Today's BT has two short articles connected with the move to allow the celebration of same sex unions in religious contexts.  Each is cautiously, and respectfully, in favour of the legislative change employing what I would term a 'truly Baptist' perspective.  Thus, the desire, pretty much en bloc, of Quakers, Unitarians and liberal Jews to be allowed to hold such ceremonies is affirmed as consistent with religious freedom.  At the same time, the freedom of a local church or a denomination (however governance works) to say 'no' is also affirmed on the same grounds.

One of the articles, by a minister in a Baptist/URC LEP, is cautiously wanting Baptist churches to have this freedom but recognising that under BUGB rules a minister would not be allowed to conduct such a ceremony even if his/her church wished them to.  BUGB at least has clear (if somewhat inconsistent) rules in this regard - I'm not so sure it's even on the radar further north.

Whatever anyone may think - and it is a topic that provokes extremely strong views - it is great that the BT has at least published a response, and one that acknowledges the complexities of cries of 'freedom' and 'rights' in a plural society as well the pastoral struggles that the legislation as it now is, and as it may become, cause.

I am sure some will be disappointed that the BT does not give stronger views for or against, depending on their own perspectives, but I feel they've got a good balance as a starting point.  Alas I can already sense the "letters to the editor" being penned expressing very strong views.  Let's just hope and pray that some of the tact and humility demonstrated in the articles spills over into the responses.