CEEC has welcomed a new paper, written by the Bishop of Guildford, Andrew Watson, critiquing the current Living in Love and Faith process and calling for a reset. It has been published on the Diocese of Guildford website.

The booklet entitled ‘Living in Love and Faith: Discerning the Mind of the Church’ highlights the lack of clarity, poor process and loss of trust that has characterised the Living in Love and Faith process to date.

In December 2023, the Prayers of Love and Faith, a suite of resources that can be used in existing services to bless same-sex couples, were formally commended for use by bishops.  Those currently leading the process are developing further proposals to allow standalone blessings for same sex couples and agreeing a timetable towards clergy same sex marriages.

In the paper, Bishop Andrew strongly advocates that the proper canonical process (B2) be followed ‘so that we can take seriously the mind of the Church, rather than pressing on with an approach that feels inadequate at best and potentially schismatic at worst. Trust will simply not be restored until this wrong is righted.’

Bishop Andrew raises concerns about the Living in Love and Faith (LLF) process and what he describes as the ‘lack of clarity’ about its end point and asks ‘is the Church set upon a course whose destination will almost inevitably lead to a change in our doctrine of marriage – either de facto or canonically – and its teaching on the place of sex within it?’.

He goes on to argue that while 54% consider the issue to be adiaphora (an issue to which we, as a church, can agree to disagree), a ‘significant minority’ (46%) considers it to be an issue on which there cannot be compromise. He says that this needs to be accepted by those guiding the process and they need to acknowledge that the proposed changes amount to a change in doctrine.

And he adds that many of those in the ‘significant minority’ are ‘cradle Anglicans’, who ‘are prepared to tolerate a degree of diversity within the Church’s teaching, and considerable pastoral accommodation from their bishops…’ and are ‘absolutely committed to an inclusive church, with a small ‘i’ at least’. But he argues that anything that could endanger the biblical foundations of the church, they would regard as ‘a red line they are unwilling to cross’.

Given the potential for legislative change and the ‘thin majority’ support for it, Bishop Andrew urges those leading the process to follow a proper ‘theological and canonical footing’ and fully embrace the B2 route. Not doing so, he argues could lead to further disunity within the Church of England and the Anglican Communion worldwide. He notes that damage has already been done across the ‘fractured’ global Anglican Communion and relationships are strained. We cannot, he argues, skirt ‘around our commitment to discerning the mind of the church’.

Looking ahead, Bishop Andrew outlines three possible paths for the Church of England: pausing where we are currently with Prayers of Love and Faith with no further developments; moving forward slowly if sufficient agreement can be reached; or pursuing a more formal ‘creative settlement’ with the House and College of Bishops. In particular, Bishop Andrew advocates an exploration of the idea of ‘three spaces’, which surfaced in the Bishop of Leicester’s meetings but was never expanded upon.

The paper concludes that the process ‘will need to be deeply bathed in prayer and the most careful pastoral handling’, as well as acknowledging with realism the significance and sensitivity around this issue.