A THREATENED “parallel Province” over blessings for same-sex couples would amount to a “deep and disproportionate schism” within the Church of England, the Bishop of Oxford, Dr Steven Croft, said on Tuesday.
He was writing in response to an open letter sent last week to the Archbishops of Canterbury and York by members of the Alliance — an umbrella group which has been co-ordinating much of the opposition to the changes led to by the Living in Love and Faith (LLF) process (News, 27 June).
Dr Croft’s response, which was published on his blog on Tuesday afternoon, argues that, in his experience, “the variety of clergy and congregations who say they require the degree of legal/provincial differentiation proposed in your letter may be very small.”
He suggests that the majority congregations contain a diversity of opinion and like to “solve problems locally and get on with the mission of God”, quite than committing themselves to 1 side or one other.
Dr Croft also questions the Alliance’s claim that it’s supported by 2000 C of E clerics, and notes that the representatives of Catholic groups within the Church should not listed among the many signatories of the newest letter.
In previous letters sent by the Alliance over the past 12 months, the director of Forward in Faith, and the chair and vice-chair of the Catholic Group on General Synod, have signed, however the signatories of the newest letter are all related to the Evangelical wing of the Church.
A press release on the Forward in Faith website explains that the three felt that it will “not be appropriate” to sign, owing to already having alternative episcopal provision based on the settlement of 2014.
On the difficulty of whether the present proposals, outlined in a paper published prematurely of the Synod meeting which spans this coming weekend (News, 21 June), required synodical authorisation via Canon B2, Dr Croft’s position is obvious:
“I genuinely don’t consider”, he writes, quoting the letter, that the proposals are “indicative of a departure from the doctrine of the Church of England in an important matter”. Instead, the proposed changes are “modest”.
For example, the prospect of rescinding the document Issues in Human Sexuality would, he argues, merely “extend to clergy the identical freedom of conscience within the ordering of their relationships as has been given for greater than 30 years to put Christians”.
The B2 process for which the Alliance has been calling amounts, he suggests, to a “device for blocking any sort of change”, because it requires a two-thirds majority within the Synod, although Dr Croft acknowledges that, were the C of E to maneuver to allowing same-sex marriage in church, it will require this process.
On the proposals as they stand, nonetheless, Dr Croft suggests that B2 authorisation might actually be unhelpful for opponents of the introduction of the Prayers of Love and Faith, as it’d make it harder for them to opt-out of using them.
Dr Croft’s letter, which runs to 5 pages, criticises the language utilized by the Alliance, suggesting that it’s “catastrophising”, while also delivering “threats in veiled language”.
He also queries the authority of the Alliance to recommend an alternate structure of episcopal provision for opponents of the changes, suggesting that doing so is hypocritical: “On the one hand you might be openly criticizing the bishops for uncanonical processes. However, at the identical time, you declare your intention to act unilaterally, outside any formal and transparent means of consultation, or Synod, or legal structure, or theological reflection, or recognisable ecclesiology, but through a set of actions determined in closed rooms.”
The idea of any such “parallel Province”, Dr Croft writes, “undercuts the very essence of Anglican ecclesiology and represents a red line we cannot cross”.
He concludes by saying that he holds “many” of the signatories in high regard, but that he believes that “the letter you’ve gotten been persuaded to sign is a deeply unhelpful and misleading contribution to our present debate.”
