The Metropolitan His Grace, Archbishop Jerome Lloyd OSJV, wishes to draw the attention of all clergy and faithful to the following documents with regard to the Bill currently proposed to the UK Parliament to allow the redefinition of legal marriage to permit same-gender couples to marry in the UK.
The first is a clarification document issued by the Department for Culture, Media and Sport entitled (link) “Myths about Equal Marriage – setting out the truth“. The Metropolitan would draw attention to the fact that the document rather than clarifying, obfuscates its own “truth” by certain statements contained within it, namely:
“MYTH: The Government has no mandate to introduce same-sex marriage.
REALITY: The Conservative Party’s Contract for Equalities, published alongside its General Election Manifesto in 2010, set out clearly that we would consider the case for changing the law to allow civil partnerships to be called and classified as marriage…”
Metropolitan’s Observation: The “myth” is technically and actually true, the proposed Bill is not seeking that civil partnerships are reclassified as marriage but that civil marriage be redefined to include same-gender couples, leaving the present provision for civil partnerships in place and unchanged. There was no declared intention/commitment and thus no mandate to seek to redefine marriage in the Conservative Party’s “Contract for Equalities” published in 2010 alongside its General Election Manifesto.
“MYTH: There is no difference between civil partnership and marriage.
REALITY: There are some small legal differences between civil partnerships and marriage. But for many people there are important differences in the perception of and responsibilities associated with these separate institutions.”
Metropolitan’s Observation: This means that despite colloquial parlance, current civil partnered citizens technically are not “spouses” and the Government is making a clear distinction between civil partnership and civil marriage.
“MYTH: Not introducing civil partnerships for opposite-sex couples is unfair.
REALITY: This is not true. We believe in the institution of marriage and we do not believe that opposite-sex couples are disadvantaged by not being able to enter into civil partnerships. This Bill is designed to remove the unfairness of same-sex couples being excluded from marriage.”
Metropolitan’s Observation: Having previously asserted there IS a difference legally between civil partnerships and civil marriage, to deny heterosexuals the option of civil partnership is clearly unfair and disadvantages them from availing themselves of an option open to others in society. This IS discriminatory.
Whilst it is clear that the State may define civil marriage (and any other civil institution), despite seeking to correct perceived inequality the proposed Bill is poorly conceived legislation and perpetuates rather than corrects discrimination and actually proposes differences between same-gender and heterosexual marriage. For example the Bill proposes there is no common law presumption as to the parenthood of any children (Schedule 4, para. 2), adultery will not be a ground for divorce (Schedule 4, para. 3) and there is no consummation requirement (Schedule 4, para. 4); all these are integral aspects of civil marriage for heterosexuals.
The Metropolitan would draw to the attention of all clergy and faithful for further analysis, a Briefing published by the (Roman) Catholic Bishops Conference of England and Wales [today [29/01/2013] in response to the British Government’s recently published “Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill”. His Grace commends this briefing to all as a rational defence for the retention of traditional marriage within British law.
“We recognise, of course, that British law does not limit marriage to those who intend to have children; nor does it deny marriage to those who are infertile. We also recognise that many same sex couples raise children in loving and caring homes. Nevertheless, marriage has an identity that at its core is distinct from any other legally recognised relationship, no matter how much love or commitment may be involved in these other relationships. Marriage has, over the centuries, been the enduring public recognition of this commitment to provide a stable institution for the care and protection of children, and it has rightly been recognised as unique and worthy of legal protection for this reason. Marriage furthers the common good of society because it promotes a unique relationship within which children are conceived, born and reared, an institution that we believe benefits children.”
Below you will find an in-depth briefing document that has been sent to MPs and serves as a useful explanation of the key issues relating to the “Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill”.
The briefing covers the following:
THE MEANING OF MARRIAGE MATTERS
RETAINING MARRIAGE SOLELY FOR OPPOSITE SEX COUPLES IS NOT DISCRIMINATORY
THERE IS NO MANDATE FOR THIS CHANGE AND THE VIEWS OF MANY HAVE BEEN IGNORED
THE BILL PAVES THE WAY FOR YET MORE FUNDAMENTAL CHANGE
THE PROPOSED ‘SAFEGUARDS’ ARE INADEQUATE
THE WIDER CONSEQUENCES OF THE BILL HAVE NOT BEEN ADEQUATELY ADDRESSED
You can download the full briefing in PDF by using the link below.
In-depth Briefing 144.46 kB
This link is to the Bill published on Parliament’s website Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill 2012-13
The Metropolitan would highlight the following paragraph from the Briefing that reflects the thinking of the Equality and Diversity Policy of the Province of Europe and the church in the United Kingdom.
“Catholic teaching, whilst it does not condone same sex sexual activity, condemns unfair discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. We note that same sex couples already effectively enjoy equivalent legal rights as heterosexual couples by virtue of the Civil Partnership Act 2004. A Civil Partnership in essence entitles a same sex couple to equivalent legal benefits, advantages and rights as heterosexual couples. Therefore the changes proposed in the Bill are not needed in order to provide legal recognition to and protection for same sex relationships. Our opposition to same sex marriage is not based in discrimination or prejudice; it is based in a positive effort to ensure that the unique social values currently served by marriage carry on being served by that institution in the future.”
Overall, the Metropolitan suggests the Briefing provided by the (Roman) Catholic Bishops Conference of England and Wales adequately reflects the position of the Old Roman Catholic Church Latin Rite in Europe and commends its arguments to clergy and faithful in other dioceses of the Province of Europe for apologia in their own nation states where and when required. His Grace would draw attention again to the non-discriminatory tone and language of the document and the reflection thereby of the Province’s own regard to issues of Equality and Diversity. His Grace commends the matter at hand to the prayers of all clergy and faithful, particularly of the Archdiocese of the United Kingdom and to all who would seek an equitable and rational conclusion to the present debate concerning the meaning, nature and purpose of marriage.
His Grace the Metropolitan, Archbishop Jerome Lloyd OSJV conveyed the prayers and sympathies of the whole Province of Europe and the Old Roman Catholic Church Latin Rite to the community of St Severin’s Abbey and the Order of Port Royal in response to the announcement of the Abbot’s sudden death, His Excellency Dom Klaus Schlapps OPR on Sunday, 20th January. His Grace and Dom Klaus had known each other for some years and were close collaborators together in the defence of orthodox Old (Roman) Catholicism in the European continent and for more professionalism in the “independent” sacramental movement. Dom Klaus had also once acted in a private capacity as a “Visitor” for the Oratory of St John Vianney and was a supporter of its aims and objectives as an ecumenical fraternity of Sacred Ministers.
It was with Dom Klaus (himself a Bishop) that as Vicar General, Msgr Lloyd had looked into the possibility of the ORCCE entering into communion with the Utrecht Union as Dom Klaus had taken the Order of Port Royal into re-union. But not long after OPR had reunited with Utrecht the Union rejected utterly any orthodox position re the ordination of women as Sacred Ministers and the celebration of same-gender marriages forcing all member jurisdictions to “accept” the ministry of women and the validity of any type of marriage irrespective of their beliefs. The Order of Port Royal soon left the Utrecht Union together with the Old Catholic Church of British Columbia, the Old Catholic Church of Slovakia and the Polish National Catholic Church and a disaster was avoided for the ORCCE! Dom Klaus eventually united the Order of Port Royal with the Nordic Catholic Church in the new Union of Scranton with the Polish National Catholic Church.
The Metropolitan urges all Clergy of the Province to remember Dom Klaus and the Order of Port Royal in their prayers and at their Altars as expediently as possible.
- January 2017
- December 2016
- July 2016
- May 2016
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012