In not understanding why churches are anti gay marriage?

[BlingLoving]

I don't agree with, but do understand, why churches will refuse to sanctify gay marriage. The Church ultimately decides what's right for its individual practitioners.

But I don't understand why they feel gay marriage must not happen full stop and why it supposedly undermines heterosexual marriage? The catholic church does not agree with pre-marital sex but it isn't out there trying to stop the rest of us.

I genuinely would like to understand why some religious groups think same sex marriage harms their heterosexual relationships. If simply makes no sense to me.

some churches don't recognise mixed faith Christian relationships and refuse to perform the marriage. Eg High Anglican and Catholic partners.

So if that couple divorce, their respective churches never recognised the marriage anyway - therefore, provided their partner is of their own faith, can then get remarried in their own church.

In the uk you can be married by a registrar ( civil non relegious marriage - this is what gay couples have now)

Julesnobrain - actually, gay couples in the UK don't have that now. The government propose to legalise non religious civil marriage for gay couples

The new legislation will not permit Churches to marry gay couples even if they wanted to (and it's worth noting that some Christian groups are in favour of marrying gay couples)

I think there's a some ignorance on this thread - could I just clear a couple of things up?

First of all, "the Church" holds many opinions, as some posters have pointed out. In my liberal CofE church, for example, we have for some years, had services of blessing for same sex couples who have tied the knot via civil partnership. As the law stands, my church, if they wanted to do so, are not allowed to legally marry that same couple.

If the law was changed to allow same sex marriage (as opposed to civil partnership), individual churches would still not be forced to marry a gay couple, as they would still have to jump through the hoops that current hetero couples do. Any couple who wishes to be married in a particular church, have to prove some connection with that church (baptised there, live in the parish, family links etc) and prove faithful intent (i.e. genuinely want a spiritual element to their wedding, rather than just think it would look nice in photos). It simply isn't the case that any couple can walk up to any church and say "we'll get married here, shall we?". Doesn't work like that.

Bowerbird. I think everyone knows that. But there are religious gay people and there are gay people that have links to a church. So the law is currently stopping them from being wed there. And the law keeps being controlled by powerful members of the cofe and catholic church who seem to think they represent all religious people.

bowerbird - I'm not sure the faithful intent question is legal. As the established Church, the CofE has a legal duty to care for all souls - whatever their faith (or none). It's not a private club. Your church may be getting away with faithful intent because no-one has objected so far, but I'm not sure it's sustainable. Would be interesting to hear from someone who knows about canon law on this issue...

Bowerbird, I think you only need the connection if you want to marry outside your parish; if you are a parishioner, you have the right to marry in your parish church, assuming you're not divorced with a living ex-partner (though of course some vicars will marry people in those circumstances.

Jesus also said that marriage of a widow wasn't legitimate. That one never seems to have been a problem in any church, because otherwise you'd have loads of non-married women running around asking to earn a living and other dangerous stuff.

Most rectors have complete discretion as to who they marry. Most, I think, (though my direct experience is limited to two churches) try to be generous about this. Most would like to say "yes", but they are able to say no.

Joan you're right of course, you only need the connection if you live outside your parish. My frame of reference is a central urban church where few of the parishioners actually live in the parish.

Edam, that's not the case. The CofE does not have a legal duty to care for "all souls -whatever their faith (or none)".

Joan, you could well be right about the widows...

Bower, do you mean the 'faithful intent' qualification is only applied to non-parishioners?

bower, indeed it does, because it's the established church and has a particular place in society and the law - it's not just a voluntary organisation that looks after its own members. It has a legal duty to everyone. If the CofE wants to become a private club, it has to disestablish. On reflection I seem to recall the duty to marry people may only apply to those who are baptised, and it only applies to one's own parish - you can't rock up at any CofE church and expect to be married there.

Does anyone here actually know any Christians? I am an Anglican and fully support and expect to see within my lifetime gay marriage in my church. Stick that in your pipe and smoke it.

Reform Jews are also leading the campaign to conduct gay marriage, they want to be able to bless it within their religion, too.

churches should not be forced to perform them. It should be optional.

I thought this was the primary objection, the main one cited repeatedly, the Anglicans & Catholics (etc.) are claiming they will be forced in future to conduct gay marriage.

Just like now they are forced to conduct Jewish ceremonies, and to let Muslims marry Quakers on church premises in ceremonies conducted by church clergy. And divorced people, they have the right to get married in a Catholic or Anglican church, too.

