PRESS RELEASE 3rd October 2025   The Anglican Network in Europe (ANiE) notes the appointment of Dame Sarah Mullally as the new Archbishop of Canterbury. ANiE exists as an Anglican jurisdiction separate from the Canterbury structures, and we look to the global leadership of Gafcon for spiritual vision and oversight.   Gafcon has made a clear statement about the appointment which can be found on their website. The statement explains why the large majority of the Anglican Communion will not be able to work with Dame Sarah in her new role because of her support for “unbiblical and revisionist teachings regarding marriage and sexual morality”, and more broadly, the office of the Archbishop of Canterbury’s track record of departure from key aspects of historic Christian doctrine and ethics.   The appointment demonstrates the imposition of the worldview of elites from the Western world rather than a desire to engage with and unite faithful Anglicans from different cultures for the sake of gospel mission.   Anglican churches, Dioceses and Provinces around the world which are growing and thriving are those which adhere to traditional Christian teaching. There are many such congregations which remain in the Church of England. Our prayers and support are with them as they decide what to do in the face of this appointment. As a response to the increasing alignment of church leaders and structures in the West with secularised theologies and policies, Gafcon has set up new Anglican jurisdictions outside Canterbury structures. One of these is ANiE, whose congregations provide an alternative, safe home for bible-based Anglicans, and an opportunity to start new churches where people are.   END

The Rev. Dr. Ronald Moore Oct 7, 2025   When the Church of England recently enthroned a woman as Archbishop of Canterbury, the media heralded it as a triumph of progress and equality. The ecclesiastical establishment congratulated itself for “reflecting the times.” Yet beneath the fanfare lies a grim theological reality: in crossing this line, Anglicanism has not merely altered its customs or broadened its leadership — it has ruptured the very fabric of apostolic continuity.   This is not hyperbole. The issue is not about preference, tradition, or even ecclesiastical polity. It is about sacramental reality — the sinew and lifeblood of the Church’s continuity with Christ and His Apostles. To ordain a woman as bishop is not simply to make a controversial appointment; it is to sever the line of apostolic succession itself, leaving the Church structurally maimed and sacramentally hollow.   I. Apostolic Succession: More Than a Lineage Apostolic succession is one of the most misunderstood doctrines in the Christian faith. In the popular imagination it is often reduced to a kind of institutional pedigree — a chain of hands laid upon heads stretching back to Peter and Paul. While this visible continuity is indeed part of it, the deeper reality is far more profound.   Apostolic succession is not merely about who ordained whom; it is about what is being transmitted. The episcopate is not a managerial office but a sacramental one. Through the laying on of hands by a validly consecrated bishop, the grace and authority entrusted by Christ to the Apostles is perpetuated in the Church. It is this succession that preserves the Church’s sacramental life, ensures the valid celebration of the Eucharist, and safeguards the deposit of faith.   St. Irenaeus, writing in the second century, put it plainly: “It is within the power of all, therefore, in every Church, who may wish to see the truth, to contemplate clearly the tradition of the Apostles manifested throughout the whole world; and we are in a position to reckon up those who were by the Apostles instituted bishops in the Churches, and to demonstrate the succession of these men to our own times” (Against Heresies III.3.1). The continuity of that line is not ceremonial — it is constitutive of the Church’s very being.   II. In Persona Christi: The Christological Foundation of Holy Orders The episcopate, and indeed the priesthood, is not a functional role that anyone may assume. It is a sacramental participation in the headship of Christ. A bishop does not simply represent the Church to the world; he represents Christ to the Church. The language of the Fathers is consistent and unwavering: the bishop is typos Christou — an icon or living image of Christ the High Priest.   This is why the Church has always insisted on the maleness of the ordained minister. Christ was not incarnate as generic humanity but as a man — not because masculinity is superior, but because in the divine economy of salvation, His male humanity is integral to His identity as the Bridegroom who lays down His life for the Bride. The nuptial mystery between Christ and His Church is inscribed in the very structure of the sacrament of Holy Orders.   St. John Chrysostom observed: “The priest stands bringing down, not fire from heaven, but the Holy Spirit. He touches the Lord of all things, and with his tongue he draws down grace from heaven” (On the Priesthood III.4). This work is not symbolic but sacramental — a participation in Christ’s own priesthood. If the sacrament is to be valid, the sign must conform to the reality it conveys. Matter and form must align. And here the Church has always understood that the matter of Holy Orders is a baptized male, precisely because the sacrament signifies Christ the Bridegroom acting for and toward His Bride.   III. Invalid Matter, Broken Sacrament All sacraments require three things: proper form, proper matter, and proper intent. If any of these is absent, the sacrament does not merely become illicit or irregular — it becomes invalid. This is not an opinion but a settled principle of sacramental theology taught by East and West alike since the earliest centuries.   For Holy Orders, the form is the prayer of consecration, the intent is to ordain a minister of Christ’s Church, and the matter is a baptized male. Remove any of these and there is no sacrament. Thus, when a woman is presented for ordination, the Church does not “ordain a female priest” — it simply performs a ritual that has no sacramental effect. The outward ceremony may look the same, but no priesthood is conferred because the essential conditions are not met.   The implications are catastrophic. A woman “bishop” cannot validly ordain priests or consecrate bishops, because she herself does not possess the sacramental character of episcopacy. Those she “ordains” are not priests; those they “ordain” are not bishops. The chain of apostolic succession is not merely bent — it is broken. The visible structure may remain, but it becomes an empty shell, like a lamp disconnected from its source of light.   IV. The Patristic and Conciliar Consensus The universal Church has never wavered on this point. Every ecumenical council, from Nicaea to Chalcedon and beyond, assumed without question the maleness of the episcopate and priesthood. Canon 19 of Nicaea (325) explicitly excludes women who acted as “deaconesses” from any participation in the sacramental ministry, clarifying that they “are to be counted among the laity.”   The Fathers, too, are unanimous. Tertullian scorned the notion of women assuming clerical functions: “It is not permitted for a woman to speak in the Church, nor to teach, nor to baptize, nor to offer, nor to claim for herself any masculine function” (On the Veiling of Virgins 9). St. Epiphanius, writing against heresies, declared: “Never was a woman a priest among Christians” (Panarion 79.3). This unbroken consensus is not a matter of cultural conditioning but of fidelity to the apostolic deposit.   V. Apostolic Succession and Ecclesial Identity The Church is not merely a voluntary society of believers. She is the mystical Body of Christ, animated by the Holy Spirit and structured by divine ordinance. Apostolic succession is not an optional adornment to that structure; it is its backbone. It is what binds the visible Church to the apostolic Church, ensuring that the faith once delivered to the saints is handed on not only in word but in sacrament and authority.   Without valid succession, the Church’s sacramental life collapses. The Eucharist, celebrated by one not truly ordained, is not the Eucharist. Absolution given by one without priestly authority is not absolution. Confirmation conferred by one who is not a bishop is not confirmation. What remains is not the Church Catholic but a simulacrum — a body with the form of religion but none of its sacramental substance.   This is precisely why Rome declared Anglican orders “absolutely null and utterly void” in Apostolicae Curae (1896) — not out of spite, but because defects in form and intent had rendered the succession doubtful. With the introduction of women’s ordination, that doubt becomes certainty. It is no longer possible to speak of a valid sacramental ministry in a church that ordains women as bishops. Apostolic succession there has not merely been questioned — it has ceased.   