Anglican evangelicals are deeply troubled

Church of England bishops will meet this month to continue their deliberations about human sexuality and gender identity.

In this meeting, and then in a subsequent meeting of the House of Bishops (diocesan bishops plus elected suffragans), they will draw together proposals to put to General Synod in February 2023. It is most likely that this synod will be used to seek opinion on the bishops’ proposals rather than to ratify a new measure, but then this will frame the agenda for the July synod.

The College of Bishops also met in October, following a programme of reflections on and responses to the Living in Love and Faith campaign, which began in 2020. In the same week, Steven Croft, the Bishop of Oxford, published his essay, Together in Love and Faith, which called for same-sex marriage in the Church of England. At the time of writing, a small number of bishops have publicly aligned themselves with his position. Again, at the time of writing, a corresponding call to hold to the current teaching of the denomination has not been issued by a bishop with an orthodox position.

One of the tenets of the Living in Love and Faith process has been to refrain from concluding on an outcome and to give time to listening to others. This has caused frustration on both sides of the debate, but many have found that taking the time to listen to people with different experiences has been profitable.

The process may have curated a deeper understanding of others, with compassion and empathy, but it has also exposed the depth of disagreement between conservatives and revisionists. We may learn to disagree without it being or feeling like a personal attack, but the disagreement is profound and fundamental because it is about how we receive the word of God.

It is hard to conceive (humanly) how the denomination will reach a settled mind on the matter. Through the concerted efforts of the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC) and Church Society last year, there is now a ‘blocking minority’ on General Synod. Nevertheless, the most vexing question is whether such deep disagreement about God’s word could come to any other resolution than visible differentiation.

In the same month of October, three new assistant bishops were consecrated in the Anglican Network in Europe, who will provide pastoral oversight to churches in the Anglican Mission in England (AMiE). For those with reformed, episcopal convictions, AMiE offers a new home. But there will be those who don’t feel ready to give up on the Church of England, and those who are committed to their parish ministry, whatever happens.

Those who are in revitalisation contexts, for example, may be working in parish churches that have never had an evangelical ministry, and may be seeking to bring a gospel witness where there is no other way. In God’s grace, this ministry is growing and there are over 150 ministers and lay people in the Network of Revitalisation Ministries (NoRM).

Both the Bishop of Oxford and the CEEC have proposed a third province in addition to York and Canterbury. From a conservative position, a separate progressive province is preferable. It could come under TEC (The Episcopal Church) in the USA, which has already changed its doctrine and practice. Obviously, the revisionists would prefer a separate province for traditionalists, and whilst evangelicals may feel able to accept this, their church councils may not be minded to opt in, particularly those in NoRM.

Further speculation is ill-advised at this stage. Anglican evangelicals are deeply troubled, but openly humbled and increasingly unified, and in all those responses we can testify to the grace of God in Christ. When Paul reflected on his troubles in Asia he said: ‘This happened that we might not rely on ourselves but on God, who raises the dead,’ (2 Cor. 1:9). May we become more dependent on God in prayer, and may He have mercy on the Church of England.