David Monteith ViaMedia.News Winded After the Death of LLF
Ruth Harley ViaMedia.News Living in Love and Faith: Where is the Power?
Simon Butler Inclusive Evangelicals Crumbs of Comfort: Standing together for Standalone Services
Colin Coward Unadulterated Love Sunday morning onslaught by the St Michael’s Basingstoke HTB God squad
My prediction is that for a time far fewer LGBT+ people will be called by God to the Church of England. There will be exceptions, of course, but most of those who would fight will be called to different battles elsewhere.
The piece by David Monteith needs to be sent to every bishop in the CofE to start with. And they need to send it every clergy person in their diocese. It should cause us all to hang our head in shame for what the bishops have done. What on earth did the apology in 2023 mean. They wrote this: ‘We want to apologise for the ways in which the Church of England has treated LGBTQI+ people – both those who worship in our churches and those who do not. For the times we have rejected or excluded you, and those… Read more »
I couldn’t agree more. The HoB’s performance – not least the pastoral ineptitude of the announcement itself – has been dismal. They have completely lost sight of the ‘radical new Christian inclusion’ towards which they were meant to be working. Dean David has spoken for all LGBTQIA+ members of the Church of England. He deserves to be heard.
What is so powerful about David’s essay is not so much the description of the lack of pastoral care related to LLF, but the additional descriptions of the many micro-aggressions that he and his partner have suffered, year in, year out, totally unrelated to LLF. The Bishops are not alone in their toxic treatment of LGBT people. The two things together are devastating. But David’s experience is not unique. There are many of us who could tell similar stories. I too have been told that when my husband I were to be introduced to a visiting Sudanese bishop, our relationship… Read more »
You’re right. Female priests, and sexual abuse survivors, can tell similar stories. The C of E is deeply uncaring and unpastoral, apart from at local level and with a few exceptions at higher level.
As could many disabled priests – the ones who tend to be overlooked in our lists of expressions of discrimination.
Andrew, it meant, it means, absolutely nothing. Points of light in the darkness there are – one or two bishops who treat us as human beings. But the hand-wringing inability of the church as a whole to turn ‘radical new Christian Inclusion’ into a policy is utterly infuriating and pathetic. Some of us kind of knew that it would never work – but we tried our hardest not to let it show, and we played the LLF game. It has failed to bring what it was meant to bring (probably because it wasn’t really designed to do that in the… Read more »
Some thoughts on the Dean’s article. 1. LLF is not dead; it is just following the synodical process required. The use of the prayers is not suppressed. 2. The hurt is on both sides and real for both those who want to change doctrine and those who want no change; both feel hurt and abandoned by this project. 3. LGBT+ people play full roles in the life of their parishes and not all agree on changing the teaching of the Church on the sacrament of marriage. 4. The people who painted the graffiti are not excluded by the church they are actively welcomed and… Read more »
Wow.
Someone writes a cry from the heart, and all you’ve got in reply is several rounds of ‘yes-butting’?
Job’s comforters sat in silence with him for seven days. Some say they’d have been better to maintain their silence a bit longer.
I increasingly wonder whether George Simm and co joined the church because they loved God or because it allowed them the best opportunity to persecute others they see as not like themselves in a way that other organisations would expressly forbid.
I think the expression is ‘Just asking for a friend?’
Dean David this weasel worded rubbish must really hurt.
I’m not going to address the nasty personal attacks for honestly sharing a heartfelt response to how we walk forward following the gospel of Jesus Christ together in our differences, only repeat the danger of “Calling people violent who are not violent is dangerous and reckless” and add to that the use of violent language or language that ridicules and dismisses, from anyone.
George, I can see honesty in your response, but not much grace. (point 7)
Re point 4, this sounds dangerously like ‘you’re welcome as long as you adapt to our culture and our way of doing things’. Maybe the ‘graffiti people’ are already followers of Jesus, model their lives on his very subversive life, and still feel very unwelcome? So many people do.