VI. A Church Divided Against Herself Some attempt to sidestep this conclusion by claiming that apostolic succession is a matter of the Church’s recognition rather than sacramental fact — that if the Church declares a woman bishop, she is one. But this is ecclesial positivism masquerading as theology. The Church is the steward, not the master, of the sacraments. She cannot make what God has not given. As St. Augustine said of the Church’s authority: “She is the mother, not the mistress, of the sacraments.”   Moreover, such reasoning reduces apostolic succession to a human construct and the episcopate to a political office. It turns the Church into a democracy rather than a divine society. And as history shows, once sacramental reality is subordinated to the spirit of the age, the Church ceases to be the pillar and ground of the truth (1 Timothy 3:15) and becomes instead a mirror reflecting the culture around her.   The result is internal contradiction. A body that claims communion with the apostolic Church while abandoning the conditions of apostolic succession is like a tree severed from its roots. It may appear alive for a time, but it is already dying. And unless grafted back into the living trunk, it will wither.   VII. The Cost of Fidelity — and the Call to Return None of this is easy to say. It would be more comfortable to treat the ordination of women as a secondary matter — a difference of opinion among Christians of good will. But to do so would be dishonest. The stakes are nothing less than the Church’s sacramental identity and continuity with the apostolic faith.   The solution is not arrogance or triumphalism but repentance. The path back is not through innovation but through obedience. The Church cannot heal herself by doubling down on disobedience; she must return to the order God has established. Only then will the broken line of succession be mended and the full sacramental life of the Church restored.   The temptation to conform to the world is ancient. It is the same temptation that led Israel to demand a king “like all the nations” (1 Samuel 8:5), and the same impulse that prompted the Galatians to turn back to “the weak and beggarly elements” (Galatians 4:9). Yet the Church does not exist to reflect the world’s values; she exists to bear witness to the truth that judges the world. And that truth is not ours to redefine.   Faithfulness, Not Fashion The enthronement of a female Archbishop of Canterbury is being hailed as a sign of progress, but it is in fact a sign of rupture. It is the outward expression of an inward schism — a church that has chosen the applause of the age over fidelity to the apostolic deposit. In so doing, it has broken the line that binds it to the Apostles, and with that break comes the collapse of sacramental assurance.   The Church does not belong to us. Her sacraments, her ministry, her order are not human inventions to be reshaped according to the mood of the times. They are divine gifts entrusted to us in fragile vessels. Our task is not to innovate but to guard, not to adapt but to hand on.   The line that stretches from the Upper Room through Antioch, Rome, Alexandria, and Canterbury is not a chain of human tradition — it is the living artery of grace. To cut it is not to evolve; it is to die. And if the Church would live again, she must return — humbly, faithfully, obediently — to the order her Lord Himself ordained.   END

By the Rev. Dr. Ronald Moore October 7, 2025   The Church in the West is dying not because God has grown weak, nor because the gospel has lost its power, but because we have turned the living, acting God into a tame abstraction — and our faith into a spectator sport. We speak of Him as if He were an idea to be admired, a concept to be discussed, a memory to be venerated. But He is none of those things. Our God is a verb. He  creates . He  commands . He  calls . He  judges . He  redeems . He  restores . He  returns . Every page of Scripture is an action, and every revelation is movement. And yet we, His people — those who claim to follow the living Christ — have reduced our response to sitting quietly in a pew once a week, consuming spiritual content, and calling it “faith.” We were never meant to be spectators. And the world is burning while the Church watches from the bleachers. The Curse of Convenience In the early Church, there was one Body, one faith, one baptism. If you walked away from the Church, you walked away from the faith. Today, we have a buffet. If First Baptist offends you, try Tate Baptist. If the Baptists in general are too much, there’s a Presbyterian church down the street. And if they preach anything uncomfortable, there’s always a non-denominational place with better coffee and a rock band. We have turned the Bride of Christ into a marketplace — and the customer is always right. The result is predictable: no accountability, no discipline, no commitment. A Christianity that costs nothing, demands nothing, and therefore  means  nothing. The first believers risked their lives to gather. We’ll change churches because the sermon went five minutes too long. If faith is a noun — a label we wear, a box we check — then of course we drift to wherever it feels easiest. But if faith is a verb — a costly, daily act of obedience — then we will stay, endure, and grow even when it hurts. Especially when it hurts. The Entertainment Gospel Too many pulpits have traded the Word of God for a weekly dose of soothing affirmation. We no longer preach repentance because it might offend. We no longer call sin by its name because it might empty the pews. We avoid the Cross because it might interrupt someone’s brunch plans. But the apostles did not die to deliver motivational speeches. They did not endure imprisonment and martyrdom to proclaim a gospel of self-esteem. They thundered the truth of a holy God before kings and mobs alike — and they did so knowing it might cost them everything. Christ did not say, “Come and be comfortable.” He said,  “If anyone desires to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow Me.”  (Luke 9:23, NKJV) The verbs are the point:  deny .  Take up .  Follow . A Christianity without verbs is no Christianity at all — it is a hollow shell dressed in religious language. The Cost of Action The Church we dream of — the one that cares for its members, shapes its neighborhoods, raises up saints and missionaries — will never exist while Christians treat faith as a hobby. It will only come when we accept that discipleship is work. It means showing up when it’s inconvenient.It means serving people who may never thank you.It means sacrificing money, time, and comfort.It means speaking truth when silence would be easier. And yes — it means staying in a congregation even when someone wounds your pride, because the Church is not a club designed to please you. It is a crucible designed to sanctify you. If our faith is alive, it will  act . If it acts, it will  cost . And if it costs, it will  change us . Clergy: The Fire Must Begin in the Pulpit If the sheep are weak, it is because the shepherds have grown timid. If the people are passive, it is because the preachers have been polite. We do not need clever talks. We need prophets again — men and women who will stand in pulpits and declare, “Thus says the Lord,” no matter the consequences. The Church needs sermons that wound our pride so that grace can heal our souls. We need pastors willing to lose members, donors, and even positions rather than compromise the truth. The Church does not need to be popular. It needs to be  holy . And holiness does not come from comfort — it comes from the consuming fire of God. A Verb-Faith Changes the World The world is not hungry for another church service. It is starving for a people who live as if God is real — as if the gospel is true — as if eternity is near. When Christians act, things change: orphans are adopted, widows are cared for, schools are built, prisons are visited, slaves are freed, and nations are transformed. When Christians sit passively, the opposite happens: families crumble, injustice thrives, and evil advances unopposed. We do not overcome darkness by analyzing it. We overcome it by  lighting lamps . We do not silence lies by lamenting them. We silence them by  proclaiming truth . If the Church rediscovered this — if we stopped making faith a noun and started living it as a verb — the decline of Western Christianity would end almost overnight. We would see conversions not because we marketed Jesus better, but because we  embodied  Him more faithfully. A Final Word of Thunder The lukewarm church nauseates the Lord (Revelation 3:16). That is not my opinion; it is His Word. If that rebuke stings, it is meant to. We have been complacent long enough. We have mistaken safety for faithfulness, numbers for fruit, and busyness for mission. Our God  acts  — and if we are His people, so must we. So, Church, stop trying to make Christianity comfortable. Stop searching for sermons that never cut, and churches that never challenge. Stop consuming faith as if it were entertainment. Take up your cross. Deny yourself. Follow Him. Do not  call  yourself a Christian.  Be  one. Our God is a verb. Our faith must be as well.

