Senior bishops of the Anglican Church in the United Kingdom and Ghana have agreed that paramount, cultural and social contexts must also be considered.

This agreement was established during a virtual meeting held between the Archbishop of Canterbury and senior clergy of the Anglican Church of Ghana on Wednesday, November 3.

The fraternity discussed their different positions on the Promotion of Proper Human Sexual Rights and Ghanaian Family Values Bill, presently before Parliament.

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, was one of the several UK-based church leaders who expressed worry over the Bill.

Taking to Twitter on October 26, he decried the stands of the Anglican Church of Ghana, stating that “the majority of Anglicans within the global Anglican Communion are committed to upholding both the traditional teaching on marriage as laid out in the 1998 Lambeth Conference Resolution I:10 and the rights of every person, regardless of sexual orientation, before the law.”

But in a statement issued after the meeting, Archbishop Welby admitted that he has no authority over the Anglican Church of Ghana, therefore, ensured that the conversation was one between equals.

“We are a global family of churches who are autonomous but interdependent: a holy, catholic, apostolic Church bound together by history, sacraments, liturgy, and the love of Jesus Christ for each and every person,” he added.

The Archbishop, however, assured that there would be a continued “good conversation with the Anglican Church of Ghana” ahead of any future public statements.

In August, eight parliamentarians jointly submitted a private bill to push for the criminalisation of LGBTQ+ activities in the country.

The proponents also want the promotion, advocacy, funding, and acts of homosexuality to be forbidden in the country.

Since the controversial bill was made public, opposers have argued that should the bill be passed into law, it will be in violation of the fundamental human rights of individuals who identify with the group.

The bill is currently with the Constitutional, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Committee of Parliament who is hearing the arguments of both proponents and opposers to make an informed decision on it.