What is in Kelvin's Head?

My own response to the government

19/03/2013

Phew, just finished writing my own response to the current round of consultation on changes to marriage law in Scotland.

This one is not about the principle of introducing marriage for same-sex couples but about how such proposals will be implemented.

It is more complex than you think because marriage law is more complex than you think!

Anyway, here is my response, if anyone is interested:

Consultation response Kelvin Holdsworth – March 2013

To save you time wading through it, here’s the most interesting thing I’ve said:

I believe that if someone is authorised to conduct a straight coupleâ€™s marriage then they should automatically be authorised to conduct marriages of same-sex couples. The law should apply equally to people and what has been proposed is not equality. For these reasons, I do not support the current proposals for determining who can and who can not conduct the marriage of a same-sex couple.

If churches wish to limit the ability of a celebrant to conduct a marriage then they should continue to be able to do that through their own internal disciplinary procedure.

I look forward to being able to celebrate marriages for same-sex couples one day in my congregation (St Maryâ€™s Cathedral, Glasgow). I note with interest that once the state licenses marriages for same-sex couples, my own denomination (The Scottish Episcopal Church) will automatically have an authorised liturgy for blessing such couples â€“ the service of Benediction, which is explicitly authorised in Canon Law for use with couples whose marriage is legal but which has not been performed according to the rites of the church.

The consultation closes on Wednesday. More details here:
https://consult.scotland.gov.uk/family-law/marriagebill

LGBT, marriage, same-sex couples

7 responses to “Remember the Anglican Covenant?”

chris

24/02/2012

A timely post, with diocesan synod coming up. May well print out. (There is virtually no signal for online devices to be used usefully in the Highland Gathering Halls in Oban. Who knew?)

Reply
Thinking Anglicans

24/02/2012

Anglican Covenant: reports and reactions…

The Church Times reports this week on the progress of voting in English dioceses on the Anglican Covenant: Covenant tastes defeat in diocesan voting. ALMOST a quarter of C of E dioceses have now voted against the Anglican Covenant. It……

Reply
Susan Sheppard Hedges

25/02/2012

“. . .if there is any truth in that thesis, its days are numbered. . .”
As we say in my home state, ‘your lips to God’s ears.’

Reply
Jonathan Clatworthy

25/02/2012

Excellent post Kelvin.
If the Covenant does get rejected in England, we’ll certainly need a period of time asking ourselves what really went wrong and how we could do things better. And Scotland will be well placed to set the ball rolling.

Reply
1. kelvin
  
  25/02/2012
  
  Thanks Jonathan – and thanks for your article on alternatives to the Covenant which we are looking at next week at our Diocesan Synod next week to balance the stuff from the Anglican Communion Office.
  
  Reply
Paul Bagshaw

25/02/2012

“Some have worried that we might be the first province to declare ourselves out of sorts with the Anglican Covenant.”

They need not worry. The Philippines have already voted against it.

It also seems probable that New Zealand will vote against.

The Irish voted for it but with the caveat that it would not supplant the existing governing documents – though it’s not clear whether they would be able to sustain this.

Source: http://noanglicancovenant.org/background.html#cofe

Reply
Alan T Perry

25/02/2012

Thanks for this, Kelvin!

What really amazes me is that the Covenant has done so well with virtually no attempt to put forward an argument (with reference to the actual text) as to why it is an unalloyed Good Thing. Proponents claim it will save the Communion without explaining just how it will do that. Those voting for it are voting for a black box.

Reply