A controversial debate by the Church of England's General Synod over whether it should seek to convert Muslims has been postponed to 2009.

The motion, tabled by lay member Paul Eddy, received 124 signatures of support from Synod members, including the Bishop of Rochester, and was scheduled for a major debate and vote during the annual extended session of the Synod in York, from 4-8 July, just weeks ahead of the Lambeth Conference.

Mr Eddy's motion called on the House of Bishops to "to confirm their understanding of the uniqueness of Christ in a multi-faith society, and to publish details of best practice in evangelising people of other faiths".

A number of bishops and clergy have spoken out against the motion, including the Rt Rev Stephen Lowe, the former Bishop of Hulme and the newly appointed Bishop of Urban Life and Faith, who was quoted by The Telegraph as saying: "Both the Bishop of Rochester's reported comments and the synod private members' motion show no sensitivity to the need for good inter-faith relations.

"Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs are learning to respect one another's paths to God and to live in harmony. This demand for the evangelisation of people of other faiths contributes nothing to our communities."

Mr Eddy's motion was dropped from the July Synod to make way for a backlog of legislative issues and another motion with a higher number of signatures on church buildings being used as tourist attractions. Mr Eddy's motion has now been shelved for next February's Synod at the earliest.

He said: "I'm not at all surprised that the motion didn't get timetabled following the opposition I had from many bishops and the reaction to the media interviews."

The former public relations consultant added that he had received wide support for the motion from the Anglo-Catholic as well as evangelical wings in Synod.

"People feel very aggrieved that, at this particular time in the Church's history, Synod was not given an opportunity to be debate evangelism," said Mr Eddy.

"At every session of Synod there are calls for more debates on vision, leadership and how we going to evangelise this nation and stem the decline in church attendance - rather than debate internal squabbles and politics. My motion gave Synod a unique opportunity to do that and others will draw their own conclusions."

Mr Eddy believes that his motion was dropped from the York Synod because of concerns over the impact that a debate on the uniqueness of Christ might have on the Lambeth Conference, which would have fallen just under two weeks after his motion was debated.

"Now that Synod has electronic voting, it would have been very easy to show how many of our bishops believed in the uniqueness of Christ as the only means of salvation, something which would have shown the division on orthodox views in the House," he said.

A Church of England spokesperson said, however: "It is not unusual for the General Synod to debate only one Private Member's Motion during its meetings, especially when there are a number of legislative issues to be debated, as there are at this Synod.

"Due to time constraints, the [Business] Committee has been able to schedule only one such motion for July, on the subject of church tourism, which heads the list in terms of the number of signatures from members.

"The motion on the uniqueness of Christ in multi-faith Britain is currently next on the list in terms of signature, and if it heads the list in February, will probably be debated then."

Mr Eddy is to be ordained in June 2009, making the February Synod in London his last opportunity to propose his motion in the Synod chamber.

"The timing of my ordination, and therefore resignation from Synod as a lay member, has not gone unnoticed by those wishing this debate to go away," he said. "In York next month I shall seek to increase the number of supporting members to my motion so that the Business Committee will have a clear 'first' when [deciding] which PMM to table for the February sessions in Westminster, London."

Mr Eddy said he had received assurances from other Synod members that a senior Synod member would table a similar motion in the event that his motion failed to be tabled in the February Synod.

"It will be debated one way or another," he vowed.