Anglicanism and the vices that have emerged over time. The author argues that a return to these foundational values may offer guidance for navigating contemporary challenges within the church. BY GRAHAM TOMLIN July 5, 2025 In the light of the changing face of Anglicanism and disputes as to what it means to be Anglican, Graham Tomlin here goes back to the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries to find the central concerns of the Reformers that may still guide us today. By doing so he provides us with six Anglican values or commitments – Scripture, culture, modesty, accountability, politics and community – which he discusses in order to highlight both some of the virtues and some of the besetting vices of Anglicanism. An email recently arrived in my inbox that read thus: The ANGLICAN VIRUS: This has no effect whatsoever. It just sits on your computer talking to lots of other computers. By the time it gets round to changing anything, you’ve upgraded your machine and rendered the virus obsolete. Jokes like this demonstrate that Anglicans don’t have a great reputation for change. However, the world is changing fast around us and, in fact, if we look carefully, the church is changing too – Anglicanism is fast becoming much more varied than it has ever been. The Anglican churches in most British cities display a huge variety in their ways of worshipping and ordering church, and that’s not just to point up the differences between Anglo-Catholics, Liberals and Evangelicals. Evangelical churches, despite an underlying similarity of doctrine, actually express their faith in very different ways: conservative, charismatic, contemporary or traditional. Around the world too, many Anglican churches who don’t have the characteristics we English think of as typically Anglican (for example establishment and a parish system) are also asking what it really means to be Anglican. Again with new ways of being church emerging around us all the time, from cell church to youth services, from the Minster model to seeker-driven church, there’s a need in assessing all of these to ask the question whether they are compatible with Anglicanism or should be avoided as unAnglican. This article seeks to answer this question by going back to a seminal period in Anglican history – the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries – when the church was reformed (not formed!). It tries to ask what were the central concerns of the Reformers as they re-shaped the church, in a process which has left an indelible mark on Anglicanism ever since. This exercise might in turn help us to identify the particular Anglican ‘style’ of doing church, worship, mission and everything else a church does. What follows is not an exhaustive list, but identifies six Anglican commitments which at the same time might help us avoid some of our characteristic and besetting sins. It also suggests that there are some tendencies in Anglican history which have contributed to its decline in western societies, and that some of the answers to our predicament may also be found within that very history, especially in these years when the identity of Anglicanism took decisive shape. Perhaps if we had kept more true to our heritage, we might have avoided some of the sins which have sometimes led us into trouble. SCRIPTURE The Anglican church has always been a biblical Church. It has always made an explicit appeal to Scripture, and its laity and clergy are encouraged to read Scripture regularly. If they said morning and evening prayer daily, as they are encouraged to do, then they would probably read more Scripture than that required by almost any other church. It’s worth remembering that one of the first acts of the English Reformation was the placing of an English Bible in every parish church in the land. Throughout the troubled sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, although deeply divided over many issues, mainly about church order and ceremonial, the surprising thing is that, even into the nineteenth century, the Church of England experienced a basic unity over the supreme authority of Scripture. Whether you turn to the seventeenth-century Puritans, the ‘High Church’ party of Archbishop Laud and Henry Hammond, or the Latitudinarians such as Edward Stillingfleet and William Chillingworth, all were committed to the principle of the authority of Scripture. Now, of course, they disagreed on the nature of that authority. Some, following Luther and, later, Hooker, took the position that Scripture taught all things necessary for salvation, but where Scripture was silent, there was liberty of practice. Hence, ceremonial actions, and liturgical nuances not explicit in Scripture could still be permitted. Others at the more Calvinist end of the spectrum such as Thomas Cartwright, the leader of the Elizabethan Puritans, claimed that what was not in Scripture should not be allowed in the church. It is of course the former of these positions that is enshrined in the 39 Articles. Yet the point is that the dispute was over the extent and nature of that authority, not the authority itself. Now this is not just an abstract point about dogmatic authority. It is at heart an essentially pastoral assertion. It refers to the question of what Anglicans choose to shape their lives, and on what they will feed their hearts, minds and souls. The Anglican belief in the authority of Scripture asserts that Scripture is good for us – it breeds good healthy Christians. As Cranmer put it in his Preface to the Great Bible of 1540: ‘In the Scriptures be the fat pastures of the soul; therein is no venomous meat, no unwholesome thing, they be the very dainty and pure feeding’. As a result, the Anglican church places a great stress upon the private and public reading of Scripture, even before it is preached on. Before we speak about Scripture, we must first listen attentively to it. Bishop Jewel, in his Apology of 1562 boasted: ‘There is nothing read in our churches but the canonical Scriptures, which is done in such order that the Psalter is read every month, the New Testament four times in a year, and the Old Testament once in a year.’ How many of us do anything near that today? Being gradually imbued with Scripture, steadily absorbing its mindset and its spirit (of course canticles and Psalms are Scripture just as much as the readings from the New and Old Testaments), the aim is familiarity with Scripture and basic Christian doctrine. It aims at slowly cultivated holiness of life, rather than dramatic but short-term spiritual special effects. The Book of Common Prayer commends the patristic idea of reading through the Scriptures every year, so that ‘the clergy… should by often reading and meditation in God’s Word be stirred up to godliness themselves, and be more able to exhort others by wholesome doctrine… and that the people, by daily hearing of Holy Scripture read in the church, might continually profit more and more in the knowledge of God.’ Here is a church that sees the reverent, expectant and attentive daily listening to Scripture as the key to holiness. Perhaps the decline of personal daily Bible reading among Anglicans is both a sign and cause of our plight. Besides its pastoral function, this Anglican insistence on the authority of Scripture is also a polemical assertion. Scripture is the text that is final and constitutive for Anglicans, not papal decretals, canon law, unwritten traditions, nor even psychological theory, sociology, opinion polls or the voice of the media, however important it may be to listen and learn from them. This is an important assertion of the distinctiveness of Christianity as opposed to any other way of life on offer in our culture. Too often in the past, Anglicans have been seen as lukewarm, conformist, socially conservative. Now, along with so many other institutions in the west, we are disdained as part of an old passing established order. If we were more true to our heritage and identity, we might realise that our appeal to biblical authority is a call to live by the story of the Bible, and no other story. It is a call to be different, to live by a different set of rules, to march to a different drumbeat, to avoid the social conformity which has been one of Anglicanism’s besetting sins. CULTURE One of Anglicanism’s more regrettable characteristics is a form of cultural imperialism which has insisted on imposing forms of worship, architecture and language on alien cultures. Sitting in nineteenth-century Anglican churches in Jerusalem or Lahore can feel little different from sitting in an Anglican church in Surrey (though it’s usually a littler warmer in Jerusalem or Lahore). In the arena of worship, we have often clung to forms of liturgical rigidity and correctness which don’t always take into account changing patterns of life or culture. The early sixteenth century in particular was a time of great cultural change. As the Renaissance re-introduced the virtues of classical culture into European minds and burgeoning urban life, and as new worlds and continents were being discovered through the explosion of travel and exploration, this was a period in which those at the cutting edge of developing thought, including the reformers, were very aware of the shifting sands of culture. As a result, we find in the writings of those very reformers, a refusal to prescribe too closely forms of worship and order for everyone. There is a recognition that the form in which the gospel is expressed, both liturgically and ecclesiastically, is not fixed and must change with changing culture. They tend to see in the silence of Scripture on these kinds of questions, a mandate for flexibility and adaptation. John Calvin had some important things to say on this, for example, in book four of his Institutes: But because (God) did not will in outward discipline and ceremonies to prescribe in detail what we ought to do (because he foresaw that this depended upon the state of the times, and he did not deem one form suitable for all ages), here we must take refuge in those general rules which he has given, that whatever the necessity of the church will require for order and decorum should be tested against these. Lastly, because he has taught nothing specifically, and because these things are not necessary to salvation, and for the upbuilding of the church ought to be variously accommodated to the customs of each nation and age, it will be fitting (as the advantage of the church will require) to change and abrogate traditional practices and to establish new ones. The same principle is present among Anglican reformers as well. Article 34 of the 39 Articles (which was present in Cranmer’s original articles as well) reads: It is not necessary that Traditions and Ceremonies be in all places one and utterly like; for at all times they have been divers, and may be changed according to the diversities of countries, times and men’s manners, so that nothing be ordained against God’s Word. This is all down to two particular aspects of Anglican theology. One is the Anglican view of authority: that Scripture alone has authority, not any particular interpretation of Scripture, or cultural reading of it, however compelling or contemporary that reading may be. Such a view of authority is very liberating. As a result, Anglicanism has an inbuilt flexibility to respond to different cultures and people, as long as this does not run counter to Scripture. The other aspect is the Reformation doctrine of adiaphora, the belief that although there are central gospel issues which are not negotiable, others are secondary and changeable. Of course it is not always easy to discern which category some doctrines or practices fall into, yet, as Oliver O’Donovan points out, ‘the point of a good theory is not to save us the task of thinking, but to organise our thoughts fruitfully’. In the 1960s, it was common amongst Anglicans (as well as others) to hear the opinion that, in response to a changing culture, we need to change the gospel message yet leave the rest of the church intact. Now perhaps we can recognise that this approach has not worked. Instead perhaps we are rediscovering that there is little wrong with the gospel. Instead it is the forms in which the gospel is presented, lived and expressed which need to change. Anglicanism is in fact entirely happy with this approach – from its (re)formation, it has always believed that, in changing cultures, our customs and habits need to change. It therefore has an ability to create new forms of Christian living and belonging and worshipping. If innovation and Anglicanism have often seemed unlikely bedfellows, then perhaps it’s because we have been untrue to our roots. New emerging forms of church and evangelism such as Alpha, Cell Church, Café church, Alternative Worship, so long as they are within the boundaries and under the authority of the Scriptures and relevant church authorities (see the fourth value below!), must not necessarily be assumed too quickly to be unAnglican. Instead, they must be tested. Then, if they meet with the deeper essences of Anglican faith and practice, they should be welcomed and embraced. Again Calvin gives us good advice: ‘love will best judge what may hurt or edify; and if we let love be our guide, all will be safe’. MODESTY Another of Anglicanism’s besetting sins has been arrogance. Ecclesiastically, we have often been condescending to other churches, especially those who have seceded at different times from the established church. We have disparaged, or even created, other churches by our casting out of different groups, such as the Puritans, Wesley’s Methodists or the non-Jurors. Yet again this assumption of superiority is outlawed by the reformers. For example, consider the position taken up by Anglicans over episcopacy. After the Reformation, all churches in Europe faced a choice over what to do about bishops. Some (for example the Roman Catholics and conservative Anglicans such as William Laud) retained the idea that bishops were of the esse of the church, guaranteeing continuity from age to age. Others (‘free’ churches and Presbyterian puritans within the Church of England) argued that they were unnecessary. The position taken up by the mainline Anglican reformers was different from both of these. It was that bishops were not essential to the being of the church, but useful for guaranteeing good order. They were not of the esse but they were of the bene esse of the church. Most Anglicans (even Laud himself!) didn’t argue that the three-fold order of bishops, priests and deacons was the only possible pattern for church leadership. They simply argued for it on the basis of long custom in the church and its provision of a good workable system of government. What they refused to do was to 9 O’Donovan, Thirty-Nine Articles, p 110. 