Tweet
What happens when Church of England bishops hold unelected seats in the House of Lords? Not surprisingly, they get criticized when they are seen to be protecting the interests of the Church over the interests of the country. This is what has happened during the ongoing debate over the Equality Bill. The Equality Bill is intended “to harmonise discrimination law, and to strengthen the law to support progress on equality.”
Recently in the Equality Bill debates, the bishops fought for and won their special right to retain the right to legally discriminate against gay employees. This has won their unelected presence in the House of Lords a fresh round of criticism, with words like “privileged” and “unaccountable” being frequently used.
Happily, several senior bishops are making an effort at compromise (and perhaps distract from the question of the wisdom of their unelected presence in the House of Lords).
Senior Church of England bishops in the House of Lords say that they will now support an amendment to the Equality Bill to lift the ban on civil partnership ceremonies taking place on religious premises.The Bill, which the Archbishop of York and other bishops recently helped to weaken when it last came to the Lords, in order to preserve their ability to discriminate in employing auxiliary staff, returns to parliament for consideration in March 2010.
The Equality Bill amendment would have the effect of removing the legislative prohibition on blessings of lesbian and gay couples. It would open the door to the registration of civil partnerships in churches, synagogues, mosques and all other religious premises – as a matter of choice rather than compulsion.
Question to Blend readers: Aren’t the only differences between marriages and civil partnerships the word “marriage” and the ability to get a union solumnized by clergy? If this is so and the bishops’ amendment is adopted, what could be the rationale for continued segregation of gay and lesbian couples into the institution of civil partnerships? One thing is certain, the debate should be interesting. Prepare for another Papal eruption and subsequent genuflecting by the “Protestant” government.
This would in effect end any remaining distinction between civil partnerships and marriage and increase the pressure on the established Church to take a more liberal line on same-sex relationships. It would also deepen the schism in the Anglican Communion over gay blessings and gay ordination. [snip]The Government has yet to decide whether to back the amendment. It wants to avoid another confrontation with church leaders, having had to back down recently over the employment of gay staff in religious organisations after an intervention by the Pope.
Stonewall, the gay rights campaign group, said: “We know this is a matter of importance to only a small number of people, but it is important nonetheless. And the amendment makes clear that the celebration of civil partnerships is permissible, not mandatory.”
The Equalities Office said that the Government was still considering the matter: “Some faith organisations are calling for the right to hold civil ceremonies in religious places, so it’s right that we discuss this with them. This is an important issue that needs to be fully explored and we need to carefully consider the implications and hear views from all perspectives.”
