llf
How I have voted in that time is a matter of public record, particularly in favour of the Living in Love and Faith (LLF) legislation.
As an example to ensure that the prayers and agreed service of LLF can be used in stand alone services to value all relationships.
Member of LLF Working Groups 2024-
I served on the Living in Love and Faith (LLF) Working Groups.
I have already spoken in three LLF debates, and pray we can find a way forward which enables all, of whatever view, to flourish in our church.
I speak up I’ve spoken in debates, asked questions and proposed amendments on a issues including Living in Love and Faith (LLF), working-class vocations, estates ministry, women's ministry, finance and neurodiversity.
LLF as a process has concluded.
The next Synod will need to grapple with the difficult legacy of the LLF process, which has led to much disappointment, pain, and upset across the increasingly entrenched divisions in our church.
On LLF and sexuality, I have consistently said that I am seeking an outcome that honours those who hold different views; which allows difference to flourish and produces an outcome that is doable over time.
I have been disappointed (and frustrated) that we have not made better progress through the LLF process and would want to engage in the next steps.
I think this disposition will be essential for the good of the church as we navigate tricky issues, like the follow-up to LLF.
We need to achieve a more inclusive and satisfactory conclusion to the LLF project, be clear in support of the local church, and regain confidence in being the church for all.
LLF focussed on only one of a myriad of issues relating to sexuality and identity that confuse and harm our communities – more wisdom in applying our integrity, less seeking to change it.
It is clear that LLF has failed fully to include people like me in the Church.
I have served on several of the working groups connected to LLF/PLF, and also on the House of Bishops Standing Commission on the 5 Guiding Principles, initially covering the complementarian episcopal vacancy in Maidstone/Ebbsfleet.
In reality this has been possible on the 5 Guiding Principles because there is clear, consensus agreement among the Bishops that they need to be made to work, but it has been less easy on LLF.
- In response to the Living in Love & Faith (LLF) initiative,
The LLF discussions have been deep, extensive, painful and unresolved.
The LLF process is now over and we have started with the new Relationships, Sexuality and Gender Working Group – I will prayerfully consider what emerges – but will do so in context of my own theological reflection whilst also listening to colleagues through chapter, deanery and synodical processes.
As one of the Alliance directors, I have met with the lead Bishops of the Programme Board of the Living in Love and Faith process and the LLF team regularly over the last quinquennium to help represent all the networks within the Alliance.
I share the concerns expressed by many across the spectrum of views that the new initiatives and bodies being proposed by the House of Bishops could mean going through the LLF journey again, risking similar results and ever deeper pain across the Church.
LIVERPOOL & NATIONAL LLF ADVOCATE
On LLF, my view is the Church must consider carefully, pastorally, and properly.
LLF doesn’t feel like the only contentious issue to face the church over the next five years.
• Living in Love & Faith (LLF): Having lived in love and faith in a same-sex
The debate at General Synod 2026, which sadly brought the LLF programme to a formal close, also voted to establish new working groups to oversee future theological and legal work.
Having been part of our diocese’s synod dedicated to LLF, I hope to be part of that conversation.
Directly participated in European Diocesan Synod discussions on LLF and diocesan strategy.
Out of conviction, I voted against the LLF proposals brought by the House of Bishops.
This will only happen if the LLF measures are reversed or a separate structure established.
It’s heartbreaking to see the church so deeply divided by aspects of the LLF process, so whilst I remain committed to the Church of England’s received doctrine of marriage, I want us to move forward together, finding a path that enables us to remain united in Christ.
The handling of the LLF process
I have spoken in many LLF debates and participated in smaller discernment groups convened by the Archbishop of Canterbury.
For the avoidance of doubt, I support the position General Synod eventually reached on LLF which included the Prayers of Love and Faith and a commitment to the inherited doctrine of marriage.
• Sexuality: The LLF process has been deeply
Having served in two iterations of the working groups for LLF, I am committed to supporting collaborative ways of seeking to build up and not devour one another.
Marriage and sexual ethics Although the LLF process has officially been brought to a close, the recent King Private Members Motion brought to General Synod indicates that the debates around a biblical understanding of human sexuality will continue into the next Synod.