10 McNeill, Calvin’s Institutes. 4.10., p 1208 Graham Tomlin Anglican Values: The Virtues and Vices of a Christian Church unchurch non-episcopalian Christians. Whereas the Roman church effectively decreed that in the absence of bishops there was no real church at all, most Anglicans held back from this stance. They saw episcopacy as a matter of pragmatism, not dogma, a matter of external government, not necessary for salvation. Continuity of the identity of a church depends not on the presence of an office or person, but on the presence of Jesus Christ through the Spirit and the good news of his grace, expressed in word and sacrament. If that is lost, then there is no church, no matter how many bishops it has! The result of this attitude and perspective is a church which acknowledges the right of other churches to exist. Perhaps the fruit of this came in 1689 with the Act of Toleration, at the time of the ‘Glorious Revolution’. This Act, which allowed dissenting congregations to meet, and took away the right of clergy to compel attendance at Anglican churches, was on the one hand the surrender of the Church of England’s claim to be the only legitimate form of Christianity in England, but on the other, a right and proper act of humility and modesty, true to its reformed and catholic identity. Here, Anglicans ate a good slice of humble pie, and rightly so. The particular decisions taken about episcopacy in the sixteenth century are an illustration and indication of the principle of Christian modesty which lies at the heart of Anglicanism. Since then we have hopefully learnt from, rather than disparaged, Lutherans, Presbyterians and Methodists. Maybe today we can learn much from Vineyard churches, Korean Pentecostals and home churches. In particular, western Anglican churches must adopt the same modesty, humility and willingness to learn towards their younger and more vigorous sister churches in Southeast Asia and Africa, rather than feeling superior to them, insisting they fall into line with western (and often failing) ways of doing things. ACCOUNTABILITY Having said all this, the Reformation in England did insist on keeping hold of bishops. Apart from the brief and chaotic period of the Commonwealth in the mid seventeenth century, the Anglican church which emerged from the Reformation retained the medieval threefold order of ministry - bishops, priests and deacons - rather than move over to a Presbyterian system as many Elizabethan Puritans would have preferred. One of the ongoing tendencies, particularly true perhaps of evangelical Anglicans, has been a tendency to go it alone. John Berridge in the nineteenth century, for example, argued that he was quite entitled to cross parish boundaries without permission, on the grounds that his neighbouring clergy were not preaching the gospel: ‘if they would preach the gospel themselves, there would be no need of my preaching it to their people; but as they do not, I cannot desist’. Charles Simeon on the other hand held the more mainstream evangelical Anglican view that it was right and proper to keep to one’s own patch: ‘a Preacher has enough to do in his own parish’. Sometimes evangelical impatience with the rest of the Church of England has led to a spirit of independence, autonomy and, dare we say it, spiritual pride, claiming that God speaks to us alone, and no-one can argue with that. The Anglican commitment to episcopacy in this context is not a claim that only episcopal churches are real churches. Instead it is a commitment to right and proper accountability within the church. It derives from a healthy theology and spirituality that knows that, left to ourselves, we are quite capable of getting it wrong, reading the signs badly, and mistaking God’s will. We need other Christians, older, wiser and more experienced than us, to check our bold ideas, discern whether they are of the Lord, and to ensure our vision and passion does not trample on the ideals and godly plans of others. And so, while Anglicans can dream up new ways of being church, new styles of worship, new approaches to ministry, we try to do this with right and proper consultation, and submitting ourselves duly to authority - the authority of those God has placed over us, just as the Scripture says (1 Cor. 16:15-16). Of course, this sometimes feels uncomfortable. We may often feel that bishops get it wrong (and being human they sometimes will). However, this is, at least so Anglicans tend to think, far better than the alternative that is sometimes glimpsed in the more radical wing of the Reformation (and in some forms of popular American Christianity) where everyone who wants to plant a church does so, regardless of the needs of the wider church, ending up with a different kind of church on every street corner, and the Christian witness broken into a thousand tiny fragments. Accountability is a sign of health and not inertia. It connects us to others, and prevents a damaging spiritual independence that ignores the whole body of Christ in favour of the particular part of the body which may be my responsibility. And that is what episcopacy preserves. It connects the local church with the regional, national and global church. It maintains the Christian virtue of humility and correctibility. It is, in other words, a response to the biblical doctrine of sin – my tendency to see and do things my way. Yes there are limits – bishops themselves need to be held accountable to the will of God revealed in Scripture and due processes must be in place to ensure that happens. Yet that does not take away this precious and vital Anglican value – the discipline of accountability. POLITICS The churches of the Reformation related to their respective state powers in a bewildering variety of ways. Calvin’s Geneva was a city state, independent of wider regional powers, and it established a delicate balance between the roles of minister and magistrate in the order of a Christian society. Zwingli saw state and church in Zürich as two sides of the same coin so that, as a pastor, he could play both a political and a pastoral role at the same time. Lutheran churches often saw religion imposed and protected by state authorities. Calvinist churches in France operated under suspicion and distrust from the state, having to function largely as underground movements. In England, the Church that emerged from the Reformation was tied closely to the realm, with the monarch as supreme governor of both church and state – a unique arrangement among Reformation churches. Clergy were both pastors of the church, yet also servants of the monarch, taking a strict oath of allegiance to the Crown, a position which has not been without its tensions then and ever since. Naturally not all Anglican churches remain established in this same way, but this historical fact still has important implications for Anglicans today. As a result of this history, the Anglican church has always been a political church. Not in the narrow sense of being allied to any particular political party, but in being concerned for the polis, the city, the public life of the wider society and community. We have never been keen on the gathered church model of a pure group, separate from public life. Instead we have wanted to be involved in and committed to society, even if that sometimes is a difficult place to be. This has imposed upon Anglican churches a prophetic role. We may prefer to avoid this - our leaders will get criticised for poking their noses into ‘political’ matters – but, to be true to our identity, we must not run away from this responsibility. Whether at a national or local level our history of intimate relationships with government means that we must take an interest in issues which affect all the people in our parishes, not just the Christians. We must articulate with boldness the principles and vision which should shape public life. It is part of our care for whole people, not just disembodied souls. This is in a sense a central part of a distinctive Anglican missiology. How do Anglican churches relate to the wider society? Yes, by evangelism, but also by taking a keen interest in the whole of life, not just the religious aspects of it. Since the Enlightenment, the temptation for all religion in the west has been to buy into what Lesslie Newbigin calls the split between private values and public facts. Thus Christianity (and Anglicanism) can be tolerated as a spiritualizing force, speaking only about the inner life, a retreat into the private sphere of beliefs, not addressing the public world of facts. There is a real temptation to build separatist church communities which glory in their vertical privileges but shun their horizontal responsibilities. Our identity-forming history denies us that option. By sticking close to our heritage we can avoid the temptation to pietistic withdrawal and public irrelevance. COMMUNITY The English Reformation was, among many other things, a reassertion of the importance of the laity in church life. The reformers insisted worship must be done in the vernacular – an end to Latin, the private language of priests and theologians. Clergy were to be like other Christians, married, bringing up children, no longer the only ones allowed access to the cup in the Christian family meal. Holy Communion was just that – communion both with the Lord at his Supper, and with each other. The distinction between clergy and laity was primarily to be one of function not status. Children were seen as included within the covenant, belonging to the family, still baptised and welcomed. Luther’s belief that the rite which confers the right and responsibility to engage in Christian ministry was baptism, not ordination, also finds an echo in our Anglican formularies. Printing made Bibles available to all, so that Cranmer’s preface to the Great Bible of 1540 could urge lay people to take responsibility for their own reading of the Scriptures: ‘for the Holy Ghost hath so ordered and attempered the Scriptures, that in them, as well publicans, fishers and shepherds may find their edification, as great doctors their erudition’. Not put off by the possibility that they might not understand the Bible, Cranmer urges them to read it for themselves, due to the great benefit they will derive from it. At least this was the theory. The practice was a bit different. The laity were in fact only partly ‘released’ by the Reformation. Clericalism soon raised its head again and catholic priests were often replaced by protestant preachers, every bit as authoritarian as their forebears! One only needs to read the novels of Jane Austen or Anthony Trollope to get a sense of the way in which Anglican churches soon developed a clerical monopoly that effectively distanced lay people from true Christian liberty and responsibility. At least the idea was there. That ideal - of a church as a community of people ministering to one another, of every believer as a priest, standing in the place of Christ to offer counsel, encouragement, even absolution to Christian brothers and sisters - remains. This was a distinct move away from the medieval notion of church as a place where the laity were largely passive recipients of grace dispensed by the clergy in the form of sacraments. This was a vision of church as community rather than institution. Lay people were intended to be active ministers, not passive observers, taking responsibility for their own & each other’s growth in faith, understanding and holiness, even taking responsibility for the church itself. If we had remained a little more true to the vision of church laid out in the time of the Reformation, perhaps we might have avoided clerical domination, another besetting Anglican sin. CONCLUSION The past often contains the secrets of the future. As we search for a way forward for the Anglican churches into the twenty-first century, these commitments made in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries may help point a way ahead. If we can rediscover a church shaped by Scripture, quick to respond to cultural change, humbly willing to learn from others, properly accountable, committed to the public life of society and with a strong sense of mutual life and community, then perhaps God may be able to use us as he has done in the past. The Revd Dr Graham Tomlin is Principal of St. Paul’s Theological Centre, based at Holy Trinity, Brompton, London.

