What is in Kelvin's Head?

  • The SNP and Equal Marriage

    The SNP must be wishing that they had never opened the can of worms that is labelled Marriage Law Reform. However, the truth is, it isn’t really they who have opened it. Equal Marriage is simply an idea whose time has come. It just so happens that the SNP find themselves needing to address the question at a time which is perhaps not particularly fortuitous to them.

    One way or another, Equal Marriage is coming. The choice the SNP must feel as though they are in the middle of making will appear to many however as not being a simple choice between allowing same-sex couples to marry or not. What they appear to be vacillating over is the kind of Scotland they want to project as the great vision for the future. Are we going to be seen as a progressive nation with a modern, can-do parliament enacting social legislation which has majority support behind it. Or alternatively are we going to appear to be run by a governing party which can’t seem to make its mind up and which will bow in submission to the loudest and most angry voices – in this case, that of Cardinal O’Brien.

    It is worth noting in passing the complete contrast between Cardinal O’Brien and Prof John Haldane who appeared on Newsnight a couple of days ago as someone speaking from a Roman Catholic perspective. Prof Haldane seemed reasonable, intelligent and sane. (He is). He also appeared to be saying that so long as no-one was forced to marry couples whom they didn’t want to marry, he personally didn’t care what happened to gay folk and was more than happy that they had partnership law to regulate their relationships. Towards the end of the piece, he made a plea for civility in the debate which the cynic might have thought was directed less at the supporters of Equal Marriage so much as towards his own Cardinal.

    Yesterday the SNP Cabinet rather foolishly seemed to be letting it be known that they would come to a mind on the Equal Marriage question yesterday and great expectations were raised. In the end they didn’t come to a mind and were left looking at best as though they’d never heard of a competent communications policy and at worst as putting themselves on the wrong side of history.

    I don’t happen to think that the SNP Cabinet is necessarily going to do something which I would disagree with. We need to wait and see. They say we will have more answers by the end of the month and I’m prepared to wait for them and make my mind up on the basis of what they decide. I still think that Equal Marriage is very much the topic on the table and I think that the SNP would probably rather deal with it all sooner rather than later to better ensure that it does not get caught up in their independence referendum.

    Yesterday was a not a victory for clear government communications nor the end of the culture wars surrounding marriage law in the 21st century world. However, the Scottish Cabinet could not have slapped down Cardinal O’Brien’s request for a referendum on the issue more clearly. It was a foolish idea to start with and has been shown to be so by those elected to take decisions on our behalf.

    I long for the day when we have marriage law that allows same-sex couples to marry just like anyone else. And I’m going to rejoice in yesterday’s rejection of a referendum on that question as simply another step on the way.

    And along with many people of goodwill, I look for more progress in this area.

    And quickly please, Ms Sturgeon. Much more quickly now, please.

    , ,

5 responses to “Heresy hunting”

  1. Nick Brindley Avatar
    Nick Brindley

    It is probably helpful to be clear about the distinction between “dogma” (which is best understood as the definition of orthodoxy and of heresy, of the things it is mandatory to affirm and the things it is forbidden to affirm) and “church order” (the rules about how people are to conduct themselves). These are related but by no means the same thing.

    “Doctrine” is a third thing again, to my mind. It is the body of teaching that the church affirms but is much more extensive and changeable than dogma.

    Of particular relevance is who has the authority to pronounce on these things. Denominational authorities quite properly establish church law and discipline (this needs to be done and there’s nobody else to do it) but would go beyond their proper sphere (in my view) if they tried to establish new definitions in the field of dogma.

    Reply
  2. Andrew Avatar
    Andrew

    I feel the need to separate praxis and doctrine, but I suppose that is probably a minor heresy in itself, in a church that hides its doctrine in its liturgy. Although I suppose the deftness of the ‘McCarthy Liturgy’ has maybe sidestepped that pitfall as deftly as an 18th century non-juring bishop side-stepping western orthodoxy and the rest…

    Reply
  3. Rosemary Hannah Avatar
    Rosemary Hannah

    To a degree I think it is a matter of tradition. Anglican churches have tended (and it is only a tendency) to insist of orthopraxis. Church of Scotland churches have tended (same health warning) to emphasise orthodoxy of belief, call it doctrine or dogma. St Andrews is not of course a C or S institution, but it used to be, certainly in my day, and to a degree in yours, heavily steeped in C of S ethos. St Mary’s trained C of S ministers and that was ALL the training they got, because then they knew Orthodoxy.

    Reply
  4. Jimmy Avatar
    Jimmy

    The links on this post have led me to think of this –

    The Inner Party – The Outer Party – The Proles.

    The model demands tight control of the middle class, with ambitious Outer Party members neutralised via promotion to the Inner Party or “reintegration” by Miniluv, while proles can be allowed intellectual (and sexual) freedom because they lack intellect. Winston nonetheless believed that “the future belonged to the proles”. Wikipedia.

    Reply
  5. Allan Ronald Avatar
    Allan Ronald

    There was most definitely a C of S ethos at St Andrews in my day [67-71]. Robin Buchanan-Smith was running a packed college chapel and one president of the SRC and one president of the Union were St Mary’s men who went on to ordination and, in one case, to be Moderator of the Kirk. Perhaps they got their orthodoxy from Matthew Black at St Mary’s and their skill in future clerical politics from their student posts…….

    Reply

Leave a Reply

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

Previous Posts

  • High Mass

    One bright spot in an otherwise rather bleak week at work was to be asked to celebrate a big High Mass for Affirming Catholicism (Scotland) in the summer. It is o­ne of those excellent organisations which I have never quite got round to joining, so is very sweet of them to ask me to join in. (Or perhaps they…

  • BBC v Government

    So, when faced with the choice, whom do I trust more, the BBC or the Labour Govenment.The BBC wins that question hands down.It is terribly sad that there should have been so much fallout from three words (“government probably knew”) broadcast at six in the morning.

  • More on the Weather Project

    There is more o­n the weather project in the Tate o­n the Small Ritual blog: http://www.btinternet.com/~smallritual/

  • Top Up Fees

    I find it hard to imagine that I would have gone to university at all under the system of fees and grants which the government managed to get approved last night. They are pawning the skills of the country’s young people. The debt, debt, debt culture is bad for individuals just as it is bad…