And all clergy have taken public vows at ordination that they believe the doctrine of the Church of England, that they will uphold it, and that they will teach and expound it.

Do you believe the doctrine of the Christian faith as the Church of England has received it, and in your ministry will you expound and teach it?

Ordinands   I believe it and will so do.

This includes the teaching of Jesus on marriage which is expressed in Canon B30 and explained in the marriage liturgy.

How, then, can we be ‘undecided’? How can some believe one thing, and others another? It can only be that we have, amongst our bishops and other clergy, people who simply do not understand the doctrine of their own Church or, understanding it, think it is wrong. That is the problem we have. What is the solution to this?

Martyn’s solution is—as he says openly in his article—‘a spirit of generosity and pragmatism.’ In other words, to preserve institutional unity, we must pragmatically give up on the idea that we actually share common beliefs, that we expect clergy to be faithful to their ordination vows, and that we expect our bishops to believe and teach the doctrine of the Church they lead. But what kind of institution will that be? A husk, a hollow shell of a ‘church’, retaining its outward, institutional, form, but having lost its heart.

Read it all.

Unity matters in our debates about sexuality—and so does truth | Psephizo https://t.co/Q1Dwp6xsw1 via @psephizo

— Simon Sarmiento (@simonsarmiento) June 24, 2024

Responding to the paper on Thursday afternoon, the national director of the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC), Canon John Dunnett, suggested that the proposals would not receive support from those who have consistently voted against LLF motions in Synod.

“The longing of CEEC Evangelicals is to remain in the C of E, but this is being undermined by the ongoing commitment of many in the House of Bishops to walk away from our biblical and inherited doctrine of marriage and sexual ethics,” he said.

Referring to provisions which, since late last year (News, 18 November 2023). CEEC has made available to churches which oppose the Prayers of Love and Faith, Canon Dunnett said:

“If General Synod approves the motion as it stands, I anticipate a significant increase in the take up of the Ephesian Fund and alternative spiritual oversight by clergy and churches in the CEEC and Alliance constituency. This is because many feel that this is the only way they can find a voice for their concern and a spiritual oversight that has integrity.” 

Read it all.

Proposals for stand-alone services of blessing for same-sex couples are to be brought to the General Synod in July, alongside an offer for “delegated episcopal ministry” for those who oppose any changes https://t.co/8reQ8xiytv

— Church Times (@ChurchTimes) June 21, 2024

An Anglican Church which says that it is acceptable to depart from this God given pattern of behaviour (or any elements of it), either in teaching, or in practice, is too broad.

Someone might object at this point ‘but surely no one would reject the basic pattern of Christian conduct outlined in the catechism?’ Sadly, however, such as rejection has taken place, and is taking place, in those Anglican churches which are supportive of same-sex sexual relationships and the adoption of transgender identities.

This is because to keep our bodies in ‘temperance, soberness and chastity, ‘ as the catechism glosses the seventh commandment, involves accepting the bodies we have as gifts given to us by God and using them only in ways that are in accordance with God’s will (see Romans 13:13-14 and Colossians 3:5-8).

Adopting a transgender identity is incompatible with accepting the bodies we have as gifts given to us by God, because the bodies we have are either male or female[20] and thus give us a male or female sexual identity. To adopt a transgender identity is to reject this sexual identity, given  to us in our bodies, as a gift from God. This is not to deny the reality of the distress caused by gender dysphoria, but it is to say that adopting a transgender identity is not a legitimate way to deal with this distress.

Being in a same-sex sexual relationship or a same-sex marriage is incompatible with using our bodies in accordance with the will of God, for the reasons helpfully summarised in the following quotation from J I Packer:

‘The Bible shows us that God created two genders for heterosexual attraction, with delight, leading to lifelong monogamous marriage for, among other things, the raising of stable and mature families; and he created sex for procreation with pleasure, and for reinforced bonding of the marriage relationship thereby. This is part of the God-given and God taught order of creation, an order that same sex unions directly contravene. So, however high- minded the participants and however faithful to each other they intend to be, same-sex bodily unions may not be viewed as a form of holiness (the Canadian Anglican General Synod of 2004 was wrong to speak of their ‘sanctity’), any more than sex with an animal (bestiality) can be so viewed. God sets limits, and obedience to him includes observing them. Sex is for marriage, and marriage is a heterosexual partnership, whatever modern society may say.’ [21]

Read it all.

Martin Davie–Why the Church of England Bishops Cannot Do what they are doing with Prayers for Same Sex couples https://t.co/ZiZJOWkIHC #anglican #theology #analysis #marriage #anthropology #ethics #holyscripture #BCP #anglican #religion #parishministry #UK 'The bishops argument… pic.twitter.com/FUM7TZSatW

— Kendall Harmon (@KendallHarmon6) October 27, 2023

Reviewing the development of Prayers of Love and Faith (PLF) reveals that it demonstrates an even more serious ‘PLF’ problem, one that is evident in other areas of church life as well: Persistent Leadership Failure. It first traces this failure back to the rushed origins of PLF in late 2022 and early 2023.

