What is in Kelvin's Head?

  • Parliamentary Victory and Interview on Scotland Tonight

    I was glued to my computer last night watching the debate from the Scottish Parliament on introducing the legislation that will one day soon, allow same-sex couples to get married.

    It is difficult to describe what it was like watching it. In touch with others on twitter, I was aware of a certain amount of nervousness from some of those who have been campaigning on this. It isn’t surprising – a lot of work has gone into this. However, it was not just parliamentary process that was affecting me last night. It was the sight of one politician after another standing up and speaking positively about gay couples they know, changes in society that have made life easier for gay people or in some cases talking about themselves as gay parliamentarians. It is difficult for me to convey what this feels like to straight people. When I was growing up you simply saw no-one say anything positive about something that is pretty fundamental to who you are. Indeed, you either got negative messages or a corrupting silence which you somehow knew you were supposed to keep.

    Times have changed and that is why evenings like last night mean so much and in the end it was a decisive victory in the Parliament – 98 votes to 15 with five abstentions.

    Later on in the evening I was asked to go on Scotland Tonight on STV. It was a very enjoyable interview.

    Here’s some of the things I said:

    • Watching my twitter and facebook feeds light up when the vote came through was like watching the lights on a Christmas tree all light up.
    • This was a sophisticated and respectful debate and was the Parliament working well.
    • I don’t agree with issues like this being dealt with as a free vote but it was not a night for reservations but for celebrations.
    • The debate brought out the fact that support for same-sex couples being treated like everyone else extends into the churches. Increasingly people want equality for same-sex couples.
    • This is one of the fastest social changes that there has ever been. It is happening and it is happening now.
    • We don’t want any more “safeguards” in the bill – they are largely unnecessary anyway.
    • The Parliament has ensured that the country can go forward together. No-one is forced to do anything.
    • There’s still more to do around education, language (see the new Stonewall “Gay – let’s get the meaning straight” campaign) and support.
    • This is an amazing stepping stone towards equality.

    , , ,

10 responses to “So, let me get this right…”

  1. Andrew Page Avatar
    Andrew Page

    I think you have understood if correctly (or at least as fully as it can be understood).

    This just shows how confused the church has become, or how keen it is to tie itself into the proverbial knots to appease both progressives and traditionalists.

    Either way, this position is both absurd and intellectually unsustainable.

    Reply
  2. Kirstin Avatar
    Kirstin

    Kelvin can I ask what submissions you are referring to, is there a new one?

    Reply
  3. Joan H Craig Avatar
    Joan H Craig

    I think that, once marriage law is passed, current civil partnerships can convert to marriage by filling form, etc. Don’t think they said what happens if the couple want a religious marriage – or did I miss that?
    If our churches persist in saying no to marriage, wouldn’t it be better to do the blessing after they’ve converted their civil status – as in some countries where every marriage is a civil ceremony, and any religious service is done afterwards
    I hope everyone has completed the most recent consultation paper

    Reply
  4. Rhea Avatar
    Rhea

    I think that the church wants to have its cake and eat it too. It wants everyone to be happy, and this is probably the best way that it knows to do this.

    Is it ridiculous? Of course.

    Reply
  5. Kelvin Holdsworth Avatar
    Kelvin Holdsworth

    There is to be a new one. I’ve not seen it. I understand that the position that the Faith and Order Board is holding to is that “church teaching” is what Canon 31 says – that and nothing else and therefore we are doctrinally against change.

    Is that not the case?

    Reply
    1. kelvin Avatar
      kelvin

      So far as I understand it, the SEC has not moved in its position since the first response at all.

      The first response included this:
      Question 10: Do you agree that the law in Scotland should be changed to allow same sex marriage?
      The Canons of the Scottish Episcopal Church (Canon 31) state that the doctrine of the Church is that marriage is ‘a physical, spiritual and mystical union of one man and one woman created by their mutual consent of heart, mind and will thereto, and as a holy and lifelong estate instituted of God’. In the light of that Canon, there is no current basis for agreeing that the law should be changed to view marriage as possible between two people of the same sex.

      Reply
    2. Kirstin Avatar
      Kirstin

      The SEC’s last response was in line with what the current law was, indeed still is, this consultation asks a very different question. To which the answer ‘well it isn’t legal, so we can’t say’, (I paraphrase) can’t be the answer this time, can it?
      Of course Canon 31 also states it is a “lifelong estate” but had clause 4 added at a later date to allow for divorce and remarriage.

      Reply
  6. Rev David Coleman Avatar
    Rev David Coleman

    I was watching the evidence to the Westminster parliamentary committees the other day. In all these things, even from churches which are prepared to be tentatively in favour, or declining to be opposed, what is missing from all the evidence is the human experience of joy and delight that actually characterises a true and good wedding, of any combination of partners. How can we get across the compelling and converting happiness when processes take the form they do?

    Reply
  7. Rosemary Hannah Avatar
    Rosemary Hannah

    Is there any way of getting hold of the board – of ordinary church members getting hold of it and making it listen?? I mean I know my approach tends to lack in subtlety what it makes up for in directness, but then, well, it is very direct.

    Reply
  8. Kimberly Avatar
    Kimberly

    Rosemary, of all the many beautiful sentences you have written, that is the very very best.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

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

Previous Posts

  • Pentecost

    Pentecost tomorrow. I’m baptising Joshua. Cue much water and flames of fire alighting on all the believers present. (Well, vigil candles, anyway).  Much thinking too about the Holy Spirit. Just as all of us who are about my age or younger in the UK are Thatcher’s children in one way or another, regardless of what…

  • Hellbound

    There has been quite a lot of chatter about the Principal of Wycliffe Hall, Richard Turnbull. A video made of a speech that he made to Reform (the Nasty Party of the C of E) has even been commented upon in the papers. (Guardian here and Independent here). He identifies key marks of what Evangelicalism…

  • And MySpace

    Might as well add a MySpace profile whilst I’m at it. Do I have any friends?

  • Facebook Group

    Can’t make my mind up about these social networking thingies. However, so many people seem to be living their lives through them that there does not seem any option but to join in. So, there is a new St Mary’s Cathedral group on Facebook. If you are connected with the Cathedral and have a Facebook…