Synodical 'scores on the doors'.
Over the past few days, a number of Anglican nerds have been scouring diocesan websites to disover who has been elected to General Synod for the next five years. To make life easier, Peter Owen, who has kept a record of everyone who has served on General Synod for the past twenty-five years, has brought all the names together in one place.
The results of a small number of seats remain unknown, however, it is possible to give an indication of how the elections have affected the overall composition of General Synod. To help do this Anglican Futures has analysed carefully every candidate's election address, and sought corroboration from public sources where available, to better understand their context and theological views.
For the last ten years differences in theological understanding of biblical authority, hermeneutics, ecclesiology and soteriology have been played out through debates about human sexuality. It is therefore perhaps unsurprising that those voting favoured those who took a clear stance on these issues in particular. Only 21% of those who either did not express a view, or spoke of a vague desire to value difference or remain united, were elected. In contrast, nearly 45% of those who took a stronger position found their way onto General Synod.
85% of those elected can be seen to align with either, 'Together for the Church of England' or, 'The Alliance'. Both are 'networks of networks' which are seeking to influence the theological direction of the Church of England. The former is more progressive, and seeks greater inclusivity for LGBTQIA+ people. The latter is more conservative, desiring the retention of the current doctrine of marriage, or at the very least a 'settlement' to allow their members to remain within the Church of England with their own episcopal oversight.
15% focused their election addresses on other issues, such as Save the Parish, or sought a 'middle-way' forward for the Church.
The simplest way to show how the election has affted the Synod's composition is to compare the allegiance of the new members with the voting records of the last Synod.
Together for the Church of England | The Alliance | Save the Parish | Middle of the Road | |
NEW (2026-31) | ||||
House of Laity | 44% | 41% | 8% | 7% |
House of Clergy | 54% | 39% | 2% | 6% |
OLD (July 2026) | ||||
House of Laity | 51% | 42% | - | 8% |
House of Clergy | 55% | 42% | - | 3% |
These figures mean that at the moment the orthodox have retained their blocking minority (34%), thus they should be able to prevent any change in doctrine in the next five years. It appears that that those seeking change have lost their simple majority in the House of Laity, which will make it harder for non-doctrinal motions to pass.
In short, it seems that the hard work of both 'The Alliance' and 'Together for the Church of England' has cancelled one another out and the next Synod will, for the time being be as deadlocked as the last.
But it is not a time for the orthodox to rest on their laurels. There are still a number of co-opted places to fill in the House of Laity and the 'middle of the road' votes have traditionally favoured those claiming to represent 'unity', 'inclusion' and 'welcome'.
Anglican Futures offers practical and pastoral support to faithful Anglicans
If you would like to hear more:
subscribe to our regular emails
Comments