It is still being assumed by those pursuing change in the Church of England that we can simply ‘agree to disagree’ over matters of same-sex marriage and blessings. In practice, this means that the permission not to use the Prayers of Love and Faith is a sufficient provision and that either no or minimum structural rearrangement is necessary.
This, however, remains a theological ostrich with its head in the sand. How can the Church of England simultaneously say that same-sex marriage and blessings are both sinful and holy? And as someone who holds to a globally acknowledged Biblical position on human sexuality, my conscience will not allow me to simply accept a Church of England that blesses sin as if it were holiness.
The best explanation I have been given as to why those seeking change will not pull their heads out of the sand and acknowledge this reality is that they do not want to address the consequences.
What are the consequences?
In the short term, clergy who in good conscience do not offer the Prayers of Love and Faith will be under pressure from at least a part of their parish and deanery to do so. They could find themselves the target of social media campaigns and abuse, and we are already seeing examples of dioceses where senior leaders are threatening parochial clergy with various consequences if they make public their position and/or participate in initiatives of conscientious objection such as the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC) Ephesian Fund and alternative spiritual oversight.
In the long term, the pressure on orthodoxy will continue to grow. In parochial appointment situations, liberal parish reps will be able to veto the appointment of orthodox candidates. The Crown Nominations Commission may find itself presented with diocesan profiles that imply that a ‘welcoming bishop’ needs to be one who supports the use of the Prayers of Love and Faith by those who wish to – the squeezing out of orthodox candidates from their consideration. Theological colleges, Bishops’ Mission Orders and other opportunities may also become contingent upon either a positive view of the Prayers, or at least silence around them.
Where are we now?
Following the February 2024 General Synod debate on Living in Love and Faith, it has been suggested that a new ‘tone’ or ‘reset’ has been achieved. While the ‘tone’ of the debate was different in the recent General Synod, the intended direction of travel seems unchanged. In a letter sent on 8 March by the lead bishop for the Living in Love and Faith project indicates the agenda remains as before – namely, to work towards the introduction of standalone services, to replace ‘issues in human sexuality’, and to offer only ‘minimal structural provision’.
Evangelicals throughout the Church of England need to be aware that the appetite of the House of Bishops and those supporting unbiblical change in the General Synod has not in any way diminished, and that the consequences referred to above (and many others) are an inevitable part of the future unless robust, legal, structural provision can be made to secure orthodox life and witness.
Is a structural settlement realistic?
The million dollar question is not ‘is it realistic?’ – rather, ‘do people want it?’. If the House of Bishops and General Synod supported a proposal for structural reorganisation (involving dioceses and provinces), it could happen. It’s as simple as that. Yes, it would involve a lot of work, substantial legal bills and hundreds of hours of committee time. But it could happen. Some have suggested that it would need Parliamentary time, though that is highly disputed and not at all proven.
So the choice facing us all is, do we want an ongoing, continuing, debilitating attritional conflict over the next few years, or could we agree to support an in-principle proposal for substantial structural reorganisation of the Church of England? No one is going to have to act against their conscience in supporting a settlement, but without one there is a high risk of orthodoxy being squeezed out.
The most significant Synod motion in forty years?
In July this year, the Church of England could see the most significant Private Members Motion (PMM) on sex and …