• 10 Unanswered Questions about Same-Sex Marriage

    Last week, at the General Synod in Edinburgh, it was announced that the Scottish Episcopal Church is to undergo a process of discussing what were referered to as “same-sex issues”.

    I’ve written about this before, and no doubt will do so again.

    For today though, here are some of the questions that are running around in my mind, most of which I don’t think were asked last week during General Synod and which I don’t think we have any answers to.

    • Once the Scottish Parliament has completed its legislative process and marriage for same-sex couples is legal in Scotland, what will be the consequences of a priest blessing such a couple in church. (NB – I can already, in some circumstances, bless couples entering into a Civil Partnership)?
    • Will all priests of the Scottish Episcopal Church be subject to the same discipline in this area or will different rules apply in different dioceses?
    • Will a member of the clergy who enters a civil marriage with someone of of the same sex have equality of opportunity in the church or will they automatically be ruled out of some appointments? Will there be parity between dioceses in this area and will the bishops have agreed a common policy?
    • If the Scottish Government were to subsequently proceed to allowing straight couples the possibility of entering a Civil Partnership, what would be the consequence of a member of the clergy entering a civil partnership and living in church-provided accommodation with their partner? Is that an acceptable moral choice in the church?
    • If it is not an acceptable moral church in the church for straight couples to live in a Civil Partnership when they have the opportunity of getting married, what standards apply to same-sex couples who might have a choice much sooner as to whether they live within a civil partnership or get married?
    • Is it acceptable for any member of the clergy to live with someone without having a legally binding committment to that person or not?
    • Is it acceptable (or even legal) for a bishop to refuse a licence to a priest on the grounds of their marital or partner status?
    • Would it be acceptable for a bishop to insist that clergy in same-sex Civil Partnerships should get married to one another once the opportunity arises for them to do so?
    • Does the peculiarly Scottish moratorium against bishops attending Civil Partnership ceremonies still apply and does it extend to civil marriage for some clergy and yet not for others?
    • Would a bishop support a priest who came to the conclusion that as the church has not made up its mind about who may get married, the right thing to do would be to declare a moratorium on marrying anyone (gay or straight) until the process of discussion about what marriage is had been concluded?

    I don’t think that any of these questions is a hypothetical question.

    Anyone with more questions or any answers?

10 responses to “The end of the World”

  1. agatha Avatar
    agatha

    Mildly serious question that has never occurred to me before. Why does she still get called the Virgin Mary when Jesus had brothers she presumably had in the normal way?

    1. kelvin Avatar

      Well, there are those who try to make the case that she remained “ever” Virgin and that the reference to Jesus’s brothers is an oblique and more general reference to the men of the extended family – cousins, uncles and so on. I think that’s rather silly myself.

      The Blessed Virgin Mary is simply one of the titles afforded her because of the persistent story of Christ’s birth. For myself, I think there is more interesting theological ground to be ploughed by thinking of her as exemplifying a virgin world waiting in longing and expectation for God to come. That kind of thing seems to me to be considerably more potent than birth-story tittle-tattle.

  2. Rosemary Hannah Avatar
    Rosemary Hannah

    When I was young I was sure the birth story was ‘just a myth’ – but then as I got deeper into history I got more experienced at evaluating stories. Not, you understand, ‘form-critical’ experienced, but historical experienced. What now strikes me with force is that two very different writers tell very different stories about the birth of Jesus with very different genealogies. However, despite the two birth stories coming from markedly different traditions, both bill Mary as a virgin. In any other context, I would find that more than convincing. So here, too, I let myself be convinced. As a sober historian, and cynic, I find it the most probably explanation. Not the only historically possible one, just the most generally convincing.

    Generally, I find historical thought more satisfying than the more circular arguments of form criticism. I am fairly sure I could use form criticism to disprove the fact that David Cameron is currently the PM.

  3. agatha Avatar
    agatha

    Thanks – I have no problem with the virgin birth, its been humanly possible for decades now so I reckon God could have arranged it easily enough a couple of thousand years ago.

  4. Rosemary Hannah Avatar
    Rosemary Hannah

    Well, actually it is NOT humanly possible – even with IVF. You cannot get a boy baby, humanly speaking, without a father. But then, humanly speaking, bodies do not resurrect, and walk and talk and eat…

  5. agatha Avatar
    agatha

    Rosemary, I think you are being a bit technical. Where I come from a virgin is someone who hasn’t had sex.

  6. Rosemary Hannah Avatar
    Rosemary Hannah

    The problem is that it is not the ‘having sex’ but the chromosomes in the baby. Or to put it another way – how did Jesus get his X? It is easy enough to get pregnant without ‘having sex’ but harder without ‘having sperm’. Despite that, the evidence is that two unrelated stories believe it was done. And two unrelated stories believe the babe was born in Bethlehem. Very interesting.

  7. Agatha Avatar
    Agatha

    From God?

  8. Rosemary Hannah Avatar
    Rosemary Hannah

    Sperm from God? Not I think, stories ‘from God’ except in the general sense that all understanding is divine. No. Stories from history. And the biology? Truly beyond current understanding. But, here you have it – if one understands it ceases to be amazing and people say : ‘Now we understand, that is not a miracle and Jesus is not form God.’ And if we do not understand, people say: ‘We do not understand and so it cannot have happened, and Jesus is not from God.’

  9. Agatha Avatar
    Agatha

    If I didn’t believe God could knock out a few sperm as and when required I would have Sunday mornings free.

Leave a Reply

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

Previous Posts

  • Primus

    The Scottish Episcopal Church has no Primus – long live the Primus.Pay attention now. Bishop Bruce resigned as Primus at the end of April, so he is no longer the Primus but still the Bishop of Aberdeen and Orkney. The election of the next primus takes place at the next meeting of the College of…

  • Whoosh – into the skip

    Anyone who thought that I could not fill a skip with junk was very much mistaken. Whoosh – so much has been thrown out this week and mostly it feels very good to be rid of it.Now, with the skip filling up and confronted by 2 record playing turntables and a pile of old LPs…

  • Sing along now

    Where have all the dog collars gonelong time passing?Where have all the collars gonelong time ago?Where have all the collars gone?Down the back of the fridge every one.When will he ever learn?When will he ever learn?

  • Auctioneer's Visit

    Today’s excitement/trauma was a visit from the auctioneers in Falkirk who took very many goods and chattels away to be sold.Anyone wanting to buy the Kelvin Holdsworth Memorial Table and Chairs (at which he ate his daily porridge in Bridge of Allan) needs to make their way to the auction rooms in Falkirk next Wednesday.I’ve…