Anglican Watch July 2, 2025   Anglican Watch  has filed a Title IV clergy disciplinary complaint against the Rev. Canon Carl Turner, rector of St. Thomas, Fifth Avenue. We did so on behalf of a male victim of sexual assault at the church, whom we referred to by the pseudonym “Michael” in order to protect his privacy and to avoid causing additional trauma. This morning, we filed an updated complaint to address four minor errata in the original. (One of the bad things about being volunteers is that folks here sometimes stay up way too late working on things of this sort!) The complaint centers on claims that Turner (“respondent”), acting directly or through others, attempted in violation of the Title IV church disciplinary canons to interfere with the ongoing criminal and Title IV investigations into the matter, which address two alleged sexual assaults against the victim, by publishing various false and defamatory per se statements about the victim in the St. Thomas church newsletter. Specific allegations we believe to be false include claims that the victim: 1.     Threatened one or more persons connected with St. Thomas. 2.     Harassed one or more persons with St. Thomas. 3.     Made false accusations, apparently about being sexually assaulted. 4.     Damaged church property. 5.     Had been arrested due to his conduct at St. Thomas. Here is a screen cap: Possibly defamatory communications from St. Thomas Fifth Avenue Our investigation, which included multiple in-person interviews, a background check on the victim, contacts with the district attorney and the NYPD, all provided zero evidence to support Turner’s claims. Moreover, we went the direct route, which was to ask the St. Thomas wardens for the information on the alleged arrest, and the names of folks at the DA’s and the police department handling these matters. Pretty simple request, right? After all, if Turner is okay putting those claims out there, a case number, along with a couple of contacts, would shut the matter down in record time. Indeed, we would happily publish a retraction were Turner in possession of supporting evidence. And these are items of public record, and all the more so because Turner chose to publish them in the St. Thomas newsletter. (While he did not expressly name the victim, almost everyone at the parish knows the identity of target of Turner’s smear campaign.) But, in true Episcopal fashion, our request was met with silence. Meanwhile, two St. Thomas’ employees are facing criminal charges, even as the Diocese of New York sits on its hands in splendidly stupid silence. We need to be clear: The new Title IV protocols are intended to facilitate transparency, healing, and resolution, but so far, the Diocese of New York has bollixed all of these goals. And while one of the employees in question has been fired, we’re still left wondering: Why is the church allowing clergy with criminal sexual assault charges anywhere near the place? Especially at a church with a choir school — and a  documented history of child sexual abuse . We also want to be crystal clear:  Intentionally interfering with a criminal investigation is, itself, the crime of obstruction of justice.  And while New York does not have a standalone obstruction of justice statute, such crimes typically are prosecuted under the Obstructing Governmental Administration in the Second Degree statute (NY Penal Law § 195.05), which provides for up to a year in prison. Additionally, the victim almost certainly has a case for defamation, defamation per se (which doesn’t require proof of actual damages). Further, while the state does not recognize civil conspiracy as a standalone tort, it does recognize it when various persons band together to engage in a primary, actionable tort. Sexual assault and battery almost certainly is one such primary tort. We’re posting our amended complaint below, which was edited to address four minor errata. We raised the issue of retaliation, expressly forbidden under the Title IV canons, separately. An important point: Turner’s apparent efforts to engage in obstruction of justice warrant his immediate suspension as rector, and we specifically ask the Diocese of New York in our complaint to do just that. Moreover, we have grave concerns about the suitability for ministry of anyone who engages in such alleged behavior, including whether Turner may have one or more personality disorders that should disqualify him from ministry. Even if,  arguendo,  someone else, perhaps one of the two employees arrested for sexual assault, provided the fabricated information to Turner, anyone with half the sense God gave a goat knows you don’t publish content of this sort about a parishioner. Indeed, even were the facts alleged true, anyone with a even a tiny amount of common sense would run the matter past the bishop, the canon to the ordinary, the chancellor, and ideally outside counsel. (Attorneys within the church, in our experience, often lack sufficient objectivity to make rational decisions on behalf of the church. Even worse, they invariably don’t have the backbone required to apologize when the screw things up on behalf of the church. So much for transparency and accountability.) Further, as is often the case when  Anglican Watch  covers a case, we’ve developed a friendly relationship with the parishioner affected by misconduct. We like “Michael” tremendously, and have zero doubt as to his personal and professional integrity. Thus, we are shocked and appalled that, even in a denomination with a flawed theology of forgiveness, this situation has been allowed to unfold as it has. Indeed, if the episcopacy cannot address issues such as this — and promptly, with integrity — why bother? Finally, we remind all involved that Title IV expressly applies only to clergy. Thus, the confidentiality provisions in Title IV only apply to clergy, and we reserve the right to publish information about misconduct at St. Thomas’ and the Diocese of New York in our sole and absolute discretion. In the meantime, our advice to the Diocese is to act fast, and do right. The longer you muck around with this, the worse the outcome will be for all involved. And as things stand, there’s already substantial irreparable harm due to the Diocese’s appalling handling of this case. END

By Stephen Noll https://stephenswitness.org/ July 14, 2025   NOTE: I preached this meditation on Sunday, July 4, 2021 at my local church in Pittsburgh. It is now available in my recent book:  Millennial People, Boomer Priest: My Year Eldering a Young Congregation .  It seems appropriate to our present situation in 2024, which resembles, eerily, the year 1968. LESSONS: Psalm 67; Deuteronomy 32:1-9; Ephesians 4:15-27 This morning, I put out the flag on our porch, which I do on national holidays. But before I did, I paused. Why? First, because showing the flag seems a provocative act at present, and second, because this year Independence Day falls on Sunday, the Lord’s Day. But I went ahead and thought this coincidence in the secular and sacred calendars might be an opportunity to say why. Let me take you back to 1968, long before most of you were born. My wife Peggy and I graduated from Cornell University on June 1, 1968. The commencement speaker was John W. Gardner. Gardner was Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare and had helped implement much of President Lyndon Johnson’s Great Society agenda. He went on to found “Common Cause,” an advocacy group for citizen participation in government, for which he was attacked from both the Right and the Left. Gardner’s speech at Cornell was widely reported at the time, particularly for his warning against “uncritical lovers and unloving critics” of America. Gardner imagined 23 rd  century historians looking back from two hundred years on this time:  They pointed out that twentieth century institutions were caught in savage crossfire between uncritical lovers and unloving critics. On the one side, those who loved their institutions tended to smother them in an embrace of death, loving their rigidities more than their promise, shielding them from life-giving criticism. On the other side, there arose a breed of critics without love, skilled in demolition but untutored in the arts by which human institutions are nurtured and strengthened and made to flourish. Between the two, the institutions perished.   The twenty third century scholars understood that where human institutions were concerned, love without criticism brings stagnation, and criticism without love brings destruction. And they emphasized that the swifter the pace of change, the more lovingly men had to care for and criticize their institutions to keep them intact through the turbulent passages. 