LLF - A 'rest' but no repentance

This week the House of Bishops of the Church of England issued a statement explaining why their plans to move forward with standalone, or bespoke, services of blessing for same-sex couples nor allow clergy to enter into civil same-sex marriages had stalled.

Anglican Futures has produced a PCC Briefing Paper setting out the main implications, which can be downloaded here.

PCC Briefing LLF Break but no Repentance.pdf

Download PDF • 83KB

The journalist, Tim Wyatt, gave his substack the subtitle: "The final stages of the gay blessings project run adrift on the hard sands of law and theology."

The bishops' own explanation is a little more pragmatic, "Despite personal convictions across traditions, the House of Bishops recognised these were the procedural realities to effect any future change."

Both suggest a legal battle ahead.

The Revd Dr Ian Paul, blogger and member of Archbishops' Council, would disagree - he has described this as "the end of the process." He is confident that the synodical numbers to introduce bespoke services are not there at the moment - and are unlikely to be there in the future. He goes as far as to conclude, "...the direction of travel appears to have reversed."

Others have been less optimistic, the Revd John Dunnett, National Director of the Church of England Evangelical Council warned,

“...the update does not in any way indicate that the House has resolved not to progress things further or that no further change will be forthcoming. This therefore leaves many questions unanswered and concerns unresolved – whatever your view of Living in Love and Faith’’.

What is certain, and to a large degree overlooked, is that the House of Bishops has neither repented of their desire to introduce these erroneous practices nor reversed the actions they have spent over a decade implementing.

It is twelve years since the Working Group of the House of Bishops published their Report on Sexuality - known by most as the Pilling Report. Thus, it is twelve years since the Rt Revd Keith Sinclair took his brave and costly stand against the progressive majority by refusing to support their recommendations and writing a 'dissenting statement'. He was largely ignored.

Since then, many bishops have been relentless in their pursuit of normalising same-sex relationships in church. They have taught, written and campaigned; they have ordained those in same-sex relationships and placed them in parishes. The majority have blindly sought out a position of 'good disagreement'. Following the failure of the shared conversations to arrive at a consensus, they spent endless hours and millions of pounds on the Living in Love and Faith book, videos and more conversations, which culminated in yet another report from the House of Bishops and, lest we forget, the introduction of the 'Prayers of Love and Faith' in December 2023.

The introduction to the 'Prayers of Love and Faith' is very clear about their purpose:

“They are not a form of marriage service, nor do they equate the relationships brought before God to Holy Matrimony.”

But they are designed, “…to give thanks and praise to God for the gift of a loving relationship between two people, to mark their commitment to one another, and to pray with and for them,” and “…to enable the people in these relationships to place themselves before God and ask for God’s blessing for their journey of love and faith.”

Or as the Archbishop of York put it at the time, "

"... Christian couples in a civil marriage or a civil partnership can, if they wish, come to church and their love for each other in that relationship can be acknowledged, celebrated and the couple can receive a blessing."

The bishops' statement "confirmed" the use of the Prayers of Love and Faith "in regularly scheduled services." This, despite accepting that the same prayers need further authorisation to be used in a private, bespoke services - when one would have thought their use in regular, public services is of far greater significance. There is no repentance, just the recognition that they have pushed things as far as they can, for now.

The Bishop of Manchester's letter to his diocese indicates that it was, in part, the bishops' unwillingness to engage with a compromise based on 'delegated episcopal ministry' which has led to this impasse.

"It has become increasingly clear over the last six months that it would not be possible at the present time to secure the necessary majorities at General Synod to authorise either the use of bespoke services for those in same sex marriages, nor the ordination of persons married to a partner of the same sex, without such a high level of delegation of episcopal ministries as to render, in the view of many bishops, such violence to our ecclesiology as to make it arguable as to what extent we could still be considered a single church. Whilst some on both sides of the LLF debate have indicated a willingness to accept such a stark division, it is not something which the House of Bishops has felt able to sanction. The role of bishops as guardians of the unity of the church, compels us to resist further disintegration."

If, the Bishop of Manchester's understanding of the situation is correct, and if, after next year's synod elections, those necessary majorities are possible, this could be a pyrrhic victory for The Alliance. For if the Bishop of Manchester is correct in his reading of the situation, there is no appetite for any institutional separation, now or in the future and the "temporary pastoral accommodation" that has been been made in the past (for example allowing orthodox bishops to ordain orthodox ordinands) will no longer be offered.

The bishops are consulting with the LLF Working Groups this weekend and will no doubt be lobbied by all and sundry over the coming weeks. In December they will meet again and decide how best to proceed, remembering that any motion they put to General Synod in February, might be rejected or even amended.

This is not the end of the battle.