Where are Britain’s moral voices?

On Wednesday, the House of Lords will debate one of the most dangerous potential legal changes that Britain has faced in recent memory. This proposal, taking the form of an amendment to a wholly unrelated piece of legislation, would make it no longer a criminal offence for a woman to end her own pregnancy in any manner, for any reason, at any stage up to and including birth.

This is not the full legalisation of abortion, meaning that doctors would not be permitted to carry out abortions for any reason just before birth. However, it would remove any criminal deterrent from a woman bringing about the end of her own pregnancy, well beyond any of the timescales or eligibility criteria that would allow them to avail of an abortion carried out by a medical professional. It goes without saying that this would be incredibly dangerous for the women involved, regardless of one’s own views of abortion as an issue.

These at-home late-term abortions would be relatively easy for women to instigate due to the “pills by post” scheme, which allows women to receive free abortion pills following a simple phone call, with no requirement for an in-person medical appointment nor any proof of gestational age required. While this was brought in as a temporary measure during covid, legislation was quickly brought in to ensure that it was made permanent. 

These pills are considered to be a relatively safe way to end one’s pregnancy at home under 10 weeks of gestational age. However, due to the ease that women can access these pills, sometimes pregnancies are ended well after this cut-off time, which is both a criminal offence and dangerous for the mother. Over the past two years, at least six women have appeared in court charged with ending their pregnancies illegally. It is likely that many others have done so without prosecution.

Amendments have been tabled, due to be debated on Wednesday, that would both remove the proposed decriminalisation of abortion and backtrack on the dangerous ‘pills by post’ scheme. 

It may surprise the reader that the Church of England, no matter how liberal it may have appeared to become, does have an official position on abortion, determined by the General Synod and General Assembly. Abortion, according to the Church, is only permissible when the mother’s life is in danger. 

26 Church of England bishops, including the Archbishop of Canterbury, sit in the House of Lords as the Lords Spiritual. While they do not generally form a voting bloc, they have been known to turn up en masse to vote on issues pertinent to Church teaching. In the past two decades, this has included gay marriage, assisted suicide, embryo research and welfare reform. 

One would imagine, therefore, that the issue regarding the upcoming debate on abortion liberalisation would be a matter for the Lords Spiritual to show up and vote against. 

The newly-appointed Archbishop of Canterbury, Sarah Mullally, has however indicated that she will not be there for the all-important vote. Instead, during this time, the Archbishop has decided to embark on a six-day walking pilgrimage with her husband, prior to her official Installation later this month. While pilgrimage and reflection is a deeply important task for many Christians, it must be reiterated that this is not normal for those in her position; indeed, the Church itself referred to it as “an historic first for modern times”.  

One cannot help but feel, as the Reverend Richard Bastable said in his letter to Sarah Mullally, that the “ethical leadership” of the Archbishop to her fellow bishops and the Church as a whole, should take precedence over any personal endeavours, at least temporarily, on an occasion as important as this. Countless lives are at stake.

The Church of England desperately needs a radical leader to save the Church

Perhaps the Archbishop will amend her planned pilgrimage to make time for this vote. I would argue, however, that this would not go far enough. The Archbishop of Canterbury, as the primus inter pares of the Church of England, should whip the other bishops into voting on these matters. It is not usual for all bishops to vote in a bloc the way that one sees political parties doing, but it has been done before, and there is no Parliamentary convention preventing it. 

The Church of England desperately needs a radical leader to save the Church. There could be no more radical an act just before her Installation than dedicating herself and her fellow bishops to the cause of saving vulnerable lives. The Quiet Revival is all well and good, but there are few who would disagree that the Church could benefit from it being just a little bit louder.