1968 was indeed a turbulent year. Vietnam protests had come to a head, with the burning of flags and draft cards, which led to the withdrawal of Lyndon Johnson from the Presidential race on March 31 st . Five days later, on April 4 th , Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated in Memphis, followed by destructive riots in many American cities, including Pittsburgh. Whole blocks in Washington, DC came to look like a bombed-out war zone and remained so for years. On June 5, four days after Gardner’s speech at Cornell, Robert Kennedy was assassinated. Kennedy was a frontrunner in the Presidential race and considered a champion of human rights. In August, violent clashes of protesters and police broke out at the Democratic Convention, which led in November to the election of Richard Nixon, who ran on a platform of law and order and patriotism. In 1968, there was demonstrably a shortage of critical lovers and loving critics. I fear the same is true today. So let me add a small ounce of critical love for America on this Independence Day. I do so as a biblical Christian. As Moses prepares to send the people of Israel into the Promised Land, he puts the moment in this perspective: “When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance, when he divided mankind, he fixed the borders of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God. But the Lord’s portion is his people, Jacob his allotted heritage” (Deut 32:8). God’s people have a dual loyalty:  to their land and to their God . The land of Canaan comes with a promise and a warning: settle down in the land of milk and honey, but do not forget God, or you will lose it. When one thinks of our native land, the first thing that comes to mind is its beauty. Take the  popular national hymns like this one , with a verse added by Ray Charles: Oh beautiful, for spacious skiesFor amber waves of grainFor purple mountain majestiesAbove the fruited plain… But now wait a minute, I’m talking aboutAmerica, sweet AmericaYou know, God done shed his grace on theeHe crowned thy good, yes he did, in brotherhoodFrom sea to shining sea. To my mind, one of the great loving critics of our day is Ken Burns, who has produced films about Americans and American culture, from Mark Twain to the Wright Brothers, from baseball and Jackie Robinson and to jazz and Louis Armstrong. Most recently, Peggy and I watched a film on “The National Parks: America’s Best Idea.” What an awesome inheritance of natural and human beauty and resources we have access to as Americans! Secondly, nations have a history. The entire Book of Deuteronomy recounts Israel’s past with a warning about its future. It is not an idyllic past: the entire generation that left Egypt had rebelled and was consigned to forty years of wandering in the desert; nor did it have an idyllic ending: destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple and exile to Babylon. Nevertheless, the people of Israel owned this history as their history, accepting God’s judgment along with His mercy. Likewise, we loving critics must own our history with the good and the bad. One of our great celebratory historians is David McCullough, a Pittsburgher for whom a bridge over the Allegheny River was recently named, who has like Ken Burns documented many historical figures and events, from John Adams to the Johnstown Flood, from Harry Truman to the Panama Canal. There is much we can take pride in as Americans this July Fourth. But, we must also confess, there are dark, damning clouds overhanging our country. One of them is the scourge of abortion on demand. Conceived in the ’Sixties, legalized in 1973, abortion violates the most basic human right and instinct.  “Can a woman forget her nursing child,” Isaiah asks, “that she should have no compassion on the son of her womb?” (Isa 49:15). I will not pursue this matter further except to quote the author of the Declaration of Independence, who said: “I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just, that his justice cannot sleep forever”; and to note that this evil has called forth many acts of compassion and generosity.   There is another dark cloud which hovers over our national identity and destiny: the legacy of slavery and racism, which was sparked anew by the death of George Floyd and led to upheavals like those in 1968 and which will follow us long after the coronavirus pandemic has faded in memory. During the lockdown, I turned back to history for perspective. I was taken by Frederick Douglass’ address: “What to the Slave is the Fourth of July?” Written in 1852, not long after his escape and emancipation from slavery, Douglass begins: “The Fourth of July is the birthday of your National Independence and of your political freedom.” But, he goes on, “the rich inheritance of justice, liberty, prosperity and independence, bequeathed by your fathers, is  yours , not  mine .  You  may rejoice,  I  must mourn. Standing with God and the crushed and bleeding slave on this occasion, I will, in the name of humanity which is outraged, in the name of liberty which is fettered, in the name of the Constitution and the Bible, which are disregarded and trampled upon, dare to call in question and denounce, with all the emphasis I can command, everything that serves to perpetuate slavery – the great sin and shame of America! That, I would say, is about as critical as one can be, addressing an assembly of white abolitionists. He proceeds to knock down one by one the slaveholders’ attempts to “slander” the Constitution, which, he says is “a Glorious Liberty Document.” He ends on a note of hope: “I do not despair of this country. There are forces in operation, which must inevitably work the downfall of slavery” – forces which ten years later led to the Civil War and hundreds of thousands of white and black soldiers who died for the cause of freedom. Slavery died, racism did not, in both South and North. It took another great man to move the country forward a century later.  I was privileged to attend the March on Washington in August 1963  and hear Martin Luther King, Jr.’s “I have a dream” speech at the Lincoln Memorial. If you have not heard it, let me urge you to listen to the  audio version online . King begins with an indictment of white America: Five-score years ago a great American, in whose symbolic shadow we stand today signed the Emancipation Proclamation…. But one hundred years later, the Negro is still not free; one hundred years later, the life of the Negro is still sadly crippled by the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination. He proceeds with a litany of present injustices and warns in the words of the prophet Amos: “we will not be satisfied until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream.” But like Frederick Douglass, King ends on a note of hope: I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream. It is a dream that one day this nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed – we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal. In his peroration, King summons the deepest chords of our national memory and love of country, recalling the patriotic hymn “My country, ’tis of Thee, sweet land of liberty, of thee I sing; Land where my fathers died, land of the pilgrims’ pride, from every mountain side, let freedom ring”: So let freedom ring [he continues] from the mighty mountains of New York. Let freedom ring from the heightening Alleghenies of Pennsylvania. Let freedom ring from the snow-capped Rockies of Colorado. Let freedom ring from the curvaceous slopes of California. But not only that. Let freedom ring from Stone Mountain in Georgia. Let freedom ring from Lookout Mountain in Tennessee. Let freedom ring from every hill and molehill of Mississippi, from every mountainside, let freedom ring.   And when we allow freedom to ring, when we let it ring from every village and hamlet, from every state and city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God’s children- black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Catholics and Protestants – will be able to join hands and to sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, “Free at last, free at last, thank God Almighty, we are free at last.” Brothers and sisters, we are a tiny molehill in the American landscape. Some say our country is moving backward, some say forward. But whatever your judgment, I would appeal to you to hold out hope for our deeply flawed nation. As Christians, let us speak the truth in love with our neighbors. As citizens, let us be critical lovers and loving critics. That’s why I put out my flag today – with a trembling hand.