Dear Dean David, Change in the Church of England does not always happen with the consent of the House of Bishops. If the leaders of the Oxford Movement had waited for the approval of bishops we would still be waiting. But because of the bravery of those pioneers, Anglo Catholic parishes flourish throughout England. One thing is now clear.The change that you and I want is not going to happen by consent: we need the bravery and disobedience that we witnessed at the end of the nineteenth century. One obstacle to that change is the peculiarly English view of what… Read more »
But the Prayers of Love and Faith are *not* marrying a same sex couple in church after a civil ceremony; they are for blessing the two people who come to church to seek that affirmation. Even this is clearly too much for conservatives, if it happens in a standalone service. I resist the term ‘bespoke’, which seems to have replaced the original wording of ‘standalone’ and which carries far more sense of a pick ‘n’ mix, make it up as you go along, service. ‘Standalone’ makes it clear that all which Synod asked for was the freedom to use PLF… Read more »
Helen, You are right that the Prayers of Love and Faith within LLF are not a marriage service, they are the blessing of a couple. But within the context that David describes, which is some form of civil disobedience to obtain public support (ecclesiastical disobedience?), then I think a marriage service and not PLF would be the appropriate liturgy to use. The wider public understand what a marriage service is, but would be confused by discussions around PLF. And according to Simon Butler it is not clear that a PLF service is unlawful anyway. I think David Hawkins is right… Read more »
Dear Helen King, I approach this from a different direction to you as I am not trained in theology and not a member of Synod. Even though I am a straight man this is extremely personal for me. I have struggled with my faith all my life and I am only a practicing Christian because of two gay clerics Paul Collier and Cherry Vann. In both cases their sexuality empowers their faith; it is not at all incidental. So I find the suggestion in “Issues in Human Sexuality” that these two holy priests are second best human beings morally repugnant.… Read more »
David, I agree with much of what you say (as a straight ally, lay woman, Synod member – not theologically trained – but mostly just as a Christian). But I wasn’t talking here about my hopes, merely about what is currently on the table. Same-sex couples being able to be married in church – that’s not even included in the discussion at the moment.
And ‘Issues’ is no longer part of the discernment and ordination process, praise God.
I am not sure about ‘Christian‘ marriage. Marriage is what human adults may choose to do. It is per se human…and may or may not be in a religious context. It is pair bonding for life, witnessed by their community, formally or informally. Christians tend to ask the blessing and witnessing of the Church. Muslims ask the blessing of the mosque etc etc. Marriage is pair bonding for life (ideally). Anti-marriage over the saddle of a Harley, committing one to the other, witnessed by fellow Hell’s Angels, is, dare I say it, marriage. It took the Church about 1000 years… Read more »
So what happens if a same-sex couple marries in an Anglican Church that allows such love/equality *and* is in communion with Canterbury, say the Episcopal Church of Scotland? Is that sacrament recognized as valid by an Anglican Church in England?
I believe the CofE has traditionally punted on the question of whether marriage is a sacrament anyway. Marriage equality has already proved a challenge to the CofE’s previous understanding that there was not a substantive difference (contrary to RC teaching) between a marriage solemnised in church and one solemnised elsewhere. I suspect that whatever answer the anti-gay crowd apply to same-sex civil marriages would apply equally to marriages solemnised in church by other Anglicans.
This all adds to calls for Civil Marriage ceremony to be made the only the legal marriage, with any other ceremony (humanist, church, etc) becoming an optional extra, as is the case in many European countries. Even at the moment if you had married in a civil as opposed to a church ceremony only the most swivel-eyed raving parson would regard you as “living in sin”.
This would have an impact, but it would not in itself improve the situation for C of E clergy . They can marry legally in a civil ceremony but currently they would either lose their licence or PtO immediately, or if they were able to stay in their current role, they would not be given a licence if they moved. The removal of the hope of even a civil marriage is heart breaking.
As Rosalind says, this would not solve the predicament. It might also be complicated to do, since Church of England clergy are all registrars.
I wonder what the nearest LGBT-friendly Scottish Episcopal church is to the border? (It would be quite funny if it was in Gretna Green!)
