to feel despair at the gay marriage vote

The Reformed Jewish Rabbi, Julia Neuberger, is also a member of the House of Lords, but the only clergy admitted to that body by virtue of their denomination are Anglicans. So discriminatory that it might be an offence against something or other.

The Chief Rabbi, Lord Sacks, is in the Lords, but I can guess on which side he would vote.

Well actually, scrolling through the very long list on wiki there do not appear to be any other serving clergy etc either christian or not. 26 bishops and 1 ex archbishop all from the same church.
But, by jingo, I had never realised that there are so many of the so and sos.
Even an "ex heroin addict".
Good job that they don't all turn up. Otherwise it would cost the country a fortune in daily attendance payments and the palace of Westminster would sink into the Thames under their collective weight.

And he has been dead since 1998.
He became a Life Peer during a Labour government and had been a leading ight in social reform as well as CND.

Jo I had to Google him with a search term like "Methodist soapbox preacher" His name had slipped out of my brain.

Yes! He was the one in the back of my mind Nelliemoser. I knew there was a well known one.

The late Donald Soper was a Methdodist member of the house of Lords. He was still a Hyde Park corner soapbox speaker, well into his nineties.

He was an amazing guy.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Soper,_Baron_Soper

Well, I care very much, just as I do whenever one group of people is suffering discrimination. I look forward to the day when there is one form of legal contract for all couples, performed as a civil ceremony. If members of any church want to add on a religious ceremony, that is between them and the relevant church.
I get the impression that most posters are very much in favour of the law change, but of course there may be people with different views who are just choosing not to post.

I didn't "tell off" anyone.

The other (low?) churches don't have bishops do they? They must have some big knobs in the House of Lords though.

Like I say #pastcaring

Of course the C of E is a "state" church jo - no other churches (not even the anglicans in Wales etc) have bishops in the house of lords. Or the queen as head.
Do you not see that there will be a mismatch between legislation on gay marriage and on discrimination and the C of E stance. They will want to retain their registrar status but pick and choose who they marry. So one law for the C of E and another law for everyone else. It does not make a lot of sense does it?
They are already getting dispensation to ignore anti-discrimination law when it comes to women bishops. How far does it go?
Crazy if you tried to explain to an non-brit really.
Don't see anything wrong in the last line of my post. We are allowed to criticise the institutions of the land if we want and you are welcome to debate with us - but not to tell us off for the content of the debate.

I'm beginning to think I don't actually give a sod.

Oh right. So it hasn't got any further than registry office marriage? So why has the church got into this thread?

J08 "...ensuring that the legislation will not affect the Canon law of the Church of England or the Church in Wales, i.e., unless Canon law and the same-sex marriage legislation are changed in future, both churches will be legally barred from performing same-sex marriages"

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_in_the_United_Kingdom#Legislation

I think it should, and probably will eventually, be allowed in the church, with individual vicars being allowed to opt out if they wish. Nobody on earth can be in charge of someone else's soul.

That is such a lovely post anxiousgran.

As a good catholic and serious believer I should say, goodness no. But you see two of my dearest and most loyal friends are gay. They have been together for 30 plus years, they love one another and they work at their love all the time. I have been through 3 failed marriages, probably my fault but who knows. Who am I to judge? Who indeed are you? When people love each other and are willing to work at that love and make it whole, then let them have what they want. I admire the tenacity, the love, the effort.

What damage to society does it do if my friends are married? I'll tell you: a big fat ZERO. What damage does it do when people are forced to hide in the shadows and suffer misery and pain, rather a lot. What damage do we all do with our pathetic views and insufferable pontifications........ I leave you to think that one thourgh.

I understand everyone's point of view on gay marriage, but I would love to see
it being lawful. I have some gay friends who are much more in love than many heterosexual couples and would make much more of a commitment to each other.
I am a Christian and our priest is set against gay marriage after praying about it. I respect his views, but others pray and get the opposite 'answer'.
Not all married couples have children for whatever reason, and others marry late in life. Some gay couples are lucky enough to adopt, so nurturing children within the sanctity of marriage applies to them.
Still, it's not the end of the road for this debate, and arguments for and against are valid.
I don't think those who oppose it are bigots or homophobes, as has been suggested in some quarters.

Have they been forbidden? Or just individual vicars allowed to opt out if they wish.

Does anyone know what is actually planned? #buggeredifido

I don't follow the logic of forbidding the C of E and C o W to marry same sex couples. Lilygran?

Special treatment for the C of E, then. Is that what you're saying, lily? Time that was changed, I think. #disestablish

Presumably members of the C of E who can't get married in their own church could go off to another sympathetic church - Methodist or Unitarian for instance - and get legitimately married there. Divorced couples have been doing this for ages. Indeed, Princess Anne had her second marriage in the Church of Scotland to circumvent the C of E prohibition on remarriage of divorcées.

The problem for the CoE is that vicars etc also act as registrars and before the new legislation couldn't reasonably refuse parishioners who wanted to get married and who met the criteria agreed by church and state. Being a Christian isn't required though obviously when ministers of any religion are approached by couples, they mostly take the opportunity of a little proselytising. Up until the new law being passed, the couple marrying had to be one male, one female. The change in the law would have meant that the CoE, unlike any other religious denomination HAD to marry same sex couples. So the CoE and the Church in Wales have been forbidden from marrying same sex couples. Members of any other faith who can find a friendly minister of religion will be able to have a religious ceremony but members of the CoE won't. Let's hope the scrutiny committe and the Lords can sort it out.

Less speed.

Shoulkd have put "to be" in between "has" and "ratified". More haste lass speed.

I don't know a lot about the who-can-marry-people regulations, but I do know that DSIL2, who was ordained into the Anglican/Episcopalian Church (long story, no time for it right now) also has the same certificate as a registrar, to let him perform marriages. I believe that in England it is the place that is licensed, so if you are married anywhere that does not have a licence it has also ratified civilly, using the celebrant's signature as evidence.

However, in Scotland the place does not matter, it is the person who is licensed. That is how Madonna could marry in a remote castle, and my friends's son could marry in the Balmoral Hotel (the ceremony conducted by an old family friend who also happens to be licensed).