Further in this series, I now respond to this comment made a few days ago:
"(2) "How would opting out line up with the religious exemption in the Human Rights Act? You could hardly argue that something is core to your belief if half of your fellow believers thought it was not.""
For those outside of NZ, this comment refers to the possibility under our laws (re Human Rights, re our Marriage Act which permits same sex marriages) that if a church such as ACANZP ends up with a set of canons which permits its marriage celebrants to believe differently on marriage then the 'religious exemption' allowing marriage celebrants not to be pursued at law for refusing to conduct a same sex marriage might not apply.
Obviously there is a legal answer to the question which I am not qualified to provide (and, indeed, no one may be so qualified until a case arises which is addressed by our judges).
But I would think there would be some credence to a church (even better, to a set of churches in NZ, Anglicans, Presbyterians, Methodists, Baptists ...) which said,
(1) our canon on marriage remains as it has been and expresses the traditional Christian belief concerning marriage, therefore our ministers accepting this canon as part of their submission to the authority of General Synod cannot say Yes to performing a same sex marriage on behalf of the state,
(2) yet a subset of ministers within the church may legally bless same sex partnerships because they choose in writing to exercise an option to do so (e.g. the option to be available to bless such partnerships).
(On my original writing of the above paragraph, I offered a confusing wording around the idea that there might be an 'opt in' to the traditional canon on marriage and/or an 'opt out' of that canon in favour of a more progressive canon. Apart from recognising (H/T to a correspondent) the confusion in the wording, I now see that 'opt in' or 'opt out' options (to coin a phrase!) are quite tricky to work out. The wording above hopefully is less confusing; but the proposal made around 'opt' could no doubt be improved considerably).
If such an approach failed then we might or even would have to pursue the possibility that we no longer conduct marriages on behalf of the state.