Tuesday, October 28, 2008

Did you know . . . ?

These are the current (2006) canonical requirements that the clergy in The Episcopal Church are obligated to follow prior to celebrating a marriage:

Sec. 2. Before solemnizing a marriage the Member of the Clergy shall have ascertained:
(a) That both parties have the right to contract a marriage according to the laws of the State.
(b) That both parties understand that Holy Matrimony is a physical and spiritual union of a man and a woman, entered into within the community of faith, by mutual consent of heart, mind, and will, and with intent that it be lifelong.


[Sec. 3.]
(d) The Member of the Clergy shall have required that the parties sign the following declaration:
(e) "We, A.B. and C.D., desiring to receive the blessing of Holy Matrimony in the Church, do solemnly declare that we hold marriage to be a lifelong union of husband and wife as it is set forth in the Book of Common Prayer.
(f) "We believe that the union of husband and wife, in heart, body, and mind, is intended by God for their mutual joy; for the help and comfort given one another in prosperity and adversity; and, when it is God's will, for the procreation of children and their nurture in the knowledge and love of the Lord.
(g) "And we do engage ourselves, so far as in us lies, to make our utmost effort to establish this relationship and to seek God's help thereto."

Sec. 4. It shall be within the discretion of any Member of the Clergy of this Church to decline to solemnize any marriage.

[Excerpts: pages 56 & 57 of the Constitution and Canons of the 2006 General Convention]

It is my understanding that all of TEC's California diocesan bishops have publicly opposed Prop 8. Do you suppose they will be inhibited for abandoning the doctrine, discipline and worship of the Church?


Alan Rogers said...

Since the church has only conducted marriages for about the past 500 years, I would like to suggest the perfect solution to this problem:
Get out of the marriage business altogether.

Anonymous said...

huh? what's that mean? why didn't you address the question? Are you at all outraged that doctrinally correct priests (according to the Episcopal church's canon laws) have been inhibited?

Anonymous said...

Fr. McCalister,
Frankly, I do not see how opposing a Constitutionally flawed proposition violates the Constitution and Canons of ECUSA. Now, if you were to question whether or not they will be inhibited based on evidence that they have performed marriages you feel are questionable, I might be able to follow your logic. However, opposition to Prop 8 does not equate with a violation of the Constitution and Canons of the Church as far as I can see. It simply is a group of bishops voicing their opinion/s on a prop that does not work under the Constitution of the United States of America. I guess, however, now that you're using the 1662 Book of Common Prayer, you probably couldn't care less about the US and its laws. How are things going, praying for the Queen of England?