Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold and the Presiding Bishop’s Council of Advice jointly denounced the Ohio confirmations as violations of the Episcopal Church’s Constitution and Canons. Griswold emphasized that any provision for dissenting minorities “must be consistent with the constitutional and canonical structures of ECUSA.” Canon III.9 requires outside bishops to obtain explicit permission before exercising ministry in another diocese. Both cited the October 2003 Primates’ Meeting statement affirming “the autonomy and territorial integrity of dioceses,” and quoted Archbishop Rowan Williams’ plea for “generous and constructive ways forward… that will guarantee Episcopal care for all and avoid further fragmentation.” The Council of Advice—a bipartisan group—stressed unity in mission despite disagreement on General Convention decisions: “We are… completely one in our commitment to… proclaim[ing] the reconciling love of God… to a broken and divided world.” Griswold suggested the timing—days before the House of Bishops’ Texas meeting—was deliberate: “I can only surmise that their intention is to co-opt the bishops’ agenda and provoke a reaction…” Yet he expressed confidence that the “diverse center” would find a just, pastoral path forward.

Multiple traditionalist Anglican groups—including Anglicans United, Forward in Faith/North America (FIF/NA), and the American Anglican Council—expressed strong support for the Ohio confirmations, framing them as a necessary act of compassion amid decades of theological drift. Canon Kendall Harmon (Diocese of South Carolina) called the move “an act offered out of deep pastoral concern” for Episcopalians alienated by liberal leadership, adding: “Religious authorities often struggle with the offer of genuine compassion to those who are oppressed.” He urged bishops to provide “Adequate Episcopal Oversight,” as envisioned by Anglican Primates in 2003, warning that failure would deepen division. FIF/NA President Rev. Dr. David Moyer linked the Ohio event to a 2000 precedent in Pennsylvania, stressing that such actions “are not acts of provocation, but responses to the ongoing crisis of faith and authority.” Anglicans United’s Rev. Todd Wetzel argued that “ecclesiastical disobedience… in good conscience” is now morally justified—mirroring tactics long used by liberal factions to advance same-sex blessings and ordinations. He noted Ohio’s membership has fallen from 40,000 to under 24,000 in two decades and demanded “Godly oversight” for every traditional parish: “The old notion of diocesan boundaries has already been destroyed by the liberals.”

V. Gene Robinson, the Episcopal Church’s first openly gay bishop, stated it is “pretty clear” that five retired bishops breached their ordination vows by conducting a confirmation service in Ohio without local diocesan approval. The event, held at an Orthodox church in Akron and attended by ~800 people, confirmed 110 individuals from six conservative congregations opposed to Robinson’s 2003 consecration. These congregations rejected Ohio Bishop J. Clark Grew II, who had supported Robinson’s election. Though current canons require permission for outside bishops to perform sacramental acts, the retired prelates—joined by a bishop from Brazil’s Diocese of Recife—acted unilaterally, citing pastoral need. Robinson expressed openness to allowing visiting bishops in his own New Hampshire diocese—if he retains oversight and the visitor doesn’t undermine his authority or encourage schism. He received the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force’s Leadership Award shortly after the Ohio event, hailed as a national symbol of LGBTQ+ progress: “He is a hero to our community… for the way in which he has conducted himself in the face of vitriolic attacks.” Robinson remarked: “I have this double life. I’m not the gay bishop in New Hampshire. I’m just the bishop.”

Philip Pullman, the acclaimed children’s author and prominent atheist, revealed he might include Jesus in his next book during a high-profile debate with the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Rowan Williams, at London’s National Theatre. Pullman, whose His Dark Materials trilogy famously concludes with the death of an aged, weakened God, declined to elaborate on Jesus’s potential role. Though some anticipated conflict over Pullman’s anti-theistic worldview, Archbishop Williams defused tension by recently recommending Pullman’s novels for inclusion in religious education curricula. Still, he criticized Pullman’s fictional Church as devoid of redemption—focused solely on control—contrasting it with his vision of Christianity as rooted in grace and transformation. When pressed on Christ’s absence in his books, Pullman noted only one passing reference to Jesus in the context of human wisdom—and confirmed no plans for personal conversion, asserting that morality does not require belief in God. Williams responded: “One of the intriguing things about the Church in your books is that it is a Church without redemption… Although that’s how a lot of people see the Church here, it is not how I see it.” He added wryly, referencing Anglican divisions: “Chance would be a fine thing.”

570 Twin Lakes Rd, P.O. Box 111, Shohola, PA 18458 * Ph. 484 888 8094   December 2025 VIRTUEONLINE is preparing for our biggest and best year yet, and we need your support to make it happen. With my new Substack davidvirtue2.substack.com on the Middle East, we are expanding our coverage in 2026 to include: The rise of Anglicanism in the Global South as it separates from the Global North The decline of liberalism and progressive theology, and the growing threat of Islam to our faith The increasing decline of the Anglican Church of Canada, The Episcopal Church, The Church of England, the Church in Wales and the Scottish Episcopal Church The rise of GAFCON and the GSFA to counter the threat of western liberalism and secularization Financial influence by TEC to influence the Global South with money aimed at persuading African Anglicans to accept pansexuality How oil-rich Middle Eastern nations use their wealth to shape Western minds and promote Islam while systematically undermining the Christian West The persecution of Christians throughout the world We need to raise $30,000 by December 31st to continue our coverage of the Anglican Communion. We are bringing on board new writers with clear insights into Scripture and culture. VOL has no mega-donors and no grants—just faithful readers like you who believe we tell the truth however difficult it may be. Tens of thousands of enthusiastic VOL readers trust us to expose the most pressing issues facing Anglicanism today. Please give before December 31st to ensure your gift is tax-deductible this calendar year. Your partnership allows us not only to continue our work but to grow and do even better with more writers. How to Give: Online: PayPal donation link at https://www.virtueonline.org/donate By check (tax-deductible): VIRTUEONLINE P.O. BOX 111 Shohola, PA 18458 Thank you for your support, David

Archbishop of Rwanda Laurent Mbanda From:: https://alivingtext.com/gafconmbandacrisis/ December 4, 2025 The ACNA is not the only part of GAFCON experiencing problems at the moment. There is a major schism taking place in the usually opaque Rwandan Anglican Church, and it involves Archbishop Laurent Mbanda, who is also the head of GAFCON. Mbanda had the bishop of the Shyira Diocese, Samuel Mugisha, arrested. Mugisha’s wife, joined by retired Bishop Alexis Bilindabagabo, declared his innocence and campaigned for his release. Rt. Rev. Bilindabagabo wrote a letter to the Rwandan Anglican bishops on February 19, 2025 questioning what was going on. A newspaper article followed this up by showing that Archbishop Mbanda and Bishop Ahimana (who succeeded Bishop Mugisha) are past the age of retirement and should be removed. Bishop Bilindabagabo’s efforts went nowhere and Mugisha remained in prison. Bilindabagabo wrote a second letter on October 8, 2025 with the subject “The Truth Shall Set you Free”—see this post. Archbishop Mbanda was forced to respond, writing a letter on October 14, 2025 titled “STATEMENT FROM THE NATIONAL LEADERSHIP.” In it, Mbanda accused retired bishops (meaning Bilindabagabo and others) of many things, such as: · Alleging that they interfere in Church governance without mandate. · Alleging that they issue public opinions without fully understanding the matters at hand. · Accusing them of propagating confusion among believers and disturbing the peace and unity of the Church. · Accusing them of convening unauthorized meetings with different groups of Church members, including retired clergy. · Accusing them of acts showing disrespect to the top Church leadership. · Stating that the retired bishops’ conduct fail[s] to meet the standards of humility and obedience. On October 17, Archbishop Mbanda wrote to the Rwanda Governance Board (RGB), an agency that maintains a surveillance mechanism over all non-state actors, ensuring no alternative power centers can emerge to challenge the ruling party (the RPF). He told them “The reality is that we have not been able to resolve the issues; we are so divided on the issue,” He documented seven meetings on the Shyira Diocesan matter—all of which ended in division and disagreement according to him. Note that this letter was sent at the same time Archbishop Mbanda was meeting with Archbishop Steve Wood and others to announce the Global Anglican Communion. Bishop Bilindabagabo wrote again on October 26, this time joined by three other retired bishops, former Archbishop Kolini, Bishop Rucyahana, and Bishop Rwubusisi. They tell Archbishop Mbanda: · You further fabricated false accusation against us, in defamatory manner, of propagating confusion among believers and disturbing the peace and unity of the Church. · In your declaration you referred to the letter written by the Retired Bishop Alexis Birindabagabo which we too received it as you did. We read that letter and affirm that everything stated therein, is true. Moreover, you accuse us of convening unauthorized meetings with different groups of Church members, including retired