Anglican Mainstream

From ComRes

A new ComRes survey of 159 MPs, conducted over the past month, has found overwhelming parliamentary support for the amendment to the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill, championed by Tim Loughton MP, which would extend civil partnerships to opposite sex couples.

The poll found that more than seven in ten MPs from all main parties support extending civil partnerships to opposite sex couples.

A separate public poll suggests support for gay marriage could be affected if the Government's proposals to legalise same sex marriage is not seen to be 'equal' in their treatment of opposite sex couples by failing to extend civil partnerships. The poll found that more than six in ten people who supported legalising same sex marriage said they would support it 'only if couples of the opposite sex also get the right to enter into a civil partnership if they wish'.

Tim Loughton MP, who is backing the amendment to extend civil partnerships, said: "This comprehensive poll clearly shows there is strong cross support to address the inequality that would result from marriage being available to same sex couples if the Bill goes through. Far from being a 'wrecking measure' some of the strongest support for my amendment to extend civil partnerships comes from the biggest supporters of same sex marriage in the Labour and Lib Dem parties. If the Government think it is right to extend marriage to everyone then it has to be right to extend civil partnerships to everyone too. This can only be good for improving stability for many more of the near 3m opposite sex couples who currently choose to cohabit but are in no formally recognised relationship. Giving them the opportunity for the rights and responsibilities that go with civil partnerships has also to be a good thing for more stability for children which is enormously important at a time of rising family breakdown."

Read here

By Andy McSmith and Sarah Morrison, Independent

U-turn will anger both Tory backbenchers and campaigners who argue same-sex couples should be able to enter civil partnerships as an alternative to marriage

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, has abandoned his support for allowing heterosexual couples to enter into civil partnerships under pressure from the church hierarchy.
 
His climbdown will be welcomed by the Government as it looks to finally ensure the smooth passage of the equal marriage bill through the House of Commons this week, against Conservative backbench and Labour Catholic opposition.

But the Archbishop’s U-turn will anger both Tory backbenchers and campaigners who argue that in the name of equality, same-sex couples should be able to enter civil partnerships as an alternative to marriage.

The Archbishop had assured campaigner Peter Tatchell four weeks ago during a private meeting in Lambeth House that when the Bill goes before the House of Lords, he would personally vote for an amendment legalising civil partnerships for heterosexuals.

But a statement, endorsed by Welby, has been put out by the Church of England contradicting his privately expressed opinion. It said: “We agree with the Government’s view that the Bill should not be amended to introduce an option of civil partnerships for couples of the opposite sex” and that it “would introduce further confusion about the place of marriage in society.”

It added that the Church was “unconvinced” there was a “genuine and widespread public need” for the change.

Read here

From The Christian Institute

The Government has said it will consider whether to allow heterosexual couples to have a civil partnership rather than a marriage, at a cost of up to £4bn.

Equalities Minister Maria Miller hopes the promise of a review will buy off votes and give a smoother ride for the same-sex marriage Bill.

Allowing heterosexuals to have a civil partnership instead of a marriage would cost the country up to £4bn in public service pension rights alone.
 
An amendment allowing straight civil unions has been tabled to the same-sex marriage Bill, and the Government is keen to see the amendment fail.

The Government has offered an alternative amendment which would promise a review of civil partnerships five years after gay marriage is legalised.

The review will include a discussion of whether to scrap the whole civil partnership system.
 
Tory MP David Burrowes says the last minute revision is evidence that the Government hasn’t thought things through.

Redefining marriage has “profound consequences”, he said, which “require proper consideration and debate and this is not the way to do it”.

Read here

By Tim Ross, Telegraph

A review will consider whether all couples could choose civil partnerships over marriage, under Maria Miller's plans.

MPs are seeking to re-write the same-sex marriage Bill next week to open up civil partnerships to heterosexual couples for the first time.

After initially resisting such a move, ministers have now agreed to offer a review of whether couples should be given the choice to formalise their relationships through marriage or as civil partners, regardless of their sexuality.

Mrs Miller, the Equalities Minister and Culture Secretary, said the main purpose of the Bill was to “extend” marriage to same-sex couples.

“Questions have been raised about whether we should also extend civil partnerships to opposite-sex couples,” she said. “There are strong views on both sides of this debate, and we have listened to those views.

