PROPOSALS for stand-alone services of blessing for same-sex couples are to be delivered to the General Synod in July, alongside a proposal for “delegated episcopal ministry” for many who oppose any changes.
A draft motion to be set before the Synod when it meets in York next month (5-9 July) also proposes that moves to permit clergy to enter same-sex civil marriages be deferred pending further work by the Faith and Order Commission. The matter would then return to Synod in February next 12 months.
In a preface to the report that features the draft motion, the lead bishop for the Living in Love and Faith (LLF) process, the Bishop of Leicester, the Rt Revd Martyn Snow, writes that the proposals for delegated episcopal ministry “are in outline form at this stage, and their development would require ongoing constructive and wide engagement as we proceed to discern how one can best navigate a way forward as one Church. . .
“At this stage, the mind of the General Synod is being sought on the outline of this proposal, and, importantly, on whether this approach is one which may enable us to maneuver forward as one Church.”
Regarding the Prayers of Love and Faith (PLF), which were approved to be used within the context of routine services after the November meeting of the Synod last 12 months, the paper lays out a proposal for them to be utilized in stand-alone services.
In a press conference on Thursday afternoon, Bishop Snow suggested that, even when approved, such services were unlikely to occur before the tip of the 12 months.
Their introduction could be buttressed with “pastoral reassurance” available for each proponents and opponents, in dioceses where their bishop is of a contrary view to their very own.
The paper coins the term “delegated episcopal ministry” to explain the proposed arrangements, and notes that, while it needn’t be underpinned by laws, it might require the agreement of a code of practice from the House of Bishops, and the formation of an independent review panel to oversee the arrangements.
Asked on Thursday whether he thought that the proposals amounted to a “breakthrough” within the LLF process, Bishop Snow demurred, but said that the weekend in Leicester at which working groups gathered was “significant” (News, 8 May).
“While I hope that there can be broad approval at Synod, I’m also under no illusion that there’ll still be some who is not going to vote for this, and never prefer it.”
He said that it was his “sincere hope” that, after a “fairly long period of individuals disagreeing over all this”, the purpose had been reached wherein people felt they might live with the proposals, even when nobody felt that they were “absolutely perfect”.
This imperfection was acknowledged by Bishop Snow in his preface to the paper: the approach, he writes, “is removed from the perfect — it’s designed for a particular period while we discern God’s leading for the long run.”
THE query of how formalised any alternative episcopal arrangements ought to be has been some extent of contention among the many working groups, and between the bishops, the Church Times understands.
At February’s Synod meeting, an amendment to the LLF motion was tabled that called for “legally secure pastoral provision” (News, 27 February). It was defeated in all three houses of the Synod (Bishops 8-24; Clergy 78-98; Laity 81-100).
The pastoral provision envisaged is not going to, Bishop Snow said on Thursday, amount to “the transfer of legal jurisdiction from one bishop to a different”, as there was “really no appetite for that among the many bishops”.
Multiple sources have reported that the proposals in the brand new Synod paper didn’t receive majority support when the complete College of Bishops met on Wednesday of last week, with a proportion of members pondering that the pastoral provision being offered went too far.
However, it is known that the House of Bishops — a smaller group consisting of diocesan bishops and a handful of elected suffragans — voted the proposals through.
Minutes from the House of Bishops are currently not made public, but in July the Synod will consider proposals to make its decision making more transparent (News, 19 June).
Despite the ruling out of legally-binding provision for clergy at odds with their diocesan bishop on this issue, “a few of the concerns that led to calls for transfer of jurisdiction can be met by the present proposals,” Bishop Snow said on Thursday, though he acknowledged that it wasn’t an answer which might please everyone.
Responding to the paper on Thursday afternoon, the national director of the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC), Canon John Dunnett, suggested that the proposals wouldn’t receive support from those that have consistently voted against LLF motions in Synod.
“The longing of CEEC Evangelicals is to stay within the C of E, but that is being undermined by the continued commitment of many within the House of Bishops to walk away from our biblical and inherited doctrine of marriage and sexual ethics,” he said.
Referring to provisions which, since late last 12 months (News, 18 November 2023). CEEC has made available to churches which oppose the Prayers of Love and Faith, Canon Dunnett said:
“If General Synod approves the motion because it stands, I anticipate a big increase within the take up of the Ephesian Fund and alternative spiritual oversight by clergy and churches within the CEEC and Alliance constituency. This is because many feel that that is the one way they will discover a voice for his or her concern and a spiritual oversight that has integrity.”
The draft motion in full reads:
That this Synod:
(a) support the general proposal and timetable set out in GS 2358;
(b) request that the House of Bishops, with the recommendation of the LLF working groups:
i. revise the Pastoral Guidance to remove restrictions on using PLF in ‘standalone’ services alongside the introduction of an arrangement to register for Pastoral Reassurance;
ii. establish the premise for the availability of Pastoral Reassurance through a House of Bishops’ Statement and Code of Practice which provides for the delegation of some specific and defined episcopal ministry, and which is overseen by an Independent Review Panel;
iii. report back to this Synod at its February 2025 group of sessions on the further theological work carried out under the auspices of the Faith and Order Commission around the character of doctrine, particularly because it pertains to the doctrine of marriage and the query of clergy in same-sex civil marriages.
(c) Agree that taken together the Pastoral Guidance, the Bishop’s Statement and Code of Practice for pastoral provision will replace Issues in Human Sexuality.
(d) Agree for the arrangements for Pastoral Reassurance to be commonly monitored over a period of at the very least three years before being formally reviewed by General Synod.
