Guardian: Anglican Bishops Can't Do Damned Thing about Clergys' Same-Sex Marriage

The Guardian

by Giles Faser

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2014/mar/11/gay-clergy-marriage-anglican-communion

Gay clergy marriages: the final chapter of the Anglican Communion fiction

Despite the inevitable toy throwing – from bishops and overseas churches – there is little anyone can do about them            

 

Gay marriage becomes a legal reality in the UK on 29 March. Photograph: Facundo Arrizabalaga/EPA

Well, you could knock me down with a feather duster. The Pope is looking into the subject of gay marriage. According to Cardinal Timothy Dolan, the Holy Father said to him that "rather than quickly condemn them, let's just ask the questions as to why that has appealed to certain people". OK, it's hardly a new Vatican policy. But language matters. And in the week of the first anniversary of Francis's appointment as pope, it is worth recognising how far the language has come.


But things are going to change even faster for the Church of England over the next few weeks. With gay marriage becoming a legal reality on 29 March, it is certain that a number of clergy will be looking to get hitched, in direct defiance of the wishes of their bishops who have vaguely warned of disciplinary action if they do. But the truth is that the bishops can actually do very little about it. The following is slightly nerdish stuff, but for the likes of north London vicar Reverend Andrew Cain, now preparing for his nuptials, it is crucial. Writing on my Facebook page last night, the Bishop of Buckingham explained the clergy discipline measure:

"Its Section 7 lays down that matters of doctrine and worship are not justiciable under the measure, but must be tried under the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction Measure 1963. Insomniacs may remember that around 10 years ago there was a proposal to have a Clergy Discipline Measure type measure for doctrine and worship cases but it failed. The legal trail leads from here to section 39 of the EJM63. The maximum penalty it lays down for a first offence is a rude letter telling you not to do it again – which hopefully people getting married won't."

Of course, the bishops could pretend that clergy getting married is not a matter of doctrine, but this would be a bit of a problem given that they have been going round telling everyone that it is.


Other ecclesiastical nerds could point to the 32nd of the 39 articles – historically, the defining doctrines of the Church of England and beloved by conservatives: "Bishops, Priests, and Deacons are not commanded by God's laws either to vow the estate of single life or to abstain from marriage. Therefore it is lawful also for them, as for all other Christian men, to marry at their own discretion, as they shall judge the same to serve better to godliness." Of course, they didn't have gay marriage in mind when they wrote this. But meaning is not determined by authorial intent.


All this means that the bishops won't be able to do a damn thing about their clergy having same-sex marriages. As the bishop of Buckingham explained: "If a member of the clergy wants to marry, I may like or not like the match, but I have no legal power to stop them marrying." And when this happens, the toys will be thrown from many a Nigerian church pram. The fiction that is the Anglican Communion will be over and we can go back to being the Church of England, rather than the local arm of the empire at prayer. And thank God for that.

Aquila Report: More Blogs on Homoerotic Unions

http://theaquilareport.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=7260%3Amore-blog-articles-on-same-sex-marriage-with-different-perspectives&catid=79%3Acommentary&Itemid=137

More Blog Articles on Same Sex Marriage, with different perspectives

Opinion and Commentary

Written by Staff

Saturday, 12 May 2012 00:00

Clearly this topic is the hottest around, in many different circles, and certainly among evangelical Christians. There was some talk it was the hottest topic in the history of Twitter. We are providing seven more links to the best of the rest out there. In case you missed it, here is the initial offering of eight articles on the topic. Most of the names on the list below are familiar to our readers, but many may not recognize Matt Tuininga. Matt served as The Aquila Report News Editor's (Don Clements) summer preaching intern a few years ago while a student at Westminster West. He is now a PhD candidate at Emory University in Atlanta. Here is a tease from his blog article on the topic: In the three years I have spent at a major American research university, pursuing my PhD in the field of Ethics and Society (as a concentration of Religion), there is no issue on which I have seen more browbeating, shameless slander, and manipulative argument than on the issue of homosexuality. Students who are concerned about the moral ramifications of theological or political approval of homosexuality, whether undergraduates, seminarians, or PhD Candidates like myself are literally terrified to offer careful, reasoned arguments on the subject, because they know they will not be heard. They will be described as bigots, charged with having an anti-gay agenda, or simply receive the silent treatment of utter astonishment. To argue against the morality of same-sex relationships at a research campus today is for many academics akin to arguing that we should be racist. There, I said it. The academy is not capable of having an honest, substantive conversation about the morality and justice of homosexuality. The issue is discussed, but only superficially and sentimentally. Matt Tuininga Kelly Boggs, SBC Tim Chaffey, Answers in Genesis Michael Horton (Very controversial) Brendan O'Neil (UK) Ed Stetzer Cal Thomas

Cardinal Timothy Dolan Confronts Obama's Views on Homoerotic Unions

          Cardinal Timothy Dolan, the Chief of Chiefs in the Roman communion, responded quickly to Obama’s declaration supporting homoerotic unions.  In doing preliminary research, it appears that—nationwide—many Roman bishops are doing the same thing.   The Roman communion is responding more clearly and with defintion than Western Anglicans.  Here’s an update from the “Catholic News Agency.”