clergy do you have any written reports or minutes from such alleged meetings? We are confident that what you put in your declaration is false; nobody should waste his or her time on your fictitious accusations which deliberately intend to tarnish our character. · …you also accuse us of acts showing disrespect to the top Church leadership. We ask: what are those acts? Who committed them, where and when? Dear Archbishop & Bishops, are these not divisive rumors spreading among those you lead, creating suspicion and mistrust within the flock of Christ? Is this being the light to the flock? · Dear Archbishop, it is well known that on every occasion you held meetings to discuss matters concerning Shyira Diocese, you ordered its Bishop to get out (which is unbelievable). Besides this uncanonical act, one may wonder who was meant to explain better the problems of the diocese when its own Bishop was sent out of the meetings. · If, as you claim, Bishop Mugiraneza has no issue with the Church, then why is he imprisoned? Who referred his case to RGB and to the persecution? Why is he charged for actions that others among you have not charged for? Are the laws applied exclusively? · Since you have invoked the law, allow us also to remind you of the Church canons you have repeatedly violated. We request for a meeting with you so that we may, in brotherly love, present the canonical law that are being violated and seek a peaceful resolution in order to avoid further harm to the Church. On October 30, 2025 Bishop Mugisha was released and acquitted. His wife wrote: On October 30, 2025, the court acquitted him of all allegations, including claims of nepotism and embezzlement of diocesan funds. A forensic audit never confirmed that. The only issue mentioned in the ruling was that he grazed his cows on diocesan land, land that was always bought for clergy use where Bishops and clergy, past and present, have always grazed and farmed without question. It has been a tradition in the Anglican Church not only in Rwanda, the truth is, these cows were a gift from the Diocese itself. This makes the ruling both surprising and confusing to many who know the traditions of the Church and the facts of this case. For anyone who might have heard misleading information that he was “charged with embezzlement,” please know this is completely false. The court ruling clearly cleared him of all financial accusations. What is the upshot of all of this? Archbishop Mbanda and all of the Rwandan Anglican leadership are tight with the ruling RPF party of this dictatorship. Gerald Gahima who was the chief of staff to the Rwandan Minister of Justice from 1996-1999, and subsequently the country’s Attorney General from 1999-2003 said this: OK I have very strong opinions about the Anglican Church in Rwanda. The Anglican Church in Rwanda, one cannot even say it has been compromised by the State, it has basically made itself an arm of the State. It has…you remember what the, the role that the Catholic Church had during the Colonial period and the time of the monarchy? How the Catholic Church was very close to the State and how this continued even during the post independence period? The Anglican Church has basically taken the role of the Catholic Church as being the chief apologist of the RPF and that has taken away a lot of the credibility. To have retired bishops openly blasting the sitting Archbishop and current Chairman of GAFCON is highly unusual in such a police state. Archbishop Mbanda had a fellow bishop arrested and sent to jail–why? And GAFCON better think fast about having this man as its leader. Timeline Date Event Details & Charges August 2024 Initial Conflict/Investigation Pastors in the Shyira Diocese who were dismissed or reassigned complained about Bishop Mugisha’s leadership and disciplinary actions, which led the Anglican Province of Rwanda to launch an investigation. August 2024 Dismissals Pastor Kubwayo Charles and Pastor Kabaragasa J. Baptiste were officially dismissed by the Bishop, leading them to raise accusations of poor governance. 2024 (Prior to arrest) Suspension and Resignation Bishop Mugisha was temporarily suspended by Archbishop Laurent Mbanda, who installed the Rt. Rev. Augustin Ahimana in his place. Bishop Mugisha subsequently resigned from his position as Bishop of Shyira Diocese on November 29, 2024. January 21, 2025 Arrest The Rwanda Investigation Bureau (RIB) arrested Dr. Samuel Mugiraneza Mugisha. January 21, 2025 Official Charges Announced RIB stated he was under investigation for alleged crimes of embezzlement and misuse of church funds for personal gain during his tenure. The allegations included: using his company to supply building materials for a diocesan project; his wife’s company having a monopoly on supplying eggs to diocesan schools; and using diocesan farmland for his personal cattle. February 12, 2025 Court Appearance Bishop Mugisha appeared at the Muhoza Primary Court in Musanze for a bail hearing. February 19, 2025 Bishop Billindabagabo first letter Rt. Rev. Bilindabagabo raises many questions including the fact that church authorities have not been given time to study the issues of Bishop Mugisha, especially since what he did is done by everyone, the fact that the Synod did nothing about it and it is the highest authority in the Church, and thus he concludes by asking how bishops are going to live together. October 8, 2025 Letter on Imprisonment Retired Bishop Alexis Bilindabagabo wrote a letter, “The Truth Will Set You Free,” stating that Mugisha had been imprisoned for nine months and arguing that the alleged offenses were common practices among bishops. October 14, 2025 Archbishop Mbanda writes “Statement from the National Leadership” The Archbishop’s statement was a public critique of the retired Bishops’ actions, accusing them of unauthorized interference and sowing disunity, and it specifically addressed a letter from Retired Bishop Bilindabagabo. October 17, 2025 Archbishop Mbanda writes the Rwanda Governance Board (RGB) He includes two attachments and says that the bishops had failed to resolve internal disputes. October 26, 2025 Several retired bishops jointly write Mbanda and the other active Rwandan bishops. “Since you have invoked the law, allow us also to remind you of the Church canons you have repeatedly violated. We request for a meeting with you so that we may, in brotherly love, present the canonical law that are being violated and seek a peaceful resolution in order to avoid further harm to the Church.” October 30, 2025 Bishop Mugisha acquitted and released. The court acquitted him of all allegations, including claims of nepotism and embezzlement of diocesan funds. Letter from the retired bishops Kigali, on 26/10/2025 To: Dear the Archbishop of the Anglican Church of Rwanda, Dear the Bishop of the Anglican Church of Rwanda Subject: Clarification regarding the statement issued by the Archbishop of the Anglican Church of Rwanda with reference: ACR/COMM/10/2025 dated October 14, 2025, titled “STATEMENT FROM THE NATIONAL LEADERSHIP.” We, the retired Bishops of the Anglican Church of Rwanda, write to you with deep sorrow and concern following the statement issued by the National leadership of our Church, signed by the Archbishop himself—the same Church we served faithfully and continue to love. The Word of God calls us to be the light of the world. (Matthew 5:16). However, the contents of your statement have grieved us because you, yourself expressed the concern over our conduct as retired bishops, alleging that we interfere in Church governance without mandate, and that we issue public opinions without fully understanding the matters at hand. You further fabricated false accusation against us, in defamatory manner, of propagating confusion among believers and disturbing the peace and unity of the Church. In your declaration you referred to the letter written by the Retired Bishop Alexis Birindabagabo which we too received it as you did. We read that letter and affirm that everything stated therein, is true. Moreover, you accuse us of convening unauthorized meetings with different groups of Church members, including retired clergy do you have any written reports or minutes from such alleged meetings? We are confident that what you put in your declaration is false; nobody should waste his or her time on your fictitious accusations which deliberately intend to tarnish our character. Dear Archbishop & Bishops would you explain to us: Does retirement deprive us of our right to serve God and to fellowship with others? We have families, friends, and our homes are open to all visitors what law have we violated by maintaining such relationships? In that declaration, you also accuse us of acts showing disrespect to the top Church leadership. We ask: what are those acts? Who committed them, where and when? Dear Archbishop & Bishops, are these not divisive rumors spreading among those you lead, creating suspicion and mistrust within the flock of Christ? Is this being the light to the flock? The Word of God in Matthew 18:15-17 teaches us that when a brother sins against you, you first approach him privately; if he refuses, take one or two witnesses; and if he still refuses, bring the matter before the congregation. Has any among you privately reached out to us before resorting to public accusation through the media? As you know, some of us Retired Bishops, we continued to live and worship within your dioceses! has any among you ever called us to point out our faults? You speak of our conduct as failing to meet the standards of humility and obedience. Beloved, does your attitude to us reflect the same spirit of humility you are talking about? Have you set an example to us (Retired Bishops). Your Grace and Active Bishops, We, retired bishops, are deeply concerned about how your colleague Bishop Samuel Mugiraneza Mugisha has been mistreated. ON PAGE TWO OF YOUR STATEMENT, you wrote: “The author of the letter may not be fully aware of the accusations in the mentioned case. If he is aware, then he has deliberately chosen to conceal the truth and mislead people.” And you conclude by warning: “Publishing in writing what one does not know or knowingly