So, what’s the way out?

Step forward, Revd Sam Ferguson, the Rector of The Falls Church Anglican in Virginia, USA, who also addressed the GSFA gathering.  

Revd Ferguson does not see the current controversies as a threat, or something to be managed, or put to one side – instead he explained that the controversy was a gift and an opportunity.  “If you look at the history of the Church”, he said, “Christian doctrine is typically produced in the pressure of heresy and controversy, not in a vacuum.”

He described the LGBTQ movement as, “a flower on a tree, that is a completely a new way of understanding what it means to be human – so underlying the whole LGBTQ movement are a whole different set of assumptions about being human.” 

His thesis was that to address these assumptions, which affect us all, the Church needs to discover an ever more compelling vision of biblical anthropology, which will then shape our response with compassion and clarity.  Compassion for individuals who experience pain. Clarity because the truth is not subjective.

Living up to the challenge, in less than an hour, he set out three of the unarticulated assumptions which shape the world in which we live and are seen in the LGBT movement.  He then offered a glorious, biblical alternative to each one. 

1. I am a self-made individual, answerable to no-one
2. My sense of self is located in my feelings rather than any objective reality
3. I find my hope in happiness (and sex) and my healing in transition

As he travelled from creation to the new creation, Ferguson showed compassion for the fallen world and pointed to the resurrection hope for hurting people.  He challenged those present that the church needed to offer “a thick enough ecclesia, Christian community, to come around people who are hurting – but it is a Spirit-shaped community and a Spirit-shaped transformation.”

The presentation was steeped in his own American culture, yet his biblical exegesis landed with those from all nations.  The Q&A just kept going and when time was eventually called, he was surrounded by delegates from all over the world. There was no ‘deep listening’ – but those listening wanted more. 

Read it all.

The CofE bishops are stuck because they cannot agree on the answer to a simple question – “Is same-sex sex sinful?” Can the GSFA Assembly help? https://t.co/JKE1AgzVya

— Anglican Futures (@AnglicanFutures) June 14, 2024

What is to be welcomed in this latest article is that it seems to acknowledge our problems are ultimately doctrinal and that our understanding of unity has to face that reality. This is because unity and doctrine belong together: different doctrines will, it acknowledges, require different spaces within one church. This represents a significant development that opens up conversations with ecumenical theology and practice but it is also one whose logic needs to be carried through carefully and consistently. There is the danger of rushing forward and falling into an unprincipled and incoherent pluralism which seeks to give equal standing to contradictory doctrines and practices. There is also the danger of failing to give the proper degree of space necessary to secure the highest degree of communion possible. 

If we are to proceed properly with this “reset” we need the bishops, members of General Synod, and the Church of England as whole (including various “stakeholders” already creating their own “space” in the new networks of the Alliance and Together) to:

• find a way forward which will allow both “freedom for each group” and “genuine expression of our unity in the Body of Christ, and in our shared Anglican heritage”;
• recognise that consensus “usually emerges, even though it may take time”;
• take seriously the “call to be careful and to respect and value the processes of the Church for collective discernment”;
• show that we believe both that “unity matters – it really matters” and that it is “important…to contend for right doctrine” and unity and doctrine cannot be separated.

There are still real risks. These include an over-emphasis on a supposed “new spirit of generosity and pragmatism”, the continuing influence among bishops of a flawed understanding of what it means for them to be “a focus of unity” detached from them upholding doctrine, and the desire on the part of many simply to “get PLF/LLF done” (in the way they want). 

If unity matters, can that be based on anything other than agreed doctrine? Do Martyn Snow's proposals for a reset address the challenges facing the LLF process? Can we avoid another car crash at Synod? @goddardaj @simonsarmiento https://t.co/A5Y5RaezVR

— Dr Ian Paul (@Psephizo) June 11, 2024

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

A Response to the Primates Meeting in Rome

Archbishop Laurent Mbanda, Chairman of the Gafcon Primates Council pic.twitter.com/6RodpHUpkd

— Gafcon (@GafconGBE) May 6, 2024

You may find the link to the text of the full letter there.

“It may be that God is destroying the Church of England and who am I to stand in his way?

“The real tragedy would be if, in this traumatic, confusing time, if all of the evangelicals and the broader Orthodox group fall out with each other… if we can bear with each other in our different strategies, then that will be what we need (in whatever the future in England is going to be), whether that’s within the Church of England or outside.