COMMENTARY   By David W. Virtue, DD www.virtueonline.org July 2, 2025   Speaking to the Cambridge Union recently, the former Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby said he was “thick” not to recognize that faithful and committed same sex relationships are a “huge blessing”.   The archbishop doesn’t get it. His tenure was marked by one disastrous decision after another, forcing him, in the end to resign over his failure to investigate abuse allegations against lay leader John Smyth when Welby became archbishop in 2013.   On same sex relationships he has proven to be equally disastrous and theologically illiterate.   Welby said, “When they fall in love, and when they live out that love faithfully and with stability and caring for others, it is a huge blessing for them and for society; and I have seen that in so many places that, in the end, even I began to realise that I was being thick.”   The archbishop’s capitulation to the culture over same sex relationships can only be described as naive at best and eternally dangerous at worst to the souls of those who engage in such behaviors.   Scripture is abundantly clear that “from the beginning of creation, ‘male and female He made them’ [Gen 1:27] and ‘for this reason a man … will be joined to his wife and the two will become one flesh’ [Gen 2:24]” (Mark 10:2-12; Matt 19:3-9). In other words, the fact that God had designed two (and only two) primary sexes for complementary sexual pairing was Jesus’ basis for a rigorous monogamy position.   To bless something God has never blessed is to go against God. That thought had apparently not crossed Welby’s mind, or if it had, that he, Justin Welby knew better, and that God had changed His mind in light of today’s open-minded progressive culture.   Welby, in a podcast, had come to the conclusion that all sexual activity, whether straight or gay, should be within a committed relationship.   The Church’s process around matters of sexuality, relationships and marriage known as ‘Living in Love and Faith’ is still discerning a way forward. Earlier this month, the Rt. Rev. Martyn Snow, the conservative Bishop of Leicester announced he was stepping down from his role as lead bishop for the process saying he no longer believed agreement could be reached under his leadership.   Now that should tip your hand that all is not well, and that the CofE is deeply conflicted over the issue, with no resolution anywhere near in sight. One wonders if that message has reached the ears of the Archbishop of York, Stephen Cottrell, the de facto leader of the CofE, in the absence of the ABC.   Distinguished theologian Dr. Robert A. J. Gagnon whose magisterial work, The Bible and Homosexual Practice: Texts and Hermeneutics, begs to disagree.   In an article Why “Gay Marriage” Is Wrong, Gagnon, argues that advocates of homosexual practice believe that “gay marriage,” or at least homosexual civil unions, will reduce promiscuity and promote fidelity among homosexual persons. Such an argument overlooks two key points.   “First, legal and ecclesiastical embrace of homosexual unions is more likely to undermine the institution of marriage and produce other negative effects than it is to make fidelity and longevity the norm for homosexual unions.   “Second, and even more importantly, homosexual unions are not wrong primarily because of their disproportionately high incidence of promiscuity (especially among males) and breakups (especially among females). They are wrong because “gay marriage” is a contradiction in terms. As with consensual adult incest and polyamory, considerations of commitment and fidelity factor only after certain structural prerequisites are met.   Scripture, Creation, and a Two-Sexes Prerequisite   The creation story in Genesis 2:18-24 illustrates this point beautifully. An originally binary, or sexually undifferentiated, adam (“earthling”) is split down the “side” (a better translation of Hebrew tsela than “rib”) to form two sexually differentiated persons. Marriage is pictured as the reunion of the two constituent parts or “other halves,” man and woman, says Gagnon.   “By definition homosexual desire is sexual narcissism or sexual self-deception. There is either (1) a conscious recognition that one desires in another what one already is and has as a sexual being (anatomy, physiology, sex-based traits) or (2) a self-delusion of sorts in which the sexual same is perceived as some kind of sexual other. As one ancient text puts it, “seeing themselves in one another they were ashamed neither of what they were doing nor of what they were having done to them” (Pseudo-Lucian, Affairs of the Heart 20). The modern word “homosexual”—from the Greek homoios, “like” or “same”—underscores this self-evident desire for the essential sexual self-shared in common with one’s partner.”   “It is not mere coincidence that when Jesus dealt with an issue of sexual behavior in Mark 10:2-12 he cited the same two texts from Genesis, 1:27 and 2:24, that lie behind Paul’s critique of homosexual practice. Jesus adopted a “back-to-creation” model of sexuality. He treated Genesis 1:27 and 2:24 as normative and prescriptive for the church (Mark 10:6-9). In contending for the indissolubility of marriage, Jesus clearly presupposed the one explicit prerequisite in Gen 1:27 and 2:24; namely, that there be a male and female, man and woman, to effect the “one flesh” reunion.”   Addressing the argument that because Jesus said nothing about the matter that it was not an important issue for him, Gagnon said there is no historical basis for arguing that Jesus might have been neutral or even favorable toward same-sex intercourse.   “All the evidence we have points overwhelmingly to the conclusion that Jesus would have strongly opposed same-sex intercourse had such behavior been a serious problem among first-century Jews. It simply was not a problem in Israel.    “First, Jesus' "silence" has to be set against the backdrop of unequivocal and strong opposition to same-sex intercourse in the Hebrew Bible and throughout early Judaism. It is not historically likely that Jesus overturned any prohibition of the Mosaic law, let alone on a strongly held moral matter such as this. And Jesus was not shy about disagreeing with prevailing viewpoints. Had he wanted his disciples to take a different viewpoint he would have had to say so.   “Second, the notion of Jesus' "silence" has to be qualified. According to Mark, Jesus spoke out against porneia, "sexual immorality" -- see Mark 7:21-23 -- and accepted the Decalogue commandment against adultery -- see Mark 10:19. In Jesus' day, and for many centuries thereafter, porneia was universally understood in Judaism to include same-sex intercourse. Moreover, the Decalogue commandment against adultery was treated as a broad rubric prohibiting all forms of sexual practice that deviated from the creation model in Genesis 1-2, including homoerotic intercourse.   “The vision of marriage found in the Jewish and Christian Scriptures is one of reuniting male and female into an integrated sexual whole. Marriage is not just about more intimacy and sharing one’s life with another in a lifelong partnership. It is about sexual merger—or, in Scripture’s understanding, re-merger—of essential maleness and femaleness.      “It is a relatively easy matter to demonstrate that in ancient Israel, early Judaism, and early Christianity, the only form of “consensual” sexual behavior regarded as a more severe infraction than homosexual practice was bestiality. The historical evidence indicates that every author of Scripture, as well as Jesus, would have been appalled by homosexual relationships, committed or otherwise.”   The view of Scripture against same-sex intercourse is pervasive, absolute and strong, and was all those things in relation to the broader cultural contexts from which Scripture emerged. It was then, and remains today, a core countercultural vision for human sexuality.   “Ancient Israel, early Judaism and early Christianity never adopted the position that they should alter their ethical standards simply because the broader cultural milieu took a more accepting view of some practices.”   In ignoring the biblical evidence against homosexual behavior and that committed same-sex relationships are a fallacy, Justin Welby demonstrates that he is still thick. The entire weight of Scripture and history is against him.   END

For too long senior clerics lacked the confidence of their religious convictions and thus drove away their congregations   By Joanna Williams THE TIMES  June 30 2025   As global conflicts intensify, the Church of England has begun preparing for a “serious” war involving the UK. Proposals before the church’s General Synod in York next month will make it simpler to appoint military chaplains and provide support for parishes to operate as “a church in a time of conflict” through the creation of “reflection and prayer spaces”. No doubt this will provide reassurance to regular churchgoers and troubled members of the armed forces.   Yet for all the earnest preparedness, the church is overlooking one crucial point. Many among the British public would not notice if their local vicar swapped cassock for fatigues and, broomstick over shoulder, re-formed the Home Guard. Offering succour amid conflict is all well and good but it helps if there is a flock in need of ministry.   Attendance at Church of England services is in long-term decline. Although there has been a slight rise over the past four years, congregations remain markedly smaller than before the Covid pandemic. Yet this decline comes against what the Bible Society has labelled a “quiet revival”. Young men in particular seem to be showing more interest in Christianity: 21 per cent of men aged 18-24 now claim to attend church at least monthly, compared with just 4 per cent in 2018. But the Anglican church is not benefiting from this revival; it is Roman Catholic and Pentecostal churches that have gained new members.   Time and again, the Church of England misjudges the moment. Take the pandemic. At a time when people wanted the comfort and security of religion, churches locked their doors. It was impossible to enter a place of worship even for private, silent reflection. Although the announcement that churches were to close was made by the prime minister, archbishops and bishops urged clergy to comply. Not even funerals took place in church buildings.   The church was then assailed by a child abuse scandal. Senior figures, including the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, were accused of showing a “distinct lack of curiosity” in their handling of the case of John Smyth, a Christian barrister who brutally beat some 130 boys over several decades. It appeared to many as if the reputation of the church had been placed above safeguarding children, a view only reinforced by Welby’s tone deaf final speech in the House of Lords.   Since Welby’s resignation, the church has shown an inability to separate worldly problems from spiritual concerns. I took my family to midnight mass at Canterbury Cathedral on Christmas Eve in the hope of a morally uplifting message amid the sloth and gluttony. What we got was a sermon on the evils of child abuse and the need for the church to repent and change. Few would disagree. But surely Christmas Eve could have been left to the baby Jesus rather than the church’s internal struggles.   Perhaps more than anything, it’s the failure of the church to stick to its core purpose — to put God and Christianity front and centre of all it does — that consigns the institution to irrelevance. Senior figures within the church have not only appeared to grapple openly with the physical resurrection of Jesus but also with a belief in God. From Welby down, bishops seem more comfortable discussing opposition to immigration controls, Brexit and welfare reform than scriptural matters.    