These resulted in further failures leading to an instability and incoherence which is traced from early 2023 to the present in relation to repeated changes in:

• For whom the prayers are being proposed;
• The theological and legal basis of the prayers;
• The relationship to the church’s supposedly unchanged doctrine where, contrary to the February 2023 Synod motion and the bishops’ original plan, PLF are now acknowledged to be “indicative of a departure from the Church’s doctrine”; and
• The canonical route by which the original proposed PLF are to be introduced. Here nine different stages favouring multiple different paths are summarised culminating in the latest reported “emerging proposal” to introduce standalone services by commending them for use for an experimental period under Canon B5.

This latest proposal has a certain logic as the prohibition on standalone services was an abuse of the House’s power and did not make canonical sense once the substance of the prayers were commended by the bishops for use under Canon B5.

However, there are ten problems with this route, some new but some previously recognised and given as reasons to reject commendation….

Read it all.

In the Church of England's 'Prayers of Love and Faith', does PLF actually stand for Persistent Leadership Failure? Where did the process go so badly wrong, and what are the numerous problems with the current proposals? @simonsarmiento @theologyethics1 https://t.co/P6uq2M6mEF

— Dr Ian Paul (@Psephizo) May 29, 2024

Then, as now, the majority of global Anglicans believed that apostolic teaching calls for those engaging in sexual activity outside of heterosexual marriage to be loved by the church and called to repent. Without repentance, such a person cannot be considered a “true shepherd” and therefore should be precluded from ordination or consecration. It was, therefore, TEC’s willingness to consecrate a man in a same-sex relationship which tore “the fabric of [the] communion at its deepest level.”

Returning to the events of Saturday 11th May 2024, Bishop Jill Duff told Anglican Futures that she was asked to attend the consecration of Bishop David Morris as a representative of the Archbishops of Canterbury and York…. She was very clear that it was in that capacity, rather than as an honorary assistant bishop in the Church in Wales, that she did so .

This raises a number of issues of national and international significance:

First, this means a bishop of the Church of England was involved in the consecration of a man whose conduct would prevent him from being consecrated as a bishop in the Church of England.

Read it all.

When @AnglicanFutures publishes a piece like this it quickly becomes obvious that the only real sin for @churchofengland bishops is to dissent from the idea that truth is best regarded as being plural. Nearly 3,000 reads shows how wrong that is. https://t.co/Z5hLAuYA8D

— Dan Leafe (@DanLeafe1) May 19, 2024

From there:

There’s a lot of water going under the Living in Love and Faith Bridge right now, including today, the 16th of May, a discussion at the House of Bishops. Whilst we do not know what they will conclude and what therefore will be brought to General Synod in July, it is clear that two things are going to happen. One, that the so-called ‘standalone services’ for blessings of same-sex relationships will be made possible.

And secondly, that, probably by the removal of ‘so-called’ discipline, that clergy in some dioceses are going to be able to marry their same-sex partners. Maybe as soon as this autumn. These are big changes, and I think it’s fairly clear that they are indeed indicative of a change of doctrine.

John Dunnett named new national director of the Church of England Evangelical Councilhttps://t.co/jjh3UMgwTm pic.twitter.com/YTRYb1tAkq

— Anglican Ink (@anglicanink) May 9, 2023

But you cannot talk about the goodness of the human body without then immediately discussing the importance of the binary of bodily forms we are given as male and female.

With regard to the matter of biological sex and the socio-cultural role of sex (or some might say gender), we are keen to emphasise that while these can be distinguished, they cannot be separated. We recognise that how we live out our roles as male or female ‘is not simply the result of biological or genetic factors, but of multiple elements having to do with temperament, family history, culture, experience, education, the influence of friends, family members and respected persons as well as other formative situations.’ We also recognise that roles attributed to the sexes may vary according to time and space. Therefore, ‘rigid cultural stereotypes of masculinity and femininity are… unfortunate and undesirable because they can create unreasonable pressure on children to present or behave in particular ways.’ However, it is clear that the sexual identity of the person as man or woman is not purely a cultural or social construction and that it belongs to the specific manner in which the image of God exists (p 8).

I cannot think of a better short summary anywhere in Christian literature of the givenness of sex binary and its relation to the various expressions of sex difference in different cultural and social contexts. Sex difference is a given; but how that difference expresses itself in different cultures will vary.

Finally, the statement then sets out what all this means in a practical and pastoral response to those who are experiencing distress or confusion about their ‘gender identity’.

We recognise that such pastoral accompaniment is complex, encompassing legal, medical, psychological, theological, spiritual and pedagogical elements. It takes place within the context of ever-changing and polarising developments in the political, cultural and commercial spheres…

Thus it is that we speak to those adult members in our Catholic communities who have chosen to transition socially and medically: ‘You are still our brothers and sisters. We cannot be indifferent to your struggle and the path you may have chosen. The doors of the Church are open to you, and you should find, from all members of the Church, a welcome that is compassionate, sensitive and respectful’ (p 8).

Read it all.

