LLF débâcle shows clarity is needed from both sides

LLF

by Angela Tilby, Church Times

‘Those who take the liberal view sometimes assume that their views are so obviously right that they need no justification’

heroimage livinginloveandfaithwindowcolouredbackground 20230830164822275 edited jpg width 410CHURCH OF ENGLAND

The Living in Love and Faith logo

THERE is much disappointment at the inconclusive ending of the Living in Love and Faith (LLF) process. The General Synod is now expected to propose new groups to continue to work on the Church of England’s approach to sexuality, relationships, and identity (News, 16 January). But, for the time being at least, the Bishops have put to an end any hopes of “equal” marriage in church, and at the same time any need for episcopal provision for those who could not accept this.

Of course, almost everyone is saying how hurt they feel about it all. Perhaps more significantly, the débâcle confirms what many have long suspected: that the whole LLF process has been a disappointing waste of time and energy. Perhaps the assumption that honest conversations between those holding irreconcilable convictions about sex could bring about trust and an agreed way forward was always naïve.

Both sides of the argument now need to clarify their position. On the conservative side, there have been attempts to do this. The Revd Dr Ian Paul, in his blog, Psephizo, has reiterated with greater nuance what has been said before: that same-sex-attracted individuals should be made welcome, but should abstain from sex. This is not new, of course, but it now comes across with a shade more warmth.

On the other side, there have been attempts to make theological sense of gay relationships. The writer Dr Theo Hobson’s and the former Bishop of Worcester Dr John Inge’s Created for Love is a recent example (Books, 19 September 2025).

But those who take the liberal view sometimes assume that their permissive views on same-sex relationships are so obviously right that they need no justification. It is not enough to repeat the “DEI” formula, especially as wider society is beginning to realise that diversity and inclusivity are not necessarily compatible, let alone the last word on Christian ethics.

Read here