Lay people should be consulted in decisions about alternative episcopal oversight

A personal reflection on oversight, and the legacy of the 2014 Guiding Principles by Paula Blake a member of the congregation at St John’s Felbridge in the Diocese of Southwark

Reading Lizzie Taylor’s recent WATCH blog (2 May) resonated deeply with me. Her reflection on the continuing impact of the 2014 Guiding Principles, and the experience of being excluded from key decisions within her own church, echoes what I, and many others, are currently facing.

As a lifelong member of the Church of England and an active layperson, I am increasingly concerned by what is happening in many parishes. Like Lizzie, I believe the 2014 settlement has not only failed to achieve genuine equality between women and men in ministry but has also facilitated the marginalisation of lay voices, especially those of us who seek a more inclusive and just Church.

I write with particular concern about the matter of Alternative Episcopal Oversight (AEO) in my own parish. I do not write from a position of authority, but as one of the hundreds of thousands who worship, serve, and hope. We hope for a Church that upholds the full dignity and equality of all people. We hope for leadership that listens. And we hope for change.

In September, our new vicar was installed in a joyful and public service, graciously presided over by Bishop Rosemarie of Croydon. However, just three months later, in December, a letter was issued by the vicar outlining his opposition to any clergy being allowed to use the new Prayers of Love and Faith (PLF) to bless committed same-sex relationships; the PCC’s intention to use the Ephesian Fund to ring fence monies paid to Common Fund – for use by theologically like-minded churches only;- and a brief notice that the PCC had decided to request AEO. This announcement came without any prior consultation with the wider congregation.

The letter stated:

“In requesting AEO we are requesting spiritual oversight from someone other than our bishops. We have not yet been assigned an overseer but the CEEC’s overseers are vetted and interviewed retired bishops and other experienced clergy. Our area bishop, Bishop Rosemarie, and our diocesan bishop, Bishop Christopher, have both spoken publicly in support of PLF and have gone further in expressing their hopes about the future. For example, expressing a wish that there be no restrictions on clergy entering into same sex marriages.”

In March, following a meeting between our vicar and Bishop Christopher of Southwark, as well as Bishop Rosemarie, permission was sought for the Bishop of Ebbsfleet to minister at our church rather than Bishop Rosemarie. As many will know, the Bishop of Ebbsfleet is one of the so-called ‘flying bishops’ who serve parishes that pass a resolution upholding complementarian teaching, that is, the belief that church leadership should be exclusively male. This arrangement appears to have been agreed despite the fact that no formal resolution has been passed.

This represents a significant moment in the life of our parish. We would hope decisions of this magnitude would be shared transparently through church notices, newsletters, or a parish-wide meeting. Instead, this change was communicated in a single general letter and noted in PCC minutes that are not readily accessible to the wider church community.

I personally requested that the WATCH conference Not Equal Yet be included in our weekly newsletter as a resource for theological reflection and dialogue. That request was refused.

I attended the conference myself and found it to be both moving and necessary. One of the speakers was Bishop Rosemarie, whose words stayed with me. I had last heard her speak just a few months earlier, at my own parish church during the installation of our new vicar. On both occasions, she spoke with honesty, compassion, and conviction.

She shared painful experiences of “gendered microaggressions” that women clergy still endure within our Church. One example stood out: she had been asked to preside at the funeral of a close friend’s wife, but the chosen church refused to allow her even to say prayers during the service. In another case, a young curate told her that although he admired her commitment to social justice, he could never stand at the altar alongside her.

These stories are not distant or abstract. They are reminders that the struggle for equality and dignity within the Church is far from over, and that decisions made behind closed doors have real and lasting consequences for those who live their ministry daily. Is this really how we should treat ordained ministers?

Further details of her talk can be found here:
Church Times – WATCH launches campaign to abolish the Five Guiding Principles

Now, many months after these decisions were made privately, a meeting is finally scheduled “to discuss our relationship with the Church of England.” As of writing, the purpose and details of this meeting have still not been clearly communicated. It is evident that such a gathering, where parishioners could voice their perspectives, should have occurred before any course of action was set in motion.

As Lizzie Taylor rightly observes, the current system allows decisions that affect entire congregations to be made by a small group, without the transparency, accountability, or pastoral sensitivity that should characterise the Church.

Lay people are not just spectators.
We are the Church.
And we deserve to be included in the discernment and decisions that shape our worshipping lives.