Paul asserts unequivocally that the Gospel he took to the Gentiles came to him direct from God, uninflected by other human views. As the Lords debate and back the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill we may consider how to discern the voices of truly ‘transformed people’ and whether, should the Bill eventually be carried into law or should it fall, the result will be leadership for the nation or just imposed conformity.

This week's news

The official view of the Church of England is against the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill, but a supportive view has been presented in the Press by the Bishop of Salisbury, allegedly with support from his superiors. It is said that the Bishops with seats in the Lords are being urged by the Church not to vote but it is expected that most will oppose. The key supporter of the Bill in the Lords is an openly gay Muslim. 

Outside the Lords, Stonewall and the Coalition for Marriage demonstrated on either side of the issue. Mixed in with the fervently held religious views and concerns for justice are considerations of electoral popularity and concerns about the constitutional position of the Church of England and House of Lords.

Reflection

It now seems self-evident that Paul took an inspired decision to go into Arabia (v.17) and Syria (v. 21). This was a transforming leadership moment when a Jewish renewal movement promised to become a world faith. It must have seemed controversial.

Both Lord Alli and the Bishop of Salisbury point to the changed perspectives of hindsight. Can we discern at this point whether gay marriage sanctioned by the Church represents a new but true development or one of those false interpretations to which Paul both earlier and later alludes (1.8;2.9)?

Paul has no hesitation in proclaiming the Gospel as revealed to him without conferring (1.16), something cited in the Free Church tradition and elsewhere as a precedent for acting on personal conscience.

What role should private conscience play in a political matter like this with alleged potential to affect family stability, disturb community relations, exacerbate attitudes to minorities, and intrude upon intricate relationships within the constitution of Church and State?

Who should decide, politicians, church and faith leaders or everyone by referendum?

Can we, without Paul’s unique experience, reliably distinguish divine words from the interpretation of deep personal conviction? A retired bishop claims that in assenting to such a Bill the Queen would break her oath to uphold God’s laws. Is such clarity and certainty, often associated with good leadership, justified?

What do we feel about initiatives born out of profound personal conviction in other contexts?
What about the demonstrations in Istanbul  touching a seam of deep-felt anti-government feeling (partly anti-Islamist in origin) and erupting into widespread violent disorder?

Prayer

You might decide to offer this prayer for private use, to avoid giving inadvertent offence through false assumptions.
Whether the Bill eventually proceeds, is amended or is finally defeated there will be many hurt, confused and bitterly disappointed people.

Lord God,
give us charity enough not to judge or blame,
a sense of justice broad enough to see that others’ convictions can be different,
and yet as deeply held as our own,
and sensitivity enough not to gloat in the face of those who have lost their cause
 should our views prevail.
Give us patience, because matters such as this cannot be dealt with quickly.
Give us courage, because some will express views we need to oppose.
Above all give us love enough to heal the hurts wherever they have been suffered.
Amen.

Questions

• Which is more important, keeping the peace within a particular community, be it a Church or a town or city, or persisting in a campaign to right a perceived injustice in the teeth of opposition?
• What part should personal conscience versus the rights of all, play in the decision making of councillors, MPs and government officials?
• What unpopular or controversial cause would you be prepared to defend against opposition?

Action

In discussing the possibility of two people of the same sex marrying, a lot has been said about marriage as the cornerstone of our society. Have a look at your own fundamental relationships, with spouse/partner, with parents/children, with close friends and extended family.

Are we remembering, in these stressful times, to look outward to society from our families as well as inward to our own needs and responsibilities?

Can we make a real effort to look outward from our security towards those who lack it? Or how can we gain from the strength and security of others?

Young People

• Opponents of the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill are concerned about consequent changes to include equal marriage in school sex and relationships education and the conscientious rights of dissenting teachers.
• What do you think about this?
• What might the impact be for teachers, for students?

Brenda Vance is a retired University Teacher of English and a URC Elder

Hypertext links to other websites are for the convenience of users only and do not constitute any endorsement or authorisation by ROOTS for Churches Ltd.