What does a biblical understanding of ourselves as humanity created male and female in the image of God say to the current debates about gender identity? How have the Catholic bishops expressed this, and why is this statement significant? https://t.co/N6cwCylvKz

— Dr Ian Paul (@Psephizo) May 1, 2024

I want to make a threefold response to what Bell says in these two paragraphs.

First, creating a new provincial structure for the Church of England to provide for the differing positions of conservatives and liberals is not a ‘fundamental threat’ to the Church of England’s ecclesiology.

What CEEC is asking for is internal differentiation within the Church of England by means of a re-configuration of the Church’s current provincial system. This could take the form of a new province for conservatives alongside Canterbury and York, a new province for liberals alongside Canterbury and York or a re-working of the two existing provinces to cover the whole country with conservatives in Canterbury and liberals in York. [1]

The key point to note about this proposal is that it is in line with the existing ecclesiology of the Church of England. The Church of England has historically consisted, and continues to consist, as a combination  of two separate provinces, each their own Archbishop (both of whom have metropolitical authority within their own province and neither of whom is subject to the other), and each having its own provincial synodical structure consisting of a provincial Convocation made up of the two Houses of Bishops and Clergy, and an attendant House of Laity.  A meeting of the General Synod is simply a joint meeting of these two provincial synods, and the two Convocations retain the power both to veto legislation proposed in the General Synod and to make provision for matters relating to their province (see Canon H.1 and Article 7 of the Constitution of General Synod).

Adding another province into the mix, or reconfiguring the two existing provinces, would not alter this ecclesiological structure in any fundamental way.[2] What it would mean is that the two (or three)  provinces of the Church of England could continue to meet together in General Synod to debate and legislate on matters of common concern, while their provincial synods could legislate to either maintain or change the Church of England’s current teaching and practice with regard to marriage and human sexuality, thus allowing both conservatives and liberals to have what they are looking for  within their own province or provinces.

Each province would hold that the other province or provinces is (or are) part of the Catholic Church and the Church of England, and there would be transferability of ministry without re-ordination between them subject to a minister being prepared to accept the doctrine and discipline of the province to which he or she was transferring.

The Church of England could thus stay together, but in a way which respected the conscientious convictions of both sides and would prevent the Church of England breaking apart entirely.

Read it all.

Martin Davie–A response to Meg Warner ‘Does the Bible really say … that sex outside marriage is wrong? https://t.co/tYzlpsnfpt #christianity #sexualethics #marriage #bible #anglican #anthropology pic.twitter.com/qdQI0oGk5j

— Kendall Harmon (@KendallHarmon6) May 30, 2019

The 11 survivors of church-related abuse who were awaiting reviews from the Independent Safeguarding Board (ISB) when it was disbanded last year (News, 23 June 2023) say that they are no closer to receiving a review into their cases. This contradicts what members of the General Synod have been told.

In a statement issued on Tuesday, the group, styling themselves the “ISB 11”, write: “Not one survivor is currently having their review progressed” by Kevin Crompton, who was appointed in September to take over the commissioning of independent reviews (News, 15 September 2023).

The statement disputes what is written in a General Synod paper, GS 2336, released on 9 February on behalf of the House of Bishops and Archbishops’ Council. The paper says: “We are glad that several people are taking up this offer and working with Kevin to set in place reviews. We remain open to listening, to conversation, and to attempts to find resolution with all those affected.”

Read it all.

The Church of England authorities appear to be deliberately misleading their own General Synod about progress in caring for victims of abuse. https://t.co/Nbr0hh3uFB

— Andrew Graystone (@AndrewGraystone) February 20, 2024

For most Americans, the decline of teen pregnancies is a reason to celebrate; and for many, falling rates of teen sex represent an equally positive development.

But it’s not just sex that’s declined among teens; it’s romantic relationships overall. Teens are dating less. A survey conducted by the Survey Center on American Life found that only 56 percent of Gen Z adults—and 54 percent of Gen Z men—said they were involved in a romantic relationship at any point during their teenage years.[i] This represents a remarkable change from previous generations, where teenage dating was much more common. More than three-quarters of Baby Boomers (78 percent) and Generation Xers (76 percent) report having had a boyfriend or girlfriend as teenagers.

Forty-four percent of Gen Z men today report having no relationship experience at all during their teen years, double the rate for older men.

Read it all.

A remarkable, lamentable decline:

“Teens are dating less. A survey [found] only 56 percent of Gen Z adults—and 54 percent of Gen Z men—said they were involved in a romantic relationship at any point during their teenage years” ~ @dcoxpolls @AEI https://t.co/m6QQYQAbqz

— Brad Wilcox (@BradWilcoxIFS) February 8, 2024

First popularised by a 2017 article in Cosmopolitan magazine, it describes a casual romance between two people that has some of the hallmarks of a formal relationship but without the commitment.

Dating experts say situationships are the natural result of apps such as Tinder, which make it easier for those seeking convenience rather than commitment. And big brands are attempting to capitalise on the trend.

Ahead of February 14, the US makers of Sweethearts — a treat similar to the Love Hearts sold in the UK — released “Situationships” boxes with the usual loved-up messages such as “true love” and “only you” printed in a blurry font.

