Same Sex Marriage Re-Visited.

[ProfessorDavey]

It's not that. The N.T. specifically mentions the criteria for Christians to marry. There are many ways to interpret many Scriptures, but I can;t see any other way than that for confessing Christians to marry, that marriage to be recognised by the church can only be man and woman. Again, that is not preventing secular marriage in any way.

Which raises an interesting question:

Does the church recognise couples married in a civil wedding - so would they consider a couple who marry in a register office to be a married couple?

[Rhiannon]

It's not that. The N.T. specifically mentions the criteria for Christians to marry. There are many ways to interpret many Scriptures, but I can;t see any other way than that for confessing Christians to marry, that marriage to be recognised by the church can only be man and woman. Again, that is not preventing secular marriage in any way.

Which is my point. You fetishise words in a book over the needs of real flesh and blood people. Tell me how that is different to the wedded-ness of Tories to benefit cuts that lead to misery and suicide.

You don't worship God, you worship a book. It's idolatry.

[Anchorman]

Which raises an interesting question:

Does the church recognise couples married in a civil wedding - so would they consider a couple who marry in a register office to be a married couple?

   



I can't speak for all denominations, but at the moment, for all matters relating to the practice and procedure of the Kirk, The CofS doesn't recognise gay marriage as Christian.

[Anchorman]

Which is my point. You fetishise words in a book over the needs of real flesh and blood people. Tell me how that is different to the wedded-ness of Tories to benefit cuts that lead to misery and suicide.

You don't worship God, you worship a book. It's idolatry.

Nope. I accept the God who gave us the book, and try to live by it.

[Sebastian Toe]

   



I can't speak for all denominations, but at the moment, for all matters relating to the practice and procedure of the Kirk, The CofS doesn't recognise gay marriage as Christian.

Would the church recognise, as married, a couple who have a marriage certificate gained from a civil wedding?

[Anchorman]

Would the church recognise, as married, a couple who have a marriage certificate gained from a civil wedding?

Yes.
However, the Kirk will not at present recognise a gay secular marriage as being compatable with the Christian faith.
That comes up - again - at the General Assembly next year. If, as I suspect it will, the Kirk changes its law, more congregations and members will leave.
Seven congregations have joined other denominations, five more independent. At least eight thousand mwembers have 'lifted their lines' and gone to other denominations so far.
At the present rate of decline, the Free Church which is increasing quite rapidly in both members and congregations, could eclipse the CofS in ten years time - which would be a pity.

[SteveH]

   



I can't speak for all denominations, but at the moment, for all matters relating to the practice and procedure of the Kirk, The CofS doesn't recognise gay marriage as Christian.

Gay marriage isn't Christian, because religious ceremonies are specifically excluded. Gay marriage can only be civil to be legally recognised. What, then, is the church whingeing about?

[jeremyp]

Nope. I accept the God who gave us the book, and try to live by it.

yes, but you don't live by it do you. There's quite a lot of stuff in that book that you claim God gave you that nobody in the modern world would try to live by.

[Nearly Sane]

Gay marriage isn't Christian, because religious ceremonies are specifically excluded. Gay marriage can only be civil to be legally recognised. What, then, is the church whingeing about?

Haven't seen anything from Anchorman opposing civil SSM, so not sure what you think he's supposed to justify here?

[Humph Warden Bennett]

Yes.
However, the Kirk will not at present recognise a gay secular marriage as being compatable with the Christian faith.
That comes up - again - at the General Assembly next year. If, as I suspect it will, the Kirk changes its law, more congregations and members will leave.
Seven congregations have joined other denominations, five more independent. At least eight thousand mwembers have 'lifted their lines' and gone to other denominations so far.
At the present rate of decline, the Free Church which is increasing quite rapidly in both members and congregations, could eclipse the CofS in ten years time - which would be a pity.

Reminds me of the DUP eclipsing the UUP, and Sinn Fein eclipsing the SDLP. :-(

[ProfessorDavey]

   



I can't speak for all denominations, but at the moment, for all matters relating to the practice and procedure of the Kirk, The CofS doesn't recognise gay marriage as Christian.

That isn't answering the question.

Does the church consider a couple (let's say they are heterosexual) as married if that marriage was a civil wedding?

[Anchorman]

Reminds me of the DUP eclipsing the UUP, and Sinn Fein eclipsing the SDLP. :-(

   





Not really; HWB.
The CofS has tried to be very inclusive as far as the spectrum of Christian thought goes; from very progressive liberal to very evangelical.
There have been tensions in thr Kirk for years over this, and other issuers.
It appears that the string is breaking and that that all-inclusive label may no longer apply in the near future.

[Anchorman]

That isn't answering the question.

Does the church consider a couple (let's say they are heterosexual) as married if that marriage was a civil wedding?

