Part 249. Down on the estate (1)

An excellent initiative in many respects but i have some reservations. Below is the text of a Church of England press release.

General Synod

General Synod calls for redoubling of efforts to create new churches on estates

26/02/2024

Estate churches thanked by Bishop for 'utterly beautiful' work in face of challenges including poverty and rising levels of destitution

The Church of England needs many more leaders from working class backgrounds and deprived communities, the General Synod has heard, in a debate where members voted to redouble efforts to establish churches on housing estates.

The Synod re-committed the Church of England to setting up a church on every significant social housing estate, five years on from first giving its backing to this goal.

Members also backed moves to double the number of young active Christians on housing estates and ensure that young people from estates and low-income communities are trained as children’s and young people’s leaders among other forms of ministry.

The Bishop of Blackburn, Philip North, who introduced the debate, called on the Church of England to act now to reverse the "slow erosion" of Christian life on estates.

Dioceses and Theological Education institutions (TEIs) – where people are trained for ordained ministry - should be encouraged to consider more ways of training lay and ordained leaders from estates and deprived communities, he said.

“Estates churches and the wider church desperately need leaders called from our estates and deprived communities,” he said.

He added: “I’m convinced that there is an underground army of evangelists and prophets out there which a culturally middle class church is simply missing.”

The Synod also backed a call for the Church of England to address financial inequalities between dioceses.

Bishop Philip said the wealth disparities between dioceses are a "scandal" that "we cannot allow to endure".

He told Synod members that there have been "many advances" since the General Synod gave its backing five years ago for the drive to set up a church on every significant social housing estates in the country.

New estate churches have been planted by all Anglican traditions, he said, and a number of dioceses, such as Southwark, Norwich, London and Southwell and Nottingham have appointed advisers.

He added that around £100 million of Lowest Income Communities Funding and £40 million in Strategic Development Funding has been allocated to estates or economically deprived communities.

But he said there had also been "significant" setbacks including the impact of the pandemic.

At least 10 more estates churches have closed in the past five years, most with no plan for replanting and there are still at least 850 significant estates that are not served by a Christian community, he said.

Bishop Philip said the Synod had a chance to acknowledge and thank a "remarkable" group of lay people and priests who minister on estates.

He said the work on estates churches had been "utterly beautiful" in the face of multiple challenges including the pandemic and increasing levels of poverty and destitution.

The motion

Synod members gave their unanimous backing to the following Estates Evangelism motion (364 votes for, none against and no abstentions):

This Synod:

*dedicate itself afresh to the goal of achieving a loving, serving and worshipping Christian community on every significant social housing estate to mark the fifth anniversary of Synod Motion GS2122

*commend the work of all who minister on our estates and gives thanks for those Dioceses who have responded positively to the 2019 Motion

*call on all Dioceses to include in their strategic mission and ministry plans the goal of planting and renewing churches on, and/or doubling the number of young active disciples in social housing estates/other economically marginalised communities

*call on the whole church to address as a matter of urgency the structural and financial injustices that prevent flourishing and sustainable worshipping communities on every estate (for example, the financial inequalities between dioceses and the distribution of LInC Funding)

*commit itself to taking the necessary steps to raise up and support a new generation of lay and ordained leaders from estates and working class backgrounds (by for example addressing the recommendations of the Ministry Council’s Report ‘Let Justice Roll Down.’) at all levels in the church including a commitment to invest creatively in local and grassroots forms of ministry and leadership training.

*Request the Estates Evangelism Task Group to work alongside diocesan vocations advisers, the 30,000 Project and other related bodies to ensure that priority is given to the formation of young people from estates and low-income communities to serve as children’s and young people’s leaders, as well as in other forms of Christian ministry.

End of press release. My comments will be in the next post.

Part 248. Apologies but no resignations.

In Part 243. As Ollie said to Stan mention is made of the independent report (Wilkinson Report) into the shambles that is the Church of England's safeguarding policies and procedures. It is a damning report.

 General Synod agreed that as a matter of priority the report be sent to committees to consider and make recommendations for change. Profuse apologies offered to victims of abuse and members of the then Independent Safeguarding Board. 

However no resignations from anyone with responsibility for this abject failure to protect the vulnerable. Heads should have rolled.

Part 247. The shambles continues

The paper and proposals for reconciliation of the conflict between the factions, battling for their respective arguments over same-sex love, were stopped in their tracks by the General Synod of the Church of England voting to move on to next business.  The woolly ten commitments, or ideas of possible commitments, are thus deposited in the waste bin. However, an amendment calling for a new structure to protect the dedicated sensibilities of the the fundamentalist brigade was lost. A portent for the future as the Archbishop of the presses on with his fiction of unity within the Church of England and the Anglican Communion.