The Spangler Candy Company said it wanted to “speak to all the people out there in hard-to-read relationships”, and judging by the sales there are plenty of customers. A limited first run of the sweets went on sale last month and was snapped up in four minutes, while another batch made available on Thursday also quickly sold out.

Read it all (subscription).

'“The ambiguous territory that lies between friendship and a committed relationship offers a preferable alternative to the stark solitude of being entirely single and alone.”

Chan said this apprehension has led to the creation of new terms such as “hesidating” and “Foda” (fear…

— Kendall Harmon (@KendallHarmon6) February 5, 2024

The Bishop of Newcastle, Dr Helen-Ann Hartley, is standing down as one of the co-chairs of the Living in Love and Faith (LLF) process. She has expressed “serious concerns” about the recent appointment of a new interim theological adviser to the House of Bishops.

In a statement published online on Thursday morning, Dr Hartley said: “It has become clear to me in the last 48 hours that there are serious concerns relating to the recent process of appointing an interim theological adviser to the House of Bishops.”

Dr Hartley and the Bishop of Leicester, the Rt Revd Martyn Snow, were appointed last November to co-chair the LLF process, and last week wrote an article for the Church Times setting out their hope for a “reset” of the process…

Read it all.

The @BishopNewcastle said that "there are serious concerns relating to the recent process of appointing an interim theological adviser", and that this had a "critically negative impact" on the work she and @SnowMartyn were doing as LLF co-chairs.https://t.co/qdnUoywfGT

— Church Times (@ChurchTimes) February 1, 2024

Their intervention represents a shift in HTB leaders’ approach to long-running debates in the Church of England. For many years, HTB has sought to avoid public comment, seeking common ground, emphasising the importance of unity and evangelism, and steering clear of divisive questions. This stance also reflected awareness of differing views among leaders and members. HTB’s 10,000-strong congregations include people in gay relationships, it says.

It remains unclear to what extent the churches in the HTB network share the concerns expressed by the signatories to the Alliance letter. Responses to the Church Times email this week indicate that some undoubtedly do.

In the 6 December letter, the Alliance referred to “a growing number of parishes and clergy that wish to come under our umbrella of partners whilst not being linked to any of the main networks that are represented by the Alliance”.

Read it all.

HTB’s allies alarmed by bid to resist same-sex blessings https://t.co/Fyr0wms75E

— Church Times (@ChurchTimes) January 16, 2024

I will take comments on this submitted by email only to KSHarmon[at]mindspring[dot]com.

….if the sexed nature of the body is irrelevant to the most intimate of human personal interactions, then who I am is detached from my body in a most fundamental way. I become something that inhabits my body and uses it as an instrument, not something that I am. In sum, one cannot desecrate the body and retain a stable notion of personhood any more than Nietzsche thinks one can kill God and keep the earth hitched to the sun.

If sex is no longer sacred, then practices relating to death have followed a similar path. Once it was a sacred mystery; now we mobilize social and technological forces to deny it. Violence and death, once too sacred to be depicted onstage in Greek tragedy, have become the trivial or pornographic fare of movies and video games. The Roman Colosseum made death a matter of entertainment; today, movies and video games bring pornographic violence into the living rooms, indeed the palms, of everyone with a television, a game console, or a smartphone.

Real death is a purely medical affair, with the dying placed in hospitals and hospices. The battle against the body is significant here too, for what is the final authority that the body possesses? Not to dictate our sex as male or female, but to dictate that we are mortal. In light of this, euthanasia looks like one last (and arguably futile) attempt to seize control of who we are.

The attempt to domesticate mortality continues after death. Churches are no longer typically built with graveyards, with the result that worship is today not experienced in the vicinity of dead loved ones. Funerals are becoming celebrations of life. Every year, cremations rise in popularity in America. There may well be practical reasons for this—cost, lack of space—but it still serves to incinerate any lasting, visible reminder from among the living of the dead as the dead. True, some have urns with the ashes of loved ones. But the jar on the mantel at home is different from—dare one say less sacred than?—a burial ground next to a place of worship. It is hard to maintain quiet reverence when the television is blaring and the kettle is boiling.

Read it all.

Carl Trueman on the Desecration of Man. As usual, he's spot on. https://t.co/AxXHGY8XYS

— Mackenzie Boudreaux (@PaperandPipe) December 13, 2023

“The bishops have exported this division down to every single local parish”

Two ordained women – Rev Catherine Bond and her partner Rev Jane Pearse – became one of the first same-sex couples to be blessed at a Church of England service, at St John the Baptist Church in Felixstowe yesterday. The couple has reportedly acknowledged that there is still “a lot pain” over the existence of their relationship.

The move to bless same-sex relationships has caused widespread division within the denomination, throughout the seven year process of deliberation and discernment known as ‘Living in Love and Faith’. Conservatives, who believe marriage must be heterosexual, and liberals pressing for change have yet to reach agreement or even a happy compromise.

Dunnett says it remains a highly divisive situation: “You’re going to have fractious debate at parochial church council meetings. You’re going to have vicars having to explain to people why they’re not doing this…

“This is going to be a recipe for distrust. It’s going to bring fracture to relationships that have up to now been good in local parishes.