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/cardinal-dolan-obamas-gay-marriage-support-undermines-society/

Cardinal Timothy Dolan

Cardinal Dolan: Obama's 'gay marriage' support undermines society 

By Michelle Bauman 

Washington D.C., May 10, 2012 / 02:06 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- Cardinal Timothy M. Dolan is charging President Barack Obama with undermining the “very cornerstone of society” by supporting “gay marriage.”

Cardinal Dolan, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, described the president’s endorsement as “deeply saddening.”

The bishops “cannot be silent in the face of words or actions that would undermine the institution of marriage, the very cornerstone of our society,” he said in a May 9 statement. “The people of this country, especially our children, deserve better.”

Cardinal Dolan said that the announcement was “not surprising” based on the Obama administration’s previous actions, which “erode or ignore the unique meaning of marriage.”

He called for prayer and efforts to “promote and protect marriage” in order to “serve the true good of all persons.”

In an unprecedented move, Obama announced his support for “same-sex marriage” in a May 9 interview with ABC News' Robin Roberts.

“I’ve just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same-sex couples should be able to get married,” he said.

The announcement came just days after U.S. Vice President Joe Biden told NBC's David Gregory that he is “absolutely comfortable” with the idea of homosexual couples marrying.

Previously, Obama had stopped short of endorsing “gay marriage,” saying instead that he opposes discrimination against gay individuals but that his views on the question of marriage were “evolving.”

However, his actions as president have won the praise of gay advocacy groups.

His administration announced in Feb. 2011 that it would not uphold the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman for federal purposes.

He also signed a law repealing the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, allowing homosexuals to serve openly in the military.

Obama’s latest statement places him in firm disagreement with presumptive GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney, who has signed a pledge to uphold marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

Romney was quick to voice his opposition to Obama’s stance.

"I have the same view on marriage that I had when I was governor and that I’ve expressed many times,” he said at a May 9 campaign event in Oklahoma. “I believe marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman.”

He explained that states can “make decisions with regards to domestic partnership benefits, such as hospital visitation rights,” but “marriage itself is a relationship between a man and a woman.”

Acknowledging that the issue is “a very tender and sensitive” one about which “other people have differing views,” Romney reiterated his own conviction, which he has held “since running for office.”

Several political commentators have suggested that Obama’s support for “gay marriage” does not reflect the views of the American people and could have a significant political impact in the November 6, 2012 election.

“Marriage was created long before any government came into existence,” said Catholic Advocate president Matt Smith.

He warned that if Obama’s advocacy for same-sex “marriage” succeeds, “Catholic institutions could be forced once again to violate our beliefs.”

“Many faithful Catholics were fooled by clever political rhetoric in 2008,” added Smith. “This year, the anti-Catholic record of the Obama administration should inform their vote.”

So far, 30 states have passed constitutional amendments banning “gay marriage,” including North Carolina, where voters approved such a measure by an overwhelming margin on May 8.

Tony Perkins, president of the D.C.-based Family Research Council, pointed to the recent North Carolina vote as evidence that “redefining marriage remains outside the mainstream of American politics, especially in the critical battleground states and among minority voters.”

He observed that the North Carolina amendment received over 60 percent of the vote in majority-black counties.

A Pew Research Center survey in April 2012 found that only 39 percent of African Americans are in favor of “gay marriage.”

Perkins noted that 10 of 16 key battleground states have passed amendments to protect marriage. He said that Obama’s announcement “ensures that marriage will again be a major issue in the presidential election.”

Anglican Church of Ireland Flubbing Around on Homoerotica

         Never has so much noise been made by so few with so little doctrine resulting in such great fear!  The Anglican Church of Ireland finds itself in the cultural morass!  What cowardice!  Get on with it!  Be kind, courageous, loving, but firm, direct and a "light in the cultural and moral darkness!"  What is the problem here with the leaders? 