So, what now?

'A legally secure structural settlement, without theological compromise, is the only way forward, says CEEC’s John Dunnett.

The meeting of the General Synod of the Church of England concluded on Tuesday.

Commenting on the debate on the Living in Love and Faith (LLF) process, Revd Canon John Dunnett, National Director, Church of England Evangelical Council, CEEC, said: “The decision taken by General Synod to move to next business [before the end of the debate] is demonstrative of widespread dissatisfaction with how the bishops have been progressing the LLF process. The one thing that Synod could largely agree on was that neither side could support the proposals that would emanate from the motion, as tabled at Synod. We believe that GS2346, as presented at Synod, is riddled with confusion and ambiguity, contains proposals we could never support, and outlines inadequate structural provision.

“Significantly, the move to next business is also evidence that we cannot ‘square the circle’ in the debate, as currently framed. This issue is not adiaphora – we cannot agree to disagree.

“This is why we continue to call for a legal and structural settlement without theological compromise, which we believe is the only way forward. We will gladly work with Bishop Martyn Snow to explore this route further. Between now and July, we will be calling on churches and their leaders to articulate their support for this.

“Many feel that the fabric of the Church of England is tearing as a result of the Living in Love and Faith process and that structural differentiation is the only way of maintaining any degree of unity."'

What will be the architecture of a legally secure structural settlement?  I believe we must wait and see what emerges before commenting.

The proponents of full inclusion also consider the disposal of the motion by General Synod helps their cause as it adds impetus and urgency to giving effect to earlier decisions by Synod relating to stand-alone services of blessing for individuals in same-sex marriages. I am not so sure. At some point there will need to be a change in Canon law that requires two-thirds majorities in all three houses of Synod. Will there be a trade-off? Agree the new structure the price for this being agreement to change Canon law?  

It looks very messy and much may depend on the composition of the General Synod after the 2025 elections. Or will Parliament intervene?

Part 246. Quotations (1)

I concur with the sentiments expressed in the following quotations.

I prefer a Church which is bruised, hurting and dirty because it has been out on the streets, rather than a Church which is unhealthy from being confined and from clinging to its own security.

Pope Francis 

We must talk about poverty, because people insulated by their own comfort lose sight of it.

Dorothy Day

If we try and have a Christianity without social justice, we cut out the beautiful beating heart of Jesus and we are left with only a lifeless corpse of religion to drag around.

John Pavlovitz

The measure of a society in found in how they treat their weakest and most helpless citizens. 

Jimmy Carter 

Any talk about God that fails to make God's liberation of the oppressed as its starting point is not Christian.

James Cone

When the Church hears the cry of the oppressed it cannot but denounce the social structures that give rise to and perpetuate the misery from which the cry arises.

Oscar Romero 

Part 245. An interesting statement.

The following is by Jim Palmer. It summarises (far better than I am able to) some key points of my current opinions.  I do not concur with all the points he makes but I have included them so as not to impair the overall context.

10 things about Christianity that Jesus would not endorse if he had a say: 

1. That his vision for a transformed society, got twisted into an afterlife fantasy about heaven.

2. That a religion was formed to worship his name, instead of a movement to advance his message.

3. That the gospel says his death solved the problem of humankind's separation from God, instead of accepting that his life revealed the truth that there is no separation from God.

4. That the religion bearing his name was conceived by the theories and doctrines of Paul, instead of the truth Jesus lived and demonstrated.

5. That he was said to exclusively be God in the flesh, putting his example out of reach, rather than teaching that we all share in the same spirit that empowered his character and life.

6. That the religion that claims his name, teaches that his wisdom and teachings are the only legitimate way to know truth and God.

7. The idea that humankind stands condemned before God and deserving of Divine wrath and eternal conscious judgement, requiring the death of Jesus to fix it.

8. That people are waiting on Jesus to return to save the world and end suffering, rather than taking responsibility for saving the world and solving suffering ourselves.

9. That people think there is magical potency in uttering the name of Jesus, rather than accessing our own natural powers and capabilities to effect change.

10. That people have come to associate Jesus with church, theology, politics and power, rather than courage, justice, humanity, beauty and love.

Jim Palmer 

Part 244. Social Justice Champions, The Salvation Army.

I have been advised that:

"SJCs are not appointed as such, nor do they hold an official position within TSA. They're supporters who have indicated an interest in campaigning on a local or national issue. Anyone can sign up."

A few months ago a corps' officer informed me I had to be approved as a SJC by the corps Council. Ah well.  

I surmise that an SJC may be assisted in the campaigning process by TSA but it would appear an individual may only act in a personal capacity, and not as a representative of TSA, when in communication with a councillor. MP etc.