“Already we’re hearing from clergy person after clergy person and from PCC members in dioceses all over the country that they are fearing what is now going to happen.”

Read it all.

There’s a lot to take in. Noticing a huge silence on the part of various bishops on social media in reaction to the papal pronouncement, Catholic blogger Amy Welborn said it for all the laity out there:

Whassup?

Judging by their silence on Twitter/X feeds, I’m guessing the papal pronouncement came as a surprise to the bishops, too. Were I one of these men in red hats, I’d be furious. They’re made to look like fools. The laity are wondering: Is this a change in doctrine or not?

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops put out a statement saying that no, it actually was not, because same-sex unions were not considered marriage but that “anyone can ask for a blessing when they are seeking God’s assistance, mercy and grace.” What does this mean? Is this something like bringing up a pet for a blessing during an annual St. Francis Day service?

Most others saw it as a major shift in doctrine, including the Rev. James Martin, a Jesuit and LGBTQ+ advocate who is editor-at-large for America magazine and someone whose ministry has been openly praised by Pope Francis.

Read it all.

Reaction to the note from LGBTQ Catholics and advocates touted the declaration as a major step forward. Commentary from some theologians, meanwhile, cautioned that it’s misleading to frame the declaration as a kind of monumental shift.https://t.co/CEtthGF4pa

— Crux (@Crux) December 19, 2023

The House of Bishops’ decision to commend the prayers of blessing for same-sex couples was made despite a last-minute plea from leaders in the HTB network. Inclusive groups are urging churches to use the prayers this Sunday.

A group calling itself “the Alliance”, which comprises the current and former vicars of Holy Trinity, Brompton (HTB), the Revd Archie Coates and the Revd Nicky Gumbel, along with 23 other figures in the C of E, wrote to the Bishops on Monday, the day before the meeting at which agreement was reached to commend the prayers…

The letter says: “It is not too late to delay the commending of the Prayers of Love and Faith until the complete package of the Prayers, the full Pastoral Guidance and the Pastoral Reassurance are all presented to Synod.”

The Bishops are also urged to provide “formal legal structural provision” for those who object to the introduction of the prayers. Such a settlement “will enable those who feel compelled to pursue changes to doctrine and practice to be able to minister freely without their actions causing growing schism in the Church of England”, the group writes.

Read it all (registration or subscription).

The House of Bishops’ decision to commend the prayers of blessing for same-sex couples was made despite a last-minute plea from leaders in the HTB network. Inclusive groups are urging churches to use the prayers this Sunday. https://t.co/MMwrokW6cW

— Church Times (@ChurchTimes) December 14, 2023

Blessings for same-sex couples can take place within existing church services from this Sunday, after the House of Bishops formally commended the Prayers of Love and Faith at a meeting on Tuesday.

A statement on Tuesday afternoon revealed that the Bishops had voted 24-11, with three recorded abstentions, in favour of commending the collection of prayers, which were first published in draft form in January….

Two marathon debates in the General Synod, in February and November, ended with votes approving the Bishops’ plan to commend the blessings, despite threats of legal action if they were to go ahead….

The blessings have only being sanctioned for use within regular services, and not as a stand-alone service. In the Synod in November, an amendment calling on the Bishops to consider a trial period for stand-alone services was carried, albeit narrowly….

Read it all.

Blessings for same-sex couples can take place within existing church services from this Sunday, after the House of Bishops formally commended the Prayers of Love and Faith at a meeting on Tuesday. https://t.co/4MuuNMnPpc

— Church Times (@ChurchTimes) December 12, 2023

A “complex matrix of reasons” led to the disbanding of the Independent Safeguarding Board (ISB), says a report published on Monday.

Its author, Sarah Wilkinson, a barrister, identifies the Archbishops’ Council as responsible for “structural” issues with the way in which the ISB was set up and administered, which led to a situation in which the positions of the board members and Archbishops’ Council “were not clearly defined”.

Ms Wilkinson suggests that the termination of the contracts of the ISB members was made “almost inevitable” owing to their “breakdown in relationships” after Meg Munn was appointed as acting chair in March….

The two other board members — Jasvinder Sanghera and Steve Reeves — expressed concern at not being consulted on Ms Munn’s appointment, and survivors and survivor-advocates suggested that her position as the independent chair of the National Safeguarding Panel, another body scrutinising C of E safeguarding practices, amounted to a conflict of interest.

Read it all.

A "complex matrix of reasons” led to the disbanding of the Independent Safeguarding Board (ISB), says a report published on Monday.https://t.co/1owXjj9XY5

— Church Times (@ChurchTimes) December 11, 2023

The problem is that, as with the former Prime Minister’s claim, nobody really believes this is the case. How many people really believe that:

• what will be commended in the PLF Suite of Resource—public prayers for God’s blessing on two people of the same sex many of whom will be in a sexual relationship and/or a civil same-sex marriage—has always been lawful in the Church of England and could have been commended by the bishops and used by clergy at any point in the past? 
• the use of such prayers does not represent a major change from the historic and current situation? 
• while the doctrine of marriage remains unchanged, the proposed use of the PLF is neither contrary to doctrine nor indicative of a departure from in doctrine in any essential matter? 
• all these claims have been shown by the House of Bishops to be theologically and legally coherent and convincing?