Charlie Skrine, the senior minister of All Souls Langham Place London, says his church (and other evangelical churches in the UK) are in a world of pain at the moment over the growing split in the Church of England.

Mr Skrine, who is speaking at the Evangelical Fellowship in the Anglican Communion Conference in Sydney, says All Souls is united in it’s commitment to biblical teaching on sexual ethics, but divided on what the best response should be.

Read and listen to it all.

In answers to British magazine Evangelicals Now, Rico Tice underlined that it is “vital” form him to express a “clear separation from a church that no longer affirms Biblical orthodoxy, especially with regard to preaching repentance”.

The fact that the Archbishop of Canterbury had not given “a substantive response” to the call by Rico Tice and others to “resist the influence of cultural values when they are in opposition to those of the Bible” led him to this decision.

The author and evangelist described himself as “a cradle-to-grave Anglican” who identifies most with Anglicans in the Global South when it comes to the authority of the Bible.

Anglican Communion movements such as Gafcon and GSAFC have been very critical with what they understand as a shift in Christian doctrine of the Church of England on issues like human identity, sexuality and marriage.

Read it all.

The well-known author of ‘Christianity Explored’ says he has not received “a substantive response” from the Archbishop on where the Church stands on issues of marriage and sexuality. https://t.co/SqtgG7QbVA

— Evangelical Focus (@Evan_Focus) April 29, 2024

The provincial proposal being advocated by CEEC and the Alliance would involve the exercise of geographical episcopacy as it would involve bishops having responsibility for particular geographical areas. I have previously made this point in a theoretical description of what a conservative third province (the ‘Province of Mercia’) might look like.

‘Like the existing provinces of Canterbury and York, the new province would consist of parishes, deaneries, archdeaconries and dioceses. The number of dioceses that would initially be formed would obviously depend on how many parishes opted to join the new province, but one possible pattern would be for there to initially be four dioceses, one in the Southwest, one in the South and Southeast, one in the Midlands and East Anglia, and one in the North. Chaplaincies in Europe would come under the diocese for the South and Southeast.

Each diocese would initially have one bishop and one of these would be the archbishop of the province. There would be no fixed archiepiscopal diocese and the office of archbishop would subsequently be held by the senior bishop of the province.

A parish church in each diocese would be the cathedral. This would contain the bishop’s chair and would be used for diocesan services such as the enthronement of the bishop, ordinations, and the renewal of ordination vows on Maundy Thursday. The diocese would be named after the location of the cathedral and the incumbent would carry the title Dean. There would be no cathedral chapter and when not being used for diocesan services the cathedral would act as a normal parish church.’

As can be clearly seen in this description the geographical nature of episcopacy would be maintained in such a provincial arrangement. Bell’s suggestion that the geographical nature of the episcopate precludes a provincial solution is therefore mistaken.

Read it all.

I have just posted a new blog post, 'Geographical episcopacy – a further response to Charlie Bell.'https://t.co/5qMh71WfIv

— Martin Davie (@MartinBDavie) March 11, 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

Early in 2023, the Anglicans in England approved liturgical prayers at same-sex civil marriages, while not permitting same-sex marriages in the Church of England itself. This led to a decision by Anglican archbishops in the Global South Fellowship of Anglican Churches (GSFA) to break off communion with Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby.

The bishops of the Global South Fellowship said that they are “no longer able to recognize” Welby as “first among equals,” because the Church of England’s General Synod made decisions that “run contrary to the faith and order of the orthodox provinces in the communion whose people constitute the majority in the global flock.”

That was one of the most important religious stories of 2023, but it did not get the attention it deserved. Welby serenely crowned King Charles in May as if nothing had changed, even though the Anglican Communion was in tatters and he was left, in effect, leading a small minority of global Anglicans.

Read it all.

Makes the heart sad–A Bleak Year for Christian Unity Concludes| National Catholic Register https://t.co/sPa91150Kz #romancatholic #popefrancis #justinwelby #globalisation #ecumenism #21stc #theology #anthropology #marriage #ethics #globalsouth

— Kendall Harmon (@KendallHarmon6) February 22, 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.

“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.

“I’m really saddened by this,” he said. “There’s lots of clergy, evangelical clergy, middle of the road clergy and Catholic Church clergy, who are really disappointed that the House of bishops have taken this step against a lot of advice and knowing that it’s going to cause massive damage to the Church of England. So I’m disappointed that we, as a Church are putting forward prayers and we are doing it on such a narrow margin in terms of votes for and against.

