The CofE's 'trojan horse' changing the doctrine of marriage

In June 2022, Aldershot Military Cemetery Chapel (not far from where I live) hosted a service of remembrance for Falklands veterans from the Parachute Regiment. That service is held every five years.

Just over a hundred and fifty years earlier, the then Bishop of Winchester, Samuel Wilberforce (third son of William Wilberforce) had consecrated the Protestant portion of the cemetery.

After the service, these comrades for life marched through the town, led by the Band of the Parachute Regiment. It was the 40th anniversary of the conflict that took the lives of 42 of their comrades.

In the Aldershot Branch of the Parachute Regimental Association, the mutual commitment is indisputable. They keep in touch with each other and meet in the town centre on the first Tuesday of every month.

‘Covenanted friendship’ quite aptly describes the lifelong bond of mutual support and platonic devotion that has been forged between these comrades. So, surely, Church of England bishops should have no hesitation in commending liturgy that affirms the goodness of that bond.

In fact, the Prayers of Love and Faith (PLF) that were commended by the House of Bishops and recently approved by a simple majority at General Synod, includes not only prayers for blessing same-sex relationships, but also prayers for blessing covenanted friendships.

The official guidance for the latter (GS2328) provides the following reasons for those prayers being placed in a separate section from the later prayers for same-sex couples:

'These Prayers for a Covenanted Friendship are available for those who wish to express their mutual love and loyalty before God in a deeper way. The conditions needed are defined by these friends, as are the type of goods they commit to embody. The inclusion of covenanted friendships in the Prayers of Love and Faith reflects the importance of deep friendship, particularly in a world in which commitment is often associated only with sexual relationships.

'Covenanted friendships embody a type of relationship that is both committed and non-sexual, which is not exclusive, yet deeply meaningful, particular, and seeking to grow in holiness…Covenanted friendships are relationships of an entirely different nature to marriage. Those who wish to seal a covenanted friendship may be of the same sex or opposite sexes. The friends may be married to other people, or unmarried. The friendship is by definition not sexually intimate. It will likely be expressed in practical forms of sharing aspects of life together. As with all friendships, care will need to be taken to identify the nature of the covenant and how the bonds of covenanted friendship will complement other friendships and (where relevant) the bonds of marriage.'

On this basis, I could see no immediate reason that prayers for covenanted friendship couldn’t be part of the Parachute Regiment’s next service of remembrance. Yet, despite the guidance, the similarities between those prayers and the CofE marriage liturgy are far too glaring for them to be appropriate for lifelong comrades.

For example, the conclusion to the final prayer is copied word for word from one of the prayers that was added to the Common Worship marriage service. Also, the repeated use of ‘N. & N.’ is a direct ‘copy-paste’ from the CofE marriage service.

Overall, it shows that those who commended the prayers only considered their use for couples and never gave the slightest thought to their use for groups of comrades who share deep, platonic bonds of mutual devotion. That glaring omission reveals PLF as a ‘Trojan Horse’, whereby revision of the CofE’s doctrine of marriage is being insinuated by stealth.

If advocates of PLF were convinced that the prayers 'say nothing about sex' (as another CofE report, GS 2358, put it), then they wouldn’t have expressed concern that making the prayers inclusive of groups of people might be misconstrued as affirming polygamous relationships.

No wonder that orthodox Anglicans considered the 26th June reply of Bishop of Oxford, Stephen Croft, (which rejected orthodox concerns raised in the letter from the Anglican Alliance as ‘catastrophising’), to be adding insult to injury. Shame on the bishop who wrote it and those who endorsed it.