Support for Black Lives Matter, the establishment of an antiracism “task force”’ and a commitment to donate £100 million to slavery reparations all add to a sense that the Bible has been dumped for more fashionable causes. In adopting a pick ’n’ mix selection of woke values, the church, like many universities, museums and art galleries, becomes just another institution in search of a purpose.   Bureaucracy fills the moral vacuum. News that disgraced former Post Office boss Paula Vennells was shortlisted to become the Bishop of London came as little surprise.   The interminable process of recruiting a new Archbishop of Canterbury crawls ever onwards. Anglicans can only look on with envy at Catholics who had a new pope in place within days.   The empty chair at Lambeth Palace appears all too symbolic: no one seems to know what the Church of England is for any more, let alone who should lead it. Sadly, as pews empty, the church compounds problems by showing a disregard for the religious and historical significance of its buildings. A recent report from the think tank Civitas highlights the crumbling state of many ancient churches as funding to parishes has been cut and resources directed to the institution’s central bureaucracy. Overly ambitious, centrally imposed net-zero targets are another headache for rural churches.   Living in Canterbury, I get to admire the stunning 16th-century Christ Church Gate, the entrance to the city’s cathedral precincts, daily. But news comes of plans to transform the gate into a one-bedroom apartment that could be let out, Airbnb style, to holidaymakers. Last summer, the cathedral hosted a silent disco, a money-making event which looks set to return this August.   It would be easy to blame both the church’s moral woes and financial troubles on shrinking congregations. But the next archbishop needs to confront the fact that the precise opposite might be true: attendance is falling and budgets are in crisis because, for far too long, high-ups in the Church of England have lacked confidence in their religious conviction. Sadly, it seems to have taken the extreme threat of global conflict to prompt the search for a long-lost sense of purpose.   ENDsection

COMMENTARY   By David W. Virtue, DD www.virtueonline.org June 30, 2025   As the culture descends further into the abyss and secularism takes hold of younger generations, the question must be asked what kind of Christianity will emerge from the secular swamp.   The rise of cultural Christianity looks appealing on the surface, atheists seem to like the veneer of Christianity that keeps society stable, but full commitment to Christ is not on their agenda. Nones are still on the rise. They number in the millions. Nearly 30% of Americans are religiously unaffiliated, describing themselves as atheists, agnostics or “nothing in particular”.   Furthermore, when the sinister forces of Islam raise their head above the Christian ramparts, everybody gets decidedly jittery.   Churchianity is in decline across the West. Denominations are emptying faster than garbage cans on pick up days. According to missiologist Carey Nieuwhof, there’s a church building closing once every hour in the U.S. That should be a wakeup call. Ya think.   Furthermore, American churches are increasingly refraining from including denominational affiliation in their name. This trend seems to be most prevalent amongst Baptist churches and less common in historically liturgical denominations such as the Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Lutheran, Anglican or Presbyterian churches, writes Isaac Collum in a column for IRD. “Rather than include denominational affiliation in their name, many local churches instead opt for generic, one-word names such as Life, Grace or Crossroads. Others use location in their name to build the identity of the church such as Chapel Hill Church, West Hills Church, or Wesley Chapel Church. Notable examples of churches hiding affiliation include Fellowship Church in Grapevine, Texas, and Woodlands Church near Houston.”   Still and all it compels the question what sort of Christianity is being proposed by the stayers?   Excising the cults and “Christian” sects like Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons et al, that have weird views of Jesus, the Bible and the Trinity, we are still left with two basic views. One is Catholic, the other is Protestant meaning reformed.   With a new Pope, many hope for a revived traditional Catholicism complete with the Latin Mass; a clear post Vatican II church that they can fully identify with as Catholic. They may get it. Time will tell. Meantime the Pope must deal with rampant homosexuality in his priestly ranks along with thousands of cases of sexual abuse resulting in numerous diocesan bankruptcies. The jury is still out for the RCC with this new Pope. Right noises don’t necessarily equate to right action.   From the Protestant side, the picture is really quite clear. Whether you are Pentecostal, Baptist, orthodox Anglican, orthodox Presbyterian or orthodox Methodist, to name just a few denominations, the picture has not changed in 500 years.   Luther’s ‘Here I stand I can do no other’ and his five Solas have stood the test of time.   Sola Scriptura – Theology must be scripturally grounded. Sola Christus – Theology must be Christ focused. Sola Gratia -- Theology must be grace-saturated. Sola Fide - Theology must be faith-driven. Soli Deo Gloria – Theology must be God-dominated.   Now most denominational preachers will not preach the Solas in sermons but they are assumed when the word is preached.   A pastor or priest who exegetes the text of Scripture is obeying the first Sola. When he focuses on Christ alone for salvation, he is obeying the second Sola. If he preaches by faith alone in the finished work of Christ at the cross, he is obedient to Sola Fide, and so on.   Rome will never understand this, nor apparently will they be persuaded despite all the talk of Evangelicals and Catholics together.   Thomas Cranmer, and the other English reformers began as devout Roman Catholics, but their context exposed them to the “new learning” of Renaissance humanism. This led them directly to the Bible and the early church fathers, where they caught the Reformation bug, writes Dean Chuck Collins.   Protestants consider many Catholic teachings unbiblical, like their understanding of the Pope’s authority, transubstantiation, purgatory, and the extraordinary place of Mary alongside Jesus as a co-redeemer.   But when we speak of the gospel that the wonderful peculiarities of what it means to be protestant Christian are seen.   The Reformation’s biggest discovery, after the Bible, was finding and experiencing a way of righteousness and justification that was all but forgotten in the Middle Ages.   Imputed verses infused righteousness delineated Protestant and Catholic teaching. Catholics understand it as a “process” to make them holy enough for the Day of Judgement. The sixteenth century reformers began at a totally different place. They believe (and we still do) that no one is ever righteous enough and that all fall short of the glory of God. Protestants understand that that their only hope is outside of themselves – another righteousness – a perfect righteousness that can somehow relate unholy men and women to a wholly righteous God. It is the righteousness of God himself which he credits to our account by faith. Protestants believe that God credits to them Christ’s own perfect righteousness.   These two views have not changed in 500 years and probably never will.  Can we be reformational without being denominational? The answer of course is yes. When God’s Spirit moves across the land as it did with the Wesley’s and other revivalists, denominationalism played little part. God seemed not to care who belonged to whom.   America today is in an advanced state of moral, spiritual and political decay; we are polarized as we have never been with hushed talk of civil war.   God’s Spirit may not appear like Belshazzar’s ‘mene, mene, tekel upharson,’ but perhaps in His mercy God will have a Daniel waiting to reveal himself. Time will tell.   END

By Jon Brown, Christian Post Reporter THE CHRISTIAN POST June 17, 2025   CHANGED co-founder Elizabeth Woning speaks on the steps of the California state Capitol in Sacramento on June 12, 2025, joined by other members of the organization who have left the LGBTQ lifestyle. | Courtesy CHANGED Movement   A group of Christians who have repented of homosexual or transgender behavior gathered at the California state Capitol in Sacramento last Thursday to speak out against cultural and government resistance toward those who desire to leave the LGBT lifestyle.   “I hope that this event accomplishes a pushback against the belief that people don't change,” Elizabeth Woning, an organizer of the event who serves as executive director of advocacy and government affairs for CHANGED Movement, told The Christian Post.   CHANGED, in partnership with the California Family Council, held a two-day “Speak Out” event last Wednesday and Thursday that culminated with Christians offering short testimonies on the state Capitol steps about how they believe God led them out of the LGBT identity.   Several of the speakers grew emotional as they described how their sinful responses to pain only deepened their suffering, leading them into a self-destructive downward spiral until they turned to God.   All of them pushed back against the prevailing culture’s suggestion that healing from such pain is impossible. Trans athletes continue to dominate women’s sports and steal titles, dreams, and scholarships. With the 2028 Olympics approaching, now is the time to act. Add your name to demand fairness and protect women’s athletics at every level. Sign it!   Woning, who left lesbianism and now has a husband, is the co-founder of CHANGED, which she established in 2018 with Ken Williams, a licensed pastor at Bethel Church in Redding, California, who penned the 2021 bookThe Journey Out: How I Followed Jesus Away from Gay. Williams is also now married and has four children.   CHANGED describes itself as “a growing international network of people who left LGBTQ identity behind.”   Despite claims from critics that “conversion therapy” causes psychological harm, Woning said the event was intended to show that people who do seek change can have fulfilling lives. It also marked the seventh anniversary of when approximately 30 people associated with the organization first assembled there in 2018 in response to AB 2943.   The proposed state law, which emerged from the California Legislative LGBTQ Caucus, would have treated “efforts to change behaviors or gender expressions, or to eliminate or reduce sexual or romantic attractions or feelings toward individuals of the same sex” as consumer fraud.   Critics argued the bill would have effectively criminalized professional counseling even for adults seeking to move away from same-sex attraction or gender confusion, which they claimed was a violation of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.   Another concern was the bill’s vague language, which the nonprofit Liberty Counsel warned at the time could encompass pastoral counseling and selling self-help books unsupportive of LGBT ideology, potentially even including the Bible.   After speakers involved with CHANGED gathered to share their stories at the California state Capitol in June 2018, the bill fizzled when it was pulled on the last day of that year's legislative session, despite passing in the State Assembly.   