IT HAS been strange
monitoring the gay-marriage debate. First, until the Department of
Culture, Media and Sport gave more details of the proposed
legislation on Tuesday, discussion of the subject was formless and
largely unintelligent. It was not helped by a narrowly defined
online government questionnaire, and a contrary petition with
off-the-peg opinions. Second, throughout, the Church of England has
been cited in opposition to the reforms. We are not aware of any
reliable opinion polls, but it is reasonable to suppose that there
is a range of views among churchgoers, as among the general
population.
The chief problem for the
C of E is not so much the Government's new understanding of
marriage as its understanding of establishment. Writing in The
Daily Telegraph on Saturday, the Culture Secretary, Maria
Miller, said: "I will never bring in a law that would impinge, in
any way, on the Church's power to decide who it marries and who it
does not." But the Church does not have the power to decide. It is
the right of any couple, provided neither has a living spouse, to
marry in their parish church. If the new legislation passes,
therefore, it will introduce a new discrimination, and cede power
to the Church that it did not have before. Perhaps some might
approve of this new autonomy, but it has a significant implication
for establishment, and at a personal, not an abstruse
constitutional, level.
Marriage is defined
neither by the state nor the Church. Couples commit themselves to
each other in ways that seem best to them, and, if it conforms to
the general understanding of marriage, that is what they call it.
The state recognises this aggregate definition and legalises
accordingly. Hence the latest move to recognise the desire of many
same-sex couples to call their union "marriage".
In a charged atmosphere
of reform, the simple restating of the present blanket ban could
not be a neutral act, especially when wrapped in the Government's
protectionist language, designed, we presume, with its own
back-benchers in mind. However mollifying various sections of the
Church have been in the past, Tuesday thus established the C of E
as a gay-unfriendly institution: the Church that says "No."
Religion has been a key part of marriage for many, but this is not
a given. The Church has the privilege of blessing the unions that
people bring to it. Since the blessing it offers or withholds is
God's, it needs to be sure that its interpretation is sound and
explicable. Many believe that it is not. The way of testing this in
the C of E is through the amending of canons - a long and, on such
a divisive issue, tortuous process. The Government proposes to
leave Churches to make up their own minds. In the mean time, there
are the twin concerns of public perception and mission. A greater
enthusiasm for the blessing of same-sex partnerships in church
would be one effective way of countering the negative impression
given this week.