I await clarification from TSA  as to the accuracy of my surmise as well as a response to my query as to how TSA may respond to a public consultation by a public body within whose area there are a number of corps. 

Kent has numerous corps within the county council's area. Many of the council's services impact on the very individuals the Army supports. The Army should be campaigning on behalf of and with those who would be affected by proposed policy and budgetary changes.

Part 243. As Ollie said to Stan...

Well here's another nice mess you've gotten me into. Yes, the Church of England is not only in a mess surrounding blessings of individuals in a same-sex marriage but also in  a fine old shambles regarding safeguarding.

A damning independent report states the safeguarding process standard falls below that expected in secular organisations and urgent action is required to remedy the mess.

The report states safeguarding processes have been used in instances that have nothing to do with protecting children and vulnerable adults. Safeguarding has been 'weaponised" as a pretext for removing people regarded as a "nuisance".

Alice in Blunderland stuff.

Part 242. what a disgrace.

The Church of England General Synod is to debate a motion on the Living in Love and Faith process.  The waters have been muddied by a letter from the motion's mover, the Bishop of Leicester, addressed to all Synod members. 

'I want to clarify the purpose of the motion we will be debating.  The papers set out a set of commitments - they are intended as an illustration of the sort of commitments that might form the basis of an agreement.'

In other words debate the outline of possible general principles rather than a detailed analysis of the words of specific proposals.

The letter continues:

'So the debate is about whether a set of commitments is a good approach, rather than whether you agree with the details of these particular commitments.'

What a continuing disgrace. Horse trading for stand-alone services for couples in same-sex marriages in return for which there will be structural change (separation) for those who dissent from the provision of said blessings.

Part 241. Snippets.

If you need the Bible to love your neighbor, you'll never truly love them.

If you need the Bible to care for people, you'll never truly care for them.

If you need the Bible to be kind, gentle, and just, you'll never be truly kind, gentle, or just.

If you need the Bible to feed the hungry, stand in solidarity with the oppressed, and resist greed, you'll never truly feed, stand for, or resist anything.

If you need the Bible to do the right thing, to live generously, and to be humble and servant minded, you'll never truly do the right things and be the right person for the right reasons.

People who need the Bible often do so because the heart is missing. Living becomes a religious act, and being becomes a religious facade. Everything is to ultimately appease a rule, ritual, or religion. It bottom lines on self-righteousness, disguised as being spiritual.

Love is only love, right is only right, and goodness is only goodness, if it is compelled from the heart. 

Grace is brave. Be brave.  

Chris Kratzer

What the hell did you expect me to do?  

You told me to love my neighbors, to model the life of Jesus. To be kind and considerate, and to stand up for the bullied.

You told me to love people, consider others as more important than myself. "Red and yellow, black and white, they are precious in His sight." We sang it together, pressing the volume pedal and leaning our hearts into the chorus.

You told me to love my enemies, to even do good to those who wish for bad things.

You told me to never "hate" anyone and to always find ways to encourage people. 

You told me it's better to give than receive, to be last instead of first. 

You told me that money doesn't bring happiness and can even lead to evil, but taking care of the needs of others brings great joy and life to the soul.

You told me that Jesus looks at what I do for the least-of-these as the true depth of my faith. 

You told me to focus on my own sin instead of trying to police it in others. You told me to be accepting and forgiving.

I payed attention.

I took every lesson.

And I did what you told me.

But now, you call me a libtard. A queer-love

You call me "woke." A backslider.

You call me a heretic. A child of the devil.

You call me a false prophet. A reprobate leading people to gates of hell.

You call me soft. A snowflake. A socialist.

What the hell did you expect me to do?

You passed out the "WWJD" bracelets.

I took it to heart. 

I thought you were serious, apparently not.

We were once friends. But now, the lines have been drawn. You hate nearly all the people I love. You stand against nearly all the things I stand for. I'm trying to see a way forward, but it's hard when I survey all the hurt, harm, and darkness that comes in the wake of your beliefs and presence.  

What the hell did you expect me to do? 

I believed it all the way. 

I'm still believing it all the way.

Which leaves me wondering, what happened to you?

Grace is brave. Be brave.

Chris Kratzer

Part 240. Whither The Salvation Army?

An article by Peter Hobbs, a former Australian officer.

