Andrew Goddard claims in a recent Psephizo blog that revisionists are responsible for the decision of a number of Global South Provinces and bishops to stay away from the 2022 Lambeth Conference. The Lambeth Conference resolutions passed in 1978 and 1988 and the Global South conference held in Kuala Lumpur in 1997 show that the Global South movement itself is entirely responsible, organising a homophobic and transphobic movement to sabotage any progressive developments.

Andrew sets out to explore the reality of the current situation after Lambeth 2022, what it might reveal about the Anglican Communion and what might lie ahead as the Church of England discerns a direction of travel in the light of Living in Love and Faith. He chooses to use what he terms “a classic definition of the Communion from the 1930 Lambeth Conference” to set out four central characteristics:

sustenance through the common counsel of bishops in conference;
mutual loyalty;upholding and propagating the Catholic and Apostolic faith and order;
communion with the See of Canterbury.

In choosing to use as his base line a definition that is eight years short of a century old Andrew assumes the four characteristics to be as valid today as they were then. I don’t think they are, good as they may once have been.

Common counsel

Says Andrew, difficulties arise in relation to sexuality because of deeper differences concerning authority, theological method, and the interpretation and authority of Scripture both in relation to specific texts and more generally. These differences were not new in 1930. They had been explored and argued over for nearly three centuries. We continue to argue about them. I have spent over sixty adult years exploring them.

Lambeth 1998

The bishops exercising “common counsel” at the Lambeth 1998 plenary session chose to ignore the wisdom of their brothers who had spent three weeks exploring seemingly incompatible ideas about human sexuality. They wrote an excellent report, only for it to be trashed in a plenary session that cobbled together a deeply compromised resolution, Lambeth 1.10, in an atmosphere described by Bishop Peter Selby as being like a Nuremberg Rally. A Nigerian bishop attempted to exorcise what he labelled ‘the demon of homosexuality’ from LGCM’s Richard Kirker, who patiently endured the abuse.

Lambeth 2022

The bishops present at Lambeth 2022 behaved in a far more mature manner, enabling a better quality of ‘common council.’ This might have had something to do with all the bishops from Nigeria, Uganda and Rwanda and a substantial number from Kenya absenting themselves. They chose to absent themselves because they prioritise their differences and disagreements about sexuality and Christian teaching and practice over and above any commitment to their brothers and sisters from the Provinces who chose to be present. The absent bishops describe competing and incompatible visions of the nature of Christianity and the church – that’s nothing new. There were divisions in 1930, but bishops didn’t refuse to attend the Conference in contrast to those who chose to absent themselves in 2008 and 2022.

Andrew says that altogether, bishops of over 200 dioceses in which are found tens of millions of Anglicans (probably 30% to 40% of those who are “in communion with the See of Canterbury”) refused to attend two consecutive Lambeth Conferences. As a result Africans, growing churches, were seriously and increasingly under-represented at the Conference. But who is responsible for their absence? LGBTQIA+ people?

Lambeth 1978 and 1988

Andrew says resolution 1.10 on Human Sexuality “clearly restated the mind of the gathered bishops as to the teaching of Scripture in this area. Andrew is wrong. Resolution 10 on Human Relationships and Sexuality in 1978, while reaffirming “heterosexuality as the scriptural norm”, recognised:

“the need for deep and dispassionate study of the question of homosexuality, which would take seriously the both the teaching of Scripture and the results of scientific and medical research. The Church, recognising the need for pastoral concern for those who are homosexual, encourages dialogue with them.”

Resolution 64 on Human Rights for those of homosexual orientation in 1988 reaffirmed resolution 10 from 1978 and added:

“the continuing need in the next decade for deep and dispassionate study of the question of homosexuality”

urged

“study and reflection on . . . the socio-cultural factors that lead to the different attitudes in the provinces of our Communion”

and called

“each province to reassess, in the light of such study and because of our concern for human rights, its care for and attitude towards persons of homosexual orientation.”

What happened next

Global South churches chose to ignore the resolutions from the Lambeth Conferences of 1978 and 1988. Global South bishops met in Kuala Lumpur in August 1997 with the intention of high jacking the agenda in advance of the 1998 conference by forming a strong anti-gay presence. This they did very successfully.