publish what is contrary to the truth, carries the same consequences: heating tempers, creating conflict between leaders and those they lead, undermining unity within the Church, causing division and disturbing peace and fellowship among people”. Dear Archbishop & Bishops let us humbly ask you: who among you holds scale that measure the truth—such that he decides what is true or false? Is there any one among you who has truly stood firm to the truth when it was most needed in matters that transpires in our church today? You say that there are things we do not know, implying that we are ignorant which is to us an attitude insulting and intimidated. Would you kindly tell us what do you know, learnt or gain in our Church which did not exist in our time which encourages you to order us to be silent. In Archbishop’s letter dated October 17, 2024, addressed to the Rwanda Governance Board (RGB), with two attachments, the Archbishop himself admitted that the bishops had failed to resolve internal disputes. The main idea was to surrender the responsibility of resolving the issues yourselves as stated: “The reality is that we have not been able to resolve the issues; we are so divided on the issue“, This is what you communicated to the RGB, under the heading: “Previous meetings held for the purpose of handling issues of Shyira Diocese“. You documented seven meetings on the Shyira Diocesan matter—all of which ended in division and disagreement. Therefore, we humbly ask you: is it right to accuse us causing division when you yourselves confessed to being divided. Since you became divided and failed to come together to address the matter concerning your fellow Bishop Samuel Mugisha, even before he was imprisoned as you yourselves have acknowledged. Now, after his imprisonment, do you claim now to be united? Do you not owe an explanation those you lead in the Church of Christ about the reasons for your lack of unity? Was the final decision on the above issues jointly approved? You have mentioned seven meetings and visits of your delegates, yet it seems as if you intended to pressure the Bishop Mugisha Mugiraneza Samuel into resolving the issue between those two pastors alleged to have a conflict with him—even while you yourself acknowledged that such measures achieved nothing. If the Former Dean Bishop Kalimba Jered had been able to assist in resolving the issue of the pastors as you described, would that have prevented your fellow Bishop from being imprisoned? Now, that those pastors have been reinstated in their duties which meeting or decision formally approved their return? Dear Archbishop, it is well known that on every occasion you held meetings to discuss matters concerning Shyira Diocese, you ordered its Bishop to get out (which is unbelievable). Besides this uncanonical act, one may wonder who was meant to explain better the problems of the diocese when its own Bishop was sent out of the meetings. Let us tell you the truth with such practices you breed (as shepherd of the Church) mistrust, confusion and disunity, the very problem you accuse us of. The true remedy for these ills is repentance not to appoint fingers to others. Your Grace, you affirm in your statement that you will continue to uphold truth, transparency, and integrity, urging pastors and believers to live in unity and love, these are admirable goals. Yet, how will unity and love flourish in the Church among pastors and believers without your example of humility and fairness should come from above? As Scripture says: “You are the salt of the earth… You are the light of the world” (Matthew 5:13-16). We, therefore, implore you to stop attributing false accusations to us. If, as you claim, Bishop Mugiraneza has no issue with the Church, then why is he imprisoned? Who referred his case to RGB and to the persecution? Why is he charged for actions that others among you have not charged for? Are the laws applied exclusively? Since you have invoked the law, allow us also to remind you of the Church canons you have repeatedly violated. We request for a meeting with you so that we may, in brotherly love, present the canonical law that are being violated and seek a peaceful resolution in order to avoid further harm to the Church. The retirement does not exclude us from the fellowship and responsibility of being participants in our Church. We remain servants of God and intercessors for the body of Christ. As our Lord said, “I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life” (John 14:6). We agree with you that mutual respect is vital in Christian ministry. Yet it is neither just nor godly to publicly humiliate those who served faithfully before you and completed their administrative and managerial work in the Church. God, who called us, still entrusts us with the duty to speak truth in love. We therefore call upon you to restore peace, uphold justice, and ensure that every level of Church leadership fulfills its divine responsibilities. May the grace and peace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. Signed: The Retired Bishops of the Anglican Church of Rwanda 1. The Right Rev. Kolini Musaba Emmanuel 2. The Right Rev. Rucyahana John Kabango 3. The Right Rev. Bikindabagabo Alexis 4. The Right Rev. Rwubusisi Geoffrey

Source: ACNA Bishop Foley Beach December 7, 2025 Dear Friends and Members of Holy Cross Cathedral,   We are saddened to share that Dean Michael Guernsey has submitted his resignation as Dean of Holy Cross Cathedral. This was a difficult decision for him, made only after much prayer and consideration. At this time, he believes it is best for both his family and the Cathedral to bring his ministry to a close and to allow all involved to move forward.   Over the past several months, concerns from staff and parishioners (and former parishioners) were brought to the attention of Diocesan Leadership and the Cathedral Chapter regarding various aspects of parish leadership, communication, and Fr. Michael’s overall health and wellbeing.   In keeping with our diocesan policies, and out of deep pastoral care for both Fr. Michael and Holy Cross Cathedral, he was placed on a leave of absence beginning August 26. This allowed time for both the ACNA’s normal process to examine the concerns raised and for a period of prayerful evaluation, conversation, and discernment about the best path forward for him and for the parish.   Dean Michael has been a blessing to Holy Cross Cathedral during his tenure and his ministry will be deeply missed. Now, we ask the congregation to come together, support one another, and help restore the stability as we walk together through the transition process. The Chapter will begin the process of searching for an interim Dean, and then we will begin the process of searching for a new Dean. With your prayers and support, we trust that God will guide us through this transition into the next chapter of our life together.   We will have a Farewell Reception for Dean Michael and his family on Sunday afternoon, December 14th at 4:00 pm. in the Strickland Student Center. The Church is invited to come and say thank you for his ministry at Holy Cross, and love offerings are appropriate.   We ask you to join us in praying for Fr. Michael and his family, for Holy Cross Cathedral Congregation, Staff and Chapter, and for all who were impacted by his leadership.   Faithfully in Christ, Roy Acord, Dean’s Warden Foley Beach, Bishop

The Rev. Dr. Ronald Moore www.virtueonline.org Dec 07, 2025   Tertullian’s immortal line—“The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the Church”—was not rhetorical flourish but sober theology. Writing in the late second century, amid the savage persecutions of the Roman Empire, the African apologist observed something that history would repeat again and again: every time the world tried to silence the Church, it made her louder. Every attempt to destroy the faith only deepened it. The sword that sought to sever the vine instead pruned it, and in pruning, made it fruitful.   From the catacombs of Rome to the fields of Uganda, from the prisons of Soviet Russia to the underground churches of China, the Church has always flourished most when she has bled. What the world sees as defeat, heaven sees as sowing. Every martyrdom plants faith deeper in the soil of human history. When one saint dies with the Name of Christ on his lips, ten souls rise to take his place.   The Strange Power of Suffering There is a divine paradox at work here: that weakness conquers, that death gives life, that loss multiplies gain. The pattern was set by Christ Himself. He conquered by being crucified. He won the world not by the sword, but by the Cross. The early Christians understood this truth instinctively. To follow Jesus was not to seek safety but to embrace sacrifice. When persecution came, it did not surprise them—it confirmed them. It proved that their Lord was worth dying for.   The Roman authorities could never comprehend why the Church would not die. They threw believers to lions, burned them as torches, and confiscated their property. Yet the more they punished the faithful, the more converts appeared. The Christians’ courage unsettled the empire. Pagan observers began to ask what kind of God inspired such joy in suffering, such peace in the face of death. And when they asked, they began to believe.   Persecution, in this light, was not merely endurance—it was evangelism. The martyr’s steadfastness was the most eloquent sermon ever preached. His death proclaimed that Christ is real, that heaven is worth more than life, and that love is stronger than fear. The early Church grew not through strategy or state approval but through witness—the Greek martyria—borne in blood.   When the Church Grows Comfortable By contrast, when the Church becomes comfortable, she often becomes complacent. The temptation of prosperity is not to deny God but to forget Him. When we are not pressed by the world, we begin to negotiate with it. We lose the edge of our confession. Faith becomes institutional, then cultural, then optional. The Church drifts from being a mission to being a club.   