         The one true, historic, catholic, biblical, reformed, confessional, creedal, invisible, visible, elect, justified, adopted and unvanquishable Church of Jesus Christ is watching!  So is the Triune God watching! 

          David Virtue carries an article at: http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=15972

Gay clergy could face witch-hunt if Church of Ireland synod backs motions, say campaigners

By Liam Clarke
THE BELFAST TELEGRAPH
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/
May 10, 2012

A controversial motion to be put to the Church of Ireland's General Synod stating that only sex within marriage is "normative" could lead to a "witch-hunt" against gay clergy, campaigners have said.

More than 20 gay, lesbian and bisexual Anglicans have signed a letter published in today's Belfast Telegraph objecting to Resolution 8A, which states that marriage can only occur between one man and one woman for the "procreation and nurture of children". It adds that monogamous marriage is the "only normative context for sexual relationships".

Signatories argue that, if passed, Church members in same-sex relationships will be stigmatised.

The term "normative" - meaning right or ideal - is used in three motions on 'Human Sexuality in the Context of Christian Belief'.

They are tabled for discussion at the General Synod, which is effectively the Church's annual general meeting, in Dublin tomorrow.

The motions are all proposed by Archbishop of Dublin Michael Jackson, and Harold Millar, the Bishop of Down and Dromore. It would be a major upset if they were not passed - but they will be opposed.

"There is a 'don't ask, don't tell', attitude towards homosexuals in the Church of Ireland," said Gerry Lynch, a member of the church board of St George's Parish in Belfast, as well as a delegate to the diocesan synod.

"It allows a very unhealthy situation to develop where you can be gay as long as everyone agrees in public that you are not really."

Mr Lynch is a former Church of Ireland missionary and former general secretary of the Alliance Party.

Other opponents who signed the letter include David Norris, who ran for the Irish Presidency last year, Canon Ian Sherwood, a Church of Ireland clergyman serving in Europe, and Jeff Dudgeon, the gay rights campaigner and Ulster Unionist Party member.

Mr Lynch said he joined the Church of Ireland in 1997, partly because of his shared faith with a prominent Anglican with whom he has been in a monogamous relationship ever since.

"I felt it was somewhere I could be gay with integrity, I felt it was more open than the Catholic Church, but there were also theological reasons," said the former missionary.

He added: "A lot of Anglicans are gay. In my experience an unusually high proportion of clergy are gay and in private they can be open about it. People don't really care as long as nothing is said in public."

Other motions will say the Church "welcomes all people to be members" and calls for a standing committee to be set up which will report to next year's synod.

There was controversy last July when Portadown-born Rev Tom Gordon, a former lecturer at the Church of Ireland theological college who is co-ordinator of religious programmes for RTE, entered into a civil partnership with his partner of 20 years. It later emerged that Rev Gordon, now a dean in Carlow, had received prior approval from his bishop.

Officially, however, vicars can lose their jobs if they admit to homosexuality and there is a complaint.

*****

Worldwide schism has little hope of healing

Analysis

by Alf McCreary

THE latest protest by the pro-gay lobby in the Church of Ireland over the handling of the same-sex issue is predictable.

The bishops had little option but to confirm current Christian teaching that marriage is a permanent union between a man and a woman.

This is one of three resolutions at the law-making General Synod tomorrow in St Patrick's Cathedral in Dublin.

A large group of Church members describing themselves as lesbian, gay or bisexual have written an open letter to complain about not being consulted by the bishops. They claim the resolutions stigmatise any sexual relationship outside opposite-sex marriage as not "normative".

Same-sex relationships are at the heart of a worldwide schism within Anglicanism.

The controversy became a live issue in Ireland last year after it was reported that Dean of Leighlin Tom Gordon had entered into a civil partnership with his male companion.

The Church of Ireland attempted to address the issue in depth at a meeting in March, but no decisions were taken. Inevitably the General Synod now has to tackle this crunch issue.

The bishops want the synod to reinforce traditional Church teaching on marriage, to ask people to "oppose all unbiblical and uncharitable actions and attitudes" regarding human sexuality, and to allow the Church to start forming a select committee this time next year.

This attempt by the bishops to cool things down and to move the issue forward slowly will not receive sympathy from the pro-gay lobby in what will be a passionate debate on Thursday.

The synod may try to reach a compromise rather than reject the resolutions outright, but - whatever happens - this increasingly intense controversy at the heart of the Church of Ireland and the other main Protestant churches will not go away.

*****

Should the Church of Ireland accept gay marriage?