The LLF process has also reached a painful and unresolved conclusion but working groups are being established to continue the necessary conversations during the next quinquennium.
I served on the Leicester LLF working groups, working closely with people across the range of views in the Church, building genuine friendships and working hard together to find ways forward despite holding very different views.
Despite the many years of discussion on LLF with apparently little progress, I remain hopeful that we can find the strength and pastoral generosity to hold together different theological perspectives.
Shared Conversations and LLF process
former church) where I have friends who do not share my orthodox Anglican stance on LLF.
In the new Synod, LLF will be reborn under a new acronym.
‘settlement’ around LLF An aspiration to search for a ‘consensual’ settlement to the challenges that will emerge as we move on from Living in Love and Faith to receive proposals from the House of Bishops sexuality Working Group.
historic teaching on marriage and sexuality, and my Synod voting record on LLF since 2021 will confirm this.
I serve on the Legislative Reform Committee of the Archbishop’s Council seeking to create flexible and pragmatic change to our legal structures and having been a member of the LLF Next Steps Group am now on the Relationships, Sexuality and Gender Pastoral Consultative Group.
Coming from a broad evangelical perspective my contribution to the LLF debate has been to find a position of unity within our dioceses, whilst seeking inclusion for LGBTQI+ sisters and brothers.
in the post-LLF era, contributing to the reflection towards changes of doctrine or practice;
On LLF, I’ve argued that until the depth of our different theological convictions is taken seriously, the process will continue to cause deep harm, especially to LGBT people (you can watch my full speech to Synod here).
Synod members talk of the toxicity around LLF, the damage done and a lack of love and respect by some.
I know there are many differences of opinion and theology about LLF and I respect that.
There are many unresolved issues following the formal end of the LLF programme.
The House of Bishops made clear that there is going to be no change in the doctrine of marriage ‘according to the teaching of our Lord’ as part of drawing line under the damaging and divisive LLF process.
Since 2017 I have fully engaged in the Living and Love and Faith (LLF) process and was an active participant in the LLF Working Groups (Leicester Groups) 2024 – 2026.
Advance a Settlement Following LLF
I have fully engaged with LLF and will continue to engage positively and pragmatically in the ongoing discussions and discernment processes that lie ahead.
Could the above be a pattern for LLF/PLF/New structures ?
I supported the LLF process, and the further work now proposed by the House of Bishops on same-sex relationships.
Joining the LLF working group in September 2024 and contributing to these discussions until the process was halted earlier this year.
e In 2021 I spearheaded our Benefice's engagement with the Church of England's Living in Love and Faith (LLF) course, and relayed feedback from our members to the central LLF team of the Church.
The LLF process has caused confusion, hurt and mistrust.
LLF – The last few years have been bruising for LGBTQIA+ folk.
The long and drawn out LLF process has resulted in some progress, but the radical inclusion that was spoken of has not materialised and the public apologies feel hollow.
I believe it is important that candidates are clear where they stand on key issues of inclusion, e.g. women’s ministry or LLF, and would encourage you to contact them, or me, to ask if unclear.
I also believe the LLF process was seriously flawed, however well-intentioned.
Lastly, there is LLF, (Living in Love and Faith) or same-sex marriage.
At the end of the last quinquennium it was decided to shelve discussion of LLF for the time being, although there is still in fact a committee working on it.
LLF meanwhile has been left languishing in the long grass.
The very public and divisive discussions during the LLF debate have done a great deal of damage to the CofE’s reputation and status, especially among young adults.
The ongoing issue of Living in Love and Faith (LLF)
Whilst I continue to support the traditional view of marriage of being between a man and a women, I would want to play a part in trying to bringing people together in a constructive consensus on the Living in Love and Faith (LLF) issue and reach a sensible consensus.
Nominated by Becky Waring (Archdeacon of Bristol) and Simon Taylor (Director of Ministry) As your representative I have given speeches in General Synod on subjects including net zero, creation care, racial justice, contested heritage, and LLF, and have asked questions on subjects ranging from church buildings to ND inclusion, from gluten free communion bread to retirement housing, and more.
Whatever outcome we hope for in the LLF process, many are finding it difficult living with uncertainty, and I want to see a resolution that enables us all to flourish.