History is uncomfortably clear about this. Whenever the Church gains social respectability, her spiritual vitality wanes. When Constantine ended the Roman persecutions, Christianity ceased to be a movement and became an establishment. The Nicene age gave us magnificent theology—but it also birthed bureaucracy. Bishops gained influence, and believers gained safety, but the fiery faith of the martyrs cooled into political calculation.   The same pattern repeated through the centuries. The Reformation reignited passion because the truth was contested. The evangelical revivals of the eighteenth century arose in a world spiritually numb. Even in our own time, where Christianity has enjoyed cultural dominance, the result has often been lukewarm faith. When church attendance becomes a social habit rather than a spiritual hunger, the Gospel loses its sharpness. The Word of God becomes advice rather than command.   Comfort is the enemy of consecration. The Church of Laodicea was neither hot nor cold, but tepid—and the Lord said He would spit her out (Revelation 3:16). That warning echoes still. A faith without fire is unfit for the altar.   The Purifying Fire of Opposition That is why persecution, dreadful as it is, may yet prove to be mercy. It exposes the counterfeit and refines the genuine. It forces believers to decide whether they truly belong to Christ or merely to a culture that once bore His name. When faith becomes costly again, it also becomes precious again.   Our Lord Himself said, “Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” The blessing is not in the pain, but in the purification. The fire that consumes the chaff purifies the gold. When Christians lose worldly status, they gain spiritual power. When their voices are silenced in public, their prayers grow louder in heaven.   In times of adversity, the Church learns to depend on God instead of her own machinery. We rediscover that faith is not a brand, worship is not a performance, and fellowship is not entertainment. We learn once more to kneel. The Church’s strength is not measured in budgets or buildings but in faithfulness. Better a small, pure Church on her knees than a vast, empty cathedral that no longer trembles before God.   Seeds for the Future Each generation of believers must decide whether it will live as the Church militant or the Church complacent. The future of Christianity will not be secured by political protection or cultural favor but by fidelity under pressure. And that pressure is coming.   Western civilization, once shaped by Christian ethics, now regards them as offensive. The Church stands increasingly outside the gates of cultural approval. In that sense, we are returning to the world of the apostles—a world that does not understand us, and may soon despise us. But that may be precisely what God intends. For when the Church loses the world, she gains heaven again.   We must remember that the seed does not grow until it dies. Jesus said, “Unless a grain of wheat falls into the ground and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it produces much grain” (John 12:24 NKJV). That is true not only of our Lord but of His Body, the Church. Her vitality is found in surrender, her power in weakness, her victory in the cross. When the world wounds her, God waters her. What falls into the ground in tears will one day rise in triumph.   The Coming Testing There are signs that such testing is near. Laws grow more hostile to biblical conviction; ridicule becomes open hatred; moral inversion becomes policy. Christians who refuse to conform may soon be called extremists or criminals. We should not be surprised. The Lord foretold this: “If the world hates you, know that it hated Me before it hated you” (John 15:18).   The Church must prepare not by panic, but by purification. Now is the time to deepen our roots in Scripture, to strengthen our bonds in fellowship, and to recover the fear of the Lord. If the storm comes, let us meet it as the saints of old—calm, resolute, and singing hymns in the fire. For every flame that burns against the Church becomes, in time, the light that guides her forward.   The Triumph of the Cross The blood of the martyrs is indeed the seed of the Church because it is the echo of Calvary. The Church is not sustained by admiration but by imitation. The saints who suffer for Christ do so because they are joined to His victory. Their blood does not save, but it testifies to the Blood that did. Their courage points beyond themselves to the Lamb who was slain and yet lives forever.   Tertullian’s insight was prophetic. He saw that Rome could not defeat the Church because Rome could not defeat death—and death had already been conquered by Christ. Empires fall; ideologies collapse; but the Cross stands. The world may despise us, imprison us, or even kill us, but it cannot silence the Gospel. Every generation that tries to bury it ends up planting it.   So let us not fear what may come. The age of comfort is ending, but the age of conviction is beginning. And that is good news. The Church that bleeds again will also breathe again. Out of the world’s hatred will come holiness; out of her scorn, strength. The God who raised His Son from the grave is not finished raising His Church from complacency.   When the next age of trial dawns, may it be said of us what Tertullian said of his generation: that the blood of the martyrs was not spilled in vain, but became the seed of revival. For the Church of Christ cannot die. She only rises.

Rev. Dr. Donald P. Richmond www.virtueonline.org December 7, 2025   As I have gotten older, I have noted that my body needs to make adjustments. One of the many adjustments that I have had to make relates to foods, what I eat and how I eat. Certain foods now need to be avoided and, along with this, I must also be far more mindful and moderate about what I ingest and how quickly I ingest it. Wisdom suggests moderation, and, if I am not wise, I develop a case of the hiccups.   Having just emerged from one of these episodes, and needing to make some postural adjustments, I was reminded of Anglo-Catholicism --- that supposed sacramental adjustment of the 19th century that purportedly corrected the Anglican theological “posture” and “palate” of the 16th century English Reformation. And to be clear, Anglo-Catholicism is little more than an adjustment, a hiccup that has been adopted, adapted and articulated as a unique theological system. Exaggerating to make a point, Anglo-Catholicism has in some way swallowed, feathers and fat alike, Tract 90 and has come to believe and behave in a manner that suggests that such a hiccup and adjustment is normal, normative and entirely keeping with the posture and proclamation of historic Anglican catholicity. This is, at best, questionable.   Because we have just celebrated Thanksgiving Day, an illustration will highlight what I am seeking to communicate. Anglo-Catholicism claims to regulate and restore some of the “foods” that the 16th century English Reformers thought peripheral or problematic to the Protestant palate. In other words, Anglo-Catholics believe that the 16th century English Reformers went too far in their reformational fervor and that they reacted, instead of responded, to Roman excess by removing a considerable amount of “stuffing” and “sauces” that could add considerable flavor to the Anglican Table.   To be sure, some tablespoon of truth can be found in this assertion. Sometimes, when experiencing new insights and fresh-found freedoms, we often take them too far. Early Reformers at times went too far. As such, reasonable re-adjustments to the adjustments are needed so that balance might be restored and benefits might be enjoyed. The problem with Anglo-Catholicism, however, is that the re-adjusted adjustment has itself now become the norm --- the hiccup has become representative, in many minds, of Anglican history, heritage and hope.   In seeking to return us to a fuller experience and expression of the historic faith, a fullness of The Faith, Anglo-Catholicism’s conceptual cornucopia is found to be not entirely digestible. Certainly, I am thankful for Thanksgiving. Certainly, I enjoy the fully dressed Anglican Table. I celebrate the meats and the vegetables and the salads and the deserts and the stuffings and the gatherings of gussied-up friends and family. It’s cozy…albeit at times gluttonously uncomfortable. Uncomfortable is a good word. After swallowing our Anglo-abundance, so sweet to the tongue but bitter to the tummy, what do we experience? We are OVER FULL, but do not experience true fullness. We are BLOATED, but we are not beatified. We are STUFFED, but not entirely satisfied. We are STUPEFIED, but not sanctified. We are full, but we are also disturbingly flatulent. We have consumed far more than is wise.   Anglo-Catholicism is a Theological Thanksgiving whereby, more often than not, we have consumed far too much, fall into some malaise (dressed up though it is!) and begin giving off unpleasant airs. Having done this for some years, we have now established a Tradition. And who wants to change Tradition? Who really wants to cut back? Who doesn’t want to indulge, and establish Fat Tuesday as a regulative and normative principle? This is most especially the case when such exuberant excess can be sanctified as standard practice. Anglo-Catholicism is an overstuffed Tradition communicating a fatness of faith that celebrates the stuffing more than the substance --- that Evangelical meat and mead of the matter.   I truly enjoy indulgence. I truly enjoy the flourish of falsetto-religion, the chuntering chant of clergy and the subtle-shuffle of sockless penny-loafer Theology. Who doesn’t! But when such indulgence is indulged, and hiccups occur, and adjustments need be made in order to restore the balance, let us at least have the common grace not to say that the hiccup is the norm --- and that Fat Tuesday is really a fullness of the True Faith of which Evangelical Anglicanism has robbed us.   Does Anglo-Catholicism represent fullness or fatness, inspiration or indulgence, historic faith or histrionic fantasy?   Rev. Dr. Donald P. Richmond,  DD, DMin is a widely published author and sometime illustrator, is a somewhat retiring Reformed Anglican presbyter.

