The assembly's decision to keep open a conversation about human sexuality is not a victory for any one ecclesiastical faction, but a victory for the Kirk itself. OK, it's a temporary victory, one which buys time before big decisions have to be made, but its significance should not be underestimated.

The Anglican communion seems to be keen on tearing itself apart on the issue of same-sex relationships. Archbishop Rowan Williams must look over the border with envy. Yesterday's wise decision recognises that the Church of Scotland is divided on this matter, and is not ready to move to judgment without further study.

A cop-out? Not really. It's not a disgrace to acknowledge ignorance. There are many people who have not (knowingly) had a conversation with a gay or lesbian. The heartfelt story of Kirk elder James Simpson, whose life was turned into turmoil when his son announced that he was gay, moved the assembly deeply.

Robert Runcie, a previous incumbent of the see of Canterbury, was criticised when he encouraged the Church of England to delay a decision on the then contentious issue of the ordination of women.

He was ridiculed for "nailing his colours to the fence". A decade of study later, The C of E voted overwhelmingly for women's ordination; the predicted exodus from the church never materialised.

On a personal basis, I'd have preferred to have a strong vote supporting the blessing of civil partnerships, but I believe the assembly made the right decision. It's my conviction that as long as the Kirk listens to the actual experience of Christians in civil partnerships, it will take its colours from the fence and nail them to the mast of the theology of a generous God.