The UK Salvation Army event [ Belonging and Believing conference referred to in an earlier post] is a nice idea but the system is broken and the senior leaders don’t have the courage, the will, or the experience to be able to lead an organisation in the ways of Jesus. Those in leadership are picked because they maintain the status quo, status quo leadership is making sure rules and regs are followed and the idols maintained. Therefore the people in leadership have never had to think outside the box, they may be aware of theories, have some ideas, but unless they have actually modelled the reality of disciple making in community they won’t have the will to change the system. There are also very strong voices like Sentry that are bullying leaders to remain conservative, threatening pulling funding to Headquarters if the army changes. People are literally fighting with threats of pulling finances to maintain the status quo. The army rolls over for money, and knows it will die quickly if the money is pulled. So they bow to the bullies rather than stand up for what’s right. Many of the senior leaders have a conflict avoidance strategy so they let the loud voice run the show and keep their money. Selling their soul at the same time. There is no fighting for justice, it’s all words. 

Cowards.

The Army leadership right up to Lyndon have shown they don’t have the will to change, and have made it clear they aren’t going to change. A recent fairwork commission the army spent $10,000 a day on the best barristers to effectively fight to keep the status quo on the position a Salvation Army Officer is not an employee. Therefore not protected under employee law and have no rights like an employee. Meaning they aggressively fought to be able to keep on treating officers anyway they like and keep using the fear method of behave or we will move or dismiss you as a weapon. $10,000 a day to keep this unjust system in play. They have no desire to serve suffering humanity and treat people with human dignity, not even their own, their officers or soldiers. They are in no position to change and they literally have no clue how to change. The movement William Booth started is dead and buried. 

The other problem is all those who have tried to change have left. All the amazing leaders left years ago. There are plenty of Salvationists who want change but the system simply won’t allow for it or create space for it. It’s all talk. It’s not going to change. 

The way forward is to take the example of Jesus, stay with the people of peace and pioneer a brand new movement wherever life happens. I have not looked back. It’s sad that people still have hope that The Army is going to change. It is current leadership right up to Lyndon who have enabled dysfunction and chosen to put the idols and dogma first and people last that have created the demise of this amazing organisation. 

But this is the way. This is what Jesus modelled. For his disciples to be thrust out into the mission field. So we can reach all cultures not just those who love an outdated 19th century irrelevant religious culture. 

This is the way. Death of the Army leads to resurrection of Jesus!

Additional comment from Peter.

I've been to youth forums, change conferences, and have been part of the change, pioneering brand-new Salvation Army communities for 40 years. Leaders talk and talk, then remain in an appointment for a year or two, then move on, and nothing happens. It’s spin to feed their narcissistic supply and make them look good so they can get promoted in the system. The talk always leads to nothing because the system is too inflexible to bring real reform.

My team worked with the territory to create a youth and children’s trauma-informed practice framework, working with our trained and proven family therapist from the Bellarine Community. Tens of thousands of dollars spent, then leaders change and the report is put on a shelf. The leaders that implemented the reform got disillusioned and left the army. Nothing happened with the report and over $80,000 wasted… It’s pure incompetence and blatant disregard of people and their investment in the mission. Our family therapist refused to work with the organisation after that. 

The idol of the soldier's covenant holds the army back, and they fight to keep it as it is. No leaders have the will to change or the knowledge of how to update it. When suggestions are made and implemented from officers on the ground, the senior leaders get their noses out of joint because the narcissistic supply is taken away from them. They then punish the leaders beneath them for thinking and innovating. It’s pathetic, it’s weak, and absolutely messed up. Narcissism is rife, nepotism is also rife, and there is zero accountability for senior leaders' decisions because they make decisions about officers in the secret, faceless Gestapo-style Officer Review board. Lives of officers are managed by people who don’t have good interpersonal people skills and, regretfully, are poor decision-makers, and what’s worst is they are usually their “friends” or peers. It’s just awful.

An Army of dysfunction, abuse, and self-obsession. It’s too toxic to change. I’d suggest any new cadet to get out while they can. But then there are no cadets anyway… senior leadership still doesn’t see there’s a problem… it’s embarrassing and an absolute disgrace to the name of Jesus. In fact, it’s Idolatry and taking the Lord's name in vain. I’m glad God is working to create brand-new organic expressions outside the army.

This is the way.

Part 239. Two key events.

The General Synod of the Church of England  meets at the end of February. The agenda includes an item on Safeguarding, a contentious issue as the current arrangements are not working. The Synod will be considering proposals for the next steps in the Living in Love and Faith saga. The talk is of 'reconciliation', but the proposals are a capitulation to the demands of Conservative Evangelicals and their Anglo-Catholic allies and another kick in the teeth for LBGTQ communities, unless they are rejected or significantly amended.

The first weekend in March sees The Salvation Army holding a conference entitled 'Belonging and Believing'. The results of an extensive survey of opinion within the United Kingdom & Ireland Territory will be published at the conference. A report from the conference will be presented to divisional and national leaderships for them to decide what to recommend to the top brass.  It is to be hoped the conference and report focus on how to stop and reverse the downward march in membership,  how to recruit many more officers and how to achieve full inclusion.

