General Synod met in July and was generally reckoned shocking by evangelicals. Motions were passed both in relation to liturgy for transgender people and counselling for gay people which were considered theologically vacuous by many. Evangelical amendments on both were rejected. Most bishops said little.
I wrote an analysis for Christian Today (google ‘Church of England Synod was so shocking’).
No moratorium
Rob Munro described it as a ‘watershed’ on the Church Society blog. The Church Times said the Synod ‘is being taken as a sign that the next three years – set by the Bishops for the production of a new teaching document on same-sex relations – will not function as a moratorium on change’. The Catholic Herald said: ‘Bishops stayed largely silent, as Synod did theology by endless anecdote’ and described conservative Synod members as ‘verging on despair’. It continued: ‘The general consensus is that the “middle third” of Synod… will quietly acquiesce to liberal demands…’
How to be faithful?
Afterwards, a statement was issued revealing that some had ‘already started to meet, on behalf of our fellow Anglicans, to discuss how to ensure a faithful ecclesial future’ – i.e. alternative Anglican structures. Signatories included Gafcon Bishop Andy Lines, REACH-SA Bishop Jonathan Pryke (see July’s en), Susie Leafe of Reform, Bishops of the Free Church of England (2,300 members), and Gavin Ashenden (a supporter of the ‘True Life in God’ messages – www.tlig.co.uk; see Wikipedia on Vassula Ryden, the mystic involved). So, a diverse group, but all united by Gafcon’s Jerusalem Declaration.
Then a letter was sent to the Daily Telegraph from many of the same signatories, and also several others including retired Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali, declaring: ‘We stand with the majority of faithful Anglicans across the globe, in prioritising Scripture … over secular fashion. We note the results of this same conflict in North America, even as we look for and pray for a similar renewal of orthodox Anglicanism and of Anglican structures in these islands.’
What now?
The bishops’ new document on sexuality will not be finalised until 2020, and a number of evangelicals are involved in the process. Although Synod was shocking, no doctrine or liturgy was actually changed. In his blog, Rob Munro says there is no salvation in ‘trying to invent some sort of parallel structural approach. The battles of Synod are not all lost… The tide can be turned, not by us but by [Christ].’ However, others believe the CofE in its current state is lost, and will form new structures – presumably raising questions of building ownership, appointments, patronage, etc.
The Church of England Evangelical Council issued a letter saying it had heard ‘the call for a clearer and louder voice in support of the traditional teaching of the church on marriage and same sex relationships, not least from evangelical bishops’ and that ‘a number of initiatives are being planned’. The letter also acknowledged some form of ‘visible differentiation’ for evangelicals within the CofE might become necessary.
Above all, as Jonathan Fletcher wrote in Spring’s Churchman, albeit in a different context, nothing must ‘replace a love for the Lord Jesus which was such a wholesome mark of the old pietists’. Moreover, he added, ‘As always, the enemy will attack evangelical unity.’
