ARCHBISHOP WOOD AND THE FUTURE OF ACNA. Why were questions never asked about his behavior before he was elected archbishop?

COMMENTARY

By David W. Virtue, DD

www.virtueonline.org

October 28, 2025

ACNA Archbishop Steve Wood, 62, has come out fighting. Following fulsome disclosure of his alleged misdeeds in the Washington Post, that includes sexual misconduct, plagiarism, abuse of power and more, the staunchly orthodox leader said in a letter to his parish, that “I unequivocally, categorically, and emphatically deny in their entirety the accusations made against me by Ms. Claire Buxton, who was employed at St. Andrew’s,” Wood said in an Oct. 24 letter to St. Andrew’s congregants.

Them’s fightin’ words.

In June 2024, two months after Buxton alleged that Wood tried to kiss her, the College of Bishops met in conclave and elected him as the Anglican Church in North America’s third archbishop.

Archbishop Wood is either calling her bluff, has giant sized cajónes, or genuinely believes he is innocent and can explain it away to his and everyone’s satisfaction. We shall see.

A formal presentment accuses Wood of violating his ordination vows, committing sexual immorality, and bringing "scandal and offense" upon his office. Additionally, Wood faces separate complaints from priests alleging that he plagiarized sermons and bullied church staff members in the years preceding his election as archbishop. The presentment accuses Wood of violating his ordination vows, committing sexual immorality and bringing “scandal and offense” upon his office.

That’s a lot to explain away. Even if he is cleared of the ‘he said/she said’ Buxton charges, there are other charges to explain or explain away.

Anglican Blogger David Roseberry had this to say: if an archbishop or any pastor has acted in a way that crosses moral or physical boundaries with another person, he should step down. Period. The Church must be a place of integrity and safety. He is right.

Accountability is the word for this moment. Wood must be held to the highest standard. He is the leader of a church, albeit small, but he must be fully accountable not just to his House of Bishops but to his clergy and laity.

There are some serious questions that must be asked and answered which looked at in the cold light of day raise issues of how he got so far into the process of being elected when so much about his past that should have given the House of Bishops pause.

According to the Post story a lot was known about Wood before he got the nod to be the next archbishop but swept under the table.

The issue of Ms. Buxton’s charges of putting his hand against the back of her head and trying to kiss her occurred two months before he was elected to the helm, according to the presentment. Why was this not a red flag to the bishops? The Post, also accused Wood of giving her thousands of dollars in unexpected payments from church coffers before the alleged advance. Why was this not challenged at the time?

Wood also faced complaints from priests that he plagiarized sermons and bullied and disparaged church staffers in the years before he became archbishop. Why were these charges not raised by the examining bishops?

In September 2019, seven years into his tenure running both St. Andrew’s and the Diocese of the Carolinas, Wood confronted pushback. In a letter to Wood, which was private until now, the Rev. Hamilton Smith, the rector of St. Thomas’ Church in Mount Pleasant, South Carolina, wrote: “I do not feel you have moral authority required to hold the office of Bishop.”

Wood preached sermons he did not write and tried to pass them off as his own work, Smith alleged. During staff meetings, Wood publicly shamed and cursed at colleagues, the letter said. Smith also questioned a $60,000 truck provided by the diocese for Wood’s church visits, noting that Wood mentioned the vehicle to him only in the context of Wood’s hunting trips.

“Is a $60,000 truck the most cost-efficient vehicle to accomplish this task?” Smith asked in the letter. “There are clergy in the Diocese that do not have any or have poor health insurance or retirement plans. … You have told me numerous times that you are a sinner who had ‘a really bad year’/‘a horrible season’ in which you did things you now regret. While I rejoice in this self-understanding, grace and forgiveness have limits.”

The next day, Wood offered a short reply, according to correspondence Smith shared with The Post. But Smith could not overcome his frustrations with Wood, and soon led his parishioners to leave Wood’s diocese. “This was the most difficult decision of my ministry,” Smith told his church at the time.

Did the bishops ask any questions about Wood’s behavior?

Wood has declined to answer specific questions about the accusations in the presentment.

In South Carolina, Wood’s elevation rattled a group of his former colleagues, most of them now priests. For years, they said in interviews, they privately shared stories that Wood demeaned them or others when they worked at St. Andrew’s. But it was Claire Buxton’s fresh accusations that spurred them to action.

By early 2025, the group drafted formal church charges based on six affidavits that accuse Wood of abusive behavior. In September, the group quietly secured the support of at least 10 Anglican priests and parishioners to sign and swear to the presentment, a prerequisite for its submission.

Why was this not raised by the presenting bishops?  Did they ask any questions? Did they challenge any of this? Did they confront Wood?

The day after the presentment was submitted, the denomination threw up what its authors regard as a roadblock: The denomination asked that all 11 endorsers re-sign the presentment under a statement attesting to the allegations’ truth “under penalties of perjury.” In an email to the lead signatory, a denomination official said this was “common practice” noting that prior presentments have been resubmitted for the same reason.

The Rev. Rob Sturdy, an Anglican priest who wrote one of the presentment’s affidavits, said in an interview that his group will not comply. He said they followed the denomination’s canons, which do not contain a “perjury” standard.

An affidavit alleges, among other things, that Wood frequently bragged about a woman from another church whom he said “he could have … anytime he wanted.”

This was not a red flag?

One wonders who was really pulling the strings that they wanted Wood so badly to be the next archbishop that other names were barely considered. There were other names in the ring including Bishop Julian Dobbs of the Anglican Diocese of the Living Word and Bishop Clark Lowenfield, of the Anglican Diocese of The Western Gulf Coast who had his eye on the job. Wood beat them all. One thing this reporter learned is that no one wanted someone as reformed as the former Archbishop Foley Beach. The mood was and is to push the ACNA in a more catholic direction, the position of the former archbishop of ACNA Robert Duncan. The issue of the ordination of women however, remains a sticking point to whatever the future holds for the ACNA.

If the presentment triggers an ecclesiastical trial, Wood could be defrocked and forced to step down.

An Anglican priest, the Rev Dr. Ronald Moore had this to say; The test of a church is how the ACNA handles its own judgment will define its future. Will this Church handle its own judgment better than the institutions it left behind, he asks? That clearly remains to be seen.

END