LLF (Living in Love and Faith).
Having watched from a distance the divisive and demoralising impact of LLF on the Church of England, I believe the Church of England must find a more constructive way forward.
I was part of the LLF Programme Board.
Post-LLF, we need to find a way forward together as a Church. Children and young people I came to know Jesus at the age of 12, and am passionately committed to relevant and creative ministry to under 18s. Safeguarding We’re currently facing big questions about the delivery and scrutiny of safeguarding at all levels in the Church.
Hopes for the future: Unity and Mission in a divided Church General Synod has become synonymous with polarity and factions, preoccupied by LLF and issues around sexuality.
Being part of the Bishop of Chester’s Advisory Group for LLF and facilitating Diocesan LLF courses online, showing a commitment to shared learning and unity.
My experience continued… Facilitating LLF conversations at General Synod, giving me insight into the processes of General Synod and how difficult some of the topics that are discussed can be.
As one who holds the traditional teaching about indissoluble marriage for life between a man and a woman and human sexuality, I served with those of all views as a member of the LLF Programme Board.
After being involved in the long LLF (Living in Love and Faith) project as a Diocesan Advocate, and on 2 national Church groups discussing the same topic, I am disappointed we haven’t got any further.
Marriage and Sexuality: The debates around Living in Love and Faith (LLF) were not easy in the last Synod.
It was a privilege to be asked to be part of the LLF working groups where deep friendships formed across our differences.
It is clear that, though LLF may be over, we are still not at the end of this particular road.
Living in Love and Faith (LLF): I hold a traditional view of marriage, but I deeply recognize the pain this debate has caused.
The original purpose of LLF was to help us ask: How do we welcome people well, irrespective of sexuality, in the name of Jesus Christ?
that threaten to tear it apart: Safeguarding following the Makin Review; Living in Love &Faith (LLF); Vicars becoming an “endangered species” amid recruiting crisis; falling congregational numbers; lack of sufficient numbers of volunteers; Finances; care of creation; wars and conflicts; Contested Heritage and Reparation; Equality, Diversity & Inclusion (EDI); assisted dying, abortion etc.
I hold an orthodox view on God’s design for marriage and feel a responsibility to engage in the LLF conversation in a way that respects the voices of those which differs to my own.
My experience of being part of the national LLF working groups, of engaging constructively with those I disagree with, is something I would continue to bring to General Synod.
Whilst I recognise the importance of resolving the impasse left from the LLF process I am concerned that it has displaced other important conversations.
Post-LLF: Navigating disagreement with pastoral grace, securing robust conscience protections, and preserving structural unity across theological traditions.
Of all the representatives elected in the previous quinquennium, I was a minority voice contending to uphold the inherited, historic teaching of the Church in the LLF conversations.
I've asked 30 questions on matters from safeguarding to racial justice, finance, governance and ministry. I've offered 14 speeches in debates on: assisted suicide, codes of conduct for lay officers, disability, funding priorities, governance, LLF, national care service, neurodiversity, poverty, racial justice, representation, safeguarding, and the value of work. I was elected by Synod to the Committee for Ministry of and among Deaf & Disabled People (CMDDP), a sub-group of the Archbishops' Council.
I have found the past five years on GS quite frustrating at times, because firstly, so little time is spent on the pressing issue of mission, particularly in rural areas but everywhere else too; and secondly, the past five years have been dominated by debates about LLF / PLF which are divisive but seem to satisfy neither side.
LLF/PLF: I am in favour of moving to standalone services of blessing.
I also recognise that we don’t all agree on issues of sexuality and I am committed to working with those with different views to me so that we can bring the work begun in the LLF process to a conclusion.
I have served as a Northern Suffragan on General Synod in the last quinquennium, and been called to speak on the environment, finances, LLF & prayer.
My own past voting record has been on the progressive side of these questions, though since being asked to chair LLF-related debates in the Synod I have refrained from voting in them as a visible expression of the impartiality of the chairing.
As a member of the national LLF working groups for part of their existence, I made it my priority above all to advocate for the whole range of conscientious views in this area to be honoured and provided for practically.
