by Martin Davie, Christian Today
In July the present General Synod of the Church of England came to an end. A new one will be elected in the autumn and inaugurated by the King in November. A key part of its agenda will be to consider the unfinished business concerning marriage and human sexuality left over from the Prayers of Love and Faith process which formed a central part of the business of the previous Synod.
The problem that the new Synod will face in dealing with this unfinished business from the last Synod was helpfully articulated by Canon Vaughan Roberts in his speech in opposition to the private member’s motion put forward by Professor Helen King calling for Synod to agree ‘that there are no fundamental objections to being in a committed, faithful, intimate same-sex relationship, and that such a relationship can be entirely compatible with Christian discipleship.’
In his speech against this motion, which, in an amended form, was eventually lost by three votes in the House of Bishops, Roberts declared that it would be a mistake to think that Synod could simply affirm both those who engaged in sexually active same-sex relationships because they believe that God approves of them, and those like him who conscientiously refuse to engage in them because they believe that God opposes them.
He said, ‘These are first order issues on both sides of these debates. We do not agree. We will not agree. And we will not meet in the middle. And it will not be possible to affirm both – because in affirming one you are not going to affirm the other. In affirming one kind of lifestyle you are not going to affirm my kind of lifestyle. You will deeply discourage me. Let’s face reality – this amended motion attempts to affirm everyone – but let’s face reality. We will not make progress in the next quinquennium unless we recognise we can’t do that.’
So how might the next Synod make progress in the next five years based on a recognition that there are those in the Church of England who hold fundamentally opposed positions on the matter? Is there a way of allowing both sides to achieve what they want?