“We are therefore offering the House the opportunity to have a review of this area, rather than legislating now without the required evidence.”

The minister has proposed an amendment to the Bill offering a full review of civil partnerships, which would take place after gay marriage had become legal.

Read here

Caroline Davies and Nicholas Watt, Guardian

The government moved to derail attempts to extend civil partnerships to heterosexual couples in a last-ditch attempt to smooth the passage of a bill that would legalise same-sex marriage.

The coalition was accused of spoiling tactics after it responded to a call for heterosexual couples to be granted the same rights to enter into civil partnerships by announcing plans for a review that would be delayed for five years once the legislation is passed. The review could mean that civil partnerships are extended to all couples – or scrapped altogether.

David Cameron, who is bracing himself for another bumpy week after the "rebellion" over an EU referendum, has issued instructions to ministers to avoid any pitfalls next week.

The government stepped in amid fears that an amendment designed to give straight couples the right to civil partnerships, planned by Tim Loughton, the former children's minister, and two other Tory MPs, could disrupt the equal marriage bill, which is opposed by many Conservatives.

Peter Tatchell criticised No 10's move. The gay rights activist told Gay Star News: "The government's decision to oppose the legalisation of civil partnerships for heterosexual couples is hugely disappointing. It is a sad betrayal of the principle of equality. I hope a majority of MPs will rebel and next week vote for the parliamentary amendment to open up civil partnerships to opposite-sex couples."

Read here

by Daniel Martin, Mailonline

Ministers are considering allowing heterosexual couples to enter civil partnerships as part of a desperate attempt to avoid defeat on their gay marriage Bill.

In yet another U-turn to placate restive Tory backbenchers, the Government has promised a review into the future of civil partnerships five years after same-sex marriage becomes law.

It will look at whether the partnerships should be scrapped – or whether they should also be offered to a man and woman as an alternative to marriage.

The government has previously refused to countenance such a move, saying it would undermine the ‘gold standard’ status of marriage.

But Tory rebels – estimated at up to 150 – said the change did not go far enough.

They said they would still vote on Monday for the immediate extension of civil partnerships to heterosexual couples – which they said was vital if marriage was to be extended to same-sex couples.

Rebel leader Tim Loughton, a former children's minister, said he was confident of victory.

‘This amendment will not wash,’ he said. ‘If this Bill passes through Parliament as it stands, both marriage and civil partnerships will be available to same-sex couples, but opposite-sex couples would only have access to marriage.

‘This cannot be fair to the many couples in loving, stable relationships who for whatever reasons do not wish to go down the traditional marriage route, but who do want a public recognition of their commitment and protections under the law that civil partnerships rightly brought to gay couples.’ 

Read here

Read also:  If you're gay, you can have a civil partnership. But if you're straight, you can't. What's equal about that? by Tim Loughton, Conservative Home

By Kunal Dutta, Independent

One of the country's most senior Anglican bishops came a step closer to endorsing gay marriage after he called for the ban on same-sex partnership blessings to be lifted.

The outgoing Bishop of Liverpool, the Right Rev James Jones, said it was time for the church to consider the blessing of civil partnerships. "We've come to a time now that if we believe that civil partnerships are just then we can't withhold the blessing of God from that which we believe to be just," he said.

Although the remarks fell short of endorsing gay marriage they will nonetheless embolden campaigners. The Church of England has previously ruled out offering blessings to same-sex couples.

Last night Rev James said: "The Church believes there is a difference between marriage and civil partnership, between heterosexual union and same gender intimacy." He told ITV's News at Ten: "While maintaining that difference I personally hope that the Church will find a way to offering the blessing of God on the love of gay people in a civil partnership and in a committed stable relationship."

Read here

By Mary Ann Mueller, Virtueonline

On the surface it seems that the Church of England is determined to stand pat on the classic biblical understanding of marriage and not be hoodwinked by the sex-crazed culture. A 24-page document, issued this week by the Faith and Order Commission and published with the agreement of the House of Bishops, states "marriage is a creation ordinance, a gift of God in creation and a means of his grace. Marriage, defined as a faithful, committed, permanent and legally sanctioned relationship between a man and a woman, is central to the stability and health of human society. It continues to provide the best context for the raising of children."

