Don't legalise gay marriage, Archbishop of York Dr John Sentamu warns David Cameron - Telegraph

Quote:

In an interview with The Daily Telegraph, Dr John Sentamu, the second most senior cleric in the Church of England, tells ministers they should not overrule the Bible and tradition by allowing same-sex marriage. The Government will open a consultation on the issue in March and the Prime Minister has indicated that he wants it to be a defining part of his premiership. But the Archbishop says it is not the role of the state to redefine marriage, threatening a new row between the Church and state just days after bishops in the House of Lords led a successful rebellion over plans to cap benefits. “Marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman,” says Dr Sentamu. “I don’t think it is the role of the state to define what marriage is. It is set in tradition and history and you can’t just [change it] overnight, no matter how powerful you are. “We’ve seen dictators do it in different contexts and I don’t want to redefine very clear social structures that have been in existence for a long time and then overnight the state believes it could go in a particular way. “It’s almost like somebody telling you that the Church, whose job is to worship God [will be] an arm of the Armed Forces. They must take arms and fight. You’re completely changing tradition.” It was widely assumed that the Church would have to accept same-sex marriage for fear of appearing out of touch. Dr Sentamu says the bishops in the House of Lords did not try to stop Labour introducing civil partnerships in 2004, giving homosexual couples improved legal rights. The Church tolerates clergy who are in civil relationships but expects them to be celibate. The Archbishop says the Church was also content with last year’s move to allow civil partnership ceremonies in places of worship, as long as it is voluntary and agreed by the governing body of any particular denomination. But Dr Sentamu is opposed to the homosexual civil marriage proposal, and says the Government would face a rebellion on any changes in legislation. His intervention may serve as a rallying cry for traditionalist Tories who oppose Mr Cameron’s plan. “The rebellion is going to come not only from the bishops,” he says. “You’re going to get it from across the benches and in the Commons. “If you genuinely would like the registration of civil partnerships to happen in a more general way, most people will say they can see the drift. But if you begin to call those 'marriage’, you’re trying to change the English language.” “That does not mean you diminish, condemn, criticise, patronise any same-sex relationships because that is not what the debate is about. “The Church has always stood out – Jesus actually was the odd man out. I’d rather stick with Jesus than be popular because it looks odd.” Dr Sentamu, in Jamaica to mark its 50 years of independence, also says the Church’s leadership needs to become less middle class.

Off-hand, the only dictators I can think of who were big on gay marriage were a few Roman emperors, and I really think we've worked through those issues.

I agree it would be dictatorial to oblige the Church to hold gay marriages, but as far as I can tell this hasn't been suggestes.

__________________
Standard disclaimer: the disgusting statements contained in this post are the views of the poster, and unless specified do not represent the views of the moderators or the site's owners.

As I am sure you understood, he meant dictators imposing strong social changes.

WRT 'gay marriage', he is using all kind of deceptive arguments and half measures ("the Church tolerates clergy who are in civil relationships but expects them to be celibate". WTF? They don't expect the same of their heterosexual vicars, do they? So what was the point of allowing the civil relationship to be formed? And indeed why accept gays and women in the first place?) - but the bottom line is that he transparently feels "uncomfortable" about "the whole gay thing".

As to civil gay marriage, I am not sure it is in the power of the Church to stop. The question comes down to who own the term "marriage" and who defines it. The Church may try but, basically, the IP on that one is long in the public domain.

However, just to make everybody happy, I would agree that the state should only dispense and recognise "civil unions" and let people choose to have a legally meaningless ceremony called marriage with whichever denomination they choose, or in Alain de Boton's 'atheist temples', for all the state would care.

The real purpose of religious weddings, for most of the unbelievers going through them, is to have some added pomp and pageantry for the occasion. It's not like they give two figs about religion or even God-as-in-the-Bible in their regular lives. The French state tried to make its civil marriages look somewhat pageant but it's still pretty dry compared to the circus of a Church wedding. And, in these times of low public budget, I'd say we should outsource the pageantry to the free markets. Let the consumers decide.

__________________
Unless otherwise specified, I am posting as a regular poster. When I will act as a mod, I'll make sure you're in no doubt.

I don't think the state is imposing a social change here. It's just acknowledging the existence of one ex post.

__________________
Standard disclaimer: the disgusting statements contained in this post are the views of the poster, and unless specified do not represent the views of the moderators or the site's owners.

Depends on the age tranche.

__________________
Unless otherwise specified, I am posting as a regular poster. When I will act as a mod, I'll make sure you're in no doubt.

Fuck him.

__________________
Give unto Caesar that what is Caesar's, and lie like hell to keep as much of the rest of your shit as you can.

"If you want something said ask a man...if you want something done, ask a woman" Margaret Thatcher

Churches have never been the bastions of progression.

__________________
“Some people like the Jews, and some do not. But no thoughtful man can deny the fact that they are, beyond any question, the most formidable and the most remarkable race which has appeared in the world.”

- Winston Churchill - Prime Minister of Great Britain