On October 1, the Reform Council expressed its dismay that the objectives of the ‘Shared Conversations on Scripture, Sexuality and Mission’ had been changed. As a result orthodox Anglicans had been, in effect, excluded.
It has called on its members not to participate under these conditions.
In response to the Pilling Report earlier this year, ‘Shared Conversations on Sexuality, Scripture and Mission’ was produced, with the objectives reported in July to the General Synod. It is a short paper written by the Rt Revd Steven Croft, Bishop of Sheffield, with two objectives. 1. To reflect, in the light of Scripture, on the implications of the immense cultural change that has been taking place, and how the Church can best be a missionary church within this changing culture around sexuality. 2. To clarify the implications of what it means for the Church of England to live with what the Archbishop of Canterbury has called ‘good disagreement’ on these issues.
However, after a mid-September meeting of the College of Bishops, the second objective was described as creating ‘space and an environment for the Church of England to live together as a family who disagree with one another…[to] ensure that those with differing views on sexuality continue to share together a place of common baptism and faith’.
Two gospels?
This new objective requires participants to: 1. To reject the current CofE understanding that all sexual activity outside of heterosexual marriage ‘should be met with a call for repentance and the exercise of compassion’. 2. To accept the premise of the Pilling Report that the Bible isn’t clear on matters of sexuality.
3. To accept an outcome in which the Church moves from its present, biblical, understanding of marriage to one where we accommodate two separate beliefs, with one part of the Church calling for repentance over sexual sin and another declaring God’s blessing.
Rod Thomas, chair of Reform, said: ‘It is difficult to see how the process of shared conversations can command credibility if those who are most committed to the CofE’s official teaching are in effect excluded. If this project is not to collapse, then decisive intervention from the House of Bishops is needed now’. In advising its members not to get drawn into what was now a ‘deeply flawed’ process, Reform also warned about the steady erosion of the Church’s commitment to biblical authority – particularly in the field of sexuality. It noted: 1. The lack of a consistent and clear response to those clergy who have entered into same sex marriages, thereby pre-empting the results of the shared conversations. 2. The continued failure to admonish the Bishop of Buckingham, despite his refusal to uphold the teaching of the church and guidance of the House on matters of sexuality.
The change to the objectives has been disputed by the Church of England.