Charlie Bell, a supporter of getting PLF done but also a severe critic of the latest proposals, recently wrote “what the bishops have done may be legal, but it is not honest”. This echoes the language of Canon C1 and the oath of canonical obedience. The way in which the bishops are proceeding—the “nothing has changed” argument and the refusal to publish the written legal advice they have received—is very difficult to view as honest and to trust. Given the law has not formally been changed, for many the introduction of PLF means that the doctrine to which the law refers has changed in practice. If, as it is being claimed, doctrine has not changed, then what is being proposed seems to many to be not only “not honest” but also, as shown by past legal advice, probably “not legal”. 

In short, unless we sincerely believe and are convinced that “nothing has changed”, then we have to say that it appears the bishops are acting in their commendation, and thereby encouraging clergy to act in their services, in ways which are unlawful. In addition, those liturgical actions are now—because of the bishops’ decisions, which do not alter the legality of what they commend and so in one sense could be described as simply symbolic or “virtue signalling”—going to attract much more attention when they take place then they have done in the past. This means clergy who accept at face value and act on the basis of the bishops’ commendation are probably more likely to face legal challenge than they were in the past.

In the light of this, it even more unacceptable that the bishops are now so reticent to set out clearly for parish clergy, and those who advise them such as archdeacons, both

1. the changing written legal advice which they have received throughout this process, particularly for their 9^th October meeting, and
2. a clear explanation as to how what they are now proposing in PLF is, and indeed always has been, legal and how this judgment relates to the content of past legal advice which they have published that would suggest otherwise.

Read it all.

It has repeatedly been stated that the CofE's doctrine of marriage has not changed. Can the bishops commend the Prayers of Love and Faith with any credibility without sharing the legal and theological basis on which they are doing so? @theologyethics1 https://t.co/3c7RlIvjb9

— Dr Ian Paul (@Psephizo) November 28, 2023

The amended motion that was eventually passed on Wednesday after a long and often painful debate as different conscientiously held views were explained and exchanged noted the progress made since the February Synod which asked the House of Bishops to find ways of commending the Prayers of Love and Faith alongside a number of other commitments, not least a heartfelt declaration of repentance for the prejudice and exclusion many LGBTQIA+ people had experienced and sadly sometimes continue to experience in the church. Nothing has yet changed or been introduced, but ways forward and a path to follow is being mapped out. That’s really what this Synod was about.

In particular, what will happen next is that the prayers themselves will be commended for use, either privately and pastorally with same-sex couples, or as part of an existing or regular service in church, but standalone services, i.e. that bit of LLF which has received the most publicity, and probably where the greatest disagreement lies, will be subject to a process of authorisation under Canon B2, which would mean that in order to receive final authorisation, there would need to be a two thirds majority in favour in each of the three synodical houses – bishops, clergy, laity.

Leading up to that vote, there will probably be a period of experimentation under Canon B5A. This is the canon allows individual parishes that want to, that opt in, to apply to be able to use material on an experimental basis for a fixed period, at the end of which, Synod considers whether to extend the authorization under B2. That’s’ the vote requiring the two thirds majorities. Doing it this way will be useful way both gauging the feeling of the Church, but also give time to properly consider exactly what sort of pastoral reassurance and provision will be necessary to honour those who in good conscience won’t be able to support these developments. Again, I want you to know that I am very committed to ensuring this happens well in the Diocese of York, but also for the whole Church of England, as are my colleagues.

The pastoral guidance concerning what this means for ordinands and clergy, particularly over whether they could be permitted to enter into same-sex marriages themselves is still a work in progress and wasn’t really discussed at this synod. But it will be forthcoming in the early part of 2024.

Read it all.

Jesus calls peacemakers ‘children of God’, a vital message for our church as well as for our world.

Read my @DioceseofYork synod address https://t.co/xs4hygpAn8

— Archbishop of York (@CottrellStephen) November 18, 2023

For many in the Church of England a line was crossed this week that we prayed and hoped would not happen.

On Wednesday afternoon, the General Synod expressed its support by a tiny majority of just a few votes for the continued implementation of the House of Bishops proposals to change the position and practice of the Church of England with regards to sexual ethics and marriage.

In practice we now expect the bishops to commend prayers of blessing for same sex couples by mid-December (and provide dedicated services soon after), to prepare guidance which will make it possible for clergy to marry their same sex partners, and that future ordinands will not to be asked to indicate whether their lifestyle and personal relationships are in keeping with the doctrine of the Church of England.

We believe these proposals are being pursued without adequate provision and protection for those holding to the biblical, historic and global majority Anglican view on marriage and sexual intimacy. This underlines the failure of leadership by the archbishops and divided House and College of Bishops….

Read it all.

