What is in Kelvin's Head?

Predictions 2026

01/01/2026
1. A rocky road to the enthronement of the next Archbishop of Canterbury.
2. Further turmoil and scandal in the Anglican Episcopates of the United Kingdom.
3. No progress for those hoping for Equal Marriage in the Church of England.
4. More talk about the Quiet Revival which will continue not to show up in denominational statistics.
5. Success for BBC Farage TV as Reform make great gains in the May elections
6. Despite its record in government, the SNP get about 60 seats in the new Scottish Parliament.
7. Because of its record in government, the Labour party gets terrible results and there is an attempt to remove Keir Starmer as leader.
8. Despite its record both in and out of government the Democratic Party does well in the November elections in the USA.
9. Stock market has another volatile year but ends up on this year, but not by much. FTSE is 9,931 at the start of the year.
10. 2026 is the hottest year ever recorded.
2026, new year, Predicions 2026, predictions

10 responses to “A simple question about Civil Partnerships”

Matthew Pemble

01/06/2015

things they haven’t thought about properly …

Legalistically, albeit IANALNDIPOOT, I think the answer is “yes”. The implications? Much hot air, minimal action.

For once, probably the only time since Joan of Arc, the French seem to have got this right (general civil society / religious split, not equal marriage, and pretty much on equal marriage. I note the binational issue. )

Reply
Beth Routledge

01/06/2015

I don’t see anything in the motion that would prohibit a mixed-sex couple from registering a civil partnership in church, if it is that mixed-sex civil partnerships become recognised under Scots law. I think that if the SEC’s intention is to undertake the registration of Civil Partnerships exclusively for same-sex couples, that would require explicit instructions to the Committee on Canons which would require an amendment to the motion as writ.

I don’t want this motion to be passed at all (an even casual parsing of the word civil, for heaven’s sake…), but perhaps the only thing I want less than that is for it to be passed with such an amendment. The last thing we need is to start writing new non-inclusive Canons when we’re still trying to get rid of the old ones.

Reply
Rosemary Hannah

02/06/2015

If they do introduce Civil Partnerships in church, are they happy to have heterosexual clergy in civil partnerships even as they are pressing gay clergy to stay in civil partnerships and not marry?

Reply
Kelvin

02/06/2015

Yes – that’s precisely the question.

Reply
1. margaret of the sea of galilee
  
  03/06/2015
  
  Once upon a time on an island far away… we (myself and my then partner – male and Christian) made several approaches to various clergy to have a church marriage but without any civil component or documentation…but no one would do it.
  Now after 30 years with This Man we still cannot get married – religious marriages are only for couples who share a common religion and there is NO civil marriage option at all.
  Not complaining, just saying
  
  Reply
  1. Stephen Clark
    
    06/06/2015
    
    #marriage This is a very good point
    Personally I am all for the European option of having formal/legal marriages registered by the State …independent of the Church….and then those of us who are so inclined going to Church.
    I don’t see any reason why the logical corollary should not be that if you don’t want or need legal recognition then Holy Church should just do its thing. Our former Archbishop (Ian George of Adelaide, South Australia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_George) did a lot of work about marriage when we (The Australian Anglican Church) were grappling with ‘remarriage’ of divorced persons and used to often note that “legal marriage” for everyone is a fairly recent phenomenon and that by and large it was about securing property and succession rights of title . Ordinary folk didn’t need this and so simply …married….
    We have lost sight of all this.
    In reality Anglican Churches could have married same-sex couples without legal sanction if we had been brave enough to have the courage of our convictions.
    
    Reply
Kirstin Freeman

02/06/2015

The more I think about this the more I think it could turn into a distraction from the main issue. Marriage is what the church offers and that should include same-sex marriage for laity and clergy alike.

Civil Partnership should be a separate discussion as it is a separate and distinct choice that can be made. If the church decides, having worked out what the theological difference between the two is, to have a liturgy for the celebrating of Civil Partnerships as opposed to that of a marriage, then that needs to go through the Canonical process and have its own canon assigned to it.

Reply
1. Beth Routledge
  
  02/06/2015
  
  My cynical side wonders if a distraction is precisely what it is supposed to be.
  
  Reply
Kelvin

02/06/2015

I’m still not getting an answer to my question and I asked it at our pre-synod meeting last week too. Can it really be possible that this motion has been proposed without anyone knowing the answer?

Reply
Kelvin

02/06/2015

Would it be possible to become a bishop if one were in a religiously registered Civil Partnership?

Is the answer different or the same if the person concerned is in an opposite sex relationship or a same-sex relationship?

Reply