NO say Archbishop Michael Jackson and Bishop Harold Millar

Marriage is in its purpose a union permanent and life-long, for better or worse, till death do them part, of one man with one woman, to the exclusion of all others on either side, for the procreation and nurture of children, for the hallowing and right direction of natural instincts and affections.

Faithfulness within marriage is the only normative context for sexual intercourse. Members of the Church of Ireland are required by catechism to keep their bodies in "temperance, soberness and chastity".

Clergy are called in the Ordinal to be "wholesome examples and patterns to the flock of Jesus Christ".

The Church of Ireland affirms a continuing commitment to love our neighbour, and opposition to all unbiblical and uncharitable actions and attitudes in respect of human sexuality, from whatever perspective.

YES say Church member Gerry Lynch and other campaigners for gay rights

By stating that faithfulness within marriage is the only "normative" context for sex, Resolution 8A imposes a condition that people in faithful same-gender relationships cannot comply with.

The implication that members of the Church of Ireland in relationships other than marriage are in breach of the catechism gives legitimacy, for the first time, to excluding lay people in same-gender relationships from Holy Communion.

Resolution 8A provides a pretext to launch witch-hunts against gay clergy in liberal dioceses. This has happened in the Anglican Church in Australia since similar motions were passed by its General Synod in 2004.

There is a culture of fear in parts of the Church of Ireland, especially for clergy. That is why some of us can only sign this letter anonymously.

END

Vetting Elites & Politicians: Mixed Messages on Marriage

        An interesting article is posted by “Chaplain Mike” at: http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/mixed-marriage-messages. Chaplain Mike challenges us about Bill Clinton (serial adulterer), John Edwards (adultery with a “love child”), Herman Cain (alleged improprieties), and Newt Gingrich (serial adulteries). As Chaplain Mike concludes, “Now that primary voters have weeded out the adulterers and philanderers…[emphasis added]” What do these men have to say—with any moral authority—on the issues of marriage, fidelity, honor, dignity, vows, integrity and as examples? 

                  Chaplain Mike then offers a review of Mr. Barak Obama and Mr. Mitt Romney. Both men are heterosexual, traditional and creditably faithful in their own marriages and families, but both are diametrically opposed on the issue of homoerotic and civil partnerships. One gets mixed signals, as Mike asserts.

          Yesterday, we called for the “vetting” and “review” of elites
by elites (highly educated, Confessional, Reformed Churchmen)
yesterday at: http://reformationanglicanism.blogspot.com/2012/05/cultural-elites-and-confessional.html.

         While we were thinking about media, Hollywood, journalistic, and academic types, the same review should be applied to political elites—our city, state and national leaders. If they wish to speak to moral issues in public, let them be reviewed publicly.

                  Let the vetting and review continue.

                  Here's Chaplain Mike.

Mixed Marriage Messages

12 May 2012

by Chaplain Mike

What an interesting cast of characters and what a conflicted conversation we’ve had in recent history in American presidential politics when it comes to the subject of marriage.
It wasn’t too long ago, we had public hearings about adulterous liaisons in the Clinton White House.
This year we are being treated to the spectacle of former Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards’s trial, in which he is accused of soliciting and secretly spending over $925,000 to cover up his adultery.
Herman Cain, Republican hopeful, suspended his campaign when he could not overcome revelations of a 13-year adulterous affair and numerous allegations of sexual harassment by some of his female employees.
Likewise, on the campaign trail this past year fellow Republican Newt Gingrich had to deal constantly with public scrutiny of his marital and extra-marital affairs. Wed three times, his two previous marriages ended in divorce after he had affairs with younger women, once when his wife was seriously ill.
I guess it could be worse. France just elected Francois Hollande, the first French president to enter office unmarried and living with his partner. Just imagine how that would play in Peoria.
Well, at any rate, now it looks as though it will be President Obama vs. Governor Romney in the U.S. November election.
When it comes to marriage, conservative Christians get mixed messages from both.
On the one hand, you have Mitt Romney, the presumed Republican candidate, who married his teenage sweetheart and has had a long traditional heterosexual marriage. He affirms his support for marriage between one man and one woman for life and says he believes the federal government should codify the institution in law. His faith is the basis for this position, he says. Mr. Romney is a Mormon, a faith that now strongly emphasizes conservative “family values,” but which was once notorious for its practice of polygamy (“plural marriage”).
Mormons officially practiced polygamy from the 1830′s until 1890. Certain Mormon sects even today continue the practice and criticize the main church body for abandoning a fundamental tenet of their faith. In 1856, the Republican party which Romney now represents had an anti-Mormon plank in its platform that berated “the twin relics of barbarism – polygamy and slavery.” In 1857-58 a conflict known as “The Utah War” saw U.S. military forces occupy the Territory of Utah under the charge of sedition and failing to honor U.S. laws (including monogamous marriage). Under constant pressure from the government, the LDS church officially changed its stance on plural marriage in 1890, when church President Willard Woodruff issued a manifesto urging Mormons to follow the laws of the land with regard to marriage.
Today the LDS church is overwhelmingly supportive of monogamous, heterosexual marriage, and Romney has conferred with leaders of the Mormon church regularly over the years about how he should approach such public issues as abortion and gay marriage so as to stay in line with church teachings. Will his faith commitment pose a problem for evangelical Christians? Although orthodox believers might envy the strong family morals Mormons promote, they still consider them theologically outside the pale of genuine Christianity, and supporting a member of a “cult” may be more than some can stomach.
For a detailed history of Romney’s actual actions regarding issues related to gay rights and marriage, see this LA Times piece. Those on the right tend to think Romney is a waffler when it comes to most political decisions and his record on gay issues may give them some ammunition to question how robust his convictions truly are.
It will be interesting to see how conservative Christians spin this. Unable to agree with Gov. Romney on doctrines of his religion and suspicious of him as a politician, I assume they will nonetheless support him based in part on his conservative social position regarding marriage. They will do this even though his position grows out of his faith, with which they disagree, and even though they see him as a political opportunist rather than as a man of real convictions.

