The Alliance and the Bishop of Oxford

by Canon Dr Phil Groves, a parish priest and convenor of the Anglican Peace and Justice Network. His PhD is on Anglican Missional Ecclesiology and he was the Facilitator for the Listening Process in the Anglican Communion and Director of Continuing Indaba.


‘The Alliance’ has written another letter to the Archbishop of Canterbury and once again the tone portrays them as the arbiters of orthodoxy. In this letter they make it clear that they will remain within the Anglican Communion while effectively becoming a separate church – a new province – in England.

They give the impression that it is the Church of England which will be isolated from the theologically uniform Global South, and so from the Anglican Communion itself, while they will be welcomed with open arms. They accuse the Archbishops of Canterbury and York of ‘Western elitism’ in ignoring the views of the Global South and claim they are the ones striving for unity.

My own bishop – the Bishop of Oxford – has written a response. In it he refers to the consensus at Lambeth 2022 which was to accept different views on sexuality and to walk together. He criticises the Alliance for not mentioning the persecution of LGBTIQ+ people in parts of the world where the [Anglican] church has given its support.

Replying to Bishop Steven, the Alliance has emphasised its opposition to the persecution of LGBTQIA+ people, but they also make clear their commitment to be in full communion with Provinces at the heart of GAFCON and the Global South Fellowship of Anglicans (GSFA) – including provinces such as Nigeria and Uganda which have promoted and rejoiced in laws that have deepened the criminalisation of LGBTQIA+ people and their allies. The members of the Alliance feel compelled to break with those who bless the union of people of the same sex, but not to break communion with those who rejoice that freedom of speech and freedom of association have been removed from those seeking to defend some of the most vulnerable people in their societies. The Alliance says it is ‘deeply concerned about the persecution of LGBTQIA+ people’ and they emphasise that their affirmation of Lambeth I.10 includes a clear repudiation of all homophobia. I don’t doubt their sentiment, but they are still aligning with church leaders who have praised laws that potentially imprison people for even being suspected of being gay.

The letters from the Alliance frequently talk about the ‘Global South’ representing 75% of Anglicanism. This is an extremely misleading claim. It may be that 75% of Anglicans live in the Global South, but even in one diocese, let alone one parish, there is always diversity. When the Alliance talks about ‘the Global South’ they seem to mean an organisation, GSFA, that according to its leader is defined by doctrine not geography. The GSFA has 8 Anglican member Provinces from a total of 31 provinces with Global South Anglicans. The GSFA has excluded or alienated most of the Global South provinces, and has been a cause of division.

The Bishop of Oxford is right to point out that, if the Alliance is in partnership with 75% of Anglicans in the socio-economic Global South, then that includes being in partnership with Anglicans who have steadfastly opposed GAFCON and GSFA and with those who are deliberating change. In the terms set by the Alliance, many of them are not ‘orthodox’. The Bishop of Oxford is aware of this because the Diocese of Oxford has a partnership with the Diocese of Kimberley and Kuruman in South Africa, where prayers for those in same sex unions have recently been approved.

And a further new partnership challenges the charge that the Church of England is failing to listen to Anglicans in the Global South. This week, the Bishop of Oxford announced the launch of a new link with the Diocese of Jamaica and the Cayman Islands.

Archbishop Howard Gregory – the Diocesan Bishop of Jamaica and the Archbishop of the West Indies – entered the partnership well aware of the progressive stance of our Bishop and of many in our Diocese. The partnership is for all in both dioceses, not just with those who self-proclaim themselves to be ‘orthodox’. His diocese also has theological diversity and we will find common ground and real challenges. He has chosen to partner his complex diocese with our complex diocese, fully aware of the range of views we have here and the direction of travel under the leadership of our bishop.

In contrast with the Archbishops of Nigeria and Uganda, Archbishop Howard has followed on from his predecessor – Archbishop John Holder of Barbados – and bravely squared up to the homophobia in West Indian culture and law. Far from being in thrall to ‘Western elites’, the Archbishop is seeking the repeal of the British colonial penal code.

The place of the West Indies in the story of GSFA is illustrative of power struggles across the Communion. The South to South encounters of the 1990s were intended to enable a post-colonial Anglican voice to emerge, but in the late 1990s some of the leadership partnered with Western conservatives who were seeking support for their opposition to women bishops and a clear stance on human sexuality. Following the 1998 Lambeth Conference, and up to his retirement in 2009, the Archbishop of the West Indies, Drexel Gomez, was at the heart of these partnerships. However, his lead role in that organisation alienated him from the bishops in his province. They had their own partnerships with dioceses around the world, including TEC, and they did not necessarily support his views. He was spoken of as ‘representing’ them, but he had no mandate to do so.

His retirement coincided with the meeting of the ACC in Jamaica in 2009. I was privileged to meet all the bishops from West Indies that week and several of them told me that they had been lobbied by Western conservatives (including one from the Diocese of Oxford) telling them who to elect as their Archbishop so they could preserve continuity with the Global South. By a huge majority they ignored the advice and elected a radical alternative – Bishop John Holder.

I knew Bishop John well. In 2006 I had just been appointed Facilitator for the Listening Process on Human Sexuality in the Anglican Communion and he sent me a copy of his training manual for all clergy in his diocese. He did so because one of the four sessions was aimed at enabling his clergy to face their homophobia, and change. He was not bowing to any Western elite; it was the conclusion of his deep engagement with Scripture and the result of his deep listening to the experience of LGBTIQ+ people (as mandated in Lambeth I.10).