Dr. Titus Chung   PRESS RELEASE   The Province of the Anglican Church in South East Asia   5 October 2025   Your brothers and sisters in Christ,   The Lord be with you!   Recent announcement of the appointment of the Rt. Rev'd Dame Sarah Mullally as the 106th Archbishop of Canterbury has been subject of much attention and response. We continue to pray for the Church of England and the See of Canterbury as Bishop Sarah takes on this role.   As a Province we must express our unease and reservation over her appointment. Bishop Sarah chaired the Living in Love and Faith project in the Church of England which led to the decision in 2023 to allow the blessing of same-sex marriages. She described the decision as “[a] moment of hope.”   This is a departure and a total misalignment from what Scripture teaches regarding marriage and sexuality. It is also a departure from traditional Anglican orthodoxy. Article 20 of the 39 Articles of Religion states that “it is not lawful for the Church to ordain anything that is contrary to God's Word written.” On one hand, from a Provincial perspective, the appointment of Bishop Sarah does not affect us substantively because each province is autonomous. At the same time, we cannot deny that the Archbishop of Canterbury has played a role of significant influence in the history of the Anglican Communion. As such, the appointment of an Archbishop of Canterbury who, in the course of her work, was instrumental in the unacceptable compromise of Scripture places us in a challenging and invidious position. With respect, under God's overarching presidency, we will not be able to recognize her as the “first amongst equals,” both in terms of leadership and influence within the Global Anglican Communion.   We had earlier prayed in hope that the next appointee of the Archbishop Canterbury would be a candidate who upholds Scripture and the same God-given principles of orthodox faith that we practice and affirm in our Province. The failure to do so was a missed opportunity for the Global Anglican Communion to find common cause and reunite through affirmation of traditional teachings of God's Word.   We recognize that many members of our Dioceses are understandably concerned about the appointment and the state of the Anglican Communion. As a Province we are well-versed and committed to the principles that we stand for, and we urge you to join us in prayer for God's truth and purpose to ultimately prevail. May He grant us discernment and use us to shine forth His light in a time of darkness. Glory be to God!   With every blessing in Christ, ++Titus Singapore The Most Revd Dr. Titus Chung Bishop of Singapore Primate of the Province of the Anglican Church in South East Asia

Bishop Derek Jones   By David W. Virtue, DD www.virtueonline.org October 5, 2025   It’s getting downright nasty and legal. ACNA bishops led by Bishop Phil Ashey contend that the charges of misconduct (but not of a sexual nature) laid at the feet of Bishop Derek Jones of the Special Jurisdiction of the Armed Forces and Chaplaincy (SJAFC) are grounds for an inhibition.   The complaints include allegations of ecclesiastical power abuse, wrongful use of disciplinary processes, backdating or fabrication of church documents, interference with external employment opportunities, wrongful release of a priest from orders, and infliction of financial, emotional, and psychological stress upon persons in Jones' care.   ACNA Archbishop Steve Wood issued a Godly Admonition to Jones on September 12, requiring him to comply with an investigation into his conduct.  However, Jones refused to comply with the directive and fought back declaring the JAFC was disaffiliating from the ACNA.   Wood and his fellow bishops promptly announced a vacancy in the office of the Bishop for the SJAFC and elected the Rt. Rev. Jerome R. Cayangyang, Captain, Chaplain Corps, USN, as bishop for the Armed forces jurisdiction. Ashey said Bishop Jones had no authority under the Constitution and Canons of the ACNA to declare that all ACNA Chaplains in the SJAFC are no longer a part of the ACNA. Period.   Jones laid out his case refuting the charges in a story which you  can read here: https://www.virtueonline.org/post/jafc-bishop-refutes-charges-of-ecclesiastical-power-abuse   The Jurisdiction of the Armed Forces and Chaplaincy (JAFC) issued a press release claiming 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 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.   Jones then responded to the disaffiliation and charges by Wood, hiring a law firm who delivered a “cease and desist” letter to Wood and his fellow bishops including former ACNA Archbishop Robert Duncan and REC Bishop Ray Sutton.   The letter accused the ACNA bishops of misleading government agencies, military services, chaplains under the supervision of the Jurisdiction and the general public into believing that the Anglican Church in North America (“ACNA”) has any ecclesiastical or practical right of supervision over the Jurisdiction or its chaplaincy program.   The lawyers accused ACNA of misusing and misappropriating the Jurisdiction’s trademarked terms, accusing them of using “defamatory remarks about the Jurisdiction and Jones himself.”   They then told Wood to refrain from making further false and defamatory or disparaging statements and to remove all disparaging materials from their websites and other publications including without limitation your publication.”   “Your malicious actions have interfered and are continuing to interfere with the Jurisdiction's crucial relationships with the United States Government and with the Jurisdiction's relationships with the many chaplains who are serving those forces and agencies. You have written to the chaplains that report to the Jurisdiction to mislead them into believing that you have replaced Bishop Jones and assumed the Jurisdiction's functions. Your interference threatens the chaplains’ assignments and the Jurisdiction’s core functions. Your disparagement has already damaged important relationships of the Jurisdiction and Bishop Jones, as you intended.”   The lawyers brought the hammer down on the ACNA and said that no ecclesiastical relationship exists between the ACNA and the Jurisdiction and Bishop Jones. “You have no legally cognizable basis for asserting any entitlement or exercise jurisdiction or discipline over either of them.”   “The Jurisdiction has essential relationships that are not yours to assume by deception or insinuation. Freedom of Religion provides no protection for identity theft.”   Jones has his defenders. Bishop Michael R. Williams a JAFC bishop, wrote VOL and said Bishop Derek Jones is neither a "scoundrel" nor a "villain"; and “I take profound offense at such an unfair and ill-founded characterization. I deem such a characterization of Bishop Derek to be an appalling spiritual abuse of the highest order from a person in ecclesiastical power, a presumptive judgement upon our beloved Bishop without due process; and, given what I am witnessing.”   It is anybody’s guess how this will play out, but the optics are bad, given that ACNA is embroiled in another unseemly canonical trial with another ACNA bishop over the mishandling of sexual abuse allegations.   END

By Chuck Collins www.virtueonline.org October 5, 2025   This is good news! For American Anglicans (ACNA), orthodox Episcopalians, and the majority of Anglicans around the world, the last ties are cut with the Archbishops of Canterbury who have been recalcitrant adulterous partners. They have done this to themselves by refusing to leave their reformist lovers and return the church to its theological grounding: the teaching of Holy Scripture as our primary authority as upheld and defined by Anglican’s historic formularies. These honorary heads of the Church of England have been unwilling to lead the Anglican Communion well, either by refusing to face head-on the thorny theological issues that threaten the Communion with any biblical conviction, or by outright calling evil good and good evil.   In recent years it has become popular by some to define themselves in terms of their relationship to the Archbishop of Canterbury. Years ago, my Episcopalian bishop told me and a large group gathered at our church that to be “in communion with Canterbury” is more important than maintaining continuity with historic Anglicanism and the teaching of Holy Scripture. In recent years Anglicans have seen the authority of the Archbishop of Canterbury balloon in stature from being the first among equals (among Anglican primates and bishops) to almost pope-like status. This constitutes a stunning shift from a “theological” to an “institutional" understanding of what it means to be Anglican.   With uncanny foresight, the 1948 Lambeth Conference declared: “Former Lambeth Conferences have wisely rejected proposals for a formal primacy of Canterbury... authority which binds the Anglican Communion together is therefore seen to be moral and spiritual, resting on the truth of the Gospel, and on a charity which is patient and willing to defer to the common mind.” The Primates, the titular heads of all the provinces that make up the Anglican Communion, also concerned about the exponential growth of Canterbury’s power and influence, expressed this after their 2005 meeting in Dromantine, Ireland: “We also have further questions concerning the development of the role of the Archbishop of Canterbury, and the Council of Advice. While we welcome the ministry of the Archbishop of Canterbury as that of one who speaks to us as primus inter pares (first among equals) about the realities we face as a Communion, we are cautious of any development which would seem to imply the creation of an international jurisdiction which could override our proper provincial autonomy.”   Even the recently retired Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, spoke of the overstated view of his bishopric: “I think someone recently said that ‘the path to heaven doesn’t necessarily lie through Lambeth.’ I agree entirely. The path to heaven lies solely through Jesus Christ our Savior and the unity he gives, and the only use and integrity of the instruments of unity [including the Archbishop of Canterbury] is when they serve that.”   Seminary professor, Bill Witt, in a essay on this topic, pointed out that there are no references to the See of Canterbury in any of the classical Anglican writings (including the Articles of Religion and the Book of Common Prayer). He concluded that, “If one actually reads Cranmer or Jewel or Hooker et al, it becomes quite clear that (as they broke with Rome) they would have had no hesitation to break with Canterbury should Canterbury break with the doctrines and practices which encapsulate the gospel -- because the identity of Anglicanism does not lie in communion with an historic see, but in the doctrines and practices that adhere to the gospel.”   All Anglicans agree that Canterbury is an historic see and the Archbishop of Canterbury has served as the symbolic head of the Anglican Communion, but to give him the kind of extraordinary authority over the church that he acquired in recent times distorts what Anglicans have historically believed. Anglicans believe that Canterbury’s word is only as good as he upholds God’s Word, and his authority only as strong as he upholds the Anglican heritage. To give our loyalty to an ecclesiastical office is misplaced loyalty. The 2008 Global Anglican Futures Conference (GAFCON), a meeting of biblically orthodox leaders from around the world, got it right when they stated: “While acknowledging the nature of Canterbury as an historic see, we do not accept that Anglican identity is determined necessarily through recognition by the Archbishop of Canterbury.”   Being “Anglican,” therefore, means a theology, a heritage, something we believe - not an artificial church structure that demands our loyalty no matter what. The office of Archbishop of Canterbury is now the adulterous partner who refuses to leave her lover. Our real hope is what the Prayer Book calls “the substance of the faith,” and what the Bible calls “the faith once and for all delivered to the saints.” This, and only this, gives us direction and hope for the future of the Anglican Communion. Gafcon promises us this hopeful future. A chapter of our history is now closed and the baton has been passed on. Thanks be to God for a clear way forward in mission and ministry!   Dean Chuck Collins is an Anglican historian. He lives in Texas.