Part 238. Towards full inclusion?

A senior officer at the territorial headquarters posted on a Facebook page that The Salvation Army in the United Kingdom & Ireland Territory is very much influenced by the charismatic and conservative evangelical wings of the Church of England.  Given the current shenanigans in the Church of England (and also in the Anglican Communion) on inclusion issues this does not bode well for any significant change in the stance of the Army on LBGTQ+ inclusion. 

However, some are of the opinion that the following statements may be indicative of change.  

Accountability and tranparency must be at the centre of our service and our leadership. In the world in which we live, and across the Army, the issues of culture and the way we do things must surrender to God’s way for his followers, especially those he has called to lead the Army and its people.

General Lyndon Buckingham.

The question that shouts out is: how do we define God's way? A theological minefield. The General is either signalling no change from the fundamentalist evangelical approach, or it is the precursor to a significant shift to a progressive stance. Either stance will be welcomed by some within the Army.

We both feel strongly about equality, which we hope is demonstrated by our leadership style. Equality, diversity and inclusion are very important to us both.This needs to be preached and lived out.

UK & I Territorial Leaders Jenine and Paul Main 

Is this an indication that fundamental change is afoot? One would like to think so, but I have my doubts. There may be tinkering at the edges. 

The Belonging and Believing conference in early March may test the waters as to the extent of demand for change.  A poor showing by the proponents of inclusion will be seized on by its opponents as a justification for no change. In my opinion that would be a disaster, not only for LBGTQ+ individuals, but also  for the Army's long-term survival in the UK.  

Edit.  

It has been suggested that the General's statement (a stand-alone  item on his Facebook page) concerns financial administration and management of resources being operated in a unified way across the Army. I agree it is a plausible interpretation. The statement ironically is opaque.

Part 237. Campaigning: proposal to The Salvation Army

The Salvation Army's ability to campaign for social justice is limited by resource constraints. This is the case particularly in regard to campaigning below national level. Organisations responsible for social care, health, education, housing, transport do not have boundaries contiguous with corps areas. Thus campaigning for changes in the policies of a county council will need to involve a number of corps. Likewise with health trusts and housing associations. 

Given the resource limitations the Army has currently, I am proposing volunteer Social Justice Champions (or should it be social justice champions) form a virtual network to consider issues that arise which may impact on individuals in more than one corps area of influence.  To achieve this a number of matters require resolution.

* What is the status of SJCs? Are they appointed by Corps or are they simply a generic group of individuals with no specific/authorised status?

* What are the reporting and control mechanisms, both for individual SJCs and when acting collectively?

These are important points for both individuals and any network. When contacting organisations there is a need for both The Salvation Army and the organisation being contacted to understand SJCs are expressing views officially endorsed by the Army.

Clearly there is much more to be considered.

Part 236. A deal in the offing?

The papers for the next meeting of the General Synod of the Church of England are published today. One paper is entitled:  

Living in Love, Faith, and Reconciliation 

Not, I hasten to add, my underlining. It is a 20 page document and I refrain from detailed analysis. The following points and observations stand out, well for me at least.

* There is an emphasis on the need for unity and respect for differing opinions. Mostly blather.

* Ten draft commitments are outlined. I was struck in particular by the 9th commitment relating to episcopay. Having learnt from the issue of women priests it is proposed that minimal formal structural change should be explored.

* The papers states approval of new services of blessing would have difficulty in achieving a two thirds majority in each of the three houses of Synod unless part of a settlement.

* The overall impression is that, in a bid to achieve a spurious unity at any cost, the interests of LBGTQ communities are to be sold down the river. The determining factor in negotiating a settlement will be the demands of conservative evangelicals and their conservative Anglo-Catholic collaborators.

* Discussion of same-sex marriage is off the agenda until at least after the 2025 General Synod elections.

Part 235. Campaigning in Kent.

Kent is a big county with many centres of population. Local government is in the hands of Medway Council (unitary authority) and Kent County Council.  The KCC area is served also by 12 district councils.  KCC's area includes Dartford, Gravesend, Sheerness, Margate, Ramsgate, Dover, Folkestone, Ashford, Canterbury, Maidstone, Tunbridge Wells, Tonbridge and Sevenoaks. Sadly, the Salvation Army does not have a presence in all the major towns, nor in many smaller communities such as Edenbridge, Swanley, Paddock Wood and Tenterden.

A matter I have raised with TSA is how it responds to Kent County Council consultations.  How may a response be made to a consultation that includes  inputs from corps in the area? Does a process or mechanism exist to achieve this?  Should an online network be established to discuss social justice issues in the county? What is the role of Social Justice Champions? 

