How do you keep two groups of bishops who deeply disagree over human sexuality in the room? That has been the aim of the Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby this week with the once-a-decade (sort of) meeting called the Lambeth Conference.
Both groups will go home with something, but the communion is now on record as being deeply split.
The progressives have had gay bishops present although their spouses were officially uninvited.
A “call” (a name for a discussion process which replaced resolutions and voting) was re-written to avoid taking a conservative stance. It now describes the disagreement between Anglicans this way: “Many Provinces continue to affirm that same-gender marriage is not permissible. Lambeth Resolution I.10 (1998) states that the “legitimizing or blessing of same-sex unions” cannot be advised. Other Provinces have blessed and welcomed same-sex union/marriage after careful theological reflection and a process of reception. As Bishops, we remain committed to listening and walking together to the maximum possible degree, despite our deep disagreement on these issues.”
That gets closer to a “two integrities” approach that many progressives wanted, but did not quite get there. They knew they could not get a pro-LGBTQIA position endorsed so sought a “we agree to disagree” approach.
The conservatives get a letter from Archbishop Welby acknowledging that the “Lambeth 1:10” resolution which rejected same-sex marriage in 1998 still exists.
“Given the deep differences that exist within the Communion over same-sex marriage and human sexuality, I thought it important to set down what is the case. I write therefore to affirm that the validity of the resolution passed at the Lambeth Conference 1998, 1:10 is not in doubt and that whole resolution is still in existence.”
The conservatives, mostly within a group called the Global South Fellowship of Anglican Churches
had sought to have this year’s conference reaffirm “Lambeth 1:10”.
In the letter, (but not the call’ resolution) the fact that the Anglican Communion is majority conservative. Welby writes “The Call states that many Provinces – and I think we need to acknowledge it Is the majority – continue to affirm that same-gender marriage is not permissible. The Call also states that other provinces have blessed and welcomed same-sex union/marriage, after careful theological reflection and a process of reception.“
The conservatives have organised a “call” of their own, asking bishops at Lambeth to sign on to a statement that does re-affirm the anti-same-sex marriage teaching as the stance of the communion.
The Global South’s call grounds opposition to same-sex marriage “because it explicitly applies the clear and historic teaching of Scripture to matters of sexual morality.”
The Lambeth 1:10 text reads:
- in view of the teaching of Scripture, upholds faithfulness in marriage between a man and a woman in lifelong union, and believes that abstinence is right for those who are not called to marriage;
- recognises that there are among us persons who experience themselves as having a homosexual orientation. Many of these are members of the Church and are seeking the pastoral care, moral direction of the Church, and God’s transforming power for the living of their lives and the ordering of relationships. We commit ourselves to listen to the experience of homosexual persons and we wish to assure them that they are loved by God and that all baptised, believing and faithful persons, regardless of sexual orientation, are full members of the Body of Christ;
- while rejecting homosexual practice as incompatible with Scripture, calls on all our people to minister pastorally and sensitively to all irrespective of sexual orientation and to condemn irrational fear of homosexuals, violence within marriage and any trivialisation and commercialisation of sex;
- cannot advise the legitimising or blessing of same sex unions nor ordaining those involved in same gender unions;
- notes the significance of the Kuala Lumpur Statement on Human Sexuality and the concerns expressed in resolutions IV.26, V.1, V.10, V.23 and V.35 on the authority of Scripture in matters of marriage and sexuality.
The numbers.
The Conservatives will get at least 270 of the 600 bishops at Lambeth to sign. The number 270 is the reported number of Global South Fellowship Anglican bishops at Lambeth. Evangelicals from “Global North” or “Global West” may add to this number.
Add in the 300 or so conservative Gafcon bishops who boycotted Lambeth and you get a clear majority for the conservative view. Gafcon – the Global Anglican Futures group which includes Sydney – overlaps with the Global South Group.
The membership numbers are even more lopsided- when you consider US dioceses in The Episcopal Church attract as low as a few hundred worshippers, whereas the conservative dioceses commonly range towards the hundred of thousands. The Global South Group represents about 75% of worshipping or active Anglicans.
The Lambeth Conference has never been good at resolving differences – since Archbishop Longley called the first one in 1867 as controversy broke out in South Africa over the interpretation of Genesis. Those two South African groups are still separate – the Anglican Church of Southern Africa and the Reformed Evangelical Anglican Church of South Africa which is friends with the Sydney diocese.
What comes next
Bishop Peter Carrell of Christchurch New Zealand observes from Lambeth that a battle of narratives will shape the effective outcome of the conference.
“Lambeth Resolution 1.10 (1998) remains in existence as the most recent formal decision of an Instrument of Communion concerning marriage and human sexuality; and it remains a decision that any Anglican province can choose to point to as its standard for teaching and for behaviour, as, in fact, most Anglican provinces do.”
On the other hand: “It is possible that today marks a moment in Communion history in which we have formally become a Communion with plural understandings on marriage and human sexuality.” This possibly Carrell, a bishop serving in a province with same-sex blessings (but not church marriage) some comfort.
But he also observes “I think that liberal/progressive Anglicans have been reminded that the Communion they belong to is inherently conservative.”