Communications Officer Benjamin John breaks down what happened at Synod this week in the debate about clergy entering into same-sex civil marriages
On Monday 8 July, the General Synod of the Church of England voted to proceed with blessings for same-sex couples and to explore allowing clergy to enter same-sex civil marriages and engage in homosexual sexual activity.
Significantly, the motion passed will allow standalone services of blessing for same sex ‘marriages’. These will look and feel exactly like weddings even though they will not be weddings in law.
The motion passed also in practice asks the Faith and Order Commission – which advises on theology and doctrine – if there is a way for clergy to be allowed to enter into same sex civil ‘marriages’ and be allowed to have homosexual intercourse. Currently, clergy are allowed to enter into same-sex civil partnerships, on the basis that they abstain from homosexual “sex”. This ‘discipline’ now looks set to be relaxed in 2025.
This motion in support of all these changes only narrowly passed in the final vote:
|
For |
Against |
Abstain |
| Bishops |
22 |
12 |
5 |
| Clergy |
99 |
88 |
2 |
| Laity |
95 |
91 |
2 |
The vote needed to be carried by a simple majority in each house. The laity vote was so close that if only two people had voted differently, the motion would have been lost. A helpful summary of the debate and speeches can be found here.
In the debate Helen Lamb powerfully explained why we have opposed these changes:
Please believe me when I say it is a matter of obedience to God, of conviction that that is teaching that marriage is given to teach us something about Jesus and his bride. So please take us at our word that we’re not obstructing or delaying or playing games. We are seeking to obey God above all. And so our disagreements are profound and they matter profoundly to all of us.
Has doctrine actually changed?
Some evangelicals have described what is happening as “a definitive change in doctrine. Indeed, it is clear that some members of the House of Bishops are openly advocating such a change.”
Technically, doctrine has not changed. The Prayers of Love and Faith and the permission for clergy to enter same sex civil marriage would not be a change in doctrine but an inconsistency with doctrine. What has happened, therefore, is that there has been an unlawful departure from the doctrine of the Church. This may just be quarrelling about words, but it is important in highlighting what is happening. A change of doctrine would require a two-thirds majority in all three houses of General Synod. The Bishops are forcing through proposals that contradict doctrine because they know they do not have enough support to actually change doctrine.
What now?
The standalone services and the change in pastoral guidance for clergy will likely happen in 2025.
An evangelical coalition, the Alliance, which includes leaders of HTB, New Wine, Church of England Evangelical Council, Renew, Church Society, wrote to the Archbishops before Synod to say that:
If the further departure from the Church’s doctrine suggested by the Synod papers does go ahead, we will have no choice but rapidly to establish what would in effect be a new de facto “parallel Province” within the Church of England and to seek pastoral oversight from bishops who remain faithful to orthodox teaching on marriage and sexuality. We will encourage all church leaders who are in sympathy with The Alliance to join the parallel Province.
This received a strong backlash from the Bishops and from liberals accusing the Alliance of being ‘schismatics’ (causing division in the church), whilst forgetting that they are the ones being schismatics for pursuing this.
The Alliance has now published a response to the vote in Synod saying that:
“…we do not believe it is possible for us to flourish within the Church of England’s current structures. We need a structurally secure space for the over 2000 clergy supporting the Alliance, and the churches they represent (some 37% of total C of E church attendance and 57% of attendance of those under the age of 18). We have asked the Archbishops and the Bishop of Leicester to demonstrate their desire for us to feel a valued part of the Church of England through actions and not just words, however warm. … In the coming months, at the invitation of the Bishop of Leicester, we will be engaging in direct negotiations with the House of Bishops. We have made clear that we are not leaving the Church of England or the Anglican Communion. We are hopeful for what will take place in the coming months, and we look to the God of hope to fill us with all joy and peace as we trust in him (Romans 15:13).”
It is not clear what this would look like in practice. And some evangelical Anglicans who have already left the Church of England have questioned that feasibility of the plans.
Ian Paul has commented:
“I cannot see any workable way in which a formal separate province will be set up. But what will happen (as I said in my speech) is that there will be growing lack of cooperation and communication between those committed to the doctrine of the Church and teaching of Jesus, and those bishops who reject it. (Again: how do we have bishops leading our Church who do not believe the doctrine they promised to uphold and teach?) We need to be honest, and say we are in impaired communion with those who will not teach the truth.”
Today, spiritual overseers were commissioned by the Church of England Evangelical Council to provide oversight to churches that cannot in good conscience submit to their bishops. This is “a temporary provision which will support evangelicals until a settlement based on structural provision is made available.”
Evangelicals will have a mixture of feelings and responses to what the Church of England is doing. There is a reality that liberal churches are collapsing and faithful gospel proclaiming churches are growing.
But there are other questions too: what does faithfulness look like now if you have a bishop promoting these prayers? Are evangelical churches united in what the opposition to this looks like? Do evangelical clergy have the full support of their congregations in taking firm stances against what is happening?
Much is on the line, not least the vulnerable sheep who are being exposed to wolves by shepherds who want to feed themselves. Now is the time to stand firm against what is happening – not just to appease our own conscience, but so that we can protect our congregations from this deception and so that the bishops know the seriousness of what is happening.
Given the small number of votes in it, it is easy to reflect and think what could we have done differently: was there anything else we could have done to change the outcome?
Certainly, we always need to reflect, but we must also trust that God is sovereign and somehow is working through all of this for his glory. Whether it is through revival or through judgement, God still rules and reigns and is working all things for good. False teaching and false teachers have always existed and will always exist, and so we, especially church leaders, must continue with their calling to:
“…preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, and exhort, with complete patience and teaching. For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths. As for you, always be sober-minded, endure suffering, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry.” (2 Timothy 4:2-5 ESV)
