CIVIL PARTNERSHIPS

In response to requests for clarification of the Bishops' position, the Bishops of Carlisle and Penrith have prepared the following statement.

Introduction

The Civil Partnerships Act has now come into force;  and thinking how to respond has not been an easy matter for many Christians.  Along with other bishops we feel the need to give some reflections on it and some guidance to the clergy.

House of Bishops' Statement

In July the House of Bishops issued a pastoral statement on the subject.  The statement, both at the beginning and at the end, indicates that the Church of England's position on marriage is unchanged.  'For Christians, marriage  -  that is the lifelong union between a man and a woman – remains the proper context for sexual activity.'  (paragraph 27) Referring to the Book of Common Prayer, the statement notes that marriage is a gift of God, established in his creation.  Marriage is central to the stability and health of society and the effective upbringing of children.  Sexual intercourse is both seal and sacramental sign of the bonds of marriage (Genesis 2.24) and belongs, in God's order, only there.  This is the doctrine of marriage recognised not only by the Church of England, but also by the whole Church throughout its history.

Civil Partnerships do have positive features, which the Bishops' Statement seeks to recognise.  Where companionship and care flow from mutual commitment, this is to be warmly welcomed.  The scriptures speak in a positive way, for example, of the covenant which David and Jonathan made with each other.  However, to assume that such a relationship necessarily involves physical sexual activity is quite wrong and simply colludes with our over-sexualised society.  The Statement also recognises the important matter of justice in being able to share inheritance and tax benefits with someone with whom one has shared a common life, often for many years.

According to the Statement clergy are free to enter a partnership which is fully honourable in its morality.  However an important caution is raised about how entering into a partnership is likely to be perceived.  If the intention of the partnership is more like a “gay marriage” then it is clearly outside the patterns which the Church can rightly bless.  The Statement indicates that clergy and those seeking ordination are expected to ensure that their lives are in God's order in these matters.  Clergy must live according to the standards they are expected to teach.

Gay Marriage?

The course of events since the Bishops' Statement has called into question some of its wording and in particular the sentence:  “the Government has stated that it has no intention of introducing 'same-sex marriage'” (paragraph 8).  Even if this were the government's original intention, it no longer rings true.  In 2004 the Government overruled the House of Lords on an amendment which would have extended the scope of the Bill so that partnerships would be open, for example, to siblings.  The exclusion clauses for civil partnerships are the same as for marriage.  The dissolution provisions and some other features are also very marriage-like.

Further, all the publicity around the initial registered partnerships, together with the way those entering them have behaved, and statements on the Government's own web-site, show that in the minds of most people civil partnerships amount to gay marriage.

Christian Standards

It is always the responsibility of a Christian minister to teach the Christian faith carefully and from the Bible.  We hope and expect that clergy will reflect on the scriptures and expound the Church's teaching both publicly in sermons and more privately in marriage preparation.  In such a sexually permissive age it is entirely appropriate for ministers, in their teaching, to call to repentance those who might be living outside Christian sexual morality.  This is a marked feature of the New Testament writings.  At a time such as this, when Christian standards of sexual behaviour are widely disregarded, the Church must not lose its nerve.  We should care for people sensitively and lovingly, as we meet them, but also point them clearly to God's will and plan for a wholesome society.  Abstinence in sexual relationships is something required of us all in relationships other than marriage.  It is neither unreasonable nor uncompassionate.

In a similar way, the Church's position on same-sex relationships needs to be both publicly taught in sermons and privately shared.  Only in the light of Scriptural teaching can people order their own lives in holiness and for God.

While the call to repentance has always been fundamental to Christian discipleship, a wise priest would not expect those beginning the journey of faith to give assurances that their lives are already fully in accordance with Christian holiness.  It takes time for the gospel to have its outworking.  The Statement recognises this in saying that lay people should not be expected to give verbal assurance that their lives are holy.  However, in our judgment, when lay people are given positions of responsibility in the congregation, or, as Readers, are teaching the Faith, then more will be expected of them.  If this leads to an issue concerning the known conduct of a lay leader in their congregation, we suggest that the priest approaches one of the bishops.

Blessings?

The ambiguity of civil partnerships has implications for the blessing of such relationships.  What is being blessed?  Do we believe that this particular relationship has a morality which brings delight to God himself?  The Anglican Communion worldwide, along with our own House of Bishops' Statement, says the public services of blessing in church should not take place.  The Church cannot bless unions which are inconsistent with our teaching about marriage.

Then what about blessings in private?  The statement says:  'The clergy need to have regard to the teaching of the church on sexual morality, celibacy, and the positive value of committed friendships in the Christian tradition.  Where clergy are approached by people asking for prayer in relation to entering a civil partnership they should respond pastorally and sensitively in the light of the circumstances of each case'. Certainly such prayer needs to be pastoral and sensitive.  But if it is to have regard to the teaching of the church, the prayer must support what we know God can bless.  To bless in private what cannot be blessed in public is to create confusion.  We advise that prayers in private should be chosen so as to support what is good and pleasing to God.  Such prayers can certainly affirm companionship;  but it is not appropriate for them to seem to support or bless a sexual relationship that is contrary to the Church's teaching on marriage.

On such a significant moral issue, any attempt to change doctrine gradually, by acting unilaterally beyond or outside the Bishops' Statement is bound to create tension, confusion and anger among many Christians.

This is a sensitive time for the Church and our society.  Our concern is that clergy and congregations do not, consciously or unconsciously, collude with the steady erosion of the fundamental pattern of stability in society given by marriage and faithfulness within marriage.

+Graham Carlisle

+James Penrith

29.03.06