“There are lots of clergy and churches who want to know how they’re going to be looked after if they dissent, if they continue to hold to the doctrine of the Church of England. None of that has been explained that this point.

“Some things in the pastoral guidance show that bishops are almost washing their hands of clergy and the doctrine. It feels like we’re almost being gaslit.”

[The] Rev [Mr] Ould said that just before the House of Bishops meeting, a broad alliance of Anglo Catholics and evangelicals had written to the bishops telling them not to go ahead with the guidance.

Read it all.

CofE bishops are ‘washing their hands of doctrine’ over same sex blessings says vicar – Premier Christian News | Headlines, Breaking News, Comment & Analysis https://t.co/UKYjUjgEV6

— GospelLover (@hateisfutile) December 14, 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

The situation the Church of England is now in.

The situation in which the Church of England finds itself as a result of the vote on the amended House of Bishops motion on Living in Love and Faith is a peculiar one.

In its official sources of doctrine, the Church of England maintains unchanged the traditional beliefs of the Christian Church as a whole, based on the teaching of the Bible:

a) That marriage is between two people of the opposite sex, that the sole legitimate place for sexual intercourse to take place is within marriage thus defined, and that any form of marriage or sexual activity outside these parameters is sinful.

b) That sinful activity needs to be addressed through repentance, absolution and amendment of life.

c) That those who are ordained ought to be living lives of visible holiness.

However, the result of November’s Synod vote is going to be that the House of Bishops will commend prayers of blessing for use in normal church services for those in same-sex marriages and/or sexually active same-sex relationships and with also authorise  experimental ‘standalone’ services to mark such marriages and relationships. This liturgical provision will not contain any call for those in such marriages and relationships to repent of them, to receive absolution and to amend their lives so that they are in conformity the Church’s teaching.

In addition, it seems almost certain that the House of Bishops will institute a change in the Church of England’s existing practice which will mean that those who are in same-sex marriages and/or same-sex sexual relationships will be permitted to be ordained. This will mean that lives of visible holiness in relation to marriage and sexual conduct will no longer be a pre-requisite for ordination.

The result of these changes will be that as a result of the action of the majority of the bishops the Church of England will be a Church that still upholds beliefs a, b and c above in terms of its official doctrine, but will have ceased to uphold them in its practice.

The question I want to address in the remainder of this paper is how conservative Christians in the Church of England who continue to uphold the traditional Christian beliefs listed above should relate to their bishops in this new situation.

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 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

Referring to Dr Croft’s amendment, …[Dr Jill Duff] said that the “one-vote knife-edge” would make it difficult to implement anything. What was needed was a “better way that will help us keep united, help us flourish”.

She referred to her positive experience in Blackburn, working with a diocesan bishop, the Rt Revd Philip North, who opposed the ordination of women, as an example of how it was possible for the Church to stay together despite deep differences (News, 12 January).

A “consensus” was needed akin to the one that had enabled the legislation on women bishops to be carried by two-thirds majorities in the Synod. “We did that quite carefully, and it has enabled us to be respected across the whole spectrum,” she said.

In the Synod in July, however, the Bishop of Dover, the Rt Revd Rose Hudson-Wilkin, made a speech in which she implored the Church not to go down the same route: it “ain’t working — and we are paying the price”, she said.

Read it all.

The Archbishop of Canterbury revealed that he had abstained from the vote, because “my pastoral responsibility extends to everyone in the Church of England and global Anglican Communion". But he “welcomed” its outcome. https://t.co/QF6mo6KJHM

— Church Times (@ChurchTimes) November 17, 2023

This week marks a tragic moment in the history of the Church of England. On Wednesday, November 15, its General Synod approved a proposal to encourage its bishops to continue their work in creating and implementing liturgical prayers of blessing for same-sex unions. The Synod additionally voted to approve an amendment that will allow clergy to go ahead and conduct standalone services of blessing on a trial basis. This means that, beginning next month, Anglican clergy in Church of England churches will be able to do what the prophet Balaam could not and would not do by going against the Word of God and blessing that which God has condemned (Num 24:12-14).

