Comments: Civil Partnerships in Religious Premises and the Church of England

So why was this not made available to the Lords Merits of Statutory Instruments Committee? It would have shown that the Opinion from Mark Hill QC, commissioned by Christian Institute and others and discussed on an earlier thread here, was not shared by the C of E's legal advisers. The C of E centre thinks that allowing Quakers, Unitarians, etc, to celebrate civil partnerships in their meeting houses poses no threat to the C of E. Why therefore was Lady O'Cathain's motion alleging the opposite allowed to get such a head of steam that it is to lead to a debate in the Lords on Dec 15th?

Curiouser and curiouser

Posted by Iain McLean at Friday, 2 December 2011 at 12:12am GMT

Iain makes the point very well.

In fact Mark's opinion looks like a rehash of a Christian Institute scare story when compared to this. Expect a rebuttal from Prof Hill.

Posted by Martin Reynolds at Friday, 2 December 2011 at 8:47am GMT

It seems, from the C.of E. legal response to the UK Government plan to allow the Celebration of Civil Partnerships on religious premises, that the C.of E.'s refusal to do so is based on not having previously sought to celebrate such C.P.s. of any constsruction. There is therefore no legal obligation incurred for them in refusing.

However, it would appear that, in the case of any future decision by the Government to legalise Same-Sex Marriage, the C.of E. may be obliged to open the doors to such couples - on account of the fact that they do already marry heterosexual people, and would, therefore be obliged to facilitate the Marriage of Same-Sex couples.

If this is the only way in which the Church of England will be open to the religious celebration of Same-Sex Partnerships, let it come soon. There still is a case, at present, for the C.of E. to distinguish Civil Partnerships from Same-Sex Marriage; but with the introduction of Marriage for all citizens of England and Wales, the C.of E. would have no further excuse for discrimination.

Posted by Father Ron Smith at Friday, 2 December 2011 at 9:09am GMT

I am no fan of Lady O'Cathain, but I can understand the concern. The law is extremely clear that heterosexual couples can't register a civil partnership. However this has not stopped such a couple applying for one, and stating that they would go the European Court of Human Rights if they are not allowed one. See http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/nov/08/heterosexuals-attempt-civil-partnership

The C of E's legal advisors might be clear on this but it may be challenged, and it may leave the C of E out of pocket on legal costs.

I do approve of the permitting denominations to register Civil Partnerships if they want to, but I do expect a legal challenge if the C of E doesn't.

Posted by Peter at Friday, 2 December 2011 at 9:15am GMT

"but I do expect a legal challenge if the C of E doesn't."

And I would be disappointed if there were not and expect to put my hand in my pocket to help resource one.

But that is how things are done, how things move along in our society. A few judges saying:

"No, the law does not allow that yet, but it's a disgrace that the national Church denies blessings to gay couples." will have a powerful affect.

Posted by Martin Reynolds at Friday, 2 December 2011 at 10:15am GMT

Ron

I believe that, if equal marriage were to become law, it should be possible for faith groups to opt out of hosting same-sex weddings. Presumably the law could specifically exempt marriage from the usual prohibition of discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation (as, for instance, employment as a minister of religion and religious activities are exempted).

Posted by Savi Hensman at Friday, 2 December 2011 at 10:51pm GMT

Surely any PCC has a right to decide what is acceptable in its own Parish Church? What is it that makes those who sit in Deanery Diocesan or General Synod believe they have a right to impose their views and decisions on PCCs which according to my reading of Parochial Church (Powers) Measure 1956 provides that they are not obliged to accept any directions they consider prejudicial to their church. Has the saying 'rules are written for the guidance of wise men and strict obedience of fools' been struck out of applicability? Is there any real difference between a church being used by a PCC to raise funds for urgent repair work or to conduct a lawful civil wedding ceremony which also provides some form of income?

Posted by Freddy Crabbe at Sunday, 4 December 2011 at 1:15pm GMT

Freddy Crabbe: "Surely any PCC has a right to decide what is acceptable in its own Parish Church? "

I should think and hope that several PCCs will take the same view. Also, heterosexual old members of my college at Oxford have always had the right to return to get married in its chapel: I should like to ask its governing body whether those of us in same-sex partnerships also have the same right to a chapel blessing of our relationships. I am confident the answer will be yes, given that the university is committed to fighting discrimination, and that college chapels are private property outside the jurisdiction of the Church of England authorities. School chapels would be similar cases in point, as, I suppose would hospital and other institutional chapels where there are (Church of England) clergy employed to provide pastoral services to all those connected with the institution concerned.

Posted by Fr Mark at Sunday, 4 December 2011 at 2:06pm GMT
Post a comment









Remember personal info?






Please note that comments are limited to 400 words. Comments that are longer than 400 words will not be approved.

Cookies are used to remember your personal information between visits to the site. This information is stored on your computer and used to refill the text boxes on your next visit. Any cookie is deleted if you select 'No'. By ticking 'Yes' you agree to this use of a cookie by this site. No third-party cookies are used, and cookies are not used for analytical, advertising, or other purposes.