...other than the trite - and frankly pathetic - option of writing a letter to the Sunday Telegraph.
The Bill will mean that for each of the next three years, most financial support for families will increase by no more than 1 per cent, regardless of how much prices rise.
This is a change that will have a deeply disproportionate impact on families with children, pushing 200,000 children into poverty. A third of all households will be affected by the Bill, but nearly nine out of 10 families with children will be hit.
Now I appreciate that this letter has been put together by the organisation once know as the Church of England Central Society for Providing Homes for Waifs and Strays (and where I once worked). And that this charity, charged as it is with a mission of care for children, is bothered about the impact of government actions on those children.
However, if these 43 bishops really cared they would do something else. The bishops could give up part of their comfortable wages to the Children's Society, they could throw open the doors of their palaces to the poor and they could take food to these families who are struggling.
Having done this, the bishops could visit the rich and successful communicants in their diocese and urge acts of Christian charity upon them. They could write letters to be read out in parishes urging Anglicans to help look after these families.
But the bishops have done nothing of the sort. Instead, from their gilded pulpits they criticise, carp and wail. And then return to their fine homes and comfortable world. Maybe government should make a different decision, perhaps some few families will find it harder and the lobbying is justified. I've said before that caring is not something that can be sub-contracted to government - it has to be a personal act.
The bishop's letter would carry more weight is if started:
"Today, we have agreed to personally support families faced with poverty and we are asking others within the church to do likewise. Nevertheless, we would urge the government to amend the Benefits Uprating Bill so as to protect children..."
It didn't. So a pox on them.