Document GS Misc 1046 with a forward by "Justin Cantuar" (Justin Welby) and "Sentamu Ebor" (John Sentamu) – the archbishops of Canterbury and York – liberally use the English Standard Version, the Anglicized New Revised Standard Version, and the New International Version of the Scriptures to make the Church's case for marriage in five succinct arguments: Belief in God the Creator; Marriage & Society; Parenthood & Partnership; Freedom & Growth; and State & Church in Relation to Marriage.

First turning to the creation story in Genesis the CofE document points out that God created males and females. Christ reminded the Pharisees of that fact in Matthew when He said: "Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh," quoting the Genesis account of the creation of Eve to be Adam's helpmeet. This is the crux of Christian marriage that the Church of England is tentatively defending against the cultural onslaught in British society.

"Marriage is a gift of God in creation," the document declares citing the CofE's Common Worship Marriage Service. Meaning that marriage is more than a cultural development or simply a political or economic institution, that "it is an expression of the human nature which God has willed for us and which we share."

Read here

by Peter Saunders, CMF

In light of the motion on Human Sexuality within the Context of Christian Belief passed at General Synod 2012 Reform Ireland asks the following questions:

By Edward Malnick, Telegraph

The Church of England is facing fresh divisions over same-sex unions. Its leadership has come under attack from one of its own bishops over its refusal to bless homosexual couples.

The Bishop of Buckingham, the Rt Rev Dr Alan Wilson, said the Church’s ban on offering blessings for civil partnerships was being flouted by several parishes across Britain.

He said this was because some felt the blessings were “logical, natural and compassionate”.

His comments come amid tensions within the Church over its opposition to the Government’s plans to legalise same-sex marriage.

The newly enthroned Archbishop of Canterbury, the Most Rev Justin Welby, has underlined his opposition to the plans.

However, a survey by The Sunday Telegraph has found several churches openly offering blessings for gay couples in civil partnerships.

Dr Wilson said bishops were turning a blind eye to churches flouting the rules to avoid a confrontation between the new archbishop and traditionalist leaders in Africa and South America, who strongly oppose any moves to bless homosexual couples.

He said: “At the moment the policy is, 'Don’t ask, don’t tell’. We all know that in many dioceses there are one or two places these gay blessings have been happening. It’s hypocrisy, although it is understandable.

“Underlying the crisis there is believed to be a need for the archbishop to say to conservative elements in the Anglican Communion, 'Oh no, we don’t do that sort of thing. It’s only the naughty Americans do that.’”

Read here

By Andrew Carey, CEN

When they near retirement bishops are often tempted to go off-message. Bishop James Jones’s call for blessings of civil partnerships should be welcomed however, because it represents an outbreak of honesty in the House of Bishops.

The collegiality of the House often signals a lack of openness and honesty about where the Church of England really is on many of the debates of the day. Bishops who sign up to official statements and then do everything they can in their dioceses to undermine Church teaching are far more damaging than gadflies on the edge of orthodoxy.

Nevertheless, Bishop James Jones is wrong on the blessing of civil partnerships for two main reasons. Firstly, though the bishops may have discussed civil partnerships in closed session on many occasions, there has been no wider theological debate in the Church of England on how these relationships reflect church teaching on marriage. I have always maintained
that civil partnerships were a step to same-sex marriage and like many others I have been proved right.

Just as importantly, most of those in a civil partnership will convert that form of relationship to marriage the moment the Bill is enacted.

Civil Partnerships will continue to be entered into by a minority but activists will now be urging the Church of England to provide blessings for gay marriage. And in fact, unofficial blessings will undoubtedly take place. Furthermore, clergy in civil partnerships will themselves convert their licences to marriage. There will be many more facts on the ground for the Church of England to deal with.

This is where the trajectory of the debate on human sexuality is headed. It will leave us with a much more balkanised Church of England. The emphasis on reconciliation from our new Archbishop will not be enough to contain the dividing lines and the inevitable fragmentation of the Church of England will continue apace.

by John Bingham, Telegraph

One of the most senior bishops in the Church of England has called for it to offer blessing services for gay couples in civil partnerships.

The Rt Rev James Jones, the Bishop of Liverpool, broke ranks with the official Church line to call for it to consider offering weddings in all but name for same-sex couples.

Bishop Jones, like the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, comes from the evangelical wing of the church, which has been at the forefront of maintaining a traditional line on issues such as gay marriage.