On the other hand, you have President Obama, who is a Christian, and who also has a traditional, heterosexual marriage. He has said repeatedly that his position on gay marriage has been “evolving,” but the direction of that evolution has been clear.

The president has taken some significant steps toward advancing gay rights. His administration moved to stop defending the Defense of Marriage Act, signed by President Clinton, which defines marriage as the legal union of one man and one woman. And he did assist in bringing an end to the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy in the U.S. military. So, although he has supported traditional marriage, and in statements has even assigned special significance to it because of his Christian faith, it is clear that he has been “evolving” toward acceptance of gay marriage. He confirmed that this week.
Like Mr. Romney, President Obama said that he came to his position via his faith. He specifically cited the “Golden Rule” taught by Jesus and said that Christian faith should not only be defined by Christ sacrificing himself for us, but also by Christians treating others as they would like to be treated.
It is unlikely that conservative Christians will do anything but condemn this. Frankly, most of the public voices I have heard from the “Christian Right” really don’t trust in President Obama’s faith and never have, and it has been rare to hear anyone engage him or take him seriously on that level. There is too much suspicion about his political motives and agendas.

According to a report in the Washington Post, the President’s announcement is already mobilizing Christians to support Gov. Romney: “Pastors in Ohio, North Carolina, Florida and other swing states are readying Sunday sermons inveighing against same-sex unions, while activist groups have begun laying plans for social media campaigns, leaflet drives and other get-out-the-vote efforts centered on the same-sex marriage issue.”
As one prominent gay marriage opponent and activist stated, “We are going to make this our key issue: the attack on marriage.”
Nevertheless, the piece also points out an ongoing uncertainty among those in the religious right that Gov. Romney is fully committed to this fight. They point to statements in recent days that he supports allowing gay couples to adopt children and that he does not view same-sex marriage as a religious issue.

• • •

So, U.S. Christians, these will be your choices when it comes to presidential candidates and their views on marriage. Now that primary voters have weeded out the adulterers and philanderers, we’re left with two people with positions that conservative Christians are going to have a hard time trusting or supporting without holding their noses.

Definition of Marriage: Church of England Wedding on 12 May 2012

Church of England Wedding, 12 May 2012

          Two things are posted. These two things pertain to “marriage.”

       First, we post a “wedding sermon” by the Rev. Mr. John Richardson, Church of England (somewhere near Chelmsford, we believe). He conducted the “wedding” today, Saturday, 12 May 2012. Inferably from the sermon, it sounds like the good parson used the 1662 Book of Common Prayer. This sermon is simple, accessible, appropriate, biblical and BCP-based, perhaps warranting inclusion with the “Homilies” of The Thirty-nine Articles.

       Second, after posting Rev. Richardson’s sermon, we are posting the wedding service from the 1662 Book of Common Prayer. It is entitled “The Form of Solemnization of Matrimony.” For ease of review and meditation, we post the entire service. We are pressed to wonder: can this be improved significantly? It is solid, biblical and has been used to marry millions of Anglicans for over 350 years of use.

