Unity is the biggest casualty in the Church of England’s sexuality wars

This month marks an “imperfect, untidy” conclusion to Church of England’s eight year process of trying to find unity on questions of human sexuality. And they are the words of the CofE bishops, not the critics.

There are several grim ironies about the Living in Love and Faith (LLF) process. But perhaps the deepest is that, under an archbishop who longed for “good disagreement”, the Church of England has actually reached new depths of disunity.

Although Most Rev Justin Welby hoped that English Anglicans could learn to disagree well, he failed to shape or steer the process in a way that won the confidence of all parties. The established roles of General Synod and its associated Commissions - which exist to advise on doctrine and liturgy - were downplayed or circumvented during many of the early years of LLF.

In their January letter to the wider church, the bishops said the changes that have now been introduced – the Prayers of Love and Faith (PLF) which may be used with a same-sex couple in the context of an existing worship service – mean that the church has acted “without departing from or indicating any departure from the Church’s doctrine of marriage”.

This assertion remains disputed by many, not least because the availability and reliability of legal advice supporting such claims has itself been contested throughout the process. In December 2023, the Bishop of Southwell and Nottingham cautioned his clergy against using the new prayers, writing that the “bishops have been advised that it is likely that such use is indicative of a change of doctrine”.

Under an archbishop who longed for “good disagreement”, the CofE has actually reached new depths of disunity

I worry that too many bishops have, in fact, been in denial – not just about the level of doctrinal clarity in the PLF, but also about the negative impact this has had at the local level. For gay Christians supportive of progressive change and their allies, years of uncertainty and waiting seem to have been largely in vain.

Meanwhile, gay Christians committed to a traditional sexual ethic have wondered if the Church is about to disregard their sacrifice. And across its breadth, the Church has witnessed worrying drops in numbers of people coming forward for ordination. It seems inescapable that the uncertainty over theology and sexuality has been a key factor.

My role sees me visiting parishes all round the country, and I have lost count of the numbers of places where LLF has taken a visible toll. I visited one deanery where members of a local church were picketing the event, handing out leaflets explaining their decision not to attend. I can think of several conversations with vicars in rural contexts, saddened by the decision of key people in their churches to leave.

There are other impacts: clergy leaving the CofE for more progressive Anglican churches in Wales or Scotland. Another part of the story is new degrees of unity emerging in unexpected places; evangelicals and traditional Catholics have found common ground over LLF, and even evangelicals who disagree profoundly about women’s ordination have worked together fruitfully in relation to sexuality.

With elections for General Synod’s new five-year term happening this year, a key danger is that this attempt at church democracy becomes riven with the factionalism against which the Bible routinely cautions. The Church of England has failed to hold together the grace and truth which Jesus models. Too many political actors in the LLF drama have disregarded St Paul’s encouragement: “If it is possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all” (Romans 12:18).

Yet it could have been so different. LLF could have started from a place of clarity about what the Church’s existing teaching was - and thus framed options in ways that made sense for a Church with a historic prayer book that is emphatic about marriage being for one man and one woman.

It could have explored change via Synodical channels, where all parts of the Church could together accept that a robust process had been followed. It could have engaged parishes and dioceses in discussion only when there was clarity about what actually was being proposed. It could have acknowledged, from the beginning, the value of drawing on the wisdom of Commissions that exist to advise on the Church’s worship and teaching.

For Dame Sarah Mullally, about to begin her tenure as Archbishop of Canterbury, LLF represents a deep wound in the Church’s common life, which is a long way from healing. Having held a pivotal role through in the LLF debate, she knows the deep frustrations and pain surrounding sexuality within the CofE.

Her own words and actions in recent years represent a complex inheritance. She approaches the chair of St Augustine knowing that so many of the questions that prompted LLF remain unresolved, as do the political tensions that continue to undermine the unity and mission of the Church she now leads.