The Last LLF Debate (?)- As it happens

Today the bishops will try to draw a line under the complete chaos of the Living in Love and Faith process. At the same time will try to keep up the momentum for bespoke services of blessing for same-sex couples and enabling clergy to enter into same-sex marriage.

This blog post will try to keep you informed through the twists and turns of the debate, which begins at 2pm.

For background - Anglican Futures made six points about the report the bishops have put forward (read here)

1) The House of Bishops are, above all else, committed to "walking together".

2) The House of Bishops continue to commend the use of the Prayers of Love and Faith (PLF).

3) The House of Bishops only apologise for the pain caused by them by not moving further, faster.

4) The only discipline proposed by the House of Bishops for those who infringe their guidance is 'informal' and possibly 'optional'.

5) The only criticism is for those who have taken a stand against the use of the Prayers of Love and Faith

6) As the LLF process draws to a close, another process begins.

The proposed motion is:

That this Synod:

(a) recognise and lament the distress and pain many have suffered during the LLF process, especially LGBTQI+ people;

(b) affirm that the LLF Programme and all work initiated by the February 2023 LLF Motion and subsequent LLF Motions will conclude by July 2026;

(c) thank the LLF Working Groups for their committed and costly work, which will now draw to a close with the conclusion of this synodical process;

(d) commend the House of Bishops in establishing the Relationships, Sexuality and Gender Working Group and Relationships, Sexuality and Gender Pastoral Consultative Group for continuing work.

Any proposed amendments will be published at lunchtime and will be copied below.

Amendments

Each one will be debated if 25 people stand to show they want to have the debate.

It is likely that they will be voted on 'in Houses' - in other words it will need a majority of bishops, a majority of clergy and a majority of laity for the amendment to pass.

Main debate

Introduced by the Archbishop of York, who admitted bishops had taken "solace in ambiguity".

Revd Clare Robson- "My partner is 88, we are unlikely to marry but we live as a visible sign of God's love"

Revd Jody Stowell - "Of course, God loves his LGBTQI children in their particularity"

Ms Busola Sodeinde - "Our brothers and sisters in the Global South are hurting as well"

Rt Revd Michael Volland -"While not perfect, the motion as it stands maintains momentum while not promising a particular outcome."

Mrs Anna de Castro - "This appears to be a debate that even the bishops on either side of the debate are prepared to die on."

Revd Rachel Mann - "I don't want lament, not after all the bruising decades, I want action."

The Revd Charlie Baczyk-Bell (Southwark) to move as an amendment:

58 ‘Leave out paragraph (a) and insert

“( ) recognise and lament the distress and pain many LGBTQIA+ people continue to suffer because the Church of England remains unwilling to affirm their faithful, committed and legally-recognised relationships”.’

Introduced with a typically passionate speech from Revd Charlie Baczyk-Bell,

Revd Kathryn Campion-Spall ("'Sorry', means you won't do it again"),

Revd Morwenna Ludlow (LGBTQIA+ people are like the woman who touches hem of Jesus' cloak who taught disciples the truth), Revd Ian Paul (After all this time there is so little understanding of those who hold to the historic teaching), Revd Simon Clift (Eleven years ago I hoped for good disagreement, now I look for a good-enough settlement).

Voting by Houses

	In Favour	Against	Abstain
Bishops	6	22	9
Clergy	80	90	5
Laity	88	94	7

Lost in all three houses

The Revd Dr Christopher Landau (Lichfield) to move as an amendment:

59 ‘After paragraph (a) insert:

“( ) acknowledge that the LLF process has revealed theological diversity among LGBTQI+ people, and that the church and its chaplaincies should be sensitive to this diversity;”.

Summary of speeches will follow

Counted vote by Houses

	In Favour	Against	Abstain
Bishops	0	30	7
Clergy	75	99	2
Laity	82	98	6

With a small number of votes not cast because the voting machine was not working.

Lost in all three houses

Dr Ros Clarke (Lichfield) to move as an amendment:

60 ‘After paragraph (a) insert: “( ) call on the House of Bishops to apologise for their failure to pay due attention to the legal advice which has not changed since February 2023, causing them to make promises which could not be kept, raise hopes which have been disappointed, and betray trust which has yet to be restored.”.’

Summary of speeches will follow

Counted vote by Houses

	In Favour	Against	Abstain
Bishops	0	36	2
Clergy	60	105	7
Laity	68	107	7

Lost in all three houses

The Revd Canon Stuart Cradduck (Lincoln) to move as an amendment:

61 ‘Leave out paragraph b.’

Summary of speeches will follow

Counted vote by Houses

	In Favour	Against	Abstain
Bishops	0	36	2
Clergy	74	94	8
Laity	78	101	6

Lost in all three houses

Mrs Vicky Brett (Peterborough) to move as an amendment:

62 ‘After paragraph (b) insert: “( ) affirm that restrictions on the use of the Prayers of Love and Faith in ‘standalone’ services should be removed at the earliest opportunity and that clergy should be enabled to use or refrain from using the said Prayers at such services according to conscience;”.’

Summary of speeches will follow

Counted vote by Houses

	In Favour	Against	Abstain
Bishops	2	32	4
Clergy	76	95	6
Laity	83	102	2

Lost in all three houses

Synod breaks for a cuppa. Back at ten to 5.

Miss Debbie Buggs (London) to move as an amendment:

63 ‘Leave out paragraph (d)’

Summary of speeches will follow

Counted vote by Houses

	In Favour	Against	Abstain
Bishops	0	30	5
Clergy	66	107	6
Laity	75	105	6

Lost in all three houses

The Revd Lis Goddard (London) to move as an amendment:

64 ‘At the end of paragraph (d) insert “, and that the current LLF working groups, in conjunction with the Programme Board, be asked to prepare a review and reflection on LLF, focussed on the work of the LLF working groups. This work should begin immediately and provide the foundation for the work of the proposed new working groups, with the aim of learning from the mistakes of the past and of undertaking honest reflection on the lessons that can be taken forward, so as to avoid having to apologise to members of Synod and our wider communities once again.”.'

	In Favour	Against	Abstain
Bishops
Clergy
Laity

If item 63 is carried, item 64 will be moved in the following form:

64 ‘After paragraph (c) insert :

“ ( ) request that the current LLF working groups, in conjunction with the Programme Board, be asked to prepare a review and reflection on LLF, focussed on the work of the

LLF working groups. This work should begin immediately and provide the foundation for the work of the proposed new working groups, with the aim of learning from the mistakes of the past and of undertaking honest reflection on the lessons that can be taken forward, so as to avoid having to apologise to members of Synod and our wider communities once again.”.'

	In Favour	Against	Abstain
Bishops
Clergy
Laity

Professor Helen King (Oxford) to move as an amendment:

65 ‘At the end, insert:

“( ) Request the Archbishops ensure that a majority of the Relationships, Sexuality and Gender Working Group are in favour of change towards standalone services of blessing

and full inclusion of clergy in same-sex civil marriages; that the Group issues a report in advance of every sitting of General Synod; and that recommendations are delivered with urgency.”.’

	In Favour	Against	Abstain
Bishops
Clergy
Laity

---

Anglican Futures offers more than a blog.

Join us online to discuss the events and implications of General Synod

Thursday 12th Feb 7.30pm

Monday 16th Feb 11am

Sign up here

Sign up here