KCC is responsible for, inter alia, social care.  Social care affects all age groups: particularly individuals and families TSA comes in contact with and seeks to support.  KCC is currently consulting on its Adult Social Care Charging Policy. Will TSA express an opinion? We should be campaigning, writing to our KCC councillors and cabinet members, meeting them,  but we must do so with a united voice.

Part 234. Progress, I hope.

Today, I received a copy of "the relaunched and restyled" Social Justice Newsletter published by The Salvation Army for Social Justice Champions. I await further developments. 

Part 233. Archbishops attempt to keep LLF on track.....they hope.

Forced move?  This situation should never have been permitted to arise. No news on a replacement co-lead. A poisoned chalice?

Theology Advisers | The Church of England

www.churchofengland.org

The Archbishops of Canterbury and York have announced the appointment of a new interim Theology Adviser, the Revd Canon Dr Jessica Martin, currently Canon Residentiary for Learning and Outreach at Ely Cathedral, to work alongside the Revd Dr Tom Woolford. Tom and Jessica will work as Joint Interim Theology Advisers to the House of Bishops and Secretaries to Faith and Order Commission (FAOC), on secondment for a six-month period starting in March 2024. These interim roles are in place while a substantive recruitment process is underway for a permanent successor to the Revd Dr Isabelle Hamley, who leaves the NCIs at the end of February to take up the role of Principal of Ridley Hall.

The Archbishops said: “In the last week, there has been a lot of public commentary about the appointment of the Interim Theology Adviser to the House of Bishops.

"This has required care to resolve, not just for individuals involved or affected by this appointment, but for the wider LLF process.

"We are grateful to Jessica and to Tom for their willingness to work together as interim Joint Theology Advisers.

"We remain concerned about the negative tone of debate in some parts of the Church, especially on social media.

"We must all do our utmost to disagree in a manner which shows the love of Jesus Christ to every person we encounter, especially those with whom we disagree.

"We are confident that Tom and Jessica will model this in their new roles and support the bishops in our work.”

Bishop Robert Innes, Chair of FAOC, said: “The Faith and Order Commission is an important resource for the national church representing a diversity of theological opinion and learning.

"I am confident that the Commission will be well served by our two new Interim Advisers. They are fine theologians, and I am personally looking forward very much to working with them.”

Dr Jessica Martin said: “It is a great pleasure to fulfil this interim role, working alongside Dr Woolford in the service of the whole Church, and modelling a mutual charity within difference in the advice he and I offer together to support the bishops and FAOC.”

Dr Tom Woolford said: “I understand the vital importance of ensuring that trust in the LLF process is maintained and I welcome the appointment of Dr Martin as Joint Theology Advisor.

"I intend and anticipate that we will both individually, as well as together, strive to provide advice in a neutral manner, and I look forward to our working together in support of the bishops and FAOC.”

Part 232. Social Justice Champion, The Salvation Army

I have decided to have another try, following the shambles surrounding my previous attempt, at becoming a Salvation Army Social Justice Champion. I was invited to apply in a Salvation Army comment on one of my comments on their Facebook page. 

Part 231. Love and Social Justice.

I do not engage in help to individuals and also campaign for social justice because I am a Christian.

I do not engage in help to individuals and also campaign for social justice because I follow Jesus.

I do these things because I choose to.

Part 230. Labour promises ban on conversion therapy.

An article in Pink News on welcome developments. Doubtless The Christian Institute will respond with its literalist fundamentalist Evangelical nonsense stoking fear about attacks on freedom.

'PinkNews | Latest lesbian, gay, bi and trans news | LGBTQ+ news

UK

Keir Starmer promises trans-inclusive conversion therapy ban under Labour

Jan 31

 Written by Chantelle Billson

LGBTQ+ activists have praised Keir Starmer for promising to bring in a trans-inclusive conversion therapy ban if Labour wins the next general election. ⁰

Labour leader Starmer vowed to tackle “psychologically damaging abuse” by bringing in a law that would extend the proposed safety net to transgender people. 

So-called conversion therapy refers to attempts by anti-LGBTQ+ groups or individuals to forcibly change the sexuality or gender identity of an individual, which is, of course, impossible.

According to The Express, Starmer, speaking to LGBT+ Labour on Tuesday (30 January), said: “We’ll implement a full, trans-inclusive, ban on all forms of conversion therapy.”

He added: “We fully support the view that conversion therapy is psychologically damaging abuse”.

LGBT Humanists co-ordinator Nick Baldwin responded to Starmer’s latest statement on conversion therapy by telling PinkNews: “I commend Keir Starmer for his promise to safeguard the rights and wellbeing of vulnerable LGBT people. Banning conversion therapy is not only a matter of legal necessity but also a moral imperative.