In fulfilment of the 1988 resolution, I had been asked to bring together a small group of LGBTQIA+ people to meet the members of the subsection dealing with human sexuality. The Global South block organised opposition to this. Although we waited patiently for the three weeks of the conference, bishops opposed to our presence refused us a hearing. They were well organised and very well resourced. They hired the Franciscan Centre on the university campus as an operations centre using conservative American expertise and funding. They were responsible for the hostile, homophobic resolution that was presented at the plenary session and the Nuremburg atmosphere that marked the two-hour debate.

Global South Coalition responsible

The Global South Coalition is responsible for sabotaging and undermining the characteristics of common counsel and mutual loyalty that Andrew so values. In a ViaMedia blog Canon Phil Groves wrote about the Global South Fellowship of Anglicans’ (GSFA) driving a divisive message that has distorted the reality of the 2022 conference, claiming to speak for those who have historically been marginalised and silenced through the dominance of power in the socio-economic global north. The remainder of Andrew’s argument depends entirely on his failure to remember the thirty-year history of organised, hostile opposition since 1998, contrary to the 1930 culture he asks us to value and respect.

The result is the opposite of what he claims. The decision of the churches in North America and Canada to disregard resolution 1.10 and explore the blessing of same-sex unions, consecrating bishops in such unions, and expanding the doctrine of marriage, is what the 1997 and 1998 resolutions explored. It is the actions of the Global South that led to the breakdown in relationships. They have absented themselves.

Failure of the Global North

Everything else that follows has been the result of the Global South actions and a failure of nerve by the “Global North”, by those bishops and Provinces that retain an Anglican polity and culture of generosity, integrity and a desire to uphold and propagate the Catholic and Apostolic faith and order in an evolutionary, now global, human and Christian culture. The Windsor Report, advocated by Andrew, was one of the valiant but doomed attempts to rescue the Communion.

Andrew says the Anglican Communion is in the mess it is in because for the majority of the bishops of the Communion the ‘historic characteristic of churches of the Communion – that they “uphold and propagate the Catholic and Apostolic faith and order” – no longer pertains or at least much less clearly and fully pertains.’ That has been the reality for over two decades.

Whatever vision and structure GAFCON and the Global South Fellowship will adapt and develop, it will be a hostile, prejudiced, homophobic and transphobic vision. The Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) and the two major international networks of GAFCON and the Global South Fellowship of Anglicans, however mighty they are numerically, continue the work of sabotage and abuse, determined to exterminate any development of theology or praxis that incorporates the results of the “deep and dispassionate” studies advocated at Lambeth 1978 and 1998, that have continued to expand, including in every GAFCON and Global South Fellowship Province, recognising the full humanity of LGBTQIA+ people.

It is in this impossible historical and contemporary context that the Church of England bishops are having to address our disagreements about sexual holiness and marriage. No wonder the bishops - and all of us - are finding it so difficult to orientate ourselves to a properly Christian, truly Anglican, theological, Christ-like foundation.

I visited Church House Bookshop this week and was offered three books that the staff thought might be of interest. Open for Liberation: An activist reads the Bible by Tim Gee, commended by Ruth Wilde, National Coordinator of Inclusive Church, provides an apposite quote:

“It often feels as if Christianity has been commandeered for the purposes of winning support for war, racism, sexism and homophobia, all of which goes against the most basic teachings of Jesus. A necessary part of the task of liberating humanity from oppression will involve liberating Christianity from those who believe that oppression is consistent with faith.”

Archbishop Justin worked to restore to Lambeth 2022 the Gospel vision of love, wisdom, justice and truth proclaimed by Jesus. I pray for the College and House of Bishops and for the members of General Synod, responsible for translating the deepest Christian faith in God’s infinite, intimate, unconditional love into the life and faith of the Church of England, making present radical new Christian inclusion for LGBTQIA+ people.

Addendum

Lambeth Resolution 1.10

The elements of Lambeth 1998 Resolution 1.10 that the non-attending churches in 2022 have always ignored, though many have faithfully struggled to implement paragraph 6:

3. 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;
4. 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;
6. Requests the Primates and the ACC to establish a means of monitoring the work done on the subject of human sexuality in the Communion and to share statements and resources among us;

To support Changing Attitude England’s campaign pursuing a vision of the Church where LGBTQIA+ people will be welcomed and loved unconditionally you might like to join Changing Attitude England on Facebook.