Thank you, Ms. May.
This official copy is inscribed by a J. Davison from Whitby Terrace, York, dated May 27, 1862. I thank my staff for the copy of this. Jane McKelvie in my office was kind enough to loan it to me so that I could read from it this evening.
I want to quote from it, and again, Mr. Chair, the relevance will be explained afterward. It is from the Form of Solemnization of Matrimony, and it reads as follows:
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:
Here is the important part:
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.
There is relevance to this, Mr. Chair, and it has a connection with Senator Forsey. The role of the opposition is, as its name applies, to oppose. There is no question that is the way our current structure is, but Senator Forsey actually uses the comparison of the marriage ceremony in the Anglican church to the role of the opposition. He writes that “Obstruction, like marriage in the Anglican Prayer Book, is 'not by any to be enterprised nor taken in hand, lightly, unadvisedly or wantonly, but reverently, advisedly, discreetly, soberly and in the fear of God.’”
In the case at hand, this filibuster, this opportunity to discuss this matter without end, is not an easy decision for us to make, as opposition MPs. We do so with great consideration and great thought given toward the challenges of so doing. Certainly we will all, each of us, at some point be subject to our electors back home. We are subject to media scrutiny. Certainly by undertaking this debate over great lengths of time, there is the distinct possibility that we could hurt our case. We could challenge ourselves for not doing so, but as the Anglican Book of Common Prayer notes, we do so with the fear of God, with the concern that we could very much find ourselves in a challenging situation by doing what we're doing. But in our case, in the case of the Conservative Party official opposition, and of the third party as well, we are doing so because we believe it is a fundamental purpose for our being here.
I want to quote from another book as well, and Mr. Chair—