Archbishop Elect Sarah Mullally A Southern Baptist leader takes a hard look at the coming leadership of the Church of England and how it will impact the Anglican Communion. By R. Albert Mohler, Jr. November 6, 2025 The Church of England announced Friday that the Right Reverend and Right Honorable Dame Sarah Mullally has been named the 106th Archbishop of Canterbury. She will be the first female to serve as priestly leader of the church, which claims a 1,400-year history. Formerly Britain’s chief nursing officer, Sarah Mullally entered the priesthood in 2002, and was installed as bishop of London in 2018, progressing in a mere 16 years from the field of nursing to assume the third most senior position in the Church of England. Now, she has been promoted to the top, to serve as primate of all England. Her predecessor as Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, resigned in the wake of a sex abuse scandal in which he was accused of taking inadequate action. The selection of Bishop Sarah to be the next Archbishop of Canterbury is seen as response to that controversy, though, given the theological trajectory of the Church of England, the appointment of a woman to the highest clerical leadership position in the church was inevitable. It was just a matter of time, and, at the end of last week, the time came. Two of the last three primates had been advertised as some kind of evangelical. In both cases, with George Carey and Justin Welby, they turned out to be the kind of evangelicals who are not evangelical. Both withered in conviction while in office. If they had any strong convictions in the past, those convictions seemed to disappear as soon as they put on Canterbury’s miter. Conservatives in the Church of England—and there are brave ones left—are now put in a devil’s bind. Evangelical priests in the Diocese of London, where Sarah Mullally has been bishop, were allowed to appeal for external episcopal oversight. Now that she is to be Archbishop of Canterbury, that would seem to be impossible. Understandably, conservatives in the Anglican Communion are up in arms. Many expressed outrage at the appointment of Sarah Mullally to Canterbury, both for the fact that they do not recognize a woman as priest or bishop, and because this particular woman bishop is quite liberal. Interestingly, she cited her experience as a nurse in coming out against assisted suicide, now debated in Britain’s House of Lords. You can imagine the puns. It certainly does appear that the Church of England is being self-euthanized. On LGBTQ issues the new archbishop is all in on welcoming practicing homosexuals in the church and blessing their unions. It is hard to see how the church will not move swiftly under her leadership to embrace legalized same-sex marriage and all the rest—meaning, all the letters of LGBTQ, and that pesky + sign as well. The Most Reverend Dr. Laurent Mbanda, Archbishop of Rwanda and leader of GAFCON, the group of conservative global Anglicans set up in opposition to liberalism in the Episcopal Church in the United States and out of disappointment with the pathetically anemic leadership of the Church of England, spoke the truth when he said that “the majority of the Anglican Communion still believes that the Bible requires a male-only episcopacy.” Worldwide, Anglicanism has been most vigorous where the doctrine has been most conservative—and that has generally meant in places far from London or Canterbury. GAFCON also expressed gave disappointment in the lack of biblical fidelity seen in Dame Sarah, and the group expressed disagreement with her “unbiblical and revisionist teachings regarding marriage and sexual morality.” Dr. Gerald Bray, historian and theologian and one of the most respected voices among conservative Anglicans, held nothing back in an article for Evangelicals Now: “Undertrained and inexperienced, with a proper job somewhere else, the only reason she became a bishop is that she was a woman when women were wanted and in short supply. A man in her position would never have been considered. General awareness of that will make her task exceptionally difficult. Everybody in the Church of England will be polite to her, but few will listen to whatever she has to say.” In the British tradition of pushing on anyway, Bray concluded: “The best we can hope for is that evangelicals (in particular) will be left alone to get on with the mission of Christ, and that when the See of Canterbury becomes vacant again, a more promising candidate may be found.” My own life has been so enriched by the Anglican tradition, and my soul has been fed by towering figures such as John Owen and Bishop Charles Ryle. I hold dear the memory and examples set by towering Reformation martyrs such as Archbishop Thomas Cranmer, Bishop Nicholas Ridley, and Bishop Hugh Latimer. I learned much from J. I. Packer and John Stott and a host of others, living and dead. I am thankful for such good work done by so many for so long. I pray for them. I cherish Anglican music, though I hear it far more commonly in my library than in my church. I grieve for my Anglican friends. Year ago, on a visit to our campus, historian John Shelton Reed remarked that you can only expect so much orthodoxy from a church founded by King Henry VIII. I see the point. But I can only wonder what King Henry would say of this development in the Church of England, and what he would think of the approval granted by King Charles III, the church’s current Supreme Governor. Then again, I am fairly certain King Henry’s response would not be printable at WORLD Opinions. I’ll leave it at that. This article originally appeared at WORLD Opinions on November 6, 2025.

DOMA Bishop Chris Warner December 4, 2025                      Incarnation Anglican Church  in Williamsburg, VA has experienced a series of crises, one result of which is a request for a formal inquiry into Bishop Chris Warner’s conduct under Title III, Canon 8 to determine whether his actions constitute canonical violations, abuse of authority, or neglect of episcopal duty. X account “@DOMA_Misconduct” has provided many documents that outline the recent history of this conflict. Extrapolating from these documents, I came up with the following timeline. Timeline: Incarnation Anglican Church Conflict 2020–2023 ·  Aug 9, 2020 : Rev. Drew Thomas is instituted as Vicar by Bishop John Guernsey. ·  Sept 2023 or Jan 2024 : Rev. Thomas departs. Date unclear. 2023 ·  Spring 2023 : Fr. Justin Murff becomes Interim Rector during a leadership crisis. 2024 ·  Dec 27, 2024 : It is suddenly announced that Fr. Murff will depart within a month, with no replacement lined up. It is revealed he had been quietly demoted from Interim Rector to Priest-in-Charge earlier in the year. 2025 ·  Jan 17, 2025 : At Bishop Warner’s and Canon Mary Hays’s direction, Incarnation Anglican Church is informed there will be no interim rector for the next 4 months. Guest preachers will serve. ·  Jan 31, 2025 : Archdeacon Murff concludes his service as Priest-in-Charge. ·  Feb 2, 2025 : Canon Tuck Bartholomew begins leading services twice a month; Canon Jim Beavers also assists. ·  Feb 9, 2025 : Canon Mary Hays celebrates the Eucharist—the first female priest to do so at Incarnation Anglican Church. Attendance drops and small groups are paused. ·  Apr 20, 2025 : Bishop Warner visits IAC, insists on gender parity for the vestry and doctrinal openness to female celebrants. ·  Apr 27, 2025 : Vestry election is disrupted. A DOMA deacon calls it “a battle between the women and the men.” ·  Apr 28, 2025 : Bishop Warner calls an emergency congregational meeting for April 30. ·  Apr 30, 2025 : Bishop Warner holds the meeting, rebukes the vestry, praises election disruptors, and accuses the vestry of plotting to leave DOMA. ·  May 3, 2025 : Bishop Warner sends a letter confirming the vestry election was valid but bars the vestry from meeting until his interim rector arrives. ·  May 7, 2025 : Tom Hample is announced as interim rector. He previously worked under Bishop Warner. ·  May 28, 2025 : The vestry sends a formal misconduct report to Archbishop Steve Wood and DOMA’s standing committee. Eight charges are outlined. ·  Jun 5, 2025 : Bishop Warner replies to the parish. Confirms Tom Hample’s appointment and expresses disappointment with the vestry. ·  Jun 10, 2025 : DOMA’s standing committee responds to the vestry’s plea by urging them to attend the next parish meeting. No substantive action is taken. Entire vestry resigns. ·  Jun 11, 2025 : Bishop Warner and DOMA appoint a “transitional vestry.” They confirm they will not investigate the misconduct claims. ·  Jun 14, 2025 : Former vestry member William Eastman emails the parish, sharing the misconduct report and urging transparency. ·  Jun 19, 2025 : Interim rector publicly shares the names of vestry signatories and accuses them of sin for bypassing Matthew 18. ·  Jul 6, 2025 : DOMA Whistleblower tweets: “Spiritual abuse is taken lightly, and investigations into misconduct only exist to be weaponized.” Here is the text of the vestry’s letter to the Archbishop, with their request for a formal inquiry: Incarnation Anglican Church Williamsburg, VA 27 May 2025 To: The Most Rev. Stephen D. Wood, Archbishop The Anglican Church in North America 440 Whilden Street Mt. Pleasant, SC 29464 Dear Archbishop Wood, Grace and peace to you in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. We, the duly elected Vestry of Incarnation Anglican Church, write with heavy hearts and solemn conviction to request immediate relief from the conduct of the Rt. Rev. Christopher S. Warner, Bishop of the Anglican Diocese of the Mid-Atlantic. Our parish has experienced significant dysfunction, pastoral harm, and decline in attendance and financial health as a result of Bishop Warner’s repeated departures from the canonical, spiritual, and relational standards required of a bishop in the Church. The matters outlined herein reflect multiple grievous contraventions of canonical duty, pastoral responsibility, and episcopal integrity under 1 Peter 5:2–3; Titus 1:7–9; 1 Timothy 3; and Title III, Canon 8 of the Canons of the Anglican Church in North America that have gravely impaired the spiritual health, flourishing, governance, and unity of our congregation: 1.     Neglect of Pastoral Oversight and Support: Through repeated and deleterious interventions by Canon for Clergy & Congregation Care Mary Hays, Bishop Warner neglected to address ongoing parish leadership conflicts and subterfuges fomented by the Senior Warden, undermined the Priest-in-Charge’s legitimate authority to maintain church order, and permitted unfounded insinuations of disciplinary charges to proceed against a priest under his care, thereby allowing the Church’s mission in the Gospel to stagnate and falter. 2.     Manipulating and Undermining the Rector Search: Bishop Warner and Canon Hays directed a delay in the formation of a search committee, withheld interim pastoral support for four months, repeatedly insisted that the next rector be installed within an expedited six-month timeframe, and imposed substantial financial burdens by mandating costly arrangements for a part-time out-of-state interim rector with prior personal ties, in a scheme to unilaterally pressure the Vestry and search committee into advancing the Bishop’s preferred candidates. 3.     