What is in Kelvin's Head?

Church of Scotland Debate

20/05/2013

I’ve spent much of today listening to the Church of Scotland’s General Assembly debating their Special Theological Commission that had been set up a couple of years ago to report on the way forward for that church with regard to the possibility of gay people to be ordained and inducted and to have their partnerships blessed by that church.

Three proposals emerged. The first two were in the report itself and labelled rather unsatisfactorily as the Revisionist (option A) and the Traditionalist (option B) position. Option A allows what tends to be called a mixed economy by which that church could eventually allow ministers in civil partnerships to be appointed to churches and gay couples in civil partnerships to be allowed to have their partnerships blessed. Option B would not though anyone who happened to be in a Civil Partnership already would probably not be hounded out of their ministry but no new minister in a civil partnership could be inducted or ordained. The third position emerged during the day and was moved in the name of Albert Bogle. (Confusingly it was option D – another motion C had been proposed and then was withdrawn during the process). This option D was a proposal to reaffirm the traditionalist view on these matters whilst allowing individual Kirk Sessions to opt to do as they like and choose such a minister anyway.

In each case, these were not final votes. The procedures of the Church of Scotland mean that where there are significant changes accepted by a General Assembly they then have to be put to the presbyteries of the church. The final position only emerges if a majority of presbyteries concur during the subsequent year and also the next General Assembly confirms the vote. (If a majority of the presbyteries do not concur then the process fails).

Option B fell in the first round of voting.

The commissioners of the Assembly then opted for Option D.

My own feeling is that this was a very hastily patched together compromise that is an astonishing move for the church to make.

It effectively means that the Church of Scotland has chosen by 340 to 282 to go down a path which delays the decision for another year and which is theologically incoherent and unexamined by the Commission which had been set up to consider these matters.

It means that the Church of Scotland has affirmed that it believes something whilst also giving permission to kirk sessions in the church to ignore that doctrine and do something diametrically opposed to what the church says it believes. It is not merely an untidy compromise, it is ecclesiastically and theologically incoherent.

The Church of Scotland became more congregational in its polity today. Some may feel that there are frightening implications for those in that church who support the ordination of women as ministers and elders. What else is going to become a matter of congregational choice?

All this now goes to presbyteries under the Barrier Act. (After next year’s Assembly, if I’ve understood this right).

It may be that some will leave the Church of Scotland because they have affirmed a plan that would allow that church to have gay ministers in some congregations even though the church has affirmed that doctrinally it believes that this is wrong.

It seems to me quite likely that presbyteries may refuse to affirm the proposal.

This matter was not resolved in either direction in the Church of Scotland today.

5 responses to “On being bought and sold”

Tim

19/07/2012

I’m contemplating it – too much instability coming up in the next couple of months though.

You might find http://www.ethicalconsumer.org/buyersguides/money/bankingcurrentaccounts.aspx interesting – the CoOp don’t seem to score all that highly, although obviously better than established big names.

Reply
Pam S

19/07/2012

I did move my account and our joint account about 18 months ago – from Lloyds to the Co-op!

My reason was what appeared to be a policy to get as much money out of me as possible, culminating in imposing an accumulating daily penalty for a going a very small amount overdrawn on one account by accident when I was ill. The charge amounted to much more than the original overdraft. They didn’t inform me of this for several days and the basic attitude was ‘well that’s your lookout’. They knew that there was enough money in other accounts to cover it.

I knew about ethical banking before that – our son is a great advocate of ethical banking and had suggested we moved to the Co-op several times – but it was only a personal experience of what I considered unethical behaviour which damaged me personally that gave me the impetus to do it.

Many years ago when my father was struggling financially, his branch of Barclays called him in to tell him off about his overdraft. He went straight across the road to another small local bank called Martin’s, asked if he could transfer his overdraft there and they lent him the money to close down the account at Barclays. He always said that Barclays had to eventually take over Martin’s to get his custom back!

One thing I did find with moving banks though – it was actually not quite as straightforward as I was told it would be – there were several standing orders and direct debits that didn’t get automatically transferred so there were a couple of months of companies contacting us to tell us we owed them money! However it was all fairly easy to sort out on the phone. Also we were on a lower overdraft limit for the first six months so if you need to use the whole of your current overdraft limit every month it’s best to be clear about what you’re being allowed.

Reply
Tracey

19/07/2012

I bank with the Clydesdale because I work for them, and they require you to have your salary paid into a Clydesdale account.

I wonder if Howard’s branch of Lloyds is being sold to the Co… I really hope so, for hunners of different reasons.

Reply
Helen

19/07/2012

I wonder how ethical the co-op bank actually is. I have had a preference for shopping at co-op supermarkets because of their ethical stance,until the recent revelations that they are among the worst offenders for driving down the price of milk below the cost of production. Fair trade and ethical have to apply to the uk too.

Reply
1. Jo
  
  20/07/2012
  
  The Cooperative have just increased the price they pay to milk producers, in response to concerns raised. As to the bank, “more ethical than any of the other high street banks” is about as good as it gets right now.
  
  Reply