Woning said the event this year was a way to “remember California's efforts at censorship, and to remind legislators that we don't want any future laws that would censor free speech.”   Despite AB 2943’s failure, it mirrors similar legislation that has been successfully passed in other countries, such as Canada, where counselors nationwide face up to five years in prison if they provide counseling that does not affirm homosexuality and transgender identity.   “Conversion therapy” for minors is illegal in the District of Columbia and 23 states, including California. The United Nations has likened so-called conversion therapy to torture, and U.N. Independent Expert on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity, Victor Madrigal-Borloz, called for a global ban on it in 2020.   ‘Still broken’   Like many of those who spoke at last week’s event at the state Capitol, Ivan Santos explained how rejecting God and embracing a homosexual lifestyle only plunged him deeper into misery.   During his testimony, Santos said his sexual experiences with other boys began at a young age. He recounted that after abandoning the Christian faith of his youth when he was 22, he at first felt a sense of freedom and belonging in the gay community.   “I was in relationships with men long-term, short-term; was into the ‘hook-up culture.’ I thought I was finally living my truth,” he said.   He ultimately realized his sense of freedom was false as he began descending into self-destruction.   “I thought I was living a life that was fulfilling, but I was very much still broken and very much still depressed. It didn’t take me long to grab a hold of substances to help with the shame and brokenness that I felt inside.”   Santos said his substance abuse began with alcohol and party drugs; by the end of his 12 years in the lifestyle, his behavior had spiraled out of control to include crystal meth and prostitution.   “I was so broken, and I remember saying a prayer. I said, ‘God, I don’t know how my life got to this point.’ And I heard Him say to me, ‘I’m ready to show you how good life can be if you follow me.’”   “And I said, ‘Lord, I want that.’”   Santos claimed that over the course of several days, he had supernatural experiences that revealed to him the intense spiritual warfare behind the veil of cultural battles. He also said he was overcome with a sense of God’s love for him despite his brokenness.   “God let me know that He loved me, and He wanted me.”   Santos said as he offered his sexuality to God despite his confusion and uncertainty, he began to realize that what he once considered to be a fundamental part of his identity was rooted in lust, the power of which diminished as he pursued repentance.   “As I followed Him, the things that felt concrete, the things that I thought would never change, began to shift,” he said. “And as the Lord showed me that I could actually walk in purity, that I could follow Him in the ways that He's asked of me, the things that were concrete, the things that I said would never change, shifted.”   Santos said he is now living “a life that is overflowing with joy and peace.”   “I'll never go back, only forward,” he added. “I'm so thankful.”   ‘Torn between two worlds’   Cecil Jackman, who was the last at the Thursday rally to offer his testimony, epitomized much of what the other speakers had to say by recounting the pain of those who come to realize their faith and sexual attractions are incompatible.   He claimed his confusion started when his female babysitter sexually abused him when he was 4 years old.   “My innocence taken,” he said, choking up. “That shouldn’t have happened.”   Jackman said he convinced himself at the time that he had been molested because he was a boy, which consumed him with a desire to be a girl to escape further abuse. Though his mother was a Christian, he said his father physically and verbally abused him, mocking him as gay when he was young because he enjoyed picking flowers with his mother.   Though he outgrew his desire to be a girl, Jackman continued to suffer growing up because he was not athletic and struggled to relate to other boys, according to his written testimony. Amid his confusion in middle school, a male teacher molested him.   Following a suicide attempt, Jackman said he reached a crisis point that pushed him to pray for God’s help, and he ultimately understood he was unable to reconcile his sexual feelings with God’s commands.   “I was torn between two worlds,” he said. “I loved Jesus, but I was attracted to guys.”   Jackman’s despair drove him to believe that God had created him simply to take pleasure in his damnation.   “Because of my ‘dad wounds,’ I was so convinced God hated me,” he remembered. “I would call him ‘the big mean bully in the sky.’ I would tell my gay friends God made me just to send me to Hell someday.”   Jackman, who now has a wife and three children, said he came to realize he was believing a lie, and that far from desiring to condemn him, the Lord loved him enough to take all of his shame upon Himself, quoting Hebrews 12:2.   “I began to realize that God did love me,” he said. “When I learned I could trust God, my healing sped up dramatically.”   ‘I wouldn’t trade it’   CHANGED co-founder Ken Williams told CP his pain growing up was significant enough that he wanted to take his own life when he was 17, but that years-long therapy with a Christian counselor helped him work through it.   When he first started seeing his counselor as a teenager, Williams said he was ridden with self-pity and questioned why God would allow him to suffer so deeply.   He said the mindset he once nursed has since dissipated.   “A lot of my thinking was, ‘Why me?’ Poor me victim mentality. ‘Why do I have to deal with the worst of the problems?’ I haven’t thought that in 15, 20 years. And it's so rewarding to now be able to hopefully have a mouthpiece that offers hope to people out there who feel like I did.”   He emphasized that the type of therapy he received as a minor is now illegal in California.   “In those days, it was legal for me to get help that aligned with my faith convictions,” he said. “After getting that kind of help, some amazing Christian people just loved me very consistently, and I came out of that.”   Williams said he also has come to embrace his suffering, realizing that God used it to draw him to Himself in an unavoidable way.   “If you want to get somebody’s attention, grab them by their sexuality,” he said. “When you're struggling with that — whether you're a male or a female — I don't know how you could struggle any deeper than that. So God got my attention deeply, He met me deeply and has walked with me closely.”   “So I wouldn't change my life at all. I'm grateful for what the Lord's done,” he added. “I wouldn't trade it.”   Regarding what he might say to someone suffering from despair regarding sexual or gender confusion, he said, “I would give him a hug and tell him, ‘Hey, this is just one day in your life, and there's a whole other life ahead for you if you want it. Jesus offers new life to people.’”   END

Andy John had previously issued ‘unequivocal’ apology over culture of excessive drinking, promiscuity and bullying   By Harriet Sherwood THE GUARDIAN 27 Jun 2025   The archbishop of Wales has stepped down after a culture of excessive drinking, sexual promiscuity, bullying, bad language and inappropriate banter at Bangor cathedral was revealed.   Andy John, who is also the bishop of Bangor, released a statement on Friday evening after calls for his resignation gathered pace.   He said he was announcing his “immediate retirement today as archbishop of Wales”, adding: “I also intend to retire as bishop of Bangor on 31 August”.   Neither his statement nor those from senior colleagues in the Church in Wales made any reference to the scandal that has engulfed Bangor cathedral over recent years. There is no suggestion that John behaved inappropriately   Earlier this week, John issued an “unreserved and unequivocal” personal apology regarding “the situation”, saying he took full responsibility for failings under his leadership. “I repent and offer no excuses nor justifications,” he said.   Calls for John to resign and for an independent inquiry into the cathedral’s culture, the behaviour of clergy, staff and volunteers, and alleged financial mismanagement had been mounting.   They came after a review by ThirtyOne: Eight, a Christian safeguarding agency, heard accounts of excessive alcohol consumption, inappropriate language and humiliating banter and a “culture in which sexual boundaries seemed blurred, and to some … promiscuity was acceptable”. Homophobic comments and an “unhappy working environment” were also reported.   A separate report from a cathedral “visitation” team recommended the appointment of “strong leadership” to “steady the ship”, improved scrutiny of governance and finances, and discouraging unkind and inappropriate private communications.   According to Tim Wyatt, who writes The Critical Friend, a newsletter on the Anglican church, and who has closely followed events at Bangor, the reports “pretty much confirmed there was a lot of drinking, sleeping around, backbiting, bullying – basically a whole culture that was completely out of kilter with what a place of Christian worship is supposed to be about”.   In addition, six “serious incident reports” have been sent to the Charity Commission in the past 18 months, four relating to safeguarding and two relating to financial matters.   Financial irregularities reportedly include more than £400,000 being spent on new furnishings for the cathedral with inadequate consultation, and £20,000 spent on trips to Rome and Dublin for senior staff.   A spokesperson for the Charity Commission said: “We have opened a regulatory compliance case to assess a number of concerns that have been raised related to Bangor cathedral and diocese, including matters reported directly to us by the charities. We are actively examining these matters with the charities’ trustees to determine our next steps.   “As regulator, if we find evidence of wrongdoing, we take robust action using the powers available to us.”   Many of the concerns about the cathedral centre on a period when Siôn Rhys Evans was its acting dean – in effect chief executive – while continuing in post as secretary of the Bangor diocese. Both posts are senior full-time jobs, and it is unprecedented for one person to manage both sets of responsibilities and workloads.   In another highly unusual move, Rhys Evans – who was seen as a protege of John – was made acting dean only a few years after being ordained as a priest. To be elevated so quickly to a high-profile job was an “astounding over-promotion”, according to Wyatt.   In February 2024, Rhys Evans stood back from both roles without explanation. He was absent from work for 10 months, after which he quietly left to take up a new post as bursar of Westminster College, Cambridge, a theological college of the United Reformed Church.   On Friday, Westminster College confirmed that Rhys Evans’ probationary period had been “unsuccessful” and he had left his job in mid-May. The Guardian has been unable to contact him.   Last month, two members of the cathedral’s college of priests, Rev Dr John Prysor-Jones and the Very Rev Prof Gordon McPhate, called for an independent inquiry into events in Bangor. “The reputational damage to the cathedral, the diocese, and the Church in Wales is considerable,” they said in a letter to the Church Times.   Ruth Jones, the Labour MP for Newport West and Islwyn, said the church must give a full explanation to members and the public. “We want openness and transparency in all our church settings and it’s really, really important that the archbishop makes clear what has gone on,” she told BBC Radio Wales Breakfast.