      For now, here is a brief from Rev. Richardson’s sermon. For the full version, see: http://ugleyvicar.blogspot.com/2012/05/wedding-sermon-literally-for-today.html

A wedding sermon (literally) for today

Today I was privileged to conduct the wedding of two previous parishioners, Simon and Sophie. This is the sermon I preached on their chosen reading.

Reading: Ephesians 5:21-32

Sermon:
It is rather a long time since I have conducted a wedding — but not that long, a couple of years.

In that time, however, a revolution has threatened. The last time I conducted a wedding, everyone knew what marriage was. Today, it appears they don’t.

I feel rather like Rip Van Winkle, the character invented by the author of the Legend of Sleepy Hollow, except in my case rather than falling asleep for twenty years, I dozed off for twenty minutes only to wake up in a different world.

I can imagine in some circles if I said I was going off to conduct a marriage this afternoon, people saying, “Well it all depends what you mean by marriage.”And I know, looking at the numbers of you here this afternoon, that if I put the question to you, I’d get a variety of different answers unimagineable just a decade ago.

So let’s remind ourselves that, in the Church at least — or at least in the Church of England — we know what we mean by marriage. In the words I read at the start of this service, “Holy Matrimony ... is an honourable estate, instituted of God himself, signifying unto us the mystical union that is betwixt Christ and his Church.”

First, it is ‘an honourable estate’. Given that today the word estate is usually used about ‘estate agents’, it might be helpful to explain that the word ‘estate’ original included a position or condition in life.

For the rest of Rev. John Richardson’s sermon, see: http://ugleyvicar.blogspot.com/2012/05/wedding-sermon-literally-for-today.html. 

Here is “The Form for the Solemnization of Marriage” and it is found at: http://www.eskimo.com/~lhowell/bcp1662/occasion/marriage.html. 

The Form of Solemnization of Matrimony

---

First the Banns of all that are to be married together must be published in the Church three several Sundays, during the time of Morning Service, or of Evening Service, (if there be no Morning Service,) immediately after the second Lesson; the Curate saying after the accustomed manner,I publish the Banns of Marriage between M. of ----- and N. of-----. If any of you know cause, or just impediment, why these two persons should not be joined together in holy Matrimony, ye are to declare it. This is the first [second, or third] time of asking.

And if the persons that are to be married dwell in divers Parishes, the Banns must be asked in both Parishes; and the Curate of the one Parish shall not solemnize Matrimony betwixt them, without a Certificate of the Banns being thrice asked, from the Curate of the other Parish.

At the day and time appointed for solemnization of Matrimony, the persons to be married shall come into the body of the Church with their friends and neighbours: and there standing together, the Man on the right hand, and the Woman on the left, the Priest shall say,


DEARLY beloved, we are gathered together here in the sight of God, and in the face of this congregation, to join together this Man and this Woman in holy Matrimony; which is an honourable estate, instituted of God in the time of man's innocency, signifying unto us the mystical union that is betwixt Christ and his Church; which holy estate Christ adorned and beautified with his presence, and first miracle that he wrought, in Cana of Galilee; and is commended of Saint Paul to be honourable among all men: and therefore is not by any to be enterprised, nor taken in hand, unadvisedly, lightly, or wantonly, to satisfy men's carnal lusts and appetites, like brute beasts that have no understanding; but reverently, discreetly, advisedly, soberly, and in the fear of God; duly considering the causes for which Matrimony was ordained.


First, It was ordained for the procreation of children, to be brought up in the fear and nurture of the Lord, and to the praise of his holy Name.
Secondly, It was ordained for a remedy against sin, and to avoid fornication; that such persons as have not the gift of continency might marry, and keep themselves undefiled members of Christ's body.

Thirdly, It was ordained for the mutual society, help, and comfort, that the one ought to have of the other, both in prosperity and adversity. Into which holy estate these two persons present come now to be joined. Therefore if any man can shew any just cause, why they may not lawfully be joined together, let him now speak, or else hereafter for ever hold his peace.

And also, speaking unto the persons that shall be married, he shall say,

I REQUIRE and charge you both, as ye will answer at the dreadful day of judgement when the secrets of all hearts shall be disclosed, that if either of you know any impediment, why ye may not be lawfully joined together in Matrimony, ye do now confess it. For be ye well assured, that so many as are coupled together otherwise than God's Word doth allow are not joined together by God; neither is their Matrimony lawful.

At which day of Marriage, if any man do allege and declare any impediment, why they may not be coupled together in Matrimony, by God's law, or the laws of this Realm; and will be bound, and sufficient sureties with him, to the parties; or else put in a caution (to the full value of such charges as the persons to be married do thereby sustain) to prove his allegation: then the solemnization must be deferred, until such time as the truth be tried.