Bishop Howard Case Dropped by PB. He resigns TEC///Anglican Church of Southern Africa Supports Palestine, Blasts Israel   The concept of substitution lies at the heart of both sin and salvation. For the essence of sin is man substituting himself for God, while the essence of salvation is God substituting himself for man. --- John Stott   The parish communion movement did not appeal solely to a tradition of frequent communion. They claimed to be building also on a primitive Christian tradition valuing communion as the central reality of Christian life.  But in fact, few ancient documents support their claim.  Indeed, if the eucharist was central to the early Christians, it seems inexplicable that Church leaders mentioned it so seldom in the hundreds of treatises and letters that have come down to us. The parish communion movement did not discover a tradition but invented one --- Professor Alan L. Hayes, Wycliffe College, Toronto   The modern Church isn’t being crucified because it’s not preaching the Christ who was. It’s preaching a Christ who pleases. – Rev. Dr. Ronald Moore   If we have seen that St. Peter had no proper supremacy, and that he was not Bishop of Rome; then, the premises being gone, the consequence must fall with them. If St. Peter had no supremacy, it could not be inherited. If he was not Bishop of Rome, the Popes could not inherit from him. – James Clark   Prayer wasn’t our substitute for action; it was our preparation for the difficult work ahead  -- Rabbi Steven Burg   Dear Brothers and Sisters, www.virtueonline.org October 3, 2025   THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND has a new 106 th Archbishop of Canterbury. She is the Bishop of London, the Rt. Rev. Sarah Mullally, 63, a former nurse. A source told VOL that she has little parish experience; it is where the CofE is based. The ABC along with all the bishops is there to support clergy in the parishes! Dame Sarah was former chief nurse for which she got her Damehood. She is another manager with minimal theological training. Mullally was ordained as a deacon in 2001 after theological training at the South East Institute of Theological Education, at the University of Kent. She has no Oxford, Cambridge, Wycliffe Hall, Oak Hill, Ridley Hall, or St. John’s College  education or any reputable seminary training. So that’s the new ABC!   The Global South reacted badly to the news. A GAFCON headline ran:  CANTERBURY APPOINTMENT ABANDONS ANGLICANS. “The Church of England has chosen a leader who will further divide an already split Communion,” said GAFCON chairman The Most Rev. Dr. Laurent Mbanda.   “We had hoped that the Church of England would take this into due consideration as it deliberated over the choice of a new Archbishop of Canterbury and would choose someone who could bring unity to a divided Anglican Communion. Sadly, they have not done so.”   “The majority of the Anglican Communion still believes that the Bible requires a male-only episcopacy. Therefore, her appointment will make it impossible for the Archbishop of Canterbury to serve as a focus of unity within the Communion.”   “More concerning is her failure to uphold her consecration vows. When she was consecrated in 2015, she took an oath to “banish and drive away all strange and erroneous doctrine contrary to God’s Word.” And yet, far from banishing such doctrine, Bishop Mullally has repeatedly promoted unbiblical and revisionist teachings regarding marriage and sexual morality.”   You can read the full report here: https://www.virtueonline.org/post/canterbury-appointment-abandons-anglicans   The GSFA also responded to the appointment with South Sudan Archbishop Justin Badi lamenting the decision saying; “We are deeply saddened that the person still perceived by many to be the spiritual leader of now some 100 million Anglicans worldwide has played a leading role in the Church of England’s departure from Anglican tradition and the clear teaching of Scripture in matters of marriage and sexuality.   “Sadly therefore, our position must remain as it was in our Ash Wednesday statement of February 2023 when we stated that we were no longer able to recognise the then Archbishop of Canterbury as the ‘first amongst equals’ leader of the global Communion.”   You can read their statement here: https://www.virtueonline.org/post/gsfa-statement-on-the-appointment-of-the-rt-revd-dame-sarah-mullally-bishop-of-london-as-the-archb   In her first address at Canterbury Cathedral , she addressed "profound global uncertainty", saying "the possibility of healing lies in acts of kindness and love."   Addressing the deadly attack on a synagogue in Manchester, she said: "As a Church, [we] have a responsibility to be a people who stand with the Jewish community against antisemitism in all its forms."   PM Keir Starmer wished her success, saying she will play "a key role in our national life."   She is opposed to Assisted Suicide bill currently before parliament.   However, there are senior bishops in the Church of England who are openly opposed to women joining the priesthood at all, never mind leading the institution.   The Church had been without someone in the top job for almost a year, after Justin Welby resigned over his failure to report a prolific child abuser.   With the recent appointment of a lesbian archbishop to the Church in Wales it looks very much like both churches are on a suicide mission to see who can swallow the ecclesiastical cyanide tablet first.   I have posted a number of stories on this appointment which you can read here including my own take: https://www.virtueonline.org/post/the-disastrous-appointment-of-woman-archbishop-of-canterbury https://www.virtueonline.org/post/the-lanyard-class-archbishop   *****   The Church of England does have an Israeli problem. Baroness Ruth Deech, DBE a British academic, bioethicist and politician, argues that the next Archbishop of Canterbury ought to acknowledge the historic role of the Church in the spread of antisemitism; accept the moral duty to protect the Jewish community; and ensure that children’s lessons are not passing on antisemitism in the guise of religious teaching.   She writes, “For nearly 2,000 years, Jews around the world suffered persecution, forced conversion, expulsion and expropriation at the hands of the Church. Only as recently as 1965 did the Catholic Church repudiate the charge of Jewish collective guilt for the death of Jesus. I well remember from my education at both a church primary and secondary school that condemnation of Jews permeated everyday worship and teaching.”   Today it is “anti-Zionism” – the 21st century’s version of antisemitism – that is driving a deplorable surge in anti-Jewish violence and discrimination. The willingness of some church figureheads to entertain and even adopt this corrosive ideology makes them culpable in this dangerous situation.   “All too often, she writes, church leaders single out Israel for the ongoing tragedy, when it is Hamas that started the war, Hamas that has rejected ceasefire offers, and Hamas that insists on fighting to the last Gazan, for whom they care so little. Statement after statement from bishops makes only fleeting reference to the plight of the hostages, followed by a “but” and unevidenced, devastating allegations against Israel.”   You can read more here: https://davidvirtue2.substack.com/p/does-the-church-of-england-have-an   *****   Anglican Church in North America bishops are up to their miters in a punch up between the ACNA and Bishop Derek Jones of the Special Jurisdiction of the Armed Forces and Chaplaincy (SJAFC).   As of this writing it is getting downright nasty and legal. Here’s the story.   Bishop Jones was issued a Godly admonition, followed by a special inhibition by ACNA Archbishop Steve Wood regarding accusations of misconduct (not related to any sexual misconduct). Bishop Jones then chose to declare himself separated from the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA). Wood pushed back saying he had no authority to do that and appointed his own bishop to run the JAFC - Bishop Jerome  R. Cayangyang.   This was confirmed by the newly anointed Bishop Phil Ashey who said Bishop Jones has no authority under the Constitution and Canons of the ACNA to declare that all ACNA Chaplains in the SJAFC are no longer a part of the ACNA. Period.   Not so fast, said Bishop Jones. He got a law firm to write a “Cease and Desist” letter to Wood saying JAFC had no ecclesiastical relationship with the ACNA, accusing Wood of “malicious” intent and “potential legal liability”.   I have posted a number of stories on this ongoing saga. It is hard to know how this will all pan out, but it is bad optics for the ACNA which is about to see a resumption of the Bishop Ruch trial and the Damoclean sword of women’s ordination hanging over the ACNA.   You can read more here:   https://www.virtueonline.org/post/acna-archbishop-inhibits-armed-forces-bishop-derk-jones   https://www.virtueonline.org/post/jafc-bishop-refutes-charges-of-ecclesiastical-power-abuse   https://www.virtueonline.org/post/bishop-jay-cayangyang-appointed-suffragan-bishop-of-jafc   https://www.virtueonline.org/post/jafc-bishop-repudiates-ill-founded-characterization-of-bishop-derek-jones   https://www.virtueonline.org/post/jafc-lawyers-issue-cease-and-desist-letter-to-acna-bishops *****   QUEER WOMAN TO LEAD ST. JOHN THE DIVINE. Nearly 700 people packed the Cathedral Church of Saint John the Divine on Manhattan’s Upper West Side on Saturday (Sept. 27) to witness the installation of the Rev. Winnie Varghese, the first queer woman of color named dean of the world’s largest Episcopal Gothic cathedral.   The ceremony, planned for an hour and a half, blended tradition and interfaith witness, with readings from the Torah, Quran, a Hindu saint and the Book of Revelation. Music ranged from a Sufi melody to a traditional spiritual, alongside a three-piece Indian band — a nod to Varghese’s Indian heritage and a tribute to her family in the front row. And you wonder why TEC is heading downhill.   *****   The flagship parish in the Diocese of New York – St. Thomas Fifth Avenue is up to its nave in homosexual scandal.   After being publicly exposed by Anglican Watch, Saint Thomas Church Fifth Avenue announced an investigation into allegations of sexual abuse, nine months after it first learned about these issues and retaliated against the complainant.   “We are calling BS on Saint Thomas Church Fifth Avenue following the church’s announcement that it is conducting a third-party investigation into allegations of sexual assault. Specifically, while the church claims in an email sent today that “the safety of all those in our communities is of paramount importance to Saint Thomas Church, and we adhere to safe church practices,” the reality is it has spent all of 2025 doing its utmost to ignore the underlying allegations while violating safe church policies by retaliating against the alleged victim of sexual assault,” said Anglican Watch.   In other words, St. Thomas’ claim is a fabrication, a lie. You can read more here: https://www.anglicanwatch.com/saint-thomas-church-fifth-avenue-announces-investigation-into-allegations-of-sexual-abuse-nine-months-after-it-first-learned-about-these-issues-and-retaliated-against-the-complainant/   *****   The Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church has finally given up pursuing the former Bishop of Florida, John Howard. Enough is enough and it’s getting too expensive with the charges brought against a bishop who has already retired from the church.   This is the same diocese that derailed the Rev. Charlie Holt from being approved after his election to succeed Howard. The panxsexualists won’t ever let up on anyone who does not yield complete fealty to their cause.   After years of conflicts about same-sex marriage and two Title IV cases with one case involving allegations that Howard discriminated against clergy based on their sexual orientation, with another charging him with wrongful handling of diocesan money, PB Sean Rowe had had enough. He brought the protracted conflict to a sudden halt by signing an accord with Howard.   Bishop Howard returned the favor by requesting release and removal from ordained ministry in The Episcopal Church under Canon III.12.8. Rowe accepted the request. Rowe still had to appease the LGBTQ+ crowd in the diocese and extended an apology to them. You can read Doug LeBlanc’s piece here: https://livingchurch.org/news/news-episcopal-church/bishop-howard-signs-accord-and-then-departs/   *****   THE ANGLICAN CHURCH OF SOUTHERN AFRICA put a resolution on Palestine on the table - PSC 2025 - noting the following:   1. on-going humanitarian crisis in Gaza with deaths in that territory nearing 60 000 people through war, starvation and lack of access to medical resources;   2. genocidal actions of the Israeli Defence Force in preventing the delivery of food, water and medicines to the people of Gaza;   3. intensifying attacks by Israeli settlers on Palestinians and the illegal expansion of settlements, both of which bear no legal consequences;   4. continued export of coal to the Israeli state by South-African based companies fuels the energy grid, illegal settlements and genocidal actions of the Israeli Defence Force;   5. 24 June 2025 Statement by the World Council of Churches (WCC) which inter alia calls for the implementation by states, institutions and churches of targeted sanctions and divestment;   6. international non-violent actions such as the Freedom Flotilla and the March to Gaza;   The church resolved to: 1. Commend and affirm all non-violent actions against the Israeli occupation of Palestine;   2. Call for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, and end to the occupation and the cessation of the killing of inhabitants;   3. Call upon the government of Israel and the Israeli Defence Force to immediately allow the delivery of humanitarian aid into Gaza;   4. Call upon the South African Football Association (SAFA) to request that FIFA bans Israel from participation in all FIFA approved events;   5. Respectfully request the Archbishop to address a letter in this regard to the SAFA administration communicating this request;   6. Call upon all sports bodies, schools and universities in South Africa, Lesotho, Eswatini and Namibia to cut all ties with Israeli institutions;   7. Call upon the government of South Africa to strengthen its principled stance against apartheid and genocide by following Colombia’s example in banning all coal exports to the Israeli state;   8. Respectfully request the Archbishop to address a letter in this regard to the President and relevant cabinet ministers communicating this request;   9. Thank the WCC for its affirmation that Israel is an apartheid state;   10. Call upon all member churches of the WCC to affirm the WCC Statement on Palestine and Israel of 24 June 2025;   11. Respectfully request the WCC Secretariat to explore ways to recommend to member churches that they engage their governments with a view to formal recognition of a Palestinian state;   12. Commend the Lent 2025 Provincial Bible Studies on Peacemaking for study at parish and school level.   13. Support the call for the Global Sumud Flotilla as a non-violent attempt to break the siege on Gaza for humanitarian aid and encourage similar initiatives.   *****   Corporations are cutting funding for LGBT initiatives left and right, a trend attributed to both the Trump administration and public pressure.   (LifeSiteNews) reports that Tampa and Ft. Myers won’t be holding their yearly LGBT “Pride” events this year due to lack of donor funding, reflecting a national trend of declining corporate support for the celebration of perversion.   The board of Tampa Pride, the LGBT event in the largest city on Florida’s west coast, announced in a letter to its president that it would take a yearlong “hiatus” due to a funding shortfall, and that it was unable to renew his contract.   Tampa Pride president Carrie West told WFLA that the decisive reason for the hiatus was the reduction or complete cancellation of donations from their largest sponsors.   *****   It’s time to admit that Christians are being persecuted in two-tier Britain.   No one has yet been killed in the UK for their Christian faith as Charlie Kirk was in the US. But many are aware that an attack on Christianity is going on.   Just last month a street preacher was arrested in Congleton because someone objected to his preaching. But when an elderly Christian woman objected to preachers of Islam she was the one the police arrested.   Concerned that the ability of Christians in the UK to practise and manifest their faith is deteriorating, Voice for Justice UK set up the Commission of Inquiry into Discrimination Against Christians (CIDAC). Tasked with investigating the nature, context and scale of this discrimination, CIDAC would arrive at solutions for what could be done. Its final report will be published in spring 2026 and will be sent to all MPs.   For the past two years, CIDAC has been collecting disturbing and at times harrowing testimonies from a range of respondents. Those working in education, healthcare, politics and business have found themselves on the receiving end of hate-filled communications, loss of job, position or training. Some have even been harassed by the police.   The extent of discrimination, even persecution, which Christians are facing in this once Christian country is more befitting of a communist regime.   Perhaps the most egregious and infamous actions of the police have been their custom of arresting individuals praying silently on the street.   *****   Please consider a tax-deductible donation for our one-of-a-kind ministry. VOL is now being read in 55 countries of the world, with hundreds of new readers going to our new website, according to WIX, a powerful, no code website builder. Please consider throwing a few tax-deductible bucks VOL’s way. I take no salary but I have several staff to pay and the Internet is not free. You can make a tax-deductible donation to keep the news coming. A PayPal donation link can be found here: http://www.virtueonline.org/support.html If you are more inclined with checks, you can send your tax-deductible donation to:   VIRTUEONLINE                                                               P.O. BOX 111                       Shohola, PA 18458   Thank you for your support, Yours in Christ, David   My Substack on the Middle East continues to grow. It is drawing a lot of interest and attention from across the globe. You can access it here: https://davidvirtue2.substack.com/   I am a strong supporter of the state of Israel’s right to exist and prosper while confronting her enemies both foreign and domestic. My latest report can be seen here: https://davidvirtue2.substack.com/p/does-the-church-of-england-have-an