Oh, no, wait, maybe they aren't actually compelled to do all that.

Respect to the Reform Jews as well as the Quakers, then.

Thank you FairPhyllis. I'm another Anglican who supports gay marriage in my church.

bowerbird I'm pretty sure that people have the legal right to be married in their parish church, or any church where one of them is on the electoral role. That was certainly te law 20 or so years back, and I haven't heard about it having been changed recently. If you want to marry in a church outside of that, the rector can make you jump through any hoops he likes, but within a parish they don't have options to refuse.

But they can refuse if someone has a living divorced ex - a similar law giving an exemption for same-sex marriage could be added.

sleepy you might be right catholic marriages. I'm UK (non catholic and dh italian catholic). We were advised to have our legal wedding in UK and catholic church blessing in Italy for regulatory reasons. The legal part they were not very interested in but suggested we do it UK because of easier admin and stuff.

MuminScotland Mea culpa. You are right. I was wrong about the rights of parishioners. As I stated before, my church is an urban parish where very few of the congregation or people on the electoral roll actually live in the parish. Hence my being misinformed. Apologies to all.

Here's from the Church of England website:

Anyone who is resident in England has a legal right to marry in his or her parish church irrespective of his or her religious affiliation and the minister of the parish (the rector, vicar or priest in charge) is under a legal duty to conduct the marriage.2 The existence of this right is recognised by the Marriage Act 1949 (which governs the procedure for all marriages in England and Wales).

But I am still in favour of gay marriage!

Oh me too, very much so. I certainly think all churches should keep their beaks out of what is allowed in terms of civil marriage - they don't have the copyright on the whole concept of marriage, whatever they like to think. And I hope that the law will allow for each denomination/religion to decide whether it is going to permit them within their own church/whatever.

But I don't think any religion should be forced to carry out weddings of same-sex couples if they don't believe it is right, just that they should not prevent it from happening outside their church. The tricky bit to word would be what happens if a denomination doesn't allow it, but one of their ministers goes ahead and does one - woul the law have anything to say either way on that one? Personally, I'd say it should be a matter of "church discipline" where the law leaves it to that denomination to decide if its a problem.

anglican.

bit concerned about this. don't want to go against biblical teaching, man and wife, that sort of thing.

but

we don't stone witches, nor are we obliged to marry our brothers in law if a husband dies, so we don't keep all the instructions given in the bible.

and we know God is the creator. all people are his creation, whatever their orientation. and Jesus told us to 'love one another'.

so i think we will see gay marriage, in church.

i think the protests are about religions saying to government 'you're not the boss of me!' and i do agree with them in a way, but i don't agree with hurting people.

Lovebunny

Wasn't the reform based on the fact that Henry the eighth married his brother's wife? (Among other things- contrary to popular belief it wasnt all about annulment) So no Anglican would expect you to marry your deceased husband's brother?

Just saying. I may be wrong though.

Anyway, am pro gay marriage, religious or civil.

xdivax - he wasn't expected to marry her to keep to levirate marriage rules!

bowerbird - glad we've got that cleared up! Love the use of mea culpa, v. appropriate on this thread. I think the CofE has an equal duty to perform funerals, IIRC, not sure whether the same applies to baptisms.

Yes lovebunny that's what I'm saying, no one expects you to marry your in law! Besides when he married Catherine he was RC. Hence my pp about the reform!

I'm a lesbian who would like to get civilly married. At the moment that is NOT an option - the Govt is intending to make civil marriage open to all, but churches will not be allowed to marry gay couples even if they want to (and some do).

For the record, I've met loads of Christians, including clergy, who support gay marriage. I don't think we should lose sight of how much this is a struggle within faith groups as well as between faith groups and the secular world.

The only rational solution, surely, is to disestablish the CoE and make all marriage a secular contract, with individuals able to add the religious blessing of their choosing if they so wish. There would then be full equality in the eyes of the law, no compulsion on churches to participate, and also legal equality between different faith groups.

Yabu In the bible a marriage is between a man and woman, Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve, you cannot change the bible like you cannt change any other religious texts such as the Koran and Torah. That is the way it is in the church, synagogue and Mosque

The Bible has been edited several times and Gospels removed. As for Adam and Eve - well what about Lilith? Surely Adam couldn't have married Eve because Lilith was still alive?

Sorry I forgot, Adam and Eve were not married. And they had only two sons. So.................... where did the rest of the population come from?