“It sends a clear message that the rights and dignity, and ultimate safety, of LGBT people should be protected in law.” 

A conversion therapy ban was first promised by Theresa May half a decade ago. 

Jayne Ozanne, the founder of the Ban Conversion Therapy Coalition, said she was glad to hear of the Labour leader’s pledge, which would “cover the one group that we know are most at risk: trans people.”

She continued: “Contrary to the fear-mongering that those wanting to continue these harmful practices are stoking, no parent, teacher or religious leader will ever be stopped from having challenging conversations with those in their care.

“What will be banned, however, are practices conducted by those with a pre-determined mind set, who say that someone can never be trans or gay. The ‘war on trans’ must stop. It is putting lives at risk for political gain, and will be viewed poorly by the electorate.”

Starmer has previously been criticised for taking Labour backwards on trans rights: Last year, he scrapped the party’s commitment to self-ID for trans people, whipped Labour MPs to abstain on the Tories’ unprecedented use of a Section 35 order to block the SNP’s gender reform bill, and described a woman as an ‘adult female’.

Keir Starmer and Labour Party banners

Keir Starmer is the current leader of the Labour Party. His comments on conversion therapy come just a day after one his most senior colleagues, shadow health secretary Wes Streeting, backed the idea of housing trans patients in separate hospital wards rather than ward that correspond with their gender identity.

In parliament on Monday (29 January), Starmer promised to crackdown on all categories of hate crime, with those found guilty facing longer jail sentences.

“We’ll strengthen the law, so every category of hate crime is treated as an aggravated offence,” he vowed.

Starmer went on to promise a modernisation of the Gender Recognition Act, following Scotland voting through its reform bill, allowing trans people to gain legal recognition without the need for a medical diagnosis.

Despite the party backtracking on previous commitments to self-ID, he insisted that Labour has defended LGBTQ+ rights. 

Last August, data journalist Ell Folan claimed that, under Starmer’s leadership, the Labour Party has become increasingly out of step with its voter base on the issue of transgender rights.'

Part 229. More Church of England discord

A storm has arisen over the appointment 'after an open and competitive process" of Revd. Dr Thomas Woolford  as interim Secretary to the Faith and Order Commission (FAOC)and Theological Adviser to the House of Bishops. The appointment was made by Bishop Robert Innes, Chair of FAOC. 

The appointment has been greeted with dismay and anger by progressives, so much so that one of the co-leaders of the LLF process, the Bishop of Newcastle has resigned. Her co-leader, the Bishop of Leicester, is staying on with provisos but has written to the two Archbishops seeking undertakings concerning his role, the appointment of a new co-leader  and appointment of a further adviser to ensure balance.

Bishop of Newcastle's Statement 

Living in Love and Faith: A Statement from Bishop Helen-Ann

First published on: 1st February 2024

My first commitment, and priority, is to continue to respond to God’s calling to be Bishop of Newcastle, and I rejoice in this calling. It has become clear to me in the last 48 hours that there are serious concerns relating to the recent process of appointing an Interim Theological Advisor to the House of Bishops. This was, and is not, an LLF appointment, and neither Bishop Martyn nor myself were involved in it. Whilst the remit of the theological advisor is broader than any matters relating to LLF, there is no doubt that LLF remains front and centre in the life of our Church at this time. What has transpired in the last 48 hours has had a critically negative impact on the work Bishop Martyn and I were seeking, in good faith, to do. My role as co-lead bishop for the LLF process is now undermining my capacity to fulfil my primary calling, to lead and care for the people and places of the Diocese of Newcastle.

I am fully committed to the vocation and life of the Church of England, its place in our diverse communities across this land, and in the wider Anglican Communion. Mindful of different views within my own diocese, I am also fully committed to the full inclusion of LGBTQIA+ people. I do not believe these are mutually exclusive, and I am not naïve in saying this. As I approach the 10th anniversary of my consecration as a bishop, my decision to step down from my LLF role is not one I have taken lightly, but is one built on all I have learnt about being a bishop, both here and in Aotearoa New Zealand. I will continue to be involved in the LLF process as a diocesan bishop, and will endeavour to prayerfully and actively work towards fulfilling the commitments expressed above, and those already agreed to in General Synod.

+Helen-Ann Newcastle,

February 1st 2024.

Strong stuff. The response of the Archbishops in on my Facebook page: John Hopkinson Theology Page 

Commentary

By Colin Coward, a leading light in Changing Attitude England

I checked my emails and Facebook before opening Thinking Anglicans, and only then discovered that Helen-Ann, the bishop of Newcastle, has stepped down from her LLF role because what has transpired in the last 48 hours had a critically negative impact on the work she and bishop Martyn were trying to do. I'm in a state of shock. 

