Do not obstruct Synod’s decision on same-sex blessings, members say
by Francis Martin, Church Times:
MORE than 130 members of the General Synod have signed a letter expressing their view that the proposal of a “reset” of the Living in Love and Faith (LLF) process is unwise, and that talk of a “settlement” for those opposing the introduction of blessings for same-sex couples fails to honour decisions taken by the Synod.
Last week, the co-chairs of the LLF process, the Bishop of Newcastle, Dr Helen-Ann Hartley, and the Bishop of Leicester, the Rt Revd Martyn Snow, co-wrote an article for the Church Times in which they argued for a “reset” of the process to allow for “reconciliation and bridge-building” (Comment, 26 January). (On Thursday, 1 February, Dr Hartley announced that she would be standing down as as co-chair of the LLF process. Story here).
The bishops also met representatives of various groups active in the debate on sexuality in the C of E, from which various accounts have surfaced online, and which has prompted a co-ordinated response from the General Synod Gender and Sexuality Group (GSGSG).
The letter, seen by the Church Times and sent to the bishops on Wednesday, says that the group understands the bishops to be proposing not to move forward with pastoral guidance allowing priests to enter into same-sex civil marriages until “some form of settlement” has been agreed.
It is unclear what form such a settlement would take, or what provisions it would contain; but, last week, Dr Hartley and Bishop Snow wrote of the hope that it “allows as many people as possible to remain within the Church of England”.
The GSGSG letter says: “It is clear that the mind of Synod, determined by due synodical process, is to implement those things agreed in February [2023], being new pastoral guidance to replace Issues in Human Sexuality and to introduce the full Prayers of Love and Faith, including the stand-alone services. It is also clear that Synod has rejected this implementation being dependent on an agreed settlement or structural provision. . .
Related Posts
Tags
Share This