Holy Scripture is clear and unequivocal in its affirmation that the only proper context for sexual intimacy is the relationship of a man and woman who have been joined together in marriage. All forms of sexual intimacy outside of this context are condemned as immorality and are behaviors from which the people of God are regularly called to repent. In I Corinthians 6:9-10, the apostle Paul tells us “not to be deceived” on the seriousness of such immorality and warns us that those who fail to repent of it will not inherit the kingdom of God. And one of the behaviors he specifically names is that of homosexual activity. Elsewhere the New Testament specifically warns against false teachers who promote sexual immorality within the church (2 Peter 2:1-3, Jude 3-4, Rev. 2:19-24) and instructs us not to listen to or heed their words.

This week, the Church of England has made it clear that they disagree with Holy Scripture. They have decided that they can bless that from which the Bible calls us to repent. What is more, although these motions were passed by very narrow votes among the clergy and laity, the bishops gave their support and approval by a very clear majority. This is a tragedy for Anglicans, for not only has the Church of England done what its own Thirty-Nine Articles forbid by approving ceremonies that are “contrary to God’s Word written” (Articles XX, XXXIV), but a majority of its bishops have broken the vows which they swore at their consecration, to “banish and drive away all erroneous and strange doctrine contrary to God’s Word” (BCP Ordinal).

Read it all.

St. Patrick’s Day – preaching in Down Cathedral, N. Ireland on the theme of reconciliation. Grateful for the opportunity! pic.twitter.com/Vxs4XAlPtd

— Laurent Mbanda (@MbandaLaurent) March 17, 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

From there:

“CEEC is grieved and saddened that the General Synod passed a motion earlier this afternoon to continue with the implementation of the bishops’ proposals. These proposals depart from a biblical understanding of sex and marriage, in particular by enabling blessings for same sex couples in parish churches. This decision follows a process that has been widely observed as unduly hasty, incomplete and haphazard.

“This is, however, more than just a departure from the biblical understanding of sex and marriage. Sadly, today marks a ‘watershed’ moment, in that it appears that the Church of England no longer sees Scripture as our supreme authority.

“If the bishops continue with the implementation of their proposals, we believe this will have a devastating impact on churches across the country and beyond. It will tear local parish congregations apart, damage the relationship between large numbers of clergy and their bishops and cause churches across the dioceses to feel as though their shepherds have abandoned them. It may also serve a final blow to the unity of the Anglican Communion.

“CEEC longs for a resurgence of faithfulness to biblical teaching, which would deepen the unity for which Jesus prayed in John 17.

“CEEC is committed to supporting the ministry of orthodox evangelical lay people and ministers across the dioceses. In the next few days CEEC will announce a series of provisions for orthodox evangelicals and work to do all it can to ensure evangelical life and witness in the Church of England continues for years to come.”

From there:

The decision of the General Synod to support the bishops of the Church of England in their intention to make provision for blessings for couples in same-sex relationships represents a shocking departure from the teaching of God’s Word, which will have serious and distressing repercussions.

I should stress that there is no disagreement about the great dignity of all people, made in God’s image and deeply loved by him. We all affirm the importance of welcoming everyone to our churches, whatever their sexuality or relational circumstances. The division is about sex and marriage. The Bible’s teaching is clear, as taught by the universal church down the ages, that God intended his good gift of sex to be reserved for the marriage of a man and a woman (see my recent publication Together in Love and Faith? for more detailed teaching on this and related matters).

By offering the prayers they have published, the bishops will be giving authority (to those clergy who wish to use them), to bless in God’s name behaviour which the Bible calls sin. This is a very grievous step to take, which will cause serious spiritual damage and result in deep division within the Church of England and wider Anglican Communion.

Although the blessings will only be formally commended after the bishops publish further guidance in the summer about the context in which they can be used, the direction of travel is clear. In our distress, and perhaps confusion, we should remember that Christ is lovingly sovereign over his church and his purposes will prevail. We should also be encouraged by the principled, robust and united opposition to these proposals from over 40% of the Houses of Clergy and Laity in Synod, as well as a handful of bishops. That is a significant grouping which, in fellowship with the great majority of global Anglicans, alongside faithful Christians of all traditions and denominations, is determined to continue to walk together in obedience to Christ, as we seek to bear witness to him in our lost and needy world. We cannot, however, travel with those who are leading people away from God’s ways.

