So it’s not that the CoE is specifically banned from performing SSM: it’s that individual officers of any religion recognized as such by England and Wales are reminded to follow their organization’s guidelines and being told they’re legally obligated to do so (i.e., it won’t be treated as an internal church matter, whether the “rebel” is CoE, RCC or Sikh).
IOW, if the CoE ever decides to start performing SSM, they can.
Hooray! My husband and I are now married in the countries each of us was raised in.
We no longer 't magically change status back to “single” on the way to visit home.
Good for gay people. They deserve all the same rights that everyone else has.
No, they (and the Church of Wales) are specifically banned from performing SSM. The law would need to change for them to start doing so. It’s an ‘established church’ thing. Other churches can perform SSM if they wish.
But not this law, but the one which regulates “marriage inside the CoE”. Which in the end is the same as for the other churches, what’s different is who sets those regulations.
Yes, this law. Made by Parliament, not the CofE. It’s had quite a lot of controversy as it explicitly isn’t the same as for other churches. It’s the politicians, not the clergy, who are making up these rules (albeit so they could push the equal marriage bill through Parliament without a huge scrap).
According to the CofE website, the General Synod has legislative powers including the power to amend Acts of Parliament concerning the church. Which means that, if and when the Church decides to perform same-sex marriages, its own governing body is able to make the necessary amendments. In other words, the CofE is forbidden to perform same-sex marriages until it opts in, just like other denominations. It’s just a different opt-in procedure because it’s the established church.
The website says that it would be necessary for both houses of Parliament to approve any change:
“All Synod Measures require parliamentary consent. The usual process of parliamentary scrutiny for legislation submitted by the Church is that it goes first to the Ecclesiastical Committee and then has a single debate in each House before the Measure goes for Royal Assent. As the General Synod’s devolved legislative powers includes the ability to amend Westminster legislation it would not require separate, additional legislation on the part of Parliament to enact any change to the Church’s practice on marriage.”
The reason why it wouldn’t require separate legislation seems to be that they’re choosing not to call a Synod Measure “legislation on the part of Parliament” even though it has to be passed by both houses of Parliament and given royal assent in order to have effect.
Right, but it only needs a single vote in each House, not the full parliamentary procedure. And the procedure for Church Measures is part of the standard governance of the church anyway, so it’s not as if some unusual new requirement is being imposed.
I remember your other thread about this, and am pleased that the situation has resolved itself so dramatically in such a relatively short period of time.
Me too—sometimes whining to the universe gets results.
Good for the UK, and God Save the Queen (HM, and all the other untitled ones)!
If I go buy a lottery ticket, I don’t suppose you would be willing to whine to the universe on my behalf, would you?