Thinking Anglicans

General Synod: motions on Sexuality and Gender

Updated again 1 July

There are two motions due to come before General Synod in York next month. One is a Diocesan motion from Blackburn, Welcoming Transgender People, to be debated on Sunday afternoon, the other is a Private Member’s Motion from Jayne Ozanne, on Conversion Therapy, to be debated on Saturday afternoon.

The Blackburn diocesan motion reads:

That this Synod, recognizing the need for transgender people to be welcomed and affirmed in their parish church, call on the House of Bishops to consider whether some nationally commended liturgical materials might be prepared to mark a person’s gender transition.

The background paper from the diocese is GS 2071A Welcoming Transgender People. This provides a comprehensive briefing, including a helpful glossary of terms, and a detailed explanation of the circumstances which prompted the motion being brought forward.

There is also a background note from the Secretary General, GS 2071B, which includes a discussion of some theological considerations, and reviews the existing liturgical provisions which might be relevant.

OneBodyOneFaith has published an article by Christina Beardsley Welcoming and affirming transgender people: reflections and resources for the Blackburn Motion,which comments on some of the opposition to this motion, and links to a number of resources that reflect modern scientific thinking on this topic.

The Private Member’s Motion reads:

Jayne Ozanne (Oxford) to move that this Synod:

(a) endorse the statement (see below) of 16 January 2017 signed by The UK Council
for Psychotherapy, The Royal College of General Practitioners and others that the
practice of conversion therapy has no place in the modern world, is unethical,
harmful and not supported by evidence; and

(b) call upon the Archbishops’ Council to become a co-signatory to the statement on
behalf of the Church of England.

The statement referred to reads:

January 16th 2017 Statement
We the undersigned UK organisations wish to state that the practice of conversion therapy has no place in the modern world. It is unethical and harmful and not supported by evidence.

Conversion Therapy is the term for therapy that assumes certain sexual orientations or gender identities are inferior to others, and seeks to change or suppress them on that basis.

Sexual orientations and gender identities are not mental health disorders, although exclusion, stigma and prejudice may precipitate mental health issues for any person subjected to these abuses. Anyone accessing therapeutic help should be able to do so without fear of judgement or the threat of being pressured to change a fundamental aspect of who they are.

The British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy
The British Association for Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapies
The British Psychoanalytic Council
The British Psychological Society
The College of Sexual and Relationship Therapists
GLADD – The Association of LGBT Doctors and Dentists
The National Counselling Society
National Health Service Scotland
Pink Therapy
The Royal College of General Practitioners
The Scottish Government
The UK Council for Psychotherapy

The background paper by Jayne Ozanne is GS 2070A Conversion Therapy. This explains how the 2017 statement came into being, describes the position of the UK Government, and lists the comments of various medical professional bodies on conversion therapy.

There is also a background note from the Secretary General GS 2070B which goes into more detail and notes some differences between the 2017 statement and earlier ones.

And OneBodyOneFaith has reproduced another article by Jayne Ozanne A Call to Condemn Conversion Therapy.


The Church Times has this: Ozanne motion seeks to label as ‘unethical’ therapy to change sexual orientation.

This paper by Jayne Ozanne is also published: Spiritual abuse – the next great scandal for the Church.

There is also another paper, written by Professors Michael King and Robert Song: Conversion Therapy – Science Briefing. Copy available here.

Notify of

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Susannah Clark
6 years ago

Some questions, issues, comments on affirmation of trans people in church and church community: 1. If there is no theological consensus within the Church of England about the identity and status of trans people, is the Church in a position to commend official liturgical materials? >>> Is there, for example, a ‘Unity in Diversity’ approach that is viable here, allowing official liturgy for those churches that are willing to use it? Or will opposition imply that ‘Unity in Diversity’ is an unpalatable approach with regard to trans-affirming liturgies, as it is with regard to liturgies affirming gay relationships? >>> In… Read more »

Susannah Clark
6 years ago

Continuing my contributed thoughts of transition liturgy: 2. For the local church to affirm and bless a person’s gender transition (or non-binary expression of identity) would undoubtedly offer profound encouragement and communal support for members of a marginal group, at the particularly vulnerable time when they embark on transition; and help make them feel comfortable and welcome when they come to church – a sense of belonging (and ‘radical inclusion’) in contrast to the hostility and abuse they may face on the street, at work, within family, or in the world at large. >>> Having said that, an individual’s transition… Read more »

Susannah Clark
6 years ago

Young trans people: 3. I am encountering more and more trans/gender-fluid young people in schools. For some this may lead to lifelong transition to an affirmed gender identity; for others it may be in a state of flux, reflecting gender fluidity; for a few, it may be an exploration, a passing phase, even a copycat fad. We need to tread carefully on a number of fronts. But we also need to act pastorally, aware of the huge isolation many LGBT people experience. >>> At what age should the Church consider celebrating and affirming a person’s transition or gender identity, if… Read more »

Susannah Clark
6 years ago

Tina’s whole article is fantastic and excellently informed and supported by literature and research. It deserves reading right to the end, if only to help the reader understand the predominant academic consensus in the medical and psychological communities, not to mention the NHS, the law, the police. Trans people are recognised as bona fide. They have societal standing today, even if they face hostility on the street. Being trans is rarely a ‘lifestyle choice’ – that is risible and uninformed: few people would choose to face street abuse, loss of jobs, refusal of housing, breakdown of family, isolation, marginalisation… just… Read more »

Susannah Clark
6 years ago

And concluding: 6. In my opinion, although God may transcend gender, God also fully feels, understands, recognises gender in each person, in the opening up of who they are, and the liberation that comes from that – whether male, or female, or non-binary, or gender-fluid, or agender. God gets it all. In this context, gender identity is a profound part of ‘who’ many people are, pregnant with psychological unfurling, and need for expression; for fulfilment of who they are as people and recognition of who they can become. >>> Still faced with significant societal hostility and street abuse, there is… Read more »

Interested Observer
Interested Observer
6 years ago

“Should the Church’s rules on marriage allow a trans woman with a vagina to marry a man?” If you simply equalise marriage such that any couple can marry, you don’t have to have any rules about genitals: it simply doesn’t matter. Two people say they love each other, take the vows of marriage, they are married. The end. It doesn’t matter what their genitals, chromosomes, birth certificates or recognition certificates says: the love and the vows are the definition of marriage. It’s only when you want to start discriminating against people that you need precise rules. Equality and openness is… Read more »

Simon Sarmiento
6 years ago

I have very belatedly discovered that an article was written in reply to King and Song, linked above, as long ago as 5 July. Although the debate to which it refers has now been held and the outcome known, I’m adding a link here for the sake of the historical record.
The article is written by Glyn Harrison and Andrew Goddard, and published here

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x