Thinking Anglicans

Evangelical Alliance publishes guidance on new Marriage law

Under the title Marriage FAQs, the Evangelical Alliance has published a guidance document:

Earlier this month, the new Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act was introduced. As this legislation has now been passed by parliament, it is important to face the reality that the state’s definition of marriage will now be different from the historical definition. The Alliance has published the following guidance for Christians and churches, answering some of the most frequently-asked questions about the implications of the Act.

The document can be downloaded as a PDF.

The Introduction is copied in full below the fold.

Introduction

The Evangelical Alliance is committed to uniting evangelicals to make a difference in our society. A key element of this is providing an evangelical voice to government and culture, and in doing so we have worked hard to oppose the government’s plans to redefine marriage. A range of statements and resources can be found here:

http://www.eauk.org/current-affairs/politics/marriage-and-family.cfm

As this legislation has now been passed by parliament, it is important to face the reality that the state’s definition of marriage will now be different from the historical and biblical definition.

However, it is also important for Christians to understand that, although we need to acknowledge the new definition of marriage, we do not need to approve of it or accept the premise on which it is based. In this context, it is vital that we are well informed of our rights and the limits of the law, and also that we speak the truth with grace and love.

It is essential for Christians to continue to defend and promote marriage as being exclusively between a man and a woman, but this does not mean that they should provoke accusations of homophobia. Indeed, it is worth remembering that many people from the gay community also opposed David Cameron’s plans.

There are many concerns about what the effect of the new law will be for churches and for individual Christians. The Evangelical Alliance offers the following FAQs as guidance for its members following the introduction of the new Marriage (Same-Sex Couples) Act 2013 which redefines marriage in England and Wales.

Please note that the FAQs represent advisory guidance and should not be regarded as legal advice. Many aspects of the law relating to the redefinition of marriage are complex, fluid and open to interpretation. Also, government assumptions about the robustness of protections for third parties are likely to be challenged by case law. Although the guidance is as comprehensive as possible, it is not exhaustive and may be supplemented or amended from time to time in the light of experience. Consequently the Evangelical Alliance accepts no legal responsibility for the accuracy or otherwise of the FAQs. In cases of doubt consultation with appropriate legal experts is recommended.

It should also be noted that because of its established status, which includes a public duty to conduct marriages, different rules apply to the Church of England as to nonconformist churches and other religious groups. The new legislation makes it illegal for the Church of England to conduct same-sex marriages. Accordingly, the guidance applies primarily to churches other than the Church of England, though some FAQs will apply also to the Church of England.

July 2013

20
Leave a Reply

avatar
3000
20 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
16 Comment authors
Timrobert Ian williamsFather Ron SmithStevenCraig Nelson Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest
Notify of
Richard Ashby
Guest
Richard Ashby

Sorry to post another link, but this is interesting too in its reporting that US conservative evangelicals fighting the culture wars against lgbti people are not only getting tired but that they are realising that it isn’t working. In this context the advice from EA seems akin to the little Dutch boy with his finger in the dyke (sorry am I allowed to use that simile these days?) They are just going to get swept away by the sea change in public attitudes: Justin Welby’s ‘revolution’.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2013/08/the-quiet-gay-rights-revolution-in-americas-churches/278646/

Iain Baxter
Guest
Iain Baxter

This seems to be a fairly clear and straight forward statement of the legal position. The only strange part is in the Introduction: “It is essential for Christians to continue to defend and promote marriage as being exclusively between a man and a woman, but this does not mean that they should provoke accusations of homophobia. Indeed, it is worth remembering that many people from the gay community also opposed David Cameron’s plans.” This seems to imply that they should not be homophobic because many gay people opposed gay marriage. Not only is this factually incorrect – a few high… Read more »

ExRevd
Guest
ExRevd

I can’t remember when I last read a more reactionary and negative document. Surely, if the “traditional” understanding of marriage is so commendable, one would expect an alliance of evangelists to be wholeheartedly commending it, and responding to FAQs of those who long to do likewise. But there is no news here, good or otherwise, just the same old, old story. For a profound lack of confidence in the Gospel, look no further.

cheryl clough
Guest
cheryl clough

Sorry I’ve seen evangelicals at their worst, particularly in an alliance. If it is not in the vernacular try this one “social deprivation”. This is where the “incrowd” attempt to deny the legitimacy of someone, accuse them of slander/insanity etc. and make it that no one “respectable” will speak to them. They then threaten defamation lawsuits or litigation if anyone tries to expose their game. Solution? Treat everyone as you would want to be treated. Be fair to everyone in the way you would want to be treated fairly. Treat gays as you would want to be treated. In reality,… Read more »

Roger Mortimer/Lapinbizarre
Guest
Roger Mortimer/Lapinbizarre

Use it with a care for spelling where US viewers are concerned, Richard. In those parts, the Little Dutch Boy had his finger in a dike, with an “i”. A “y” would convey a totally different meaning.