If no impediment be alleged, then shall the Curate say unto the Man,

WILTthou have this woman to thy wedded wife, to live together after God's ordinance in the holy estate of Matrimony? Wilt thou love her, comfort her, honour, and keep her in sickness and in health; and, forsaking all other, keep thee only unto her, so long as ye both shall live?

The Man shall answer, I will.

Then shall the Priest say unto the Woman,

WILTthou have this man to thy wedded husband, to live together after God's ordinance in the holy estate of Matrimony? Wilt thou obey him, and serve him, love, honour, and keep him in sickness and in health; and, forsaking all other, keep thee only unto him, so long as ye both shall live?

The Woman shall answer, I will.

Then shall the Minister say,

Who giveth this woman to be married to this man?

Then shall they give their troth to each other in this manner.

The Minister, receiving the Woman at her father's or friend's hands, shall cause the Man with his right hand to take the Woman by her right hand, and to say after him as followeth.

N. take thee N. to my wedded wife, to have and to hold from this day forward, for better for worse, for richer for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, till death us do part, according to God's holy ordinance; and thereto I plight thee my troth.

Then shall they loose their hands; and the Woman, with her right hand taking the Man by his right hand, shall likewise say after the Minister,
N. take thee N. to my wedded husband, to have and to hold from this day forward, for better for worse, for richer for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love, cherish, and to obey, till death us do part, according to God's holy ordinance; and thereto I give thee my troth.

Then shall they again loose their hands; and the Man shall give unto the Woman a Ring, laying the same upon the book with the accustomed duty to the Priest and Clerk. And the Priest, taking the Ring, shall deliver it unto the Man, to put it upon the fourth finger of the Woman's left hand. And the Man holding the Ring there, and taught by the Priest, shall say,
WITH this ring I thee wed, with my body I thee worship, and with all my worldly goods I thee endow: In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.
Then the Man leaving the Ring upon the fourth finger of the Woman's left hand, they shall both kneel down; and the Minister shall say,

Let us pray.

ETERNAL God, Creator and Preserver of all mankind, Giver of all spiritual grace, the Author of everlasting life: Send thy blessing upon these thy servants, this man and this woman, whom we bless in thy Name; that, as Isaac and Rebecca lived faithfully together, so these persons may surely perform and keep the vow and covenant betwixt them made, (whereof this Ring given and received is a token and pledge,) and may ever remain in perfect love and peace together, and live according to thy laws; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Then shall the Priest join their right hands together, and say,

Those whom God hath joined together let no man put asunder.

Then shall the Minister speak unto the people.

FORASMUCH as N. and N. have consented together in holy wedlock, and have witnessed the same before God and this company, and thereto have given and pledged their troth either to other, and have declared the same by giving and receiving of a Ring, and by joining of hands; I pronounce that they be Man and Wife together, In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.

And the Minister shall add this Blessing.

GOD the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Ghost, bless, preserve, and keep you; the Lord mercifully with his favour look upon you; and so fill you with all spiritual benediction and grace, that ye may so live together in this life, that in the world to come ye may have life everlasting. Amen.

Then the Minister or Clerks, going to the Lord's Table, shall say or sing this Psalm following.

Beati omnes. Psalm 128.

BLESSED are all they that fear the Lord: and walk in his ways.
For thou shalt eat the labour of thine hands: O well is thee, and happy shalt thou be.
Thy wife shall be as the fruitful vine: upon the walls of thine house;
Thy children like the olive-branches: round about thy table.
Lo, thus shall the man be blessed: that feareth the Lord. The Lord from out of Sion shall so bless thee: that thou shalt see Jerusalem in prosperity all thy life long;
Yea, that thou shalt see thy children's children: and peace upon Israel.
Glory be to the Father, &c.
As it was in the beginning, &c.

Or this Psalm.

Deus misereatur. Psalm 67.

GOD be merciful unto us, and bless us: and shew us the light of his countenance, and be merciful unto us.
That thy way may be known upon earth: thy saving health among all nations.
Let the people praise thee, O God: yea, let all the people praise thee.
O let the nations rejoice and be glad: for thou shalt judge the folk righteously, and govern the nations upon earth.
Let the people praise thee, O God: yea, let all the people praise thee.
Then shall the earth bring forth her increase: and God, even our own God, shall give us his blessing.
God shall bless us: and all the ends of the world shall fear him.
Glory be to the Father, &c.
As it was in the beginning, &c.