Responding to the 15 November 2023 General Synod decision: looking forward – The Church of England Evangelical Council https://t.co/uCRNEJTIW2

— Simon Sarmiento (@simonsarmiento) November 18, 2023

From there:

We are saddened to know that the General Synod of the Church of England has passed a resolution to bless same sex unions despite almost 50% of the Synod opposing the bishops’ proposal. This disastrous decision creates the same serious consequences of differentiation and division as in other provinces and further fractures our beloved Anglican Communion.

On behalf of the Primates of the Global South Fellowship of Anglican Churches (GSFA), I once again affirm the GSFA Ash Wednesday Statement which we made on Feb 20^th this year (2023). We wholeheartedly support the faithful bishops, clergy and laity within the Church of England and assure them of our continuing prayers and pastoral commitment as a global body.

“……. Be faithful unto death, and I will give you the crown of life.” Revelation 2:10

Congratulations to Archbishop Justin Badi Arama who was enthroned as Archbishop of South Sudan this weekend!

We pray that God will use him to uphold the authority of scripture and the true gospel of Jesus Christ in South Sudan and beyond. pic.twitter.com/hxEWNPx93O

— GAFCON (@gafconference) April 25, 2018

Stand-alone services of blessing for same-sex couples are to go ahead in trial form, after an amendment was made — by a narrow vote — to the main motion being debated by the General Synod.

The final motion was carried on Wednesday afternoon in all three Houses: Bishops 23-10, Clergy 100-93, and Laity 104-100.

The motion stated that the Synod “recognise the progress made by the House of Bishops towards implementing the motion on Living in Love and Faith (LLF) in February 2023 . . . and encourage the House to continue its work of implementation”.

The margins in the final vote were tighter than they had been in February’s vote on the original proposals…, in the House of Bishops as in the others: nine months ago, only four bishops voted against.

Read it all.

Stand-alone services of blessing for same-sex couples are to go ahead in trial form, after an amendment was made — by a narrow vote — to the main motion being debated by the General Synod.https://t.co/q3vLOH8NmF

— Church Times (@ChurchTimes) November 15, 2023

10.6 Faced with these problems there would appear to be broadly three (not necessarily mutually exclusive) pathways forward that would have some degree of theological integrity and which might enable the Church of England to proceed in a way that minimises conflict and division and maintains as high a degree of communion as possible in the light of where we now are:

Pausing in order to refine and develop further the theological arguments set out here in Annex H and then seeking a consensus for them in their final articulation as an adequate theological rationale for a form of PLF consistent with them and for new pastoral guidance and pastoral reassurance including any “formal structural pastoral provision in this time of uncertainty” (Introduction, para 18, p.3);
Recognising that for “a time of uncertainty” we have well-established processes in relation to liturgical development and so using Canon B2 (and the need for two-thirds support for any change in all 3 Houses of General Synod at the end of the process) for all of PLF;
Acknowledging that our deeper problem is that the Church has within it two significantly sized groupings divided over whether the existing doctrine is right and should shape our pastoral and liturgical life or is wrong and needs to be replaced with an alternative theology that should then shape our pastoral and liturgical life. Each of these has a clear and internally consistent theological rationale. What is therefore likely needed is not an unsatisfactory and unstable mix of supposed doctrinal continuity but with significant practical changes based on a “new insight into doctrine”. Instead, we need to seek some form of new structural settlement which would give to each of these contrasting and competing theologies their own secure, legally defined and episcopally-led ecclesial space with theological integrity and as high a degree of communion as possible between them within the Church of England.

Read it all.

As General Synod gathers, some thoughts on the theological rationale being offered for PLF with thanks again to @Psephizo for posting. https://t.co/R3RmHgE3pU

— Andrew Goddard (@goddardaj) November 13, 2023

A group of 44 bishops made a public statement on Wednesday afternoon expressing their hope that pastoral guidance allowing priests to be in same-sex marriages would be issued “without delay”.

The statement in favour of reform follows three weeks after 12 bishops publicly dissented from a majority decision by the House of Bishops to commend prayers for same-sex couples….

The new group, 15 diocesan bishops and 29 suffragans, write that they “recognise the complexities of the Pastoral Guidance in relation to ministry, and also the need for a swift end to the current uncertainty for LGBTQIA+ clergy and ordinands.

“We look forward to Guidance being issued without delay that includes the removal of all restrictions on clergy entering same-sex civil marriages, and on bishops’ ordaining and licensing such clergy, as well as granting permissions to officiate.”Read it all (registration or subscription).

Don’t delay guidance allowing priests to be in same-sex marriages, say 44 bishops https://t.co/81hu1fsLkH

— Simon Sarmiento (@simonsarmiento) November 1, 2023

The LLF steering group is chaired by the the Bishop of London, the Rt Revd Sarah Mullally, and the Bishop of Winchester, the Rt Revd Philip Mounstephen.

In response to the question from Sir Ben and Mr Gibson “what physical acts the Church refers to when teaching that sexual intimacy outside of marriage is forbidden”, Mr Selous — who represents the Church Commissioners in Parliament — responded: “The Living in Love and Faith process has always sought to recognise that the expression of sexual intimacy between two people cannot be reduced to a small set of defined actions.”

