Skip to main content

The True Meaning of 'Reconciliation': A Biblical Response to the Church of England's Latest Error


Having pressed ahead with its blessings of homosexual unions,[1] the Church of England now wants to repair the disunity this has inevitably rendered in the denomination.  The words ‘love’ and ‘faith’ were used to enshroud this rejection of God’s commandments on gender, sex, and marriage.  Now the word ‘reconciliation’ has been introduced to attempt to rally unity between the orthodox and heretical groups despite fundamental disagreement.  The baker has followed a faulty recipe, the cake has flopped, and now he imagines he might repair the mess he has made with a pretty icing.  Theological terms—nice-sounding terms—like ‘love’, ‘faith’, and ‘reconciliation’ are used in feigned spirituality, devoid of their Biblical meanings, in order to drag Christians along a heretical path.[2]  The overseers of a Church that they have abused and diminished[3] cajole faithful believers not supporting their wayward ways.

‘Reconciliation’ is a term found in Paul’s writings, and if Scripture is to be referenced at all, one needs to begin with passages like 2 Corinthians 5.17-21; Romans 5.1-10; Colossians 1.15-23; and Ephesians 2.11-21.[4]  Paul’s theology of reconciliation is rich, and it reaches back into Old Testament eschatology even though one will not find the word ‘reconciliation’ used.  In the Old Testament, a theology of reconciliation is the third leg of salvation history.  The first is sin, the second is judgement, and the third is reconciliation.  This pattern is repeated again and again in Old Testament narrative and theology.  As a narrative, the three are, of course, sequential.  Reconciliation has to do with God’s forgiving a repentant Israel that has been judged.  Israel’s story in its post-exodus history is one that repeats this plot in the minor narratives of various judges and kings.  When Israel divides into ‘Israel’ as the northern kingdom and Judah as the southern kingdom, the plot continues for each: sin, judgement, a promise of reconciliation.  Ultimately, judgement becomes exile, and the vision of reconciliation that the prophets foretell is of a return from exile that includes unity between the two kingdoms of Israel and Judah and an inclusion of Gentiles into the people of God.

A number of Old Testament texts might be considered to explain the eschatological vision of reconciliation on which Paul is dependent for his theology of reconciliation.  A new covenant, forgiveness, peace, return from exile, and so forth are all part of the Old Testament writers’ hope of reconciliation with God and with one another.  What is essential to understand from such passages is that reconciliation is not about communal fellowship alone, a united kingdom under one king alone, an acceptance by God alone—it is not merely relational.  It is not a teaching about two groups that differ agreeing to disagree.  Nor is it a matter of smoothing over differences, as though they were not significant enough to require fixing.  Judgement follows sin, and reconciliation only comes when sin is removed.

Consider a vision for reconciliation expressed in Ezekiel 37.15-23.  Sinful Israel and Judah are at this time in exile for their sins.  God caused Israel to be taken into exile in 722 BC by the Assyrians and Judah in 587/586 BC by the Babylonians.  Their sins had built up to the point that, like the Canaanites before them, the land vomited them out.  Ezekiel also says that God’s presence left the Temple.  Judgement had finally come.

Yet Ezekiel is given several visions of God’s subsequent restoration of His people from their sins and from exile, such as the new covenant and resurrection of the dry bones (chs. 36-27) or the New Temple (chs. 40-48).  One of these visions is when God tells the prophet to take two sticks, symbolising the kingdoms of Israel and Judah, and join them together, predicting a miraculous return from exile and a reunion of the two.  This reconciliation requires more than lashing two sticks together.  It is not an apparent or fake unity.  It requires repentance and conversion, a complete change.  In Ezekiel 37.23, God says, 'They shall not defile themselves anymore with their idols and their detestable things, or with any of their transgressions.  But I will save them from all the backslidings in which they have sinned, and will cleanse them; and they shall be my people, and I will be their God.'  Reconciliation with God and one another requires a rejection of other religions and detestable things (transgressions, backsliding, sin).  When that happens, there can be reconciliation to God and to one another.  Not before.

