Bishop backtracks

‘Gilbert and Sullivan, P.G. Wodehouse and Alan Ayckbourn in concert couldn’t have written a better farce’, was how one incumbent expressed his concern over the recent Pastoral Guidance on trans issues from the Church of England’s House of Bishops.

The saga began in 2017, when General Synod asked the bishops, ‘to consider whether some nationally commended liturgical materials might be prepared to mark a person’s gender transition’. Simultaneously, Synod rejected the suggestion of considering ‘the substantial theological and pastoral issues raised’.

Having non-theologically considered the matter, the bishops decided that no new liturgy was necessary because the existing rite of ‘Affirmation of Baptismal Faith’ could be used to mark a point of ‘personal renewal’ such as gender transition. ‘Evangelical bishops’ welcomed this as representing ‘no change’.

The decision having been made, the matter was referred on to a sub-committee for them to write some Pastoral Guidance.

The sub-committee included three trans-gender clergy. In their not-so-impartial hands it became clear that ‘no change’ actually meant the ‘unconditional affirmation’ of ‘trans people’, with the rites of Baptism, Confirmation or the Affirmation of Baptismal Faith to be used to provide ‘a celebratory service to mark an individual’s new identity’.

The Pastoral Guidance came with a warm commendation from the chair of the committee charged with authorising it on behalf of the bishop, Julian Henderson, who in another role is chair of the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC). Three days later he signed a CEEC statement deeply critical of the guidance and distancing himself from his own commendation.

Confusion and contradiction

Confusion reigned – the guidance represented a serious doctrinal error on the part of the bishops who, by re-purposing the liturgy in this way, had intentionally or otherwise redefined the sacrament of Baptism and in doing so attacked the very heart of the gospel – a stance which had been both commended and condemned by Bishop Henderson.

Henderson expressed the view that the guidance did not change the fact that ‘the only transition marked in an Affirmation of Baptismal Faith is commitment to Christ’, a suggestion that was then ludicrously contradicted by the House of Bishops’ own Sir Humphrey Appleby – Secretary General William Nye said the guidance ‘commends and encourages the use of an Affirmation of Baptismal Faith for the purpose of a transgender adult wishing to reaffirm their Christian faith and mark their transition’. Seemingly, the bishop who commended the guidance on behalf of the House of Bishops spoke neither for them, nor, at least in one guise, himself.

Clearly this is no laughing matter and Archbishop Nicholas Okoh, the chairman of the GAFCON Primates, has been clear about its seriousness: ‘Although Lambeth Resolution I.10 of 1998 did not directly address gender transition, by taking this step, the Church of England is rejecting biblical authority’.

In England, an unprecedented response underlined that the archbishop was in no way exaggerating. Within days, more than 90 people, mainly clergy, had joined in six GAFCON UK Virtual Conversations to discuss how to respond.

It is often said that farce is more akin to tragedy than comedy and that it relies on placing ordinary people in a predicament beyond their control. This episode may have been farcical, but we are grateful God remains faithful. We ask for your prayers for those who seek to remain faithful to him.