Imposition of Ideological Requirements Against Parish Discernment: Bishop Warner sought to enforce a doctrinal stipulation in the parish profile that the next rector must be willing to receive Holy Communion from a female priest, contrary to the unanimous discernment of the Vestry and rector search committee—fully aware that this would divide the congregation and alienate a substantial number of members from the body of the church. 4.     Public Maligning of Clergy Formerly Under His Pastoral Oversight: The Bishop maligned, knowingly mischaracterized, and instructed Vestry members to disparage a priest formerly under his care in public congregational settings, failing in his episcopal role as pastor. 5.     Participation in a Campaign of Spiritual Harassment to Undermine Ecclesial Order: Bishop Warner enabled, encouraged, and actively participated in a pressure campaign of spiritual harassment orchestrated with Ms. [REDACTED], parish staff, and volunteer Deacon [REDACTED], directed at Vestry Members to intimidate, improperly influence, and obstruct a Vestry election which was later determined to be lawful by the bishop’s own chancellor. 6.     Failure to Enforce Accountability for Public Disruption of a Lawful Vestry Election: Despite the premeditated and public disruption of a lawful Vestry election by the spouse of Ms. [REDACTED] and the husband of the Director of Children’s Ministries, Bishop Warner failed to hold these individuals accountable or adequately call them to repentance. Instead, he publicly commended Ms. [REDACTED] before the entire congregation, signaling approval for their conduct and emboldening further disorder. 7.     Public Undermining of Vestry Members Without Attempts at Reconciliation: Bishop Warner publicly maligned Vestry Members by disclosing and misrepresenting selective contents of private and preliminary communications before the entire congregation without first seeking the Vestry Members’ private clarification or consent. He thereby irreparably compromised the trust necessary for the Vestry to engage with him directly in good faith. 8.     Weaponization of Ecclesiastical Authority to Usurp Vestry Governance: Bishop Warner coerced a Member of the Vestry through ecclesiastical directives and spiritual pressure to unilaterally enter contractual and financial obligations with his preferred candidate for interim rector, thereby circumventing the Vestry’s canonical authority over temporal matters and violating the collaborative governance model essential to Anglican church order. In light of these grave concerns , we respectfully request immediate relief under the appropriate canons of the Anglican Church in North America and Diocese of the Mid-Atlantic. Specifically, we seek: 1.     A formal inquiry into Bishop Warner’s conduct under Title III, Canon 8 to determine whether his actions constitute canonical violations, abuse of authority, or neglect of episcopal duty. 2.     The emergency appointment of a trusted interim rector, selected by the Vestry, to stabilize the congregation, restore trust, and resume an open rector search. Since Bishop Warner’s April 30 intervention, ASA has declined to less than 50% of parish membership and roughly $70,000, or 25%, of annualized pledged giving has been lost. The congregation can no longer meet its financial obligations at current giving levels. We submit this request out of sincere desire to restore health, trust, and proper order to the Church, and after numerous failed attempts to resolve concerns privately with Bishop Warner. We seek accountability and healing, and entrust this process to your prayerful discernment. Please confirm receipt of this letter and advise us of the next appropriate steps. We are prepared to provide full documentation and testimony as needed. Sincerely, The Vestry Incarnation Anglican Church Williamsburg, VA The tweets (do we still call them tweets?) and some of the correspondence follow: Dec 27: It is suddenly announced that IAC’s priest, widely respected by the congregation, will be departing within a month with no planned replacement. It is also revealed that he was quietly demoted earlier in the year from interim rector to priest in charge. Incarnation will experience another new season in 2025. After serving our congregation for the past 18 months, Archdeacon Murff’s time as the Priest-in-Charge will come to a conclusion at the end of January. We were blessed that [REDACTED] was willing to loan him to us and help get through a difficult period that began in the spring of 2023. If you were not at Incarnation at that time, our Rector left suddenly, and we needed a replacement not only in the pulpit but also a spiritual leader. Archdeacon Murff served as our Interim Rector through the end of that year, and then joined us as Priest-in-Charge at the beginning of this year. During this time he continued his responsibilities to the Province as the Archbishop’s Canon for the [REDACTED]. Jan 17: An email from IAC's Parish Administrator announces that, at the direction of Bp. Warner and Cn. Mary Hays, IAC will forgo pastoral support for the next 4 months. Guest preachers from his diocesan staff including Cn. Hays herself will lead services, with no interim rector. Incarnation Family, This week our diocese sent Canon Mary Hays (DOMA’s Canon for Clergy and Congregational Care) to meet with the Vestry and Staff to help plan our transition. Mary informed us that Bishop Chris Warner has arranged for Canon Tuck Bartholomew to lead our services twice a month beginning on February 2nd. Canon Tuck lives in Charlottesville and is the Canon for Mission and Ministry in our diocese. The other Sundays will be covered by Canon Jim Beavers (Canon for Ordinations in DOMA). We are incredibly blessed and grateful for the support and leadership that both of these men will bring to Incarnation. Additionally, we are excited to announce that Bishop Chris will lead our Easter service this year. Any Sundays that are not covered, Canon Mary Hays or Deacon [REDACTED] will help fill in as needed. Abbot [REDACTED] also lives nearby and may be called to lead as well. Feb 9: Canon Mary Hays visits IAC and leads the Sunday service. This is the first time a female priest has celebrated the Eucharist at IAC. Parish attendance declines significantly amid growing unease over innovations to liturgical standards. Small groups are placed on hold. Apr 20: Bp. Warner visits IAC a week before the vestry election. Around this time, he insists the vestry add another female vestry member and that the parish profile require the next rector to be willing to receive communion from a female priest. What guidance has our Bishop offered? Currently, one of our Bishop’s top priorities is achieving gender parity on the Vestry. He has asked that we create a new Vestry seat to add an additional female Vestry Member. Because we received this guidance after we had already announced the time and location of the election, the Vestry will consider creating a female-only Vestry seat at our next Vestry meeting in May. Apr 27: The vestry election is disrupted by individuals associated with Bp. Warner, who challenge the legitimacy of the process, berate vestry members, and attempt to impede the vote. A DOMA deacon is overheard describing the election as "a battle between the women and the men." Apr 28: The next day, an IAC staff member sends a message from Bishop Warner to the parish calling for "an emergency congregational meeting" on Apr 30. He attributes the unrest not to the election disruption but to "systemic anxiety" within the parish’s leadership. Dear People of Incarnation Williamsburg, Grace and peace to you in Christ our Lord. It was a joy to be with you on Easter to celebrate the Feast of the Resurrection and to baptize and confirm/receive. It has come to my attention that Incarnation is experiencing significant tension, interpersonal conflict and systemic anxiety within the congregation and among its leadership. While it is unlikely the casual attender would be aware of this, the nature of this conflict is serious enough that I have decided to call an emergency congregational meeting at 7pm this Wednesday, April 30th at the Hellenic Center.  I’m sorry for the short notice — I know everyone’s schedules are full — but it’s very important that we gather to address some critical matters together.  If you are committed to the church and concerned about a healthy future, I strongly recommend that you attend. It is my intention that we make space for honest conversation. I truly believe the Lord will meet us as we seek His grace and wisdom together. Thank you for your understanding and your flexibility. I’m looking forward to being with you all very soon. In Christ’s love, +Chris The Rt. Rev. Chris Warner Bishop, Diocese of the Mid-Atlantic Apr 30: At the parish meeting, Bp. Warner offers no rebuke for the instigators. He blames the vestry, questions their legitimacy, maligns former parish priests, praises the spouse of one of the instigators, & accuses the vestry of plotting an illicit transfer to another diocese. May 3: In a letter to the parish, Bp. Warner continues to undermine the vestry's legitimacy. He reveals that vestry members were re-elected but accuses them of disloyalty, barring them from meeting until his handpicked interim rector arrives. "His contract is now signed." Diocese of the Mid-Atlantic Anglican Church in North America May 3, 2025 Dear Brothers and Sisters of Incarnation Anglican Church, I want to thank those of you who joined me for the emergency congregational meeting on Wednesday. It was an important first step toward healing the confusion, division, and secrecy that have affected this wonderful community. IAC is a young congregation, still growing into the rhythms and practices of our Anglican tradition and polity, and you have experienced leadership transitions over the last five years, which have contributed to some of the challenges that came to light on Sunday. These things do happen in churches, and when they do, we are called to reorient ourselves to Jesus Christ—His love, His truth, and the guidance of the Holy Spirit. It was good to be with you, to begin unpacking the backstory and timeline of your church, and to name the challenges you now face. Conflict is often uncomfortable, but when engaged through the lens of our life in Christ—with direct communication, repentance, and faith—it can become an opportunity for growth and renewal. Wednesday’s meeting was a hopeful and necessary beginning in that direction. I also want to report on the results of last Sunday’s election of Vestry members. While there were some irregularities in how the meeting was conducted and in the delay in counting the vote, and there was also tension and uncharitable actions on the part of multiple people, it is my judgment, after consultation with the Diocesan Chancellor, that the meeting and the vote were valid.  