St Ebbe’s clergy have already declared that we are in impaired communion with the bishops in our diocese, which means that we will not welcome them to preach, confirm, ordain or conduct our ministerial reviews, and we will not take communion with them. The PCC has also taken action to ensure that any money we pay within the diocese is distributed via the Oxford Good Stewards Trust and is only used for faithful gospel ministry and essential administrative costs. We will be working closely with others, especially within the Church of England Evangelical Council, to discuss what other actions we can take, either individually as churches or together, both to distance ourselves from false teaching and to promote the cause of the gospel. As a larger church, we are especially conscious of our responsibility to help and support smaller evangelical churches, as well as faithful clergy and laity who are in the especially vulnerable situation of serving in churches where their congregations are divided or against them on these issues.

The debate within Synod, and the decision it made, bear witness to a division which goes far deeper than that over the particular presenting issue. There are now two distinct groups within the Church of England. One has chosen the way of compromise with the world and disobedience to God’s word; the other is determined to stay faithful to Christ, whatever the cost. It has been very encouraging to see deepening bonds growing between orthodox Anglicans, from different evangelical and other orthodox ‘tribes’. In the months, and no doubt years, ahead we will be seeking to build new structures that will, God willing, enable us to maintain distance from those who have gone down the wrong path, while working together with orthodox Anglicans in the cause of the gospel.

There will be significant challenges ahead, as we are forced to distance ourselves from many within the Church of England, while being faced with bemusement and, no doubt hostility, from the watching world. Perhaps most painfully, we will have to face differences amongst friends about how to respond to these realities. Our consciences and contexts differ. For myself, along with very many others, I am determined to stay to contend for truth and bear witness to Christ within the Church of England, and believe we can do so with integrity, certainly at this time and for the foreseeable future. Others, for varying reasons, whether principled, pragmatic or both, will choose a different path. Let us determine to resist the devil in his attempts to divide us and keep looking to our loving God. We are in desperate need of his mercy, because of our many sins, his wisdom in our perplexity and his strength in our weakness.

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

The General Synod is to vote on whether stand-alone services of blessing for same-sex couples should be authorised immediately for experimental use rather than first undergoing a full synodical process.

The move would effectively reverse a decision made in the House of Bishops last month…, but seems to be supported by both archbishops.

A total of 13 amendments have been tabled to the motion to be tabled by the Bishop of London, the Rt Revd Sarah Mullally, on Tuesday afternoon, which recognises both the uncertainty surrounding the implementation of Prayers of Love and Faith for same-sex couples, and the progress that has already been made. The Synod’s agreement in February…to commend the prayers has since been challenged by those who want the decision to be removed from the Bishops and given to the Synod.

The Bishop of Oxford, Dr Steven Croft, has tabled an amendment asking the Bishops “to consider whether some stand-alone services for same-sex couples could be made available for use, possibly on a trial basis, on the timescale envisaged by the motion passed by the Synod in February 2023”.

Read it all.

The move would effectively reverse a decision made in the House of Bishops last month, but seems to be supported by both archbishops https://t.co/BBZVym6KzL

— Church Times (@ChurchTimes) November 14, 2023

Where we are right now, is not where any of us would like to be.

But I continue to believe that we can find a way of living in love and faith.

Furthermore, I stand by the statements I made in February. There will need to be some sort of provision. But just as the way forward that is being proposed is pastoral, and in my view does not mean a change in the Church of England’s doctrine of Holy Matrimony, so I believe the reassurance and provision that we need should be pastoral. This is why I will be supporting the amendment being put forward by the Bishop of Oxford because, as things stand, I am concerned that clergy using the commended prayers might find themselves vulnerable to a legal challenge if their use of the prayers looks to someone else to be a standalone service.

Something that allows standalone services for an experimental period seems to me to be a sensible and pastoral way forward. It gives clergy and parishes who want to use the Prayers of Love and Faith the legal protection they need. And because this will be on an opt-in basis, clergy and parishes who in good conscience won’t use the prayers will be under no compunction or compulsion so to do, nor will they be disadvantaged in any way by their decision.

We will, of course, need further discussions about how this provision continues to run through all that we are proposing. I’m sure the Bishop of London will say more about this when we get to that bit of our agenda. I also recognise that the pastoral guidance that is such a key component in this work should not be thought of as a fixed entity but a body of guidance that will evolve.

But my purpose in this address is not to anticipate the debate. Rather, it is to ask us to lift our eyes above the debate to see Jesus.

Read it all.

General @Synod for the @churchofengland starts today. Over the next few days, we’ll be debating and voting on a number of important items.

Pray for all involved, that we may come together well and be granted wisdom in our discussions and decisions. 🙏 pic.twitter.com/LHXGGGk9FM

— Archbishop of York (@CottrellStephen) November 13, 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