What transpired to provoke her resignation seems to be the appointment of the Vicar of All Saints’, New Longton, the Revd Dr Thomas Woolford, a tutor at Emmanuel Theological College, as the interim secretary to the Faith and Order Commission (FAOC) and adviser to the House of Bishops. He has held homophobic and misogynistic views in the past, though he claims to have modified them.

The most recent post on TA reports that more than 130 members of the General Synod Sexuality and Gender Group 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.

THINKING ANGLICANS 

Has the Bishop's Statement and then:

The Church Times has this: Bishop of Newcastle stands down from LLF over ‘serious concerns’ about interim adviser

This report is comprehensive, and I urge you to read it in full. But here are two excerpts:

…Earlier in the week, the Vicar of All Saints’, New Longton, the Revd Dr Thomas Woolford, a tutor at Emmanuel Theological College, was announced as the interim secretary to the Faith and Order Commission (FAOC) and adviser to the House of Bishops, before a permanent post-holder takes up the position in September.

After his appointment, an article by Dr Woolford, published in 2019 on the website of Church Society, a conservative Evangelical organisation in the C of E, began to be circulated on social media.

In the article, Mr Woolford wrote: “I think it would be disastrous and desperately wicked if the Church were to prepare blessings for things we must not bless, alter the canons to accommodate worldly thinking, give up the standard of chastity for ordained office-holders, or sanction false teaching.”

Speaking shortly after Dr Hartley’s announcement, Dr Woolford distanced himself from the tone of the article. “I’m still a conservative on blessings and on sexuality; so that part hasn’t changed,” he said. “But I’d put a lot of things differently in light of the journey that we’ve been on in Synod and in the wider Church.”

And the report later continues:

…On Thursday afternoon, the Bishop in Europe, Dr Robert Innes, who chairs the FAOC, said that Dr Woolford’s was an “advisory role, not an executive role”.

“He is an adviser among other advisers, and advisers come from an appropriately diverse array of positions,” he told the Church Times, and emphasised that it was a six-month interim appointment.

“It’s testament to the very febrile nature of the Church at the moment that the appointment of a temporary adviser attracts so much interest and controversy, and I do regret that.”

He described Dr Woolford as a “a very able theologian indeed”, who understood that he had to “behave in a neutral way”.

Statement from Bishop of Leicester.

Statement from Bishop Martyn on his role as Co-Lead Bishop for LLF.

I am deeply saddened by the Bishop of Newcastle’s decision to stand down from the role of Co-Lead Bishop for the Living in Love and Faith process. I greatly enjoyed working with her on this process and I want to express my personal thanks for her support and encouragement, and my respect for her decision to prioritise her ministry in her own diocese.

I took on the role of Co-Lead Bishop for the Living in Love and Faith process out of a sense of calling to bridge-building and reconciliation – both for their own sake and as a core part of our Christian witness. Having reflected on my position over the past couple of days, this sense of calling remains.

However, I recognise that confidence and trust in the Living in Love and Faith process is low, and that I cannot by myself rebuild that trust or command the confidence of the full breadth of the Church of England. So I have indicated to the Archbishops that I am willing to continue in the role of Co-Lead Bishop with several provisos: 

Like Bishop Helen-Ann, my diocese is my first priority. I have been in Leicester eight years and the people and communities of this wonderful diocese know my views on LLF. They may not all agree with my views but we have had regular discussions at Diocesan Synod, in small groups and one-to-one conversations, and there is a high level of mutual respect. I will continue to prioritise these local conversations.

The Archbishops will need to appoint a successor to Bishop Helen-Ann who commands similar respect across the House of Bishops and General Synod. It is important to model an approach of people with differing views working together.

The Secretary-General will need to appoint a second Interim Theological Adviser to the House of Bishops so that there is a similar model of working together across difference. And the Co-Lead Bishops for LLF must be involved in the appointment of future Theological Advisers (we were not involved in the recent process). 

The Faith and Order Commission must remain a diverse group which resources the House of Bishops through careful, rich and nuanced theological work.

I have asked the Archbishops to consider leading a time of prayerful reflection at General Synod which sets this whole process once again in the context of discernment about what sort of Church we are called to be in the coming years.

I remain committed to serving the Church as we seek a way forward which ensures that LGBTQIA+ people are accepted, valued and loved for who they are, and ensures that those who cannot in conscience use the Prayers of Love and Faith also have a secure place within the Church.

The commitments which will be brought to Synod later this month will do more to lay out the steps we need to take to improve the transparency and accountability of the Living in Love and Faith process. My prayers are for an honest, generous and prayerful debate.