FROM: NELSON MADDEN BLACK   LLP New York, New York   September 23, 2025   TO: The Most Rev. Stephen D. Wood Archbishop Anglican Church in North America Mt. Pleasant, South Carolina   The Most Rev. Robert Duncan Archbishop Emeritus Anglican Church in North America Vero Beach, Florida   Anglican Church in North America Mt. Pleasant, South Carolina   Bishop Ray Sutton Dallas, Texas   The Rt. Rev. Jay Cayangyang Bishop Ledyard, Connecticut   Gentlemen:   We represent the Jurisdiction of the Armed Forces and Chaplaincy (the “Jurisdiction”) and its Bishop, the Right Reverend Derek Jones. You are hereby directed immediately to cease and desist from (1) your efforts to mislead government agencies, military services, chaplains under the supervision of the Jurisdiction and the general public into believing that the Anglican Church in North America (“ACNA”) has any ecclesiastical or practical right of supervision over the Jurisdiction or its chaplaincy program; (2) your misuse and misappropriation of the Jurisdiction’s trademarked terms, including without limitation “Jurisdiction of the Armed Forces and Chaplaincy” (USTO serial number 90265640) and the Anglican chaplains (USTO serial number 87202112), and its former corporate identity, “Special Jurisdiction of the Armed Forces and Chaplaincy,” and (3) your publication of defamatory remarks about the Jurisdiction and the Right Reverend Derek Jones, and to refrain from making further false and defamatory or disparaging statements. You are further directed immediately to remove all disparaging materials from your websites and other publications including without limitation your publication entitled:   •A Letter from the Archbishop of the Anglican Church in North America to the Chaplains Domiciled in or Licenced by the Special Jurisdiction for the Armed Forces and Chaplaincy – 21 September 2025   •New and Updates on the Inhibition Of Bishop Derek Jones and the Status of the Special Jurisdiction for the Armed Forces and Chaplaincy (SJAFC)   Your malicious actions have interfered and are continuing to interfere with the Jurisdiction's crucial relationships with the United States Government and with the Jurisdiction's relationships with the many chaplains who are serving those forces and agencies. You have written to the chaplains that report to the Jurisdiction to mislead them into believing that you have replaced Bishop Jones and assumed the Jurisdiction's functions. Your interference threatens the chaplains’ assignments and the Jurisdiction’s core functions. Your disparagement has already damaged important relationships of the Jurisdiction and Bishop Jones, as you intended.   No ecclesiastical relationship exists between you and the Jurisdiction and Bishop Jones, and you have no legally cognizable basis for asserting any entitlement or exercise jurisdiction or discipline over either of them. The Jurisdiction has essential relationships that are not yours to assume by deception or insinuation. Freedom of Religion provides no protection for identity theft.   You are hereby instructed that you are not to claim that you have any right or control over a “Special Jurisdiction for the Armed Forces and Chaplaincy” (or to use that phrase in any publication), or that you have any involvement or jurisdiction over the Jurisdiction or over the chaplains that are affiliated with the Jurisdiction, or that you have any right to meddle in the relationship of the United States Government agencies with the jurisdiction and its chaplains. Your actions and false statements have exposed the Jurisdiction, Bishop Jones, and members of the Jurisdiction's chaplaincy corps to damage and potential legal liability and the Jurisdiction and Bishop Jones reserve all rights to receive monetary contribution and indemnification from you for any damages that result from your actions, as well as statutory damages for the misappropriation and misuse of the Jurisdiction's trademarks.   Be guided accordingly,   Sincerely, Jonathan R. Nelson

By Concerned Anglican www.virtueonline.org October 3, 2025   In his recent article published in "Juicy Ecumenicism," https://juicyecumenism.com/2025/09/29/anglican-chaplains/ Jeff Walton shared his perspective and opinion on the recent events that have transpired between the JAFC and the ACNA. It is unfortunate that Mr. Walton's opinions were not better informed, which, had they been, may have more accurately reflected the reality and complexity of the situation. His choice of publication, however, must be commended, as there surely could have been no better venue to distribute such opinions than one with the term "Juicy" in its title—clearly betraying the true intent to simply contribute to the sensationalism of hinted scandal designed to distract from the real story, which is far more nefarious and ungodly. On one side of this unfolding story is an aggressor: the office of the Archbishop of the ACNA, who through the use of a "godly" admonition attempted to usurp the canons of the church, which codify his rightly limited authority, in order to usurp the rightful authority of the Bishop of the Armed Forces and Chaplaincy, dismantle the organizational structure of the JAFC, appropriate its hard-won reputation through unlawful use of its trademarks, and squelch the single greatest threat to his continued agenda of moving the ACNA toward acceptance of the same progressive ideology he has expounded for years. Notice the attention of this accusation is levied at the office of the archbishop rather than simply the archbishop himself, and that is not without intentional consideration. This is not simply the work of one man but the culmination of his work in carefully curating a team of professional corporate staff in the office of the archbishop, all of whom reject a complementarian understanding of gender roles at the minimum, and some of whom clearly advocate the woke ideology Bishop Jones has a reputation for calling out. Any reasonable person would ask why—to explore not just one facet of this story, but many. Why would the archbishop want to target Bishop Jones? What events precipitated this attack? Why would a supposed man of God behave this way? Why would Bishop Jones not simply submit to the investigation to see his good name cleared? These are all good questions, and they will each be answered, but one essential question remains: Why would the archbishop need to rely on the playbook of the woke progressives rather than the carefully cultivated canons of the ACNA?   You Cannot Serve Both God and Money The reasons why Bishop Jones would be targeted are many, but all stem from his consistent track record of not only holding faithfully to orthodox and classical Anglican views but courageously defending them, often requiring him to stand against the ungodly behavior of his fellow bishops in the ACNA college. He is certainly not the only ACNA bishop to hold correct views on the classical Anglican faith, but he is the only one who has consistently spoken out against heresy, heterodoxy, and at times even felonious criminal behavior within the college of bishops—often as only a former fighter pilot could. In the most recent conclave to determine the next Archbishop of the ACNA, Bishop Jones prevented a bishop known to have embezzled over forty thousand dollars from likely being elected Archbishop of the ACNA, a situation that he and five other bishop had discovered years ago and dealt with quietly under the direction of Archbishop Beach to avoid damaging church scandal while simultaneously ensuring proper restitution was made. This bishop was one of the named bishops as supporting the unlawful inhibition of Bishop Jones. Dual "Integrity?" Another ungodly situation that unfolded just this past year hits a bit closer to Mr. Walton's home diocese, and perhaps explains the obvious bias in his opining. Many of us are familiar with the unfolding story in the Diocese of the Mid-Atlantic, where Bishop Chris Warner violated the oxymoronic dual-integrity arrangement that has kept the untenable federation of ACNA dioceses weakly connected these past fifteen years. It is common knowledge by this point that Bishop Warner assigned a female presenting herself as a priest to celebrate sacramentally in a parish that rejected the unorthodox and unbiblical practice of supposed female priests. Bishop Warner doubled down on his position in the aftermath of this debacle by asserting he would only approve a chosen rector who would submit to receiving Holy Communion consecrated by a supposed female priest. This resulted in immediate fallout within the parish and ensuing conflict between Bishop Warner and the vestry and rector search committee of Church of the Incarnation (CoI). This conflict eventually resulted in the entire vestry and rector search committee resigning from their positions and withdrawing from the diocese. What some may not know is that the previous priest-in-charge/interim rector of the parish was a JAFC chaplain who had brought stability and growth to the parish for two years, and that it was a new JAFC church plant planned nearly 8 months previously that welcomed in the disaffiliated parishioners from Incarnation when it launched last month. As this current situation between the ACNA and the JAFC surely demonstrates, church drama is often messy, but when it comes to contentious issues like the ordination of women, it is more than just messy—it threatens the total deterioration of the already strained relationship between ACNA dioceses and the respective parishes within those dioceses who hold opposing views on this divisive issue. Bishop Jones's central role in protecting the orthodox faith and providing emergency episcopal cover to those who chose to stand for truth rather than capitulate to episcopal abuse of authority has made him a target. It is of particular interest that in this case, the resigned vestry of CoI presented the standing committee of the DOMA and the Archbishop with a signed complaint outlining specific canonical violations and presenting specific details about the events surrounding these violations, requesting an inquiry into Bishop Warner. This request was completely ignored by the Archbishop while he simultaneously chose to launch an unlawful investigation into Bishop Jones. Why the incongruence? Perhaps because Bishop Warner is aligned with the Archbishop in moving the ACNA toward his progressive goals , while Bishop Jones stands as a faithful defender of orthodoxy. Did Someone Say Mistrial? Need we even mention the disaster that is the ecclesiastical court case and mistrial of Bishop Stewart Ruch? Could this have possibly been managed more badly? Bishop Jones has been outspoken about not only the irregularities of how this case has been mismanaged and the multiple resignations from the office of the Archbishop, but also the Archbishop's presumptuous choice to issue a letter on behalf of the entire college of bishops that many of the bishops had not seen or participated in—including Bishop Jones. Do You Think You Have What It Takes to Be a Chaplain? Just a few months ago, the JAFC's Director of Accessions sent a letter of concern to the Archbishop outlining several disturbing trends observed as clergy from across the ACNA's varied dioceses made application to be considered for discernment to serve as chaplains. In his letter, he outlines several trends