Your bylaws state that a Vestry member must receive a simple majority of the members present at the congregational meeting. While there are more than 80 members at Incarnation, only 33 were present, which means a minimum of 17 votes to be elected. All four individuals received more than the minimum votes and are therefore duly elected (yes votes ranged 25–27). That said, there are important issues that must be addressed to ensure that the Vestry functions in a way that aligns with the bylaws of Incarnation, and the Canons of the Diocese of the Mid-Atlantic and the ACNA. Therefore, I do not want the Vestry to meet formally or informally until after the Rev. [REDACTED] begins his ministry as Interim Rector and calls the Vestry together. His contract is now signed and his first Sunday will be May 11. Once in place, he will guide the Vestry in bringing its membership and election procedures into conformity with the proper norms. Finally, I must share that the Vestry’s relationship with me, your Bishop, is currently impaired. As Anglicans we know that Christ is the Head of the Church. The Archbishop of the ACNA, the Most Reverend Steve Wood, is first among equals within the College of Bishops. The Bishop of a Diocese (in DOMA, it’s me) is the spiritual authority, under Christ and within the College of Bishops, over the churches and clergy of his Diocese. Mistrust and division have taken root. Two Vestry members resigned in frustration following Sunday’s chaotic meeting. Another has offered resignation. Some have struggled to honor Fr. Justin’s resignation, even though his designated ecclesial authority as Priest-in-Charge was formally removed as of the end of January. Others have initiated conversations with a Bishop through a priest from another Diocese about departing DOMA. These actions are deeply concerning and out of step with Anglican polity and the agreements under which Incarnation, DOMA, and the ACNA operate. I have spoken with Bishops Breedlove, Hawkins, and Jones. We are united that Incarnation is a church of the Diocese of the Mid-Atlantic under my authority as the rightfully elected Diocesan Bishop and no conversation about changing dioceses can begin or occur apart from my consent per the Canons of the ACNA. Compounding this, only one member of the Vestry attended the emergency congregational meeting I called to help the congregation speak truth to one another and to begin the healing process—further straining trust between the Vestry and Diocesan leadership. These matters will be addressed in due course, and I remain hopeful that trust can be restored. This will be more fruitful once the Interim Rector is in place and able to lead alongside me. Please know that I care for you deeply and that you are continually in my prayers, as well as in the prayers of Canons Jim, Mary, and Tuck—all of whom have served you this year and came to show their support for you at the emergency meeting this week. There is a good and godly future ahead for IAC. This will come as we seek the Lord together. In the meantime, pray. Hold fast to what is good. Practice the love you have for one another by resisting gossip and speaking the truth in love. Repent to those whom you’ve hurt. With love for you in Christ,  Chris S. Warner The Rt. Rev. Chris S. Warner The Rt. Rev. Christopher S. Warner, Bishop May 7: The new interim rector is announced in the parish newsletter. He has an extensive history of having worked under Bp. Warner, having served 9 years as his assistant at St. Christopher Conference Center in Charleston, SC. He will travel back and forth between IAC and SC. May 28: The vestry sends a letter to the archbishop and DOMA's standing committee signed unanimously by the vestry & search committee, outlining 8 charges of episcopal misconduct and spiritual abuse by Bp. Warner. The letter is personally received by Archbishop Steve Wood. Diocese of the Mid-Atlantic Anglican Church in North America June 5, 2025 To the Vestry and People of Incarnation Anglican Church (IAC) Incarnation Anglican Church 4900 Mooretown Rd Williamsburg, VA 23188 Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ, Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. I write to you, as your Bishop, mindful of the challenges that Incarnation has experienced in recent months—a time marked by uncertainty and disruption. In such moments, we are called anew to seek the presence of Christ among us: the One who calms the storm, heals the brokenhearted, and calls His Church to unity in love and truth. At present, there is tension between members of the church, between the vestry and the staff, and between the vestry and my office. Recently, and in accord with my responsibility and prerogative as Bishop, I called an emergency meeting of the congregation on April 30, following the disrupted vestry election that occurred on April 27. My goal was to foster discussion, to be open about the tensions that had developed, and to do so in the context of community. I called the meeting because I was baffled by the notification I received that two vestry members had resigned, and one of them did so via a text message to me. Of the remaining vestry members, regrettably, only the Junior Warden attended that gathering. During that event, the parishioners present participated in Evening Prayer, some publicly repented of their words or actions from previous weeks—including at the vestry election—and we talked about ways to move forward as a congregation. I offered a history of the past two years, and we discussed some of the complexities around leadership that had contributed to the confusion and challenges we now face. For many attendees, this information was new and surprising. It was not meant to disparage anyone, though I have been told after the fact that some who weren’t actually at the meeting took it as such. No one has called me directly. The evening seemed to be productive and charitable for those who attended. After the meeting, the one vestry member who did attend freely offered me his resignation if it would help the church. I asked him to wait, telling him that I would consider it and follow up with him after I had time to pray and consult with the Diocesan Chancellor. Because the April 27 vestry election vote had never been counted, there was also some question as to the validity of the election. I was given the ballots and proceeded to consult with the Chancellor in the days ahead. Together we determined that the vestry election was viable. However, at that point in time, we were also unclear as to whether there even was a vestry other than the Treasurer and the Junior Warden. On May 1, attempting to bring pastoral stability to the congregation, I installed the Reverend [REDACTED] as the Interim Rector of IAC. In this role he serves as the pastoral leader with all the responsibilities of priest-in-charge, as well as the express goal of helping the church prepare for the next full-time and permanent Rector whom the vestry is tasked to call with my approval as Bishop. Rev. [REDACTED] has signed an employment agreement and operates, as all Anglican clergy do, under the ecclesial authority of the Diocesan Bishop. Rev. [REDACTED] is a priest in good standing in the Anglican Diocese of South Carolina but has been licensed by me to serve in the Diocese of the Mid-Atlantic. After having searched for several months to find IAC a clergy person within DOMA, I had come up empty. Because we are a new diocese, we simply don’t have a “deep bench” when it comes to extra clergy. Thus, after prayer, I asked Rev. [REDACTED] to serve in this capacity. I am delighted that he agreed to do so. He has already made a wonderful difference in bringing peace and stability to this church community. Rev. [REDACTED] brings pastoral experience and spiritual maturity, but also a heart for reconciliation and a steady presence that will serve you well during this season of transition. As Interim Rector, his ministry will be to walk alongside you: listening, healing, leading worship, overseeing, and working with a vestry to prepare the ground for a faithful and hopeful future. A couple of weeks ago I was told that the remaining vestry had notified Rev. [REDACTED] of their intention to step down, “for the good of the church,” and to do so in a non-destructive way. As such, Rev. [REDACTED] sought potential names from the few remaining vestry members and others who could serve as a temporary vestry until such time that a new vestry election can be called. Four people indicated their willingness to serve in this temporary capacity. This seemed right and good to me, as well as peaceable and holy. Sadly, I was notified last week that the vestry members rescinded their resignations and no longer intend to step down. Additionally, they sent a letter to the Standing Committee of the Diocese, with copies to the Archbishop and others in the ACNA, complaining of my conduct as bishop. At no time have they sought me out or communicated with me directly. This has been the cause of the recent delays in communication, and it means the search process for a permanent Rector will be on hold until we get these matters sorted out. My communicated hope was that we could get a new Rector in place by the end of the summer for the sake of the church and because that’s a good time for clergy with families to move. This time frame seems unlikely now. The next thing that will occur is a… Jun 10: With mounting pressure from Bp. Warner, the vestry again pleads with DOMA’s standing committee and the archbishop's office for relief. They offer no action, only encouragement to attend the Jun 11 meeting. With no diocesan & provincial support, the entire vestry resigns. Diocese of the Mid-Atlantic Anglican Church in North America June 10, 2025 To: Senior Warden Incarnation Anglican Church, Williamsburg Via email Dear [Name Redacted], Thank you for your letter to the Standing Committee, and your subsequent emails to me. Please be assured that we are praying for you, for the vestry, and for the congregation at Incarnation Anglican Church, and for our Bishop. As I previously informed you, the DOMA Standing Committee met last night to review the current situation at Incarnation Anglican (of which Bishop Warner had already made us aware), to pray, and to consider our recommendations for next steps. It is clear to us that there is a great deal of confusion and uncertainty surrounding the current situation at Incarnation Anglican. To cite one example, there seems to be a lack of clarity as to who is or is not on the current vestry, given some apparent resignations or offers to resign. In this environment, we believe that Bishop Warner’s offer to meet with members of the congregation who would like to meet with him is both timely and appropriate. In fact, we believe that face-to-face communication is almost always the best way to overcome misunderstandings among Christians. To that end, we urge you and other members of the leadership of the congregation to attend the meeting and to participate fully in the conversations and prayers. We believe that this step is the best way to find a path forward that honors God and that assures that all concerned parties are heard. We will hold you and Bishop Warner in prayer during the meeting. In Christ, Jim Oakes Vice-Chair, Standing Committee Jun 11: A "transitional vestry" is quickly appointed. Members of DOMA’s standing committee join Bp. Warner at the Jun 11 parish meeting. They discuss the allegations in the misconduct report but state that they do not intend to investigate the charges or take any further action. For the past couple of weeks I have worked to identify and ask some members of IAC to prayerfully consider serving on the temporary/transitional vestry. This search was done quietly to avoid over-complicating the process and causing more division. Much thought, care, and prayer went into how this process was conducted, and to ensure that the process was in line with the Bylaws of IAC and the Canons of the Diocese of the Mid-Atlantic. Four individuals were identified and agreed to serve, and last night the transition began at our regularly scheduled vestry meeting. Because the bylaws do not anticipate a group resignation from the vestry, it took multiple votes and extra time to complete the necessary steps. This morning the process