All Saints Gretna is an option. Whether it’s the closest to the border I couldn’t say:
https://gretna.church.scot/
David Monteith’s piece is powerful and heartbreaking. It reveals the depth of the betrayal by the HoB in stepping back from the ‘radical Christian inclusion’ which was promised so long ago. Shame on them! A few, here and in other threads, have bravely tried to ‘look on the bright side’ by focussing on the rejection of further ‘delegated episcopal ministry’ and on the possibility that a new ‘inclusive’ ABC might take a different line when she takes the reins. But the reality is that the HoB merely thought that further delegated episcopal ministry was no longer needed because of their… Read more »
I posted on TA a number of years ago that LLF was a kicking the can down the road exercise. Nonetheless it’s difficult to read David Monteith’s article without feeling the pain of his disappointment. Just as there has been no pastoral care in the Canterbury diocese for LGBTQ clergy, there’s been a definite silence here in York too. By their fruits ye shall know them. Apologies for homophobia and promises of radical inclusion were evidently just words. Surprisingly for evangelicals Scripture gets overlooked in their grubby power struggle. In so much as you did not do it to the… Read more »
Fr Dean. I have often heard that image but never agreed. There was no one called ‘LLF’ kicking cans. There were a number of honourable people, including bishops, who were working formidably hard to take this forward. But there were/are formidably, very well financed conservative groups, implacably opposed, who succeeded in continually slowing it down and exhausting the process. The mistake was thinking that if we kept inviting them to the table and ‘including’ them in the processes, they would come on board. The result was we kept conceding ground to them and is now clear now they had no… Read more »
Nobody asked you to “[keep] conceding ground to them”. They made it very clear that they would object to any effort to change the whole church’s doctrine of marriage, but that they would accept a separate province that retained the current doctrine – and in that case would support you in having as big a change as you’d want.
The conservatives/traditionalists/orthodox have been very open and honest about what it would take to legally change the church’s doctrine. This disappointment (for you, and relief for me) has come because the advocates for change were not so honest and open.
” they would accept a separate province that retained the current doctrine – and in that case would support you in having as big a change as you’d want.”
And how long do you think they would be satisfied with that? Wouldn’t they next demand that the archbishop of this new province have equal standing with the ABC and ABY? And that the new province be guaranteed an equal representation in General Synod? Or, even more likely (IMO) an override vote within GS?
Actually it was not at all clear that, even if granted their wee homophobic enclave, conservatives wouldn’t have still impeded any steps towards equal marriage. The demands seemed to be for the “third province” to even get the miserable little compromise of PLF.
I certainly don’t agree. I don’t believe that the conservatives would ever have moderated their position. They took down Jeffrey John for goodness sake. The bishops have once again led LGBTQ people up the garden path on a futile exercise and spent a fortune in the process. The voting thresholds at General Synod have surely not come as a surprise to the bishops. David, have you asked your wife about the absence of pastoral care for LGBTQ people following the bishops’ decision?
Once again Sam Howson’s interview, published yesterday, on YouTube, this time with Paul Martin, seems to speak right into the heart of what is being discussed here – indirectly concerning the latest set back for LLF but also more directly in relation to Colin Coward’s reflections. It’s definitely worth a listen if you have an hour or so.
https://youtu.be/a822rWVD9Rw?si=QmTZWUC-bK1GOroN
I’ve just caught up with Sam Howson’s interview with Paul Martin and really value the connections he makes and information he provides about the elements of charismatic practice that have affected my energy and health over the past two weeks, The proactive presence of people in St Michael’s Basingstoke last Sunday was persistently abusive and disturbing – and I couldn’t quite work out why. I now understand much better than did on Sunday that people repeatedly asking if they could pray for me and the insanely excessive attention I was being given as a newcomer was psychologically intrusive and upsetting.… Read more »
The saccharine cries from the antis that this is all about “process” and “procedure” leaves a sickening taste in the mouth, if only for the duplicity of it all. A rather inadequate fig leaf to hide behind and buy time to rally the troops. The CofE is quietly sinking beneath the waves of indifference as we drift further and further away from the society we are called to serve. We are irrelevant to the majority of people who call England home and we have yet again proven that we’ve earned this. We won’t win anyone for Christ like this.
For those who may be interested in GAFCON news from North America, the New York Times has reported that a presentment has been filed against Archbishop Stephen Wood, the primate of the Anglican Church in North America, a GAFCON member. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/23/us/anglican-church-stephen-wood.html
“The highest-ranking prelate of the Anglican Church in North America, a conservative denomination that broke from the Episcopal Church in 2009, has been formally accused of sexual harassment, plagiarism and bullying by former employees.”
Archbishop Wood has said that he does not believe the allegations in the presentment have any merit.
As I write this from across the sea and as an Episcopalian observer, I first say to you, David, how in awe I was (and still am) when you were appointed the Dean of Canterbury. It meant a lot to me as you replaced retired Dean Robert, a Christian leader who so helped me with the Garden Congregation. I visited and stayed at the Cathedral several days about a few months after you had been appointed. I remembered you in my prayers at the different daily services, as I could only imagine the difficulty that an openly gay dean and… Read more »