of unorthodox beliefs and practices that seem commonplace in many of the ACNA's dioceses. This letter revealed the JAFC's unique position to observe and analyze these trends. Although this letter was never responded to by the Archbishop or anyone from his office, it seems perhaps he chose to respond in less appropriate ways through a "godly" admonition. Why the Woke Tactics? Why silence your enemy, launch unlawful investigations based on vague allegations, and destroy your enemy's credibility through defamation? Why would the archbishop, a supposed man of God, need to rely on the playbook of the woke progressives rather than the carefully cultivated canons of the ACNA? The answer to this question is in fact incredibly simple: Following the Title IV canonical process would simply not produce the results the Archbishop wants, so he chose to ignore it. In the Anglican tradition, the office of the Archbishop is largely a figurehead role with very limited authority, constrained to only that which member dioceses concede in the canons of the church. If the Archbishop had credible complaints, he would have given a Presentment to Bishop Jones with charges of specific canonical violations related to those complaints (indicating who, when and where), which would have included the most basic information regarding the context of these alleged events, which could then be investigated. Instead, he chose to admonish Bishop Jones to participate in an unlawful, unrestricted investigation, by an outside agency which is not allowed in the canons, with the intent of determining if anything could be uncovered. Imagine if this were the standard of legal process that applied in civil court. Someone could, based on only vague allegations by any anonymous complainant who had been offended by you at any point in the past, launch an unrestricted investigation into every part of your life to determine if there is any evidence of wrongdoing related to the allegations or not. Who among us could possibly tolerate such a flagrant abuse of power? The irony is that such abuse would be willfully ignored by a publication representing the Institute for Religion and Democracy. There is great wisdom in the rule of law, and the archbishop is not above it, even when he finds it inconvenient. Fortunately, standing up against this degree of abusive totalitarianism is not so difficult, especially for the men and women of courage who lead the JAFC. But this woke playbook is not played out yet. We may have navigated the first two stages of attack, but now find ourselves squarely in the midst of the third, destined to play out in the court of public opinion, manipulated by biased "reporters" determined to defame the credibility of a recognized American hero, Godly bishop, and defender of the faith once delivered. Bishop Jones Does Not Stand Alone This is not a story about Bishop Jones leaving the ACNA and trying to take the Anglican Chaplains™ with him. The Executive Committee of the JAFC voted unanimously to disaffiliate from the ACNA. Three of the four suffragan bishops resident in the JAFC continue to stand with Bishop Jones and the JAFC in defense against ACNA abuse, while the only one to leave the JAFC for the ACNA did so for direct personal gain. Further, more than two hundred chaplains remain faithful to Bishop Jones, many of whom have expressed profound dissatisfaction with the ACNA. In regard to the Archbishop, why would a supposedly Godly man choose this path? You will have to decide that for yourself.   END

COMMENTARY   By David W. Virtue, DD www.virtueonline.org October 3, 2025   Dame Sarah Mullally, 63, Bishop of London, will be the 106th Archbishop of Canterbury, the first woman to hold that position in the 490-year history of the Church of England.   By all accounts she has never studied theology to graduate level. She trained part-time for the ministry receiving a Diploma of Theology from the University of Kent. She has only served six years as a rector. She was fast-tracked by Justin Welby, the former Archbishop of Canterbury because of her nursing career, along with Paula Vennells, who was apparently the other candidate for London. She is pro-choice on abortion, and pro-gay.   As one insider told VOL, “She is the English equivalent of Katharine Jefferts Schori, former TEC presiding Bishop -- inexperienced, unqualified, with no doctrinal compass. She is Welby’s toxic legacy.”   Mike Judge, writing for the Evangelical Times said it well when he wrote that the Anglican rot set in long ago. “Today’s announcement that the Church of England has appointed Dame Sarah Mullally as its first female Archbishop of Canterbury marks not merely a new historical first, but yet further evidence that the institution — I can’t bring myself to call it a church — departed from the faith decades ago.   “Her appointment exhibits a denial of what scripture plainly teaches about male leadership in church office. Yet we must also recognise that the decay began long ago, when church structures permitted — in fact, they encouraged — the appointment of men who lacked serious conviction in God, scripture, or gospel truth. This revolution did not begin yesterday; today is simply another milestone on a sad path.”   “The Church of England has steadily diluted its commitment to biblical orthodoxy, compromised under pressure from cultural shifts, and rewarded liberal assent more than gospel faithfulness, over many decades. The abandonment of robust biblical expository preaching, the elevation of charismatic personality over theological depth, and the creeping accommodation to social trends weakened the church from within.”   When bishops and archbishops are chosen for their administrative or public appeal, rather than for their love of Christ and fidelity to scripture, the door was left open for more radical departures— such as appointing a woman to the highest bishopric. In many dioceses, clergy have long articulated little more than vague pieties, turning a blind eye to sexual ethics, compromising on doctrines of sin and substitution, or showing fear of offending prevailing cultural mores, wrote Judge.   “The leadership pipeline was hollowed out. As evangelicals from outside Anglicanism warned: mixed denominations that did not require consistent biblical conviction would sooner or later collapse inward. The Church of England’s drift is not an accident; it is the fruit of decades of toleration of theological dilution.”   Judge makes his final appeal writing; “Evangelical Anglicans across the UK and beyond must ask: will you remain in fellowship with a denomination that refuses to take scripture seriously? Or will we obey the Lord, even if that means leaving familiar structures and entering into faithful separation?”   The chairman of GAFCON, the Most Rev. Laurent Mbanda, echoed his words when he wrote on behalf of millions of Global South Anglicans saying the Canterbury appointment abandons Anglicans. “The Church of England has chosen a leader who will further divide an already split Communion. We had hoped that the Church of England would take this into due consideration as it deliberated over the choice of a new Archbishop of Canterbury and would choose someone who could bring unity to a divided Anglican Communion. Sadly, they have not done so.”   “The majority of the Anglican Communion still believes that the Bible requires a male-only episcopacy. Therefore, her appointment will make it impossible for the Archbishop of Canterbury to serve as a focus of unity within the Communion.”   “More concerning is her failure to uphold her consecration vows. When she was consecrated in 2015, she took an oath to “banish and drive away all strange and erroneous doctrine contrary to God’s Word.” And yet, far from banishing such doctrine, Bishop Mullally has repeatedly promoted unbiblical and revisionist teachings regarding marriage and sexual morality.”   Archbishop Justin Badi speaking for the GSFA said; “This appointment is a missed opportunity to reunite and reform the Anglican Communion.”   “We are deeply saddened that the person still perceived by many to be the spiritual leader of now some 100 million Anglicans worldwide has played a leading role in the Church of England’s departure from Anglican tradition and the clear teaching of Scripture in matters of marriage and sexuality.”   The South Sudan Archbishop said it was a moment of lament because he believed that the teaching of Jesus and the whole of Scripture is fundamental to human flourishing, both now and for eternity, and should not be compromised by the pressures of a particular culture.   “Sadly therefore, our position must remain as it was in our Ash Wednesday statement of February 2023 when we stated that we were no longer able to recognise the then Archbishop of Canterbury as the ‘first amongst equals’ leader of the global Communion.”   With a new woman Archbishop of Canterbury, a new Lesbian Archbishop of the Church in Wales, a new progressive Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church and a new liberal Archbishop of the Anglican Church of Canada, it would appear that Western Anglicanism is on a pathway to self-immolation.   END

