Ministers in their parishes are held responsible for the exercise of care and jurisdiction over their pastoral charge. Our induction to a pastoral charge, as well as being a heavy responsibility, is for most of us also the greatest privilege of our work. In the practice of ministry, we discover that all of our theological thinking remains only words and concepts until we go to the coalface of ministry: our parishes. It is in our parish, and not simply in our congregation that our theology must prove itself to have relevance, worth, and to be life affirming.

There are many different parishes, served by many different ministries and ministers, all of whom bring to the Church’s work their integrity, faith and experiences. In recognition of this diverse and rich resource, the Church of Scotland has historically allowed ministers to exercise freedom of pastoral conscience and to use their own judgement in their ministries. This is our heritage and a much valued right. Moreover it speaks of a church that trusts its own ministers, respects their personal and theological integrity and finds a place for each of them in a broad church. Attempts by some to take away this freedom of pastoral conscience, to replace it with their own dogmatic understanding of ministry and scripture would be a serious deviation from the best traditions of our broad national Kirk.

In the matter of civil partnerships the Legal Questions Committee has struck a balanced, centre way. The Declaratory Act respects the integrity of all ministers and their theological viewpoints by recommending permissive legislation which forces nothing on to ministers, whatever their view. This Act leaves room for those of diverse views within the practice of ministry, without forcing one viewpoint on the whole church. Such a consensual and enabling approach respects the integrity and strongly held views of all.

The larger question for the Church is where does the attempt to remove the right of pastoral conscience end? If a vociferous lobby on this issue succeed, which aspect in the pastoral life of ministers will next be under review? Why are some in the Kirk unable to trust the judgement of their colleagues, and why do they seek to deny others the same pastoral freedoms and respect that they enjoy?

We all hope for Church unity even in the midst of difficult and contentious debates. For that unity to flourish, there must be an understanding that we all hold our opinions with sincerity and integrity. A church which allows its ministers freedom of pastoral conscience is much richer than one which descends into a narrow legalism which says some are “in” and some are “out”.

Rev Scott M Rennie