• Benediction

    A couple of people have asked me to give details of the service of Benediction which can be used in the Scottish Episcopal Church where a couple conduct a marriage which is a legal marriage but one which is irregular under canon law.

    The form of service that we are talking about is this one:

    A FORM OF BENEDICTION OF MARRIED PERSONS

    The canon that governs marriage in the Scottish Episcopal Church includes this clause:

    5. A cleric may use the form of Benediction provided in the Scottish Book of Common Prayer (1929) to meet the case of those who ask for the benediction of the Church after an irregular marriage has been contracted or after a civil marriage has been legally entered into, provided only that the cleric be satisfied that the marriage is not contrary to Sections 3 and 4 of this Canon.

    Here’s the whole thing if you want chapter and verse.

    Now, the reason this is interesting at the moment is that the Scottish Government is keen to introduce the possibility of marriage for same-sex couples. I’m very much in favour and hope that the Scottish Episcopal Church enjoys a fruitful discussion about these matters over the next months and hope that the result of those discussions is that we can opt into whatever means the government chooses in order the enable those marriages to happen.  Now, obviously, one matter that will need some attention is the marriage liturgy. There will need to be some work put in to ensure that it can be used for all marriages. This won’t be too much trouble though as we’ve plenty of experience of rewriting liturgies in inclusive language. (Not least the fairly recent rewrite of the ordinal to ensure that it did not use male pronouns all the way through the liturgy for making someone a bishop).

    One little detail which seems to have passed most people by is that the Canon which governs marriage in the Scottish Episcopal Church explicitly authorises an old form of words, the Service of Benediction from the Scottish Prayer Book for use for a couple whose marriage is legal but cannot for some reason be regarded as having been regularly conducted according to the canons of the Scottish Episcopal Church. For a long time, this was the mechanism by which divorced people could have a blessed (ie a benediction) in church after a civil marriage.

    Nowadays, most couples where one person or other has been divorced can have a marriage in church anyway, by going through a pastoral procedure involving the bishop.

    However, the clause permitting Benediction still exists. Its only stipulation (and it uses the word “only” quite explicitly) is that the marriage is a legitimate one and that the couple have not been refused a marriage by a bishop if they have gone through the pastoral process pertaining to divorce.

    The consequence of all this is that once the Scottish Government legalises marriage for same-sex couples, the Scottish Episcopal Church has on its hands a piece of Canon Law which permits those couples to be blessed in church using an authorised liturgy.

    The liturgy itself would need some very minor modifications to be modified for inclusive language of course, but clergy do that all the time.

    Here are two versions of the text to show how easily that can be done:

    A FORM OF BENEDICTION OF MARRIED PERSONS for gay men

    A FORM OF BENEDICTION OF MARRIED PERSONS for lesbians

    Now, someone might want to argue that section 1 of Canon 31 (which is a doctrinal statement) prohibits this. But the point it, Canon 31 has a number of clauses which all have the same validity. Section 5 was explicitly put into the canon to deal with situations where a couple’s marriage did not fit within the boundaries of Section 1.

    Anyone attempting to argue that Section 5 does not apply if a couple’s marriage falls outwith the doctrinal boundary of Section 1 risks casting a slur upon those divorced persons blessed in church under the canon thus far. Such an argument would undermine the position of the Faith and Order Board’s recent first submission to the Scottish Government. It would also undermine the Grosvenor Essay produced last year by the Doctrine Committee. (You can’t argue that Section 1 of the canon means what it literally says amidst fast changing circumstances without also applying the same standards to Section 5).

    Without taking any actions, the Scottish Episcopal Church is going to find itself in the interesting position of having a service, albeit an archaic one, of blessing for gay couples authorised because of the actions of the Scottish Parliament.

    Now, wouldn’t it be much more sensible for us to have some discussions about this in the synod instead to ensure that there are appropriate resources for everyone who is engaged in ministry with engaged couples in our church?

5 responses to “On being bought and sold”

  1. Tim Avatar

    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.

  2. Pam S Avatar

    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.

  3. Tracey Avatar
    Tracey

    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.

  4. Helen Avatar
    Helen

    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.

    1. Jo Avatar
      Jo

      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.

Leave a Reply

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

Previous Posts

  • BirthdayFest #2 – The Rivals

    To Glasgow on Saturday for a performance at the Theatre Royal of the Rivals by Sheridan. Oh dear, not even Stephanie Coles as Mrs Malaprop could save this production. She tried though bless her. What a lot of shouting from some of her fellow actors. How long too. Longer than many members of the audience…

  • Sermon – 23 October 2005

    I have become accustomed to seeing in the bookshops great quantities of what have become called “Self-Help Books”. I may even have one or two on my bookshelves – many people do. You know the kind of thing – The Road Less Travelled, Feel the Fear and Do It Anyway, Women who Run with the…

  • BirthdayFest #1 – You Never Can Tell

    Just back from seeing Mr Shaw’s, You Never Can Tell at the King’s Theatre in Edinburgh. A comedy of manners intertwined with a gentle battle of the sexes never does anyone any harm. Ms Diana Quick presented a most elegantly emancipated dragon; Mr Edward Fox an all-seeing Butler. If anything about the play surprises is…

  • BirthdayFest

    Having missed going to see anything at all during the Edinburgh Festival and not having been to the theatre for months, I have decided to declare the coming week BirthdayFest in honour of my 39th birthday which falls tomorrow. So, off to Edinburgh for a bit of Shaw. Review later.