What is in Kelvin's Head?

The SNP and Equal Marriage

18/07/2012

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.

equal marriage, Scotland, snp

23 responses to “What if this is the end of the Eucharist?”

Thomas Scott

06/05/2020

Just noticing here that DGD (of happy memory) seems to have left out of his catalogue of joyous, sad, perilous, and solemn occasions any instance of celebrating during a plague or pestilence. I’m not worried about the mass. The eucharist need not be celebrated as though it were a car battery, as if not offering it now would somehow allow the power to run down. It is not at risk, we are, which I think is your point. The questions asked are worth asking, of course.

Reply
Mo Nicholson

06/05/2020

Mo Nicholson. This is an intriguing discussion and what I would like to add to it is the observation that I have had to learn the hard way that participation in the Eucharist being made impossible in no way diminishes an individual’s ability to worship God or be in fellowship with other believers. I am barred from receiving Holy Communion in the Catholic church because allergies make this impossible for me. The pain induced by this has little to do with feeling separation from God, in fact nothing at all as I do not feel that. It comes from feeling excluded from the community, different sections if which regard it as desirable or tolerable that a member of the community should be excluded in this way. This experience has made me understand as never before that if we place prime value on liturgical celebrations, ir indeed anything else, above charity, compassion, welcome and inclusivity, in other words love, then we have become the sounding gong which St Paul warned against. If we truly believe that God is love, as I do, then it is obvious that it is love for one another which makes us true children of God our Father, and in light of this we could begin to look at these present challenging circumstances as simply an opportunity to love more, to reach out to one another in whatever way possible in the knowledge that this is what actually matters and always did. Only perhaps we were tempted to almost make a fetish of our rituals, sacraments and so on. And perhaps this can show us a better way more adapted to the world we are supposed to serve.

Reply
Lynsay Downs

06/05/2020

You and your conversation with Dave Roberts prompted me to write this. Does it resonate for you?

https://astonishing.community/2020/05/06/conversations-in-coronatide/

Reply
1. Kelvin
  
  06/05/2020
  
  Thanks Lynsay – yes, it does resonate with me very much.
  
  I’ve shared it on facebook. I think it is really helpful.
  
  Reply
Fr Keith

06/05/2020

Thanks again for such a thoughtful piece. With the Eucharist central to much of, at least Anglican/Episcopalian, worship in recent generations, we perhaps forget that the Church in these islands was, between the Reformation and the liturgical revivals of the 19th and 20th centuries, sustained by Mattins and Evensong as the regular diet of worship on Sundays. I’m not advocating a return to such times, but there is, as you suggest, work to be done on non-Eucharistic worship (though not defining it as a negative). Thanks again.

Reply
Fenland Boy

07/05/2020

For the record, I’m not in favour of lay presidency at the Eucharist. I believe, for better or worse, in an ordered church.

Why are you concerned about lay Presidency?

Reply
Chuck

08/05/2020

May I say respectfully, lighten up. Many Anglicans/Episcopalians lived on the edges of civilization in the nascent U.S. and various elements of the British Empire. Priests to celebrate the Holy Eucharist and to baptize were seldom seen, at most twice a year in many areas. (Bishops, only every several years.) The Church carried on in this manner decade after decade. If circumstances require, the Church will carry on again despite our profound sense of loss.

I should add, to those who grew up under threat or reality of war, persecution, oppression, famine, other disease, etc, the present difficulty is not unfamiliar in many respects.

Reply
Miriam MacCarthy

08/05/2020

Thank you! It is wonderful to read these serious, personal thoughts about the Eucharist. My feeling is that it has become celebrated to the point of boredom. Church, and what we do in it, is in danger of becoming simply a habit. It could just as well be crackerjack for a fast-asleep congregation. My heresy is that the direction Jesus gave is to “do this in remembrance of me”, and that means everything we eat at any time, whether alone or with others, in thanksgiving. If that is seriously done, it has vastly more meaning. It really gets ones attention and requires preparation. Would not become popular or usual, I predict!

Reply