Sarah Mullally is the pure distilled essence of everything wrong with the Church of England   By George Owers Artillery Row THE CRITIC 3 October, 2025   Although talk of a “Quiet Revival” of Christianity in the UK is probably over-egged, there is a clearly an element of truth to it: congregations in some churches do appear to be picking up, especially among the young. What is absolutely clear is that the revival of Christianity among young people is overwhelmingly occurring among those disillusioned with the sterility and emptiness of secular modernity.   What such people are looking for, as James Marriott showed comprehensively in a recent Times piece, is “full-fat faith”, that is, forms of Christianity that unapologetically adhere to the traditional practices and doctrine of their respective denominations, or perhaps are the most sharply counter-cultural and unapologetic in their supernaturalism and rejection of liberal pieties. Such pieties are usually theological but often also political, in the sense of constituting the semi-secularised milk-and-water forms of Christianity which present themselves in terms almost indistinguishable from the beliefs of, say, Oxfam or the average Guardian leader: a “religion” of lanyard class talking points with occasional mentions of God. Unsurprisingly, therefore, the revival is happening most obviously among trad Roman Catholics, assertive evangelical or charismatic sects, and similar.   In this context, it appeared to be a great gift of providence that Justin Welby stepped down as Archbishop of Canterbury just as this revival gathered steam and the cultural moment was changing. New Atheism is cringe; everyone’s read Dominion by Tom Holland; many can see that what has come after Christian hegemony is far worse. People are looking for something different. As Nick Cave said recently, the most countercultural thing you can do is go to church. The time was ripe for a new Archbishop of Canterbury well-placed to exploit this new atmosphere: a theological heavyweight and spiritual big-hitter who could speak a more traditional, uncompromising language, tone down the Church of England’s invariably progressive mood music, and challenge the church’s creeping culture of bland managerialism. No one was expecting a Prayer Book purist who knows the Thirty-Nine Articles by heart, but it wasn’t absurd to hope for a small move in the right direction.   Even I was a bit taken aback at the sheer perversity of this choice   If I were to try to imagine a candidate for the new Archbishop of Canterbury who is the furthest away from this, the worst and least suitable replacement for Welby possible, I would probably pick someone along the following lines. They’d be a former state bureaucrat who made an entire career out of the sort of bland HR department-inspired managerialism that is destroying the church, probably a senior civil servant in (say) the NHS. They’d be on record as having every tick-box lazy progressive political and theological opinion imaginable. They would, of course, have lived and worked in London for most of their life and be a thoroughgoing metropolitan. They would have no record of any serious theological or scholarly work, but be thoroughly intellectually mediocre.   Whoops, I just described the person announced this morning as the new Archbishop of Canterbury, Sarah Mullally. The Church of England making an appalling decision is too common to be surprising, but even I was a bit taken aback at the sheer perversity of this choice. She is the pure distilled essence of the hectoring lanyard class, a bureaucrat, a proceduralist and a progressive down to her fingertips. Her entire professional career was spent in the NHS, latterly as Chief Nursing Officer and “Director of Patient Experience”; she is on the record as being “pro-choice”, pro-gay marriage, on board with the usual check-box list of LGBTQIA+ orthodoxy; she has lived in London for most of her life. She will occupy an Archiepiscopal throne once occupied by theologians of the calibre of Anselm, Cranmer, Michael Ramsey and Rowan Williams: her sole contributions to the intellectual life of the church are a couple of those paper-thin (in every sense) “Advent/Lent reflection” books, the authorship of which appear to be compulsory now among senior bishops, and the readership of which is close to non-existent.   Although my first thought was that she is just pure Welbyism redux, right down to the less-than-pure record on clergy discipline and safeguarding, my second thought was worse.   One might remember that Paula Vennells, later disgraced for her culpability in the Horizon postmaster scandal, almost became a bishop. It was only sheer luck that saved her from being catapulted from a senior position in the quasi-governmental senior management class onto the episcopal bench: indeed, she was one of the rivals for the job of Bishop of London when Mullally was appointed, backed by Welby. There, but for the grace of God and some investigative journalists, goes the person who the establishment might now be celebrating as the first female Archbishop of Canterbury instead of Mullally (which I suppose is some sort of mercy).   Now, there is no reason to think that Mullally was responsible for any comparable scandal when a senior bureaucrat in the NHS, but in many other respects Mullally and Vennels are strikingly similar figures: both pursued careers within the nexus of the bureaucratic-management state and its corporate appendages and have near-identical views and backgrounds. They are both mediocre non-entities promoted above their abilities, partly, no doubt, to burnish the feminist credentials of those who appointed them, partly because their anaemic liberal views challenged no-one and they could be relied on to keep the procedural wheels of their respective institutions rolling. They both saw a second career in the Church as a natural extension of their first careers as managers within the therapeutic-technocratic state.   As such, it seems highly probable that Mullally has inherited much the same sort of mindset as Vennels, i.e. the classic mental toolkit of the modern day British state managerialist. For these people, there are only a few overriding objectives. Firstly, they promote the interests of the management class, specifically by increasing the authority and number of bureaucrats — sensible “people like us”, managers who can be trusted to stamp out any outbreaks of people actually doing their job properly. Secondly, to them “inclusion”, defined in purely secular DEI-style terms, is sacred. Finally, their overarching priority is reputation management and “comms”, and these things overrule everything else. The actual purpose of the institution — saving souls, ministering to the nation, spreading the gospel etc — will always, in people of this background and class and politics, come second, and if pursuit of their main goals is compromised by such inconvenient things as “being the Church of Jesus Christ”, then it’s Christ who loses out.   The ministry of the Church of England to the nation has already been severely imperilled by the widespread impression that its leadership caters only to a tiny segment of progressive urban Christians of liberal theology, that it is the “Lib Dems at Prayer”. This tiny group — mainly found within the Church’s leadership class — is happy to speak out on public affairs only when its controversial views coincide with the secular-liberal consensus of the BBC executives, politicians and journalists. As they are essentially part of that consensus, that is almost always. (I will make one concession here, which is that despite scandalous views on abortion, Mullally has been sound so far on assisted suicide — that is about all that can be said in her favour). Seating the human embodiment of the lanyard class on the Chair of St Augustine will only compound the existing negative impression that huge swathes of the country already have of the Church and make it seem off-limits to the vast majority of the non-progressive masses.   This is, in a sense, apt. Most of the Church of England is already run by people like Mullally, and installing one of their own at the top is only cutting out the middleman. More broadly, it is very much of a piece with the general drift of our national institutions: the Church is becoming just another legacy institution gutted of its essential purpose and made into an instrument of an incompetent, distant, unpopular technocratic liberal state. Her appointment is, in a sense, the logical conclusion of this process, of the victory of Rainbow Flag Erastianism, the view that the Church is basically the spiritual equivalent of the NHS and subject to all of the progressive ideological orthodoxies that constitute our real — and politically determined — state religion.   And so it seems almost certain that the Church of England will miserably fail to take advantage of the enormous opportunity that the “Quiet Revival” affords. Many coming to Christianity from secular backgrounds are running away from the precisely the vacuous milquetoast progressivism that Mullally is such an obvious representative of, and are hardly going to be attracted by her as Archbishop. No doubt some heroic parishes and priests within the Church of England — the ones that embrace “full-fat Christianity” rather than her sterile liberalism — will find ways to flourish, but as a broad national church, in vast swathes of the country, we will continue to die, eaten alive by the twin cancers of metastasizing managerialism and liberal indifferentism.   I sincerely hope that I am mistaken. I don’t know her personally, and however sceptical I am of her I will pray for her ministry. Nonetheless, I think it’s vain to expect someone whose origins lie deep within the belly of the beast to be inclined to help slay it. Perhaps her pastoral skills will be her saving grace, as some claim. I remember people saying the same of Welby, and I wonder what, say, those who know and loved Fr Alan Griffin, driven to suicide by vague and unsubstantiated allegations of sexual abuse in her diocese, would say about that. I suspect that her pastoral skills are similar to the people skills possessed by HR managers who hand over P45s in an inappropriately matey and upbeat manner, as if one should be grateful for being sacked. They’re not the pastoral skills that many sheep are terribly grateful for.   Perhaps Mullally will even have the political antennae to tone down her worst instincts and simply preside over the same failed Welbyite approach with fewer obvious gaffes and without grinding our faces into the dust too harshly. The only consolation is that our extinction as a Church is not — if the faithful laity are prepared to assert themselves against the cowardly leadership class — inevitable. We are still God’s church and the gates of hell will not prevail against us, however much we might dread the coming years. Let us take comfort in that and pray for deliverance.   END