was completed. Jun 19: After a former vestry member shares the misconduct report with the parish, Bp. Warner’s handpicked interim responds on Jun 19 by sharing the names of signatories with the parish, publicly accusing them of sin for not following the pattern of reconciliation in Matthew 18. Subject:  Letter of Complaint From:  William Eastman Date:  6/14/2025, 9:55 PM To:  undisclosed-recipients Over the past several weeks, you may have heard references from Bishop Warner and others to a letter the former vestry submitted to the Standing Committee of our diocese and to Archbishop Wood. This letter, dated May 28, raised serious concerns about the conduct and integrity of Bishop Chris Warner. While we had hoped that diocesan and provincial processes would be able to address these concerns quietly and faithfully, parts of our letter have now been described by the bishop publicly in parish communications and meetings, without the letter itself being shared. However, in the interest of transparency and to prevent further speculation or misunderstanding, it is now necessary to share the May 28 letter with you directly, so that you can see clearly the matters that led to mounting pressure on the vestry to step aside. You will find it attached. We understand that some have asked why we did not share these concerns with the congregation sooner. Our desire was to keep the congregation united, not divided. It was not until the bishop began pressuring the vestry—particularly on the topic of women’s ordination—that we realized how deeply these matters were affecting parish life. Also, the vestry was hesitant to share the information because we didn’t want a trial by gossip, rather an investigation carried out by a neutral third party so everyone was protected. From the beginning, we sought to follow the Church’s canonical processes. We submitted our request to the Standing Committee and the Archbishop’s Office, trusting they would provide next steps. We were grateful that Archbishop Wood personally received our letter. Then, in the face of continued escalating public pressure from Bishop Warner invalidating the vestry’s authority, we followed up again to the Standing Committee and Archbishop’s Office with a plea for guidance. They responded without offering any substantive action or relief. This led all vestry members to succumb to the mounting pressure from the bishop to resign. As of today, no meaningful steps have been communicated to us—either by the diocese or the province—to formally address these allegations, provide relief, or initiate an impartial investigation. We continue to pray that leaders in the Church will act with pastoral courage so that an investigation will be allowed to run its course prayerfully and without obstruction. Light dispels darkness. Our hope is for true reconciliation, healing, and unity between all parties. Healing requires the truth to be named. Without truth, there can be no trust. And without trust, reconciliation cannot be real. More importantly, our prayer is that bringing these concerns into the light may not only help our church heal and be restored, but may also protect other congregations facing similar misuses of episcopal authority. The Church does not ultimately belong to any one of us: not to a vestry, not to a rector, not to a bishop, and not even to an archbishop. When authority in the Church is exercised without accountability, and when concerns are silenced rather than addressed, it strikes at the very heart of the Church’s witness to the Gospel of our crucified and risen Lord Jesus Christ, who alone is the true and eternal Head of the Church. We are praying for you, for your new vestry, and for healing and peace. (end of email) Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ, Grace and peace to you. I write to you with a heavy heart, in response to a recent email that was sent by a former vestry member to the entire congregation this past Saturday evening, disclosing grievances against individuals in our church that are contained in the grievance letter that the former vestry has made against our Bishop. The message and the letter understandably caused concern, confusion, and pain among many in our church family. Because I have heard that not everyone at church has received the email sent on Saturday night, I regretfully need to provide the email and the letter so that all may know the context of my comments made this past Sunday and of this present email. Both the letter with the complete signature page and the Saturday night email are attached to this email. DOMA Whistleblower Jul 6 The response from DOMA's standing committee, and the silence from Archbishop Steve Wood of  @the_ACNA  speaks loud & clear: Spiritual abuse is taken lightly, and investigations into misconduct only exist to be weaponized against ideological opponents. Will this be investigated?

The Five-Year Collaborative Project Will Strengthen Leadership Development Across the Anglican Church in North America December 3, 2025 AMBRIDGE, PA — Trinity Anglican Seminary has received a grant of $9,999,876 from Lilly Endowment Inc. to establish the Anglican Formation Network: Equipping Leaders for Mission. Working in collaboration with the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) and in partnership with several regional formation centers across the province, this five-year initiative will create a comprehensive leadership development ecosystem to strengthen Anglican ministry formation across North America. The Anglican Formation Network addresses a critical need in the ACNA. As one of North America’s fastest-growing Christian denominations, with 13% growth in 2024, the ACNA needs more well-formed clergy and lay leaders than our existing pathways can provide. The grant will enable Trinity to work closely with the ACNA Provincial Office to develop a strong network of strategic partnerships, including The Ridley Institute , The Charles Simeon Institute , Anselm House , The Anglican Center for Theology and Formation , The Anglican Catechist Training School , the Brazos Societies Project , and others. “This grant represents a transformative moment not just for Trinity but for the entire Anglican Church in North America,” said the Very Rev. Cn. Dr. Bryan Hollon, Dean & President of Trinity Anglican Seminary. “We face a wonderful challenge: The ACNA is growing rapidly, drawing young leaders hungry for theological depth and liturgical formation. But our bishops and rectors tell us often that they need more qualified candidates than we can supply. The Anglican Formation Network will multiply our capacity to form excellent leaders while ensuring that Anglican formation—grounded in Scripture, shaped by the Prayer Book, and oriented toward mission—becomes more accessible across our province.” The Anglican Formation Network addresses the need for more robust leadership development through three strategic initiatives: first, by cultivating a robust vocational discernment and leadership pipeline infrastructure; second, by integrating residential seminary education with practical church-based ministry experience; and third, by developing consistent leadership formation standards across the ACNA. “Identifying and developing the next generation of Anglican leaders is the most strategic and valuable investment we can be making in the future of the Anglican Church in North America,” said the Rt. Rev. Julian Dobbs, Dean of the Province. “The opportunity to partner with some of our best training institutions, like Trinity, to provide the deep theological and liturgical formation that Anglican ministry requires provides remarkable hope for how God is strengthening His Church in this time.” The program is being funded through Lilly Endowment’s Pathways for Tomorrow Initiative. This initiative is designed to help theological schools across the United States and Canada as they prioritize and respond to the most pressing challenges they face as they prepare pastoral leaders for Christian congregations both now and into the future. The grant to Trinity Anglican Seminary is one of 45 that was approved in this competitive round of funding to support theological schools as they lead large-scale collaborations with other seminaries, colleges and universities, and other church-related organizations. Lilly Endowment launched the Pathways for Tomorrow Initiative in 2021. Since then, it has provided grants totaling more than $700 million to support 163 theological schools in efforts to strengthen their own educational and financial capacities and to assist 61 schools in developing large-scale collaborative endeavors. Parishes and dioceses interested in partnering with the Anglican Formation Network or learning more about fellowship programs, church-based pathways, and formation opportunities are invited to contact Allyson Martin, Executive Assistant to the Dean & President, at amartin@tas.edu . About Trinity Anglican Seminary Trinity Anglican Seminary, located in Ambridge, Pennsylvania, is the flagship seminary of the Anglican Church in North America. Founded in 1975, Trinity forms biblically faithful Christian leaders through a residential community oriented around prayer, worship, study, and formation in the Anglican way. Trinity trains students in the 2019 Book of Common Prayer and provides a formation fully aligned with the ACNA’s vision and standards. The seminary maintains strong connections with global Anglicans through GAFCON (Global Anglican Future Conference) and the Global South Fellowship of Anglicans. Its student body includes residential students, online learners, and international students from Africa, Asia, Latin America, Australia, and Europe. For more information, visit www.tas.edu . About the Anglican Church in North America The Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) unites 28 dioceses comprising approximately 1,000 congregations and 130,000 members across the United States, Canada, and Mexico. As part of the global Anglican Communion, the ACNA is committed to biblical faithfulness, missionary zeal, and church planting. The province reported 13% growth in Average Sunday Attendance (ASA) in 2024, making it one of the fastest-growing Christian denominations in North America. For more information, visit www.anglicanchurch.net . About Lilly Endowment Inc. Lilly Endowment Inc. is a private foundation created in 1937 by J.K. Lilly Sr. and his sons Eli and J.K. Jr. through gifts of stock in their pharmaceutical business, Eli Lilly and Company. While those gifts remain the financial bedrock of the Endowment, it is a separate entity from the company, with a distinct governing board, staff and location. In keeping with the founders' wishes, the Endowment supports the causes of community development, education and religion and maintains a special commitment to its hometown, Indianapolis, and home state, Indiana. A principal aim of the Endowment's religion grantmaking is to deepen and enrich the lives of Christians in the United States, primarily by seeking out and supporting efforts that enhance the vitality of congregations and strengthen the pastoral and lay leadership of Christian communities. The Endowment also seeks to improve public understanding of religion and lift up in fair, accurate and balanced ways the roles that people of all faiths and various religious communities play in the United States and around the globe. ### Media Contact: Christina Thornburg Director of Development Projects Email: christina.thornburg@tas.edu Phone: 724.385.8026 www.tas.edu