JAFC Bishop Refutes Charges of Ecclesiastical Power Abuse

By David W. Virtue, DD

www.virtueonline.org

September 25, 2025

The Jurisdiction of the Armed Forces and Chaplaincy (JAFC) claims that a press release from the archbishop of the ACNA “presents a false and misleading account of the events concerning both the JAFC and Bishop Derek Jones.”

In a hard-hitting response to ACNA Archbishop Steve Wood, the JAFC and Bishop Derek Jones described the archbishop’s account as an “inaccurate account of events” and has cut off all communication with the ACNA withdrawing its jurisdiction from the ACNA.

In a video explaining his situation and the charges leveled against him, Jones said he had been wrongfully charged with violating Title IV of the canons and using Title IV disciplinary proceedings to manipulate clergy. He said two people had produced evidence of his backdating official church documents. At least one person said they had evidence of fabricated official church documents. At least two people had claimed that he had disciplined or attempted to discipline persons not under his canonical authority. At least two people claim he had wrongly interfered when employment opportunities were sought outside the SJAFC. Six people accused him of misusing his ecclesiastical authority by inflicting financial, emotional, and psychological stress upon persons under his care. One person claimed that he had been wrongfully released as a priest from his orders. Bishop Jones angrily denies all the charges. You can see the video here: (Start at 20 mins): https://www.anglicanchaplains.org/post/clarity-and-candor-amid-clandestine-claims

Jones claims that procedures regarding the allegations were not followed and that ACNA canons demand an investigator be assigned before charges are made. This was not done, he maintains. To date no presentment has been received by Jones.

“Regardless of whether you're disciplined or not, every person is briefed and told that they have recourse within the system to where if they want to make a complaint back; they can.”

Bishop Jones maintains that he was issued a “godly admonition” that has no basis in canon law, it was wrongfully administered, it was manipulating and included the fabrication of church documents. Discipline was done under wrongfully followed processes, he maintains. Jones says the charges are without context and asked that the godly admonition be lifted.

Jones angrily denied backdating official church documents. “No documents were ever produced that do not go through multiple hands,” he said.

“When this was delivered to me by the archbishop, my initial response was what are you going to do. There was no presentment it was going to be “handled pastorally.”

Jones took a swipe at the archbishop insisting on his following the canons like (Bishop) Ruch, who has been charged with several offenses, including habitual neglect of the duties of the bishop's office and conduct giving just cause for scandal or offense.

A number of people have come to Bishop Jones’ defense and believe the letter from the archbishop's office inaccurately portrays the sequence of events and conflates distinct matters. Most notably, it misrepresents the relationship between the JAFC and the composition of the ACNA’s Title I, Canon 11. It was mutually understood and agreed upon during the JAFC’s transition from the Church of Nigeria to the ACNA that Canon 11 would be inoperative. This agreement was made in recognition of the JAFC's unique history and structure, which was established in 2007, prior to the formation of the ACNA.”

The chaplains point to the video which addresses all these charges here: https://www.anglicanchaplains.org/post/clarity-and-candor-amid-clandestine-claims

“Bishop Jones has consistently stated his full cooperation with any lawful investigation or accountability process. His only requirement is that such proceedings be conducted in accordance with established legal and canonical norms.”

Several ACNA Bishops reached out to Bishop Jones, requesting that he consider having a conversation with Archbishop Wood with the aim of initiating reconciliation. Bishop Jones readily agreed, encouraging these ACNA Bishops to move forward. Regrettably, Archbishop Wood vehemently refused their requests for attempts toward reconciliation.

Archbishop Wood’s office says they received a report from its Safeguarding Office of credible complaints against Bishop Derek Jones who serves as bishop for the ACNA’s Special Jurisdiction for the Armed Forces and Chaplaincy (SJAFC).

The complaints alleged abuse of ecclesiastical power. They do not involve any accusations of physical or sexual abuse or doctrinal concerns. The Safeguarding Office determined that the complaints were considered credible enough to require further investigation to determine if any rose to the level of a presentable offense.

FORMER ACNA ARCHBISHOP ROBERT DUNCAN WEIGHS IN

Former ACNA Archbishop Bob Duncan weighed in and said in an email to Jones; “Dear Derek, I am saddened beyond words at the course you have elected to take. Instead of ending as a hero, you will be remembered as a scoundrel. Your end in this will be like Chuck Murphy's, [Murphy led the Anglican Mission in America - AMIA], somebody surrounded by only a remnant of what was once among the greatest of the ACNA treasures. You could still turn back. Don't go down in flames. Admit that your chancellors did a mistake today. Retire now and pass this amazing achievement that was the jurisdiction on to the next generation. End as one who shaped and led a great movement or be remembered as a villain. You who stood against godly authority and illustrated what not to do when challenged by the laws you had agreed to paternally and with all humility.”

Jones responded; “Your grace, I can sense your anger and disappointment. By the way, that's a very vicious email and I want you to know how measured I am. How about a little information from the victim in this matter? My initial response to Archbishop Steve was to move with the process. Unfortunately, when I informed them of my admonishment, it was revealed that they had reliable information that this was possibly going to happen before my meeting with Steve, that I was going to undergo a targeted attempt to remove my by reinvigorating past issues that had already been resolved and to damage my reputation. Thus, as far as this affects me, it would be the outcome is predetermined whether we allow this non-canonical process to continue or not. I'm no Chuck Murphy. Chuck held an iron fist on his ministry. This ministry isn't structured that way. And when the chancellors say I'm being directed by the ETS leadership, it is true. I don't think you have been given the whole story. I remain committed. What is the reason I should retire? These charges can't be substantiated other than the woke charges that can easily be waged against the archbishop himself or anyone for things done just last week. It is utterly silly. Of course, I am willing for them to be looked at. I say again, despite being informed that this is targeted against me personally, I am absolutely willing for them to look into the allegations made by these formally disciplined chaplains, but not in a manner outside of how it is outlined in the canons. actively seeking for a year to find individuals to bring charges against me. “

Jones concluded saying that he would like a peaceful solution, but the leadership of this jurisdiction has had enough. “For them, it is not about me. They see this as yet another event in a long chain of events that leads them to conclude that the ACNA is nothing more than a power-hungry, litigious minded, increasingly woke TEC 2.”

As of now, Bishop Jones and the JAFC College of Bishops have officially disaffiliated with the college of ACNA bishops. The vice chancellor will continue to lead the JAFC and that Archbishop Wood’s inhibition has no effect given the affiliate status of the JAFC with the ACNA and the fact that his consecration originated elsewhere. The JAFC is an independent 501© 3 corporation with its own governing board of which the ACNA has no control. Any attempt to appoint another person, whether bishop, or to temporarily lead the JAC, is illegal and will be of no effect.

END