Simon Sarmiento
Guest

In my opinion, this EA document is noticeably less negative in tone than earlier ones. See
http://www.eauk.org/current-affairs/politics/new-resources-on-marriage.cfm
and in particular this briefing note issued only a few days earlier than the one linked above
http://www.eauk.org/current-affairs/politics/upload/The-redefinition-of-marriage-Church-briefing.pdf

Richard Ashby
Guest
Richard Ashby

Roger, at the risk of provoking the esteemed moderator of this blog, my Chambers dictionary allows both spellings tor either meaning!

Roger Mortimer/Lapinbizarre
Guest
Roger Mortimer/Lapinbizarre

Chambers is a British dictionary, Richard. US usage is as I described above. Moreover, even the most reputable dictionaries can be idiosyncratic. The shorter OED bought when I started university, noted of the verb “masturbate” that it is “intrans”.

Craig Nelson
Guest
Craig Nelson

I think EA have done a considerable public service by producing this factual, accurate and balanced publication. Of course they are catering for people opposed to marriage for same sex couples but they do so in a calm, measured way which I think is helpful. One can see less of the apocalypse in this document than is often the case with EA.

Richard Ashby
Guest
Richard Ashby

I sometimes think that it would be rather nice to have those ‘like’ buttons here, as they do on Facebook.

Brian
Guest

There is the law of a government, which is always changing, and the beliefs of a Church, which should not change. Maybe it shouldn’t matter to the Church what the government’s current law is, except to recognize it but apply one’s own beliefs. I’m not sure why a belief about the meaning of marriage means one is “homophobic” if they disagree with current law. It just means they disagree, without using inflammatory language to paint an inaccurate picture of the person.

MarkBrunson
Guest

Thanks, Brian. With friends like you, our enemy quotient is dead full.

Awesome!

Pat O'Neill
Guest
Pat O'Neill

“There is the law of a government, which is always changing, and the beliefs of a Church, which should not change.”

Really? Not even when those beliefs contradict proven science? Does the sun revolve around the earth? Are the stars and planets merely points on a succession of spheres surrounding the earth?

Laurence
Guest
Laurence

‘It just means they disagree, without using inflammatory language to paint an inaccurate picture of the person.’

You will find, if you care to look, that anti-gay MPs, peers and archbishops both RC and C of E, do indeed employ very intemperate and ‘inflammatory language’ while they seek to deny those of us who happen to be lgbti a place in both community and in their denominations.

Do not not try to paint them as simple, victimised believers, please.

Interested Observer
Guest
Interested Observer

“the beliefs of a Church, which should not change”

So the Catholic Church should be proscribing heliocentric models of the cosmos and asserting that Jews bear the guilt of killing Jesus, in order to remain consistent?

Craig Nelson
Guest
Craig Nelson

I think it’s a little unkind to denominate Brian as an ‘enemy’ (I have no idea whether he is or isn’t). The point is that the law that has been passed does decide the question of whether same sex marriage should be allowed to couples who wish to marry and also to churches and synagogues who wish to marry them and a mechanism to allow that to happen (a somewhat cumbersome one as it happens but there we are); the law also recognises the bona fides of those who are not on the same page and can, as a result,… Read more »

Steven
Guest
Steven

Laurence – ‘You will find, if you care to look, that anti-gay MPs, peers and archbishops both RC and C of E, do indeed employ very intemperate and ‘inflammatory language’ while they seek to deny those of us who happen to be lgbti a place in both community and in their denominations.’

Are you really denied a place in their denominations? Just because a homosexual couple cannot be married in one of their churches does this really mean they are denied a place in that community?

Father Ron Smith
Guest

Today, New Zealand celebrates its first Same-Sex Marriages, with some religious bodies agreeing to perform the ceremonies. In the meantime, the Anglican and Roman Catholic Churches will not be joining in the celebrations. This does not prevent some anglicans and Catholics from joining with our LGBT sisters and brothers in celebrating their committed, faithful, same-sex relationships.

robert Ian williams
Guest
robert Ian williams

You can rest assured there will be some gay marriages in Anglican Churches in Aotearoa/NZ, as the Governmment has no coercive powers over the Church.

Tim
Guest

`from the historical and biblical definition.’

That would be the historical view that held women as property until the last couple of centuries, would it? And the biblical “definition” that somehow ignores Solomon having 700 wives and 300 concubines?

*barf*

Pull the other ones, they have bells on.