Those at the General Synod of the Church of England this month who have touted reconciliation as a communal affair, a ‘walking together’ without repentance of sin and turning in obedience to God, are promoting a continuation in sin.  If we are to picture this in terms of the three-legged stool of Biblical theology and narrative, of sin, judgement, and reconciliation, the proponents of this distorted version of reconciliation have removed the leg of sin—declaring ‘good’ what God has called evil—and they have removed the leg of judgement, replacing it with ‘blessings’ of sinful unions.  They are trying to sit on a stool with one leg.  Even then, the leg of reconciliation has been cut short and not nailed to the seat.  Watching the show from the stands reminds one of the circus clown trying to balance on a one legged stool.

Nehemiah lived in the days of the return of Israel from exile.  In Nehemiah 9-10, we read a passage that shows us what reconciliation really involves.  It was not, as Bishop Martyn Snow of Leicester is suggesting, finding ways that people who differ over righteousness can just get along and get on with serving the nation.[5]  Rather, the people of Israel having been brought back by God from exile in their sins, were to be reconciled by means of certain concrete actions.  The acts required for reconciliation might be summarised from these two chapters as follows:

1.     Assemble with fasting, sackcloth, and dirt on their heads in a corporate act of repentance;

2.     Separate themselves from all foreigners (who, by the pressure of cultural conformity, encouraged infidelity to God);

3.     Confess their sins and the iniquities of their fathers;

4.     Read the Book of the Law (not throwing around vague principles like love, faith, and reconciliation but enquiring of God’s Word what obedience entailed);

5.     Confess further their sins as they hear the Law read;

6.     Spend time in worship of God;

7.     Bless the Lord (not blessing those in sinful unions);

8.     Rehears their heritage as God’s people;

9.     Acknowledge that the laws, statutes, and commandments are right and good and from God;

10.  Acknowledge that their history as a people involved disobedience, that they had rebelled against God, cast aside God’s Law, killed the prophets, and committed great blasphemies;

11.  Declare the truth that God is ready to forgive, gracious, merciful, slow to anger, abounding in steadfast love, and that He remains faithful;

12.  Acknowledge yet again that, even though God sent ‘saviours’ or prophets to the people time and again, they continued to do evil, act presumptuously, sin against God’s rules, turned a stubborn shoulder, stiffened their necks, and did not obey Him or heed the prophets He sent to warn them;

13.  Made a covenant with God to walk in God’s Law, observing and doing all His commandments, rules, and statutes, desist from their sins, and observe right worship.

Let us not turn ‘reconciliation’ into yet another act of disobedience, a way to continue in sin without repentance and conversion, without covenanting to follow God’s righteous requirements.  For sinners to insist that the prophets God sends to them should be reconciled to them in their sin makes a mockery of God.



[1] I am fully aware of how these blessings have been packaged to avoid saying that the union itself is being blessed or that no affirmation of same sex marriage or cohabitation is involved.  This is just packaging.  We all know what is really going on, and to play along with the nuances and processes and endless conversations or debates is to play the fool.

[2] See the beguiling words of Bishop Martyn Snow, Leicester: ‘Living in Love and Faith: “The Work Goes On” Bishop Martyn Tells Synod,’ The Church of England (27 February, 2024); https://www.churchofengland.org/media/press-releases/living-love-and-faith-work-goes-bishop-martyn-tells-synod (accessed 28 February, 2024).

[3] Cf. Ian Paul, ‘Ian Paul’s Speech to General Synod—“Standing on the Brink of a Precipice,’ Anglican Ink (27 February, 2024); https://anglican.ink/2024/02/27/ian-pauls-speech-to-general-synod-standing-on-the-brink-of-a-precipice/ (accessed 28 February, 2024).

[4] In response to the current confusion in the Church of England over reconciliation, see Martin Davie, ‘What Do We Mean by Reconciliation?’ Reflections of an Anglican Theologian Blog (27 February, 2024); https://mbarrattdavie.wordpress.com/2024/02/27/what-do-we-mean-by-reconciliation/comment-page-1/?unapproved=3905&moderation-hash=b0508fe27879303fe9143847b779d1cc#respond (accessed 28 February, 2024).

[5] Cf. note 2, above.

Comments