But he said future historians would find it “extraordinary” that taking a strong line homosexuality is considered by many to be the “litmus test” of loyalty to true Christian teaching.

He questioned whether the current prohibition was a Christian approach, asking whether it was tenable for the Church to “deny the blessing of God to that which is just” any longer.

Liberals have long argued for the Established Church to offer religious blessings to couples forming civil partnerships but conservatives believe it would go against the teaching of the Bible Bishop Jones is by far the most senior figure to call for a radical rethink on the issue.

The Archbishop of Canterbury has signalled support for a softening of the Church’s line saying he would “prayerfully examine” his own position but has avoided being drawn into specifics.

Read here

by John Bingham, Telegraph

LAWS restricting civil partnerships to gay couples discriminate against heterosexuals, four straight couples are to argue in a landmark challenge at the European Court of Human Rights.

The couples, who do not want to have a traditional marriage, have all attempted to apply for civil partnerships at their local register office but been refused because they are not the same sex.

They say that is as discriminatory as denying gay couples the right to marry and are being supported by gay rights campaigners.

But supporters are hopeful that the case could trigger a change in law without ever having to reach court, after winning cross-party support among MPs.

They hope to add an amendment to the Government’s Same-Sex marriage Bill, currently going through the Commons, to allow heterosexual couples to opt for civil partnerships.

If successful it could transform family life in Britain, opening the way for thousands of couples to decide against marriage altogether.

They point to the Netherlands, where a decade after a change in the law, the majority of couples applying for the equivalent of civil partnerships are straight couples.

In France, the Pacte Civil de Solidarité, has also proved popular with young couples who shun the formality of marriage.

Thomas Freeman and Katherine Doyle, a couple from Islington, north London, who have been together for seven years, publicly challenged the law in 2010 when they went to their local register office to apply for a civil partnership but were refused.

Read here

By Sir Roger Gale

[,,,]  It is not surprising that, based upon the naked opportunism and political treachery of the second vote and the betrayal of a fundamental belief in the true meaning and value of marriage of the first, the Great British Public has begun to feel that the days of honour, vocation and commitment in politics are under terminal stress.

I happen to have been in the chair for much of the passage, through committee, of the Civil Partnerships Bill. It was clearly stated, at that time, that this was “not the thin end of the wedge” and that it would “not lead to gay marriage” and that it was a complete measure in itself designed to rectify in law some undeniable and unacceptable discriminations against same-sex couples. So much for undertakings. The Secretary of State with responsibility for Equality, Maria Miller, has stated, correctly, that one government cannot bind a future government. Without, however, some acceptance that undertakings clearly given by both sides of the House in a particular debate should be given a reasonable chance to stand the test of time I see no future for any such undertakings, given by any and all political parties, in relation to, say, High Speed Rail, the European Union , or the protection of religious faith in the context of same-sex marriage. With cynicism and expedience the order of the day we may be sure that if the Same-Sex Marriage bill proceeds through the Commons and the Lords to Royal Assent – and I can only hazard a guess at what Her Majesty might be thinking as she writes , in Norman French, “La Reine le veult” on that piece of legislation – it will only be a question of time before a referral to the European Court of Human Rights drives a coach and horses through Mr. Gove`s promises that “this will not affect the rights of teachers faith schools” and the Maria Miller`s much-vaunted “quadruple lock” in respect of marriage in church or chapel or mosque or temple or synagogue. I do not believe that those offered ”protections” will be worth the paper that they are written on.

Read here

by Peter Tatchell, Pink News

While legalising marriage equality is welcome and commendable, the government’s refusal to end discrimination against straight couples in civil partnership law is flawed and wrong. Opposite-sex couples are legally prohibited from having a civil partnership and for no rational reason David Cameron intends to keep it that way.

Despite proclaiming that the legalisation of same-sex civil marriage is driven by the principle of equality, the government’s forthcoming legislation will retain the inequality of the current legal ban on heterosexual civil partnerships.

This will mean that for the first time in British law gay couples will have legal privileges over heterosexual couples.

Read here

By Andrew Goddard, ACI

by George Conger, CEN

By John Martin, The Living Church

The Anglican Church in North America’s College of Bishops dedicated a week to meet together in Orlando, Florida under the leadership of the Most Rev. Robert Duncan, Archbishop and Primate, to worship, pray, take counsel together and do Bible study.