acknowledge that in all our churches the word of God is authentically preached, and the sacraments of baptism and the eucharist are duly administered.”

    I am just not sure about this. Naturally, the pasteure has not been episcopally ordained. I think there must be many similarities with the Church of Scotland, indeed, in the 1920s the local pasteur had studied at a Scottish University. He offered BCP Communion services in English and had to be warned off using the absolution and prayer of consecration by the C of E bishop.

    Hmmm!

    1. Kelvin Avatar

      Yes, the Columba Declaration has much copied over word for word from the Ruilley Declaration. That’s always left me to say that this means the C of E isn’t taking the C of S that seriously, something that C of S people don’t understand. Columba is made up of Ruilley not Porvoo.

  6. Whit Avatar
    Whit

    “We don’t do Archbishops generally. We don’t have one of our own and woe betide any Primus that doesn’t understand that from the get go.”

    That’s interesting. Our Presiding Bishop has, over the course of the last two decades become an archbishop in all but name. Indeed, I no longer bother correcting English people who call the PB an archbishop.

    1. Robin Avatar
      Robin

      The last Scottish Episcopalian Archbishop was Archbishop Paterson of Glasgow, who died in 1708. The Primus of the Scottish Episcopal Church is neither an Archbishop nor a Primate nor a Metropolitan. He/she is, as the name ‘Primus’ implies, merely first among equal Bishops.

  7. Richard Barnes Avatar
    Richard Barnes

    You’ve been very restrained in not naming anyone over the past 5 months, but since Abp Welby specifically mentioned him, it seems to me it’s the Bp of Chester who should have apologized. According to Chester Diocese he studied and trained in Edinburgh, so I’d’ve thought he would have known the hurt the Columba Declaration would cause to the SEC…
    With Welby trying to be all things to all men, I’m surprised his costume department didn’t find some Geneva bands for him to show how Calvinist he is.
    40 years ago in St Andrews, we had ecumenical Communion Services in the University Chapel led one week by the CofS Chaplain, another week by the “Anglican” Chaplain, and sometimes by a transAtlantic, woman Presbyterian minister; all equal in integrity, consecration and worth for my spiritual health, and no Declarations or Committees, just local ecumenism working.
    I look forward to our House of Bishops working out how to welcome married gay CofS ministers to work in England while persecuting their own.
    Not a proud week to be CofE.

Leave a Reply

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

Previous Posts

  • Rigoletto Review – Scottish Opera 18 October 2018 – ***

    Scottish Opera has chosen to begin its season of main stage operas this year with a revival – the production of Director Matthew Richardson’s Rigoletto which was first seen in 2011. If anything the passage of time makes both the opera itself and this particular production all the more relevant. This is a piece that…

  • Can the Epi Scopal Church speak of the love of God?

      In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen. Identity matters. It always has of course but these days it seems to matter a huge amount. And one of the most difficult things for Scottish Episcopalians is to explain to others who we are. The name doesn’t…

  • Who would true valour sing?

    I had the opportunity this week to abide for a while and think by Bunyan’s grave in Bunhill Fields in London. I was on my way back from holiday (Budapest, Sophia, Istanbul, London) and had scarcely thought of work at St Mary’s for most of the time that I had been away. But finding myself…

  • Sermon – 19 August 2018 – The Hostile Environment and who is missing

      There were some bits missed out. Not by the reader but by the compiler of the lectionary. Whole verses. Whole themes. Whole characters. Whole murders. Missed out in the twinkling of an eye. The eagle eyed amongst you will have noticed that the first reading was two verses from the second chapter of 1…