Yes.

[Rhiannon]

yes, but you don't live by it do you. There's quite a lot of stuff in that book that you claim God gave you that nobody in the modern world would try to live by.

Slavery?

[Rhiannon]

Nope. I accept the God who gave us the book, and try to live by it.

If you truly accept that god then you would accept that if he is supposed to be the god of love, and that judgement is his and his alone, then you have no right to say who can and cannot live with others and marry others, regardless of what else is in your book.

Supposing you are wrong. Supposing your god doesn't exist. The actions and beliefs of people like you are causing young people to take their lives, self harm and for others to live in self-hating misery. And supposing your god is real and he doesn't care about gay relationships, being the god of love and all? How do you think he would view those who worship the Biblical homophobia?

[ProfessorDavey]

Yes.

How about if that marriage involved divorced individuals and the church didn't recognise divorce (for example the RCC)?

[Spud]

If you truly accept that god then you would accept that if he is supposed to be the god of love, and that judgement is his and his alone, then you have no right to say who can and cannot live with others and marry others, regardless of what else is in your book.

As a minister, though, and along with most other Christian ministers, Anchorman is free to decline to marry a couple if that would be against his conscience. He would not say that they could not have a civil ceremony.

[Rhiannon]

As a minister, though, and along with most other Christian ministers, Anchorman is free to decline to marry a couple if that would be against his conscience. He would not say that they could not have a civil ceremony.

He would if they were Christian.

Incidentally, no minister in the CofE is permitted to conduct a same sex marriage even if their conscience tells them that it is ok to do so. Last I knew they could get in huge trouble for blessing civil marriages of gay couples too.

[Anchorman]

If you truly accept that god then you would accept that if he is supposed to be the god of love, and that judgement is his and his alone, then you have no right to say who can and cannot live with others and marry others, regardless of what else is in your book.

Supposing you are wrong. Supposing your god doesn't exist. The actions and beliefs of people like you are causing young people to take their lives, self harm and for others to live in self-hating misery. And supposing your god is real and he doesn't care about gay relationships, being the god of love and all? How do you think he would view those who worship the Biblical homophobia?

I believe other denominations are more liberal where accepting the Message is concerned.
They may accept same-sex Christian marriage.
Should those who claim Christ as Lord wish to have such a marriage, then they may find a home there.
It's a matter of interpretation.

I haaprn to go with Paul...sex outside the bond of male-female marriage is simply not on.
Such an activity is sin and can only be removed on repentence.

[Anchorman]

As a minister, though, and along with most other Christian ministers, Anchorman is free to decline to marry a couple if that would be against his conscience. He would not say that they could not have a civil ceremony.

Haud the bus! I'm a reader - still studying for the Ordained Local Ministry!
It'll be a while before I'm let loos as a registrar!

[Rhiannon]

I believe other denominations are more liberal where accepting the Message is concerned.
They may accept same-sex Christian marriage.
Should those who claim Christ as Lord wish to have such a marriage, then they may find a home there.
It's a matter of interpretation.

I haaprn to go with Paul...sex outside the bond of male-female marriage is simply not on.
Such an activity is sin and can only be removed on repentence.

You happen to go with a fallible human being? Really?

Let' space it, if what you do is tell Christians to go elsewhere your church deserves to die.

[Anchorman]

You happen to go with a fallible human being? Really?

Let' space it, if what you do is tell Christians to go elsewhere your church deserves to die.

   





I don't 'tell' anyone to do anything.
I simply give them my view of the situation, and willingly debate with them.
I have never laid down the law - in the pulpit or outside it.
But yes, there are lines that, as a result of my reading of Scripture, which the Chuch of Scotland has as its "subordinate standard" (daft kirk speak)
its' "Supreme rule for faith and life".
Should the Kirk stray much further than it already has on this, I won't have a problem when interpreting Kirk law in the light of Scripture - because I won;'t be there.

[jeremyp]

Slavery?

That's certainly on the list.

[Rhiannon]

That's certainly on the list.

If w are looking at the NT - which I believe we are - then that is probably the biggie. That and divorce.

[Spud]

He would if they were Christian.

Incidentally, no minister in the CofE is permitted to conduct a same sex marriage even if their conscience tells them that it is ok to do so. Last I knew they could get in huge trouble for blessing civil marriages of gay couples too.

I think he would tell them what he believes the bible teaches and leave it at that. I recently had some chats with a friend I've known for a long time who is gay, and I know he has liberal views but didn't talk about them. If he asked my view I would tell him but wouldn't expect him to share my view. The problem I have is when people are expected to promote promiscuity, homosexuality, gambling, alcohol or smoking in the work place. I am not responsible for someone taking offense if I decline to endorse a particular lifestyle.