When the Bishops of the West Indies chose him as Primate, they did so in order to break with the organisation that the Alliance calls the ‘Global South’ and to ensure that they were part of an Anglican Communion that included TEC and the Anglican Church of Canada.

This pattern was often repeated across the Communion. I saw it in Ghana, Tanzania, Southern Africa and elsewhere and so when the GSFA tried to divide the Bishops at the 2022 Lambeth Conference by encouraging dissent through the signing of a document demanding universal conformity with Lambeth I.10, only a tiny proportion of bishops from the Global South signed up. Not one bishop from the West Indies signed it.

Calling the GSFA ‘the Global South’ is deliberately confusing. Because it is an organisation that is defined by doctrine not geography, people may be surprised to know that the breakaway Anglican Church in North America is a member! Yet the vast majority of Anglican Provinces in the socio-economic global south are not.

All this does not mean the partnership between Jamaica and the Cayman Islands and the Diocese of Oxford will be easy. Jamaica has been struck by a deadly hurricane almost immediately after the announcement of the link and this calls for us not only to seek money to help but also to ask hard questions about our responsibility for the environmental crisis engulfing the world. We will also be required to examine our place in the horror of chattel slavery. One of the historic patrons of one of my churches was a slave owner – my guess is that slave-trade related patronage runs deep within our diocese. Effective partnership is going to be uncomfortable for all of us.

This new partnership indicates that the Anglican Communion has a healthy future. We will need to face difficult conversations with openness, honesty, and humility, but we will benefit from those as we walk with Christ.

Comments

8 responses to “The Alliance and the Bishop of Oxford”

  1. Brynn Craffey avatar

    Thank you for this more detailed and clearer view of these disturbing developments!

  2. Peter avatar
    Peter

    Helen, I am not a natural supporter of the positions you generally take. However, I cheered out loud at a question you put the bishops this evening at GS

    You asked “Where are the laity included in all this ?” If on little else, I stand shoulder to shoulder with you on that point.

    Apologies to Dr Groves for comment crashing his article.

    1. Helen King avatar
      Helen King

      Ha, only just catching up with comments. Just to clarify, while I also feel that there’s a continued issue with making sure lay voices are included in all these discussions – it happens, but sometimes one needs to push for it – my intervention in that LLF panel presentation was specifically about those present on the platform. They hadn’t been introduced to us; it was York Synod so the dress code meant clerical collars weren’t there to give us a clue; so it wasn’t immediately obvious that we were hearing from 5 clergy and an ordinand. On the first of those points, I also intervened in the ‘fringe’ presentation on LLF to ask +Martyn to make sure those present gave their names. New Synod members are coming in on by-elections all the time and we really shouldn’t be making the assumption that we all know each other.

    2. Phil Groves avatar
      Phil Groves

      No problem

  3. Lee Longden avatar
    Lee Longden

    Many thanks for this article, Phil. As an ecclesiologist by teaching/research specialism, I cringe, and often despair, at the many ill-informed blanket characterisations of pretty much every organisational unit from a local parish outwards being carelessly flung around in debates, alliance forming and ‘official’ reorganisation strategies these days. It’s a pleasure to read something from a well-informed corrective voice!

  4. Vivienne Hayward avatar
    Vivienne Hayward

    The assertion that ‘75% of Anglicans in the Global South’ do not support LGBTIQA+ people’ is premised on the proposition that all Anglicans in a diocese know, understand and and endorse the views of their bishops, which is clearly absurd. It is simply the opinion of a handful of men (bishops) who do not.

  5. Paul avatar
    Paul

    Howard Gregory was also the author of the Lambeth Call on Human Dignity which said:

    “It is the mind of the Anglican Communion as a whole 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. It is the mind of the Communion to uphold “faithfulness in marriage between a man and a woman in lifelong union” (I.10, 1998).

    This was only two years ago.

    1. Phil Groves avatar
      Phil Groves

      Agreed, but the distinction I am making is between those who also eager to be on a journey with those like the Bishop of Oxford who support equal marriage. GAFCON and GSFA are committed to closing down the possibility of change. Archbishop Howard is not. The Alliance is partnering with those who close down change.
      I am very happy to be on a journey with those who are prepared to be open to the movement of the spirit, even if they have convictions different to mine. Archbishop Howard is prepared to partner with us, even if we are the inheritors of wealth built on the blood of the slaves in Jamaica and on the carbon fuels that propel hurricanes across his island.
      We should not pretend justice is simple. We in the Global North are very happy to pay lip service to the call of justice on those issues.
      Archbishop Howard is also seeking the end of the criminalisation of LGBTQI+ people. Only after decriminalisation can our LGBTIQ+ siblings speak for themselves in his context. Once they have a voice, who knows the future.
      I believe that the first step is toleration and Archbishop Howard s there. I trust the Holy Spirit will lead the church on to acceptance and then to celebration. I don’t think it is possible to get to celebration without the first step. I am happy to be on that journey with him, and open tot he possibility that the journey may end with toleration. That is the risk God takes with all of us.
      The contrast is with the Alliance who break communion with those of us who celebrate with our LGBTIQ+ siblings but eagerly partner with those in GAFCON and GSFA who demand and rejoice in the deep criminalisation of LGBTQI+ people.

Any thoughts?