• 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.

10 responses to “The morning after the day before”

  1. Neil Oliver Avatar
    Neil Oliver

    Kelvin, I agree with much of what you’ve said here, particularly your paragraph on the merits of the Better Together campaign. I truly hope the energy in campaigning for a socially just Scotland and in the wider UK can continue.

  2. Rosemary Hannah Avatar
    Rosemary Hannah

    The problem with more powers for local government is that it is the least trusted and most corrupt wing of government, even in many places where one instinctively feels it ought to be a voice and a power for change.

  3. Derek Avatar
    Derek

    I hope you’re right but given the most recent WM polls from last week a likely outcome for Scotland is that there will be another Tory govt elected next year, and an EU referendum after that – who knows what will happen with UKIP. I wish there were signs for the reforms you mention but I can only sense self interested political party manouvering. I hope there’s a wider movement for local democracy and dispersed power that follows on from the yes campaign. I feel like yesterday was an opportunity missed but am still hopeful.

  4. Isobel Avatar
    Isobel

    Thankyou for this – today seems a little dreich.

  5. Christine McIntosh Avatar

    I shall continue to bang on about the immoral and absurd retention of nuclear weapons by what is going to continue as the UK – especially when the only place to keep them seems to be on my doorstep. There you are – moral high ground and nimbyism in one neat parcel.

  6. Fiona Avatar
    Fiona

    Absolutely Kelvin. I believe that the vast majority of the Scottish electorate agree on the things we want to change. We just have different ideas about how best these changes can be effected. I’m sad that people are still posting on social media that the “other” side are, to paraphrase, numpties.

  7. Jimmy Avatar

    The so called “middle class” turned their noses up at a possible egalitarian state.

    1. Christine McIntosh Avatar

      It was also, sadly, people of my generation who overwhelmingly voted to stay in the past.

  8. Kim Avatar
    Kim

    Liked your post.Hope there is no Glasgie “kissin”this w/e.personally I’m glad it’s a No vote so the Queen won’t need Her passport to stay at Balmoral.

  9. Alan McManus Avatar

    Glaesga in Scots. Glasgie in Liverpool (I have no idea why). And it’s not our ” “kissin” ” you have to watch but our smiles. I liked what Kelvin said on Twitter about the need for a commitment for social justice not just reconciliation. otherwise it’s the tyranny of niceness and papering over the cracks. It was “truth and reconciliation” in SA and although our situation is in no way comparable, theirs can still inspire us.
    I think Kelvin also put his finger on what’s been wrong with this referendum: odd bedfellows. We’ve had people voting one way out of international socialist solidarity; greed; fear; or not a little sectarianism (I witnessed this at a polling station outside Glasgow and I suspect it was a factor in S. Lanarkshire). we’ve had people voting the other out of think-global-act-local values; community values; Anglophobia; or nostalgia for The Corries (I really hope no-one was influenced by Mel Gibson but I suspect there were some).
    Therefore, to be cheery about the turnout is valid but to be complacent that we all voted for social justice in our own wee ways, is not. The referendum didn’t make the choice clear. It was a leap of faith into an unspecified future of going it alone versus business as usual or perhaps unspecified changed with an unspecified timetable – the latter becoming (as YES voters predicted) more and more unspecified as the days go on.
    Speaking as a YES voter, this is what helps:
    1 young people got involved in politics
    2 the majority of people I know, whatever they voted for, voted for noble reasons
    This is what doesn’t help:
    1 mixing up the Union of the Crowns with the Union of the Parliaments
    2 using the USA and ‘secession’ as analogous to the UK
    3 the retrospective admission by NO voters of the greed and fear of much of the NO THANKS campaign – admission before the vote may have stopped YES voters feeling so patronised
    4 lack of admission by YES voters that Anglophobia was a factor for some voters in this referendum, and continues to be a reality in Scotland
    5 political commentators using metaphors of torture for holding people accountable
    So, to do my bit for truth and reconciliation, I admit that I was so busy being really angry at people dismissing my thoughtfully worded comments as Anglophobic, that I neglected to publicly take on board that this kind of prejudice is quite real in my native country and that it is especially incumbent upon us as Scots to stamp it out.
    I’m sorry about that and I pledge to do better in future. Please don’t hold my feet to the fire. I’m vegetarian and my shoes will quite possibly melt.

Leave a Reply

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

Previous Posts

  • 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…

  • Praying for Dr Pritchard

    Every morning at Morning Prayer in St Mary’s we pray for those whose “year’s mind falls at this time”. That means remembering in our prayers those who have died, on the anniversary of their death. Many of our churches in Scotland do this and we have a list of remembrances that leads to a couple…

  • Pagliacci – Scottish Opera ****

    Paisley Opera House (aka a tent on Seedhill Playing Fields in Paisley) Scottish Opera’s summer show in Paisley is a completely immersive bundle of fun that manages to be innovative and hugely entertaining. It isn’t difficult to see where the idea of putting this show on in a big tent comes from. Pagliacci (The Clowns)…

  • Sermon preached on 15 July 2018 (Pride Weekend)

    Is this the word of the Lord? Is this the gospel? “What should I ask for” said Herodias. “The head of the Baptist” said her mother. And it was so. And where is the good news in any of that? It is one of the worst, most barbaric and miserable stories in all of scripture.…