Sorting out the disagreements about homosexuality

In an article in the current issue of the Spectator, Divided we stand: Anglicans need to agree to disagree, Theo Hobson notes how two years ago the Church of England decided to delay any public discussion of its deepest division over homosexuality until 2022. He thinks this might be the year in which the Church of England sorts itself out ‘a bit’. Sadly, Covid etc has upset the timetable and Spring 2023 is when any sorting out might be done. Hobson has faith in the possibility of a sorting out because “challenging times can clarify minds, and prod an awkward, uncertain tradition into life.” His focus is on “the core Anglican tradition of liberal Anglo-Catholicism, liberal in the sense that it affirms the liberal state and rejects a reactionary response to modern culture, Anglo-Catholic in the sense that it has confidence in ritual tradition, and is wary of simplistic emotional piety and bossy legalism. It prefers mystery, difficulty, open-mindedness.”

Assert liberal Anglo-Catholicism

Hobson says

“the Church of England should regain some pride in its positive affinity with cultural freedom. it is a crucial part of Anglican identity, and only a church that has confidence in its core identity can attract people. It’s time for a nuanced approach, in which aspects of liberalism are criticised, but in which the basic Anglican affirmation of the liberal state is renewed.”

Asserting the centrality of liberal Anglo-Catholicism in the Church means

“treating evangelicalism with a bit less respect. For decades it has unbalanced the Church by drawing relatively big (and affluent) crowds with a style that grates on most Anglican sensibilities. Its simplistic idea of mission has dominated all recent attempts at innovation, which have been heavily backed by the archbishops, leading to discontent in the parishes. its reputation for trend-bucking success is now fading: a recent report showed that its latest church-planting efforts were largely fruitless.”

I wholeheartedly agree with his characterisation of the evangelicalism and evangelicals who are driving the Church of England into an expensive and almost certainly disastrous wasteland as having a simplistic idea of mission. I also think the contemporary evangelical dominant strand has simplistic ideas of God, Jesus, the Holy Spirit, Christian history and tradition, creation and evolution. These may be my prejudices but I hold them with deepening conviction.

In my previous blog I wrote about the inspiration I find in returning to Harry Williams’ sermons in The True Wilderness. I’m not sure whether Harry Williams represents the liberal Anglo-Catholicism advocated by Hobson. I’m not an Anglo-Catholic. I’m the ‘product’ of an Anglo-Catholic childhood and I was trained at a ‘liberal Anglo-Catholic’ theological college, but I have never ‘belonged’ to a particular tradition in the Church. If pushed, I would identify as an evangelical catholic.

I find no evidence of a coherent liberal Anglo-Catholic tradition in the Church of England today, let alone one that is actively inspired by leaders of the quality of Harry Williams and other priests, theologians, visionaries and mystics of his era, who are preaching and publishing work of the depth and truth needed to inspire a movement today capable of challenging the dominant evangelical tropes.

Hobson sees a Church of England that is full of moral muddle because that’s how you and I are. It reflects us. It is the muddle of honesty. That’s a very Harry Williams view of the reality of life. Hobson claims that “plenty of us still feel called to keep the experiment going, of Christianity plus moral honesty.” I doubt that there is a sufficiently strong strain of moral honesty in today’s Church. If it is there, it is being kept under wraps in an effort not to upset the conviction of both Archbishops that the time, energy and money they are pouring into their missionary activities are going to transform and save the Church. Nearly all members of the both the House and College of Bishops collude with the Archbishops’ fantasy by staying silent.

An Anglican culture of creativity

I wholeheartedly agree with one idea proposed by Hobson. He says “every parish should have an extrovert creative wing, an in-house arts centre. The aim is a new Anglican culture of creativity, rooted in parishes.” I’m all for extrovert creative wings and the opening of church buildings to an Anglican culture of creativity. Some parishes already are and have been for years centres of creativity and so are many cathedrals. Chichester and Salisbury come to mind immediately. But the creative strand of cultural creativity is not embedded in today’s dominant brand of English Anglican evangelicalism. It is almost entirely absent.

A solution to the homosexuality dispute

Hobson says the solution to end the dispute over homosexuality is clear enough. “Diversity must be allowed: liberal parishes must be free to conduct gay weddings, evangelical parishes must be allowed to refuse to.” Hobson sometimes feels that the Church was wrong to tolerate dissent on the ordination of women and let the traditionalists have their separate structures. Now he thinks that it was providential because it set a precedent that can belatedly be followed on an even more divisive issue.

I disagree. I think the pragmatic arrangements made to tolerate dissent on the ordination of women have enshrined an utterly unchristian intolerance and prejudice in the life of the Church. We now have legalised enclaves of abuse and misogyny. I have no wish to allow evangelical parishes to refuse to marry lesbian and gay couples. We should have the right, equal to heterosexuals, to be married in every Anglican parish church and building in England.

If you are inspired by this blog to campaign for equal marriage in the Church of England, please join these two Facebook groups: Changing Attitude England and the Campaign for Equal Marriage in the Church of England.