The Psalm ended, and the Man and the Woman kneeling before the Lord's Table, the Priest standing at the Table, and turning his face towards them, shall say,
Lord, have mercy upon us.Answer. Christ, have mercy upon us.Minister. Lord, have mercy upon us.

OUR Father, which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy Name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our trespasses, As we forgive them that trespass against us. And lead us not into temptation; But deliver us from evil. Amen.

Minister. O Lord, save thy servant, and thy handmaid;Answer. Who put their trust in thee.Minister. O Lord, send them help from thy holy place;Answer. And evermore defend them.Minister. Be unto them a tower of strength,Answer. From the face of their enemy.Minister. O Lord, hear our prayer.Answer. And let our cry come unto thee.

Minister.

GOD of Abraham, God of Isaac, God of Jacob, bless these thy servants, and sow the seed of eternal life in their hearts; that whatsoever in thy holy Word they shall profitably learn, they may in deed fulfil the same. Look, O Lord, mercifully upon them from heaven, and bless them. And as thou didst send thy blessing upon Abraham and Sarah, to their great comfort, so vouchsafe to send thy blessing upon these thy servants; that they obeying thy Will, and alway being in safety under thy protection, may abide in thy love unto their lives' end; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

This Prayer next following shall be omitted, where the Woman is past child-bearing.

MERCIFUL Lord, and heavenly Father, by whose gracious gift mankind is increased: We beseech thee, assist with thy blessing these two persons, that they may both be fruitful in procreation of children, and also live together so long in godly love and honesty, that they may see their children Christianly and virtuously brought up, to thy praise and honour; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

O GOD, who by thy mighty power hast made all things of nothing; who also (after other things set in order) didst appoint, that out of man (created after thine own image and similitude) woman should take her beginning; and, knitting them together, didst teach that it should never be lawful to put asunder those whom thou by Matrimony hadst made one: O God, who hast consecrated the state of Matrimony to such an excellent mystery, that in it is signified and represented the spiritual marriage and unity betwixt Christ and his Church: Look mercifully upon these thy servants, that both this man may love his wife, according to thy Word, (as Christ did love his spouse the Church, who gave himself for it, loving and cherishing it even as his own flesh,) and also that this woman may be loving and amiable, faithful and obedient to her husband; and in all quietness, sobriety, and peace, be a follower of holy and godly matrons. O Lord, bless them both, and grant them to inherit thy everlasting kingdom; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Then shall the Priest say,

ALMIGHTY God, who at the beginning did create our first parents, Adam and Eve, and did sanctify and join them together in marriage; Pour upon you the riches of his grace, sanctify and bless you, that ye may please him both in body and soul, and live together in holy love unto your lives' end. Amen.

After which, if there be no Sermon detailing the duties of Man and Wife, the Minister shall read as followeth.

LLye that are married, or that intend to take the holy estate of Matrimony upon you, hear what the holy Scripture doth say as touching the duty of husbands towards their wives, and wives towards their husbands.

Saint Paul, in his Epistle to the Ephesians, the fifth Chapter, doth give this commandment to all married men; Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the Church, and gave himself for it, that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water, by the Word; that he might present it to himself a glorious Church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy, and without blemish. So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself: for no man ever yet hated his own flesh, but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the Church: for we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife; and they two shall be one flesh. This is a great mystery; but I speak concerning Christ and the Church. Nevertheless, let every one of you in particular so love his wife, even as himself.

Likewise the same Saint Paul, writing to the Colossians, speaketh thus to all men that are married; Husbands, love your wives, and be not bitter against them.
Hear also what Saint Peter, the Apostle of Christ, who was himself a married man, saith unto them that are married; Ye husbands, dwell with your wives according to knowledge; giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life, that your prayers be not hindered.

Hitherto ye have heard the duty of the husband toward the wife. Now likewise, ye wives, hear and learn your duties toward your husbands, even as it is plainly set forth in holy Scripture.

Saint Paul, in the aforenamed Epistle to the Ephesians, teacheth you thus; Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the Church: and he is the Saviour of the body. Therefore as the Church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. And again he saith, Let the wife see that she reverence her husband.

And in his Epistle to the Colossians, Saint Paul giveth you this short lesson; Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord.

Saint Peter also doth instruct you very well, thus saying; Ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the Word, they also may without the Word be won by the conversation of the wives; while they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear. Whose adorning, let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel; but let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible; even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price. For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands; even as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord; whose daughters ye are as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement.

It is convenient that the new-married persons should receive the holy Communion at the time of their Marriage, or at the first opportunity after their Marriage.