As Theology Advisor, I worked extensively on LLF and the Prayers of Love and Faith, earning the trust and respect of people with very different convictions to my own.
The uncertain and unsatisfactory conclusion to the LLF process late on in the last quinquennium seems, in retrospect, to have been inevitable: the doctrinal, legal, and ecclesiological questions and constraints, and the lack of a clear majority in any House in either direction made real progress intractable.
As the formal LLF process has concluded, much remains unresolved.
Astonished and concerned at the legal complexity of General Synod: The background papers on LLF/PLF, for example, comprises hundreds of pages of argumentation.
I am deeply saddened that, unlike other western Christian Churches, the CofE has not yet been able to fully welcome Boris and I into its structures and practices, despite the extensive debates over Living in Love and Faith (LLF).
During my recent time on General Synod, I noticed how the debates around LLF dominated many of the wider issues, and I experienced firsthand the pain that has been caused by people from all perspectives.
The last General Synod achieved some great things but manifestly failed in others, not least in the LLF process.
I was at the forefront of efforts to progress LLF and have worked constructively at all levels within the church for greater progress in this area.
Finally, the LLF process which dominated the last quinquennium has ended, but the issue remains and the journey continues through two new working groups set up to take the work forward.
• The position we have reached in the LLF process
ecumenical representative at the Methodist Conference in Telford in 2025 On LLF working group, Pastoral Guidance for the use of prayers, in its later stages, before the project was ended.
As I said in my speech to General Synod, at the end of February’s concluding debate on LLF: ‘I do have hope that, in the future, our Church will no longer feel the pain of this faultline.
This lack of trust stems from failings in a number of areas, including governance, safeguarding, and the way debates concerning LLF and finance have been conducted.
During the LLF process, I worked to encourage serious, respectful and sustained dialogue on these matters at national and diocesan level.
PLF & Teams (from Feb 2024) - From the start I have challenged the Bishops over the question of Teams / multi-church benefices & parishes, and LLF.
With regard to LLF / PLF, I hold the traditional historic Anglican view of marriage.
I was part of Shared Conversations many years ago, maintaining relationships across the piece since then, and served in the LLF Working Groups over the last couple of years.
Living in Love and Faith (LLF) – I long to see a church that fully includes LGBTQIA people at all levels in the church.
I don’t want the work done on LLF to be lost but to be driven forwards.
It is my view that the theological studies undertaken by the Faith and Order Commission towards the end of the last Synod, and on which the decisions to halt various aspects of the LLF programme were based, represent a wholly inadequate view of the theological questions involved.
My MPhil dissertation was in the area of Science and Theology (my previous doctorate having been in Mathematics), which I believe will equip me well for supporting a rigorous theological approach to the questions arising from the LLF programme.
Human sexuality and marriage The LLF and PLF processes and the debates of the last quinquennium have created hurt and division across our church.
I participated actively in the LLF process, and from within my traditional viewpoint I have sought to be someone bringing people together rather than pushing people apart.
LLF occupied much space and rightly so, given its impact.
On LLF I have voted consistently for change, to recognise, celebrate and rejoice with the same sex couples who have been part of church life certainly for my whole lifetime.
Whilst I agree with the LLF process I do not think it should be the focus of church work.
The Future: making church work for all I want us to face the future trusting God and displaying the love of Christ: ● There are still big issues to face in our church: the most critical is falling numbers in congregations and vocations, but we also need to tackle our finances, safeguarding, trust and trustworthiness, and the replacement for the LLF process.
In the last three years, at their request, we’ve explored a range of topics, including sexuality and gender (using both the LLF and Kaleidoscope materials to spark extraordinarily respectful and open discussions), the authority and reliability of the Bible, social justice, women in leadership, evolution, social media, and more.
I have spoken on a range of issues including governance, adult social care and LLF.
Lastly, I was bitterly disappointed at the failure of the LLF journey twelve months ago.
Human Identity and Sexuality In my own context, the Living in Love and Faith process nationally and leading the LLF course locally both helped us to have these important conversations.
Although LLF has drawn to a close, Synod still has significant decisions to take in this area and, whilst holding to a traditional view of marriage, I want to continue to contribute to this important matter in the life of our national Church.