A further question asked whether a “letter threatening legal action” had been sent to the Bishops between the meetings of the College and the House, to which Mr Selous responded that “several items of correspondence were received over this period from a number of groups with different views, reflecting differing legal and theological opinions, as is widely in the public domain.

“Some offered a legal opinion on the routes of commendation or authorisation for the Prayers of Love and Faith, but I am not aware that any directly threatened the recipients with legal action.”

Read it all.

“The proceedings of these meetings of the House of Bishops and College of Bishops, including details of votes, are confidential," Mr Selous wrote. On Thursday, @ChurchTimes revealed that both had voted that clergy should be able to enter same-sex marriageshttps://t.co/aHHdbYyr9r

— Church Times (@ChurchTimes) October 27, 2023

That story—at least, a sinister reading of it—came to mind as I tried to process last week’s revelation of an amicus brief filed in April by legal counsel for the Southern Baptist Convention, the SBC’s Executive Committee, Lifeway Christian Resources, and The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.

The case is Samantha Killary’s lawsuit against the city government of Louisville, Kentucky, where law enforcement employees allegedly enabled her years-long sexual abuse by her father, also a police officer.

No SBC entity is named in the lawsuit. But because it is similar to other lawsuits being brought against the SBC and the Executive Committee in Kentucky, legal counsel apparently advised these entities to file the amicus brief, encouraging the state Supreme Court to exclude “non-offender third parties” from Kentucky’s recent change in the statute of limitations for abuse claims.

This may protect the SBC from legal liability, but it harms Killary and excuses the institution that hurt her. It is an enormous betrayal to abuse survivors and our allies for accountability within the SBC, and the consequences will—and should—be grave.

Read it all.

After revelations of a scandalous amicus brief, @RevChrisDavis wonders who in the SBC is to blame.

“Here we are—survivors and pastors and therapists and attorneys who thought things were changing for the better—wondering what has just happened.”https://t.co/MO47ss2Oxo

— Christianity Today (@CTmagazine) November 1, 2023

The first thing to note is that it is not only difficult, but impossible, to argue that what the bishops are proposing is not a departure from teaching contained in the bishops’ statements concerning Civil Partnerships and same-sex marriages in 2005, 2014 and 2019. In these statements the bishops said that public prayers should not be said for same-sex couples. What is now being proposed is that such prayers should be offered. If the Bishops previous teaching constitutes doctrine for the purposes of clause (g) of the February General Synod motion and for the purposes of the Canons, then what is proposed is contrary to the doctrine of the Church of England.

The bishops argument seems to be that this change from previous teaching is not indicative of a change in any ‘essential matter’ because they are not proposing any change to the Church’s doctrine of marriage or its doctrine of sexual ethics which says that sexual intercourse should only take place within marriage (meaning a marriage with two people of the  opposite sex). Where their argument falls down is that if the Church of England’s doctrines of marriage and sexual ethics are viwed alongside the Church’s doctrine concerning the need for repentance and forgiveness for sin, then what they are proposing is necessarily a change of doctrine in an ‘essential matter.’

To understand why this is the case, the point that has to be grasped is that it is an absolutely essential part of Church of England doctrine that in order for people to be rightly related to God in this life and eternally happy with him in the next, they have to acknowledge, repent of, and confess their sins, not only in private but in the context of public worship, so that their sins may be forgiven and no longer constitute a barrier between them and God.

This doctrine is made crystal clear, for example, in the opening paragraphs of the service of Morning Prayer in the Book of Common Prayer:

Read it all.

Martin Davie–Why the Church of England Bishops Cannot Do what they are doing with Prayers for Same Sex couples https://t.co/ZiZJOWkIHC #anglican #theology #analysis #marriage #anthropology #ethics #holyscripture #BCP #anglican #religion #parishministry #UK 'The bishops argument… pic.twitter.com/FUM7TZSatW

— Kendall Harmon (@KendallHarmon6) October 27, 2023

Voting records seen by the Church Times show that a majority of 75 to 22 at the College of Bishops meeting in September supported a plan to approve the services under Canon B5A, which would have enabled their immediate use as an “experimental” service under the authority of the Archbishops.

At a meeting on 9 October, however, the House of Bishops opted to take a different route, and instead move straight to the full synodical process outlined in Canon B2. The College of Bishops had expressly voted against this, by a majority of 68 to 28.

The decision to reverse this in the House was by a small margin: 19 in favour of the plan to proceed straight to B2, and 16 against.

Although this will delay implementation, it means, none the less, that the votes are likely be taken by the present membership of the Synod. When the Synod voted to approve the Prayers of Love and Faith in February, the motion failed to gain a two-thirds majority in either of the Houses of Clergy and Laity

Read it all.

EXCLUSIVE: A large majority of C of E bishops support a move towards allowing priests to enter into same-sex marriage, and the immediate adoption of stand-alone services of blessing for same-sex couples, the Church Times can report. https://t.co/uo9UwWC0ZI

— Church Times (@ChurchTimes) October 26, 2023