Cranmer’s Church Then & Now // Trump Drops F-Bomb – Evangelicals Silent // The Christian community is a community of the cross, for it has been brought into being by the cross. --- John Stott I consider blasphemy laws to be a needless attack on the fundamental values of a liberal democracy, values that I believe derive in part from the Christian tradition with its claim that love for God must be accompanied by love for one’s neighbor, enemies, and outsiders. To truly love “others,” one must be willing to permit the criticism of yourself by others, whether it is about your politics, ethics, or religion, and even if it is laced with vehemency and umbrage. Michael F. Bird Last year was the first time that the ACNA topped pre-pandemic levels of Average Sunday Attendance (ASA). This year, numbers have continued to rise, and the province has surpassed its highest average attendance ever.  --- ACNA provincial report. General Synod comes at a time when many have expressed worries about the future of the church. Parishes are closing and being merged, it’s hard to get clergy to fill vacancies … There’s financial issues and things are closing down. I think people see problems for sure. – Alan Hayes professor emeritus of church history at Wycliffe College We call the killing of thousands in the war in Gaza ‘genocide’, but the killing of 250,000 human beings every year in the UK through abortion ‘reproductive rights! -- David Robertson Historically, a clear link exists between the push for women priests and homosexual activism. In 1974, the same year that Louie Crew founded the homosexual activist organization Integrity eleven women, including known lesbians, were ordained in Philadelphia. --- Alice Linsley “The more humble and obedient to God a man is, the more wise and at peace he will be in all that he does.” -- Thomas à Kempis Western Culture often seeks to promote sympathy for beliefs and practices that contradict the gospel, for example the homosexual lifestyle and alternative families made up of same-sex partners and their adopted children. – Pope Leo XIV   Dear Brothers and Sisters, www.virtueonline.org June 27, 2025   THE overall picture of Christianity in America is very mixed. On the one hand California evangelist Greg Laurie tells us that America is hungry for spirituality. He writes; “Something’s stirring in America. You can feel it—a growing hunger for truth, hope, and meaning after years of academia, media, and entertainment tirelessly working to dismantle the core values that built our great nation. People are ready for change…I believe we’re going to see it.” “Specifically, young men are attending church at unprecedented rates when we’re so used to seeing women lead the way in spirituality. Men are exhausted of being told to suppress who God created them to be. They don’t want to be told that their masculinity is “toxic,” or that they’re part of the “patriarchy.” They want to be the men God has called them to be—not the emasculated boys’ culture is telling them they have to be.” Laurie points to the surge in Bible sales. “People are looking for something other than what culture’s been offering. They want to know truth. They want to know what God has to say about hope, their lives, their identity—all of the truths that have been blurred.” Of course, in California one can go from crack cocaine and a surf-boarding culture to Christ in an instant without much contradiction… “it’s cool dude” is an overworked refrain. On the other hand, those pushing for a new anthropology of sexuality are turning churches inside out over gay marriage and the normalization of homosexuality that sees an Episcopalian politician like Pete Buttigieg and a leading pro-gay Jesuit Roman Catholic priest, Fr. James Martin sitting down with Buttigieg talking about the need for the full acceptance of homosexuals in the church. Pope Leo has begun pushing back on this with the added note that his priests must be celibate.   But all is not consistent in the Vatican. The Pope recently promoted a pro-LGBTQ Prelate who permitted a pagan idol in a Cathedral. Dr. Jules Gomes has written extensively about this here: https://anglicanmainstream.org/article/pope-leo-xiv-promotes-pro-lgbtq-prelate-who-permitted-pagan-idol-in-cathedral/   And then there is all the talk about gender issues; trans humanism, artificial intelligence, the uniqueness of Christ, Islam vs Christianity, the encroachment of Islam in the West, the persecution of Christians from Syria to Nigeria and much more.   It all depends on where you live. Starting a church in the south is far easier than planting a church in the north and northeast. While mega churches abound in Dallas, Texas, the only serious church planting model that has worked successfully in the northeast is the ministry of Tim Keller in New York City. Slim pickings indeed. Yes, there are many small vibrant evangelical ministries but they don’t compare with large churches south of the Mason Dixon line.   Then of course a lot of Christianity in the South is cultural. If you were raised Southern Baptist in Texas, you would be walking down the aisle before you were a teenager. But SBC membership has fallen to a 47-year low, even though church involvement is up. The SBC has lost four million “born again” believers which leaves one asking just how real it all is. The SBC is losing about 200,000 members annually and there is no sign of a reversal. 700 SBC pastors have been credibly accused of the sexual abuse of women.   Furthermore, a significant segment of Southern Baptist-associated churches are avoiding outward declaration of their Baptist identity. Data from five cities that recently hosted the SBC annual meeting revealed that around 43.5 percent of associated churches do not include “Baptist” in their name. That percentage becomes a majority in cities including Indianapolis, Indiana and Anaheim, California.   Ryan Burge the doyen of demography reveals much when he shows that while 57 percent of boomers believe in God only 40 percent of Gen Zer’s do and there is no sign that there is any turning around.      He asks; Is there a religious revival occurring among Generation Z? “I’ve got two hunches why I am getting asked about the possibility. The first is pretty simple - people of faith want to believe that there’s a revival right around the corner and they want to be a part of it. Every Christian hears about stories of mass conversion events and wants to believe they could witness that type of history. The other is subtler, I think. It’s people who don’t feel strongly about religion one way or the other, but are just tired of hearing more stories about religious decline. Thus, any indication that Gen Z is returning to religion would just bring about a change in the dominant narrative. Trust me when I tell you that I don’t revel in the fact that I’m the ‘prophet of doom’ in this area, but wishing doesn’t make it so.” The picture is still very mixed.   *****   The Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) held its Provincial Council meeting at Trinity Anglican Seminary in Ambridge, Pennsylvania this past week and reported attendance up by double digits for the third consecutive year, according to congregational report data released during the meeting.   The denomination in 2024 reported a net increase of 14 congregations to a total of 1,027, an increase in membership of 1,997 (+1.5 percent) to a total of 130,111 and an increase in attendance of 11,354 (+13.4 percent) to a total of 96,148.   “It is humbling and incredible,” Archbishop Steve Wood said of the numbers in his opening address to the council. “And it makes me eager to see what the Lord is up to next.”   Hassler said leading indicators, including baptisms (+207, or 5.6%), confirmations (+656, or 15.8%), and weddings (+104, or 17.4%) are also up. These metrics are regarded as signaling the direction of future membership and attendance numbers. For the first time, 27 local churches now have an average attendance exceeding 500, up from 16 surpassing that number the year before.   Provincial Council is the annual governance meeting of the ACNA, comprising a bishop, elected clergy, and two elected lay members from each of 28 dioceses, alongside delegates from a half-dozen ministry organizations with an official status.  Among the changes ahead are a complete overhaul of the ACNA’s Title IV (disciplinary) canons.   “There have been structural inefficiencies baked into the system,” the Rev. Andrew Rowell, Governance Task Force chairman, told the council in outlining a case for comprehensive reform. “While the present Title IV system was designed to be flexible and simple, neither accusers nor accused trust the current system, since it lacks sufficient transparency.” You can read more here: https://www.virtueonline.org/post/acna-sees-multi-year-growth   One critic of the ACNA gathering was a Canadian priest Mark Marshall who blasted Archbishop Wood over his handling of Calvin Robinson who blew in from the UK in time to tell us his thoughts about women’s ordination, an issue that has bedeviled ACNA for a dozen years. After a half dozen bishops took him in and then dumped him, he has apparently found a home with a vagante Continuing Anglican crowd – the Anglican Province of America. Maybe now he will get on being a priest rather than a politician.   *****   The Church of England is endlessly embroiled in one issue after another even as it looks for a new Archbishop of Canterbury, a position many asking if it is really necessary bearing in mind that all the hard work is done on the ground by local vicars who get little support from the pontifications from Lambeth Palace. Two issues reared their ugly head this week; Abortion and euthanasia AKA assisted suicide. The abortion issue revolved around terminating the life of the unborn up till the time of birth; and the other is knocking off people who decide they want to die earlier rather than later, thus saving the NHS thousands of pounds.   VOL’s Judith Sture, a scientist, weighed in all this and you can read her Dark Days in the United Kingdom here: https://www.virtueonline.org/post/dark-days-in-the-united-kingdom   Here is a sample: “On Tuesday 17 June 2025, the House of Commons voted on an amendment to the government's crime and policing bill, to allow abortion outside the legal framework without fear of prosecution. It is now possible for a woman to ‘terminate’ her baby (sorry, ‘foetus’ – better still, ‘clump of cells’) up to the day before the due date. Yes, you read that right – a woman in the UK can now choose to ‘abort’ a 9-months gestation baby and not face prosecution. The government won the vote with a majority of 242 votes. You read that right as well.”   On euthanasia she had this to say; “Just days later, on Friday 20 June, the Commons voted on a private member’s bill (brought forward by an MP, rather than the government) - the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill. This proposes what is euphemistically known as ‘assisted dying’. For which read ‘death on demand’. MPs voted to support the bill by a majority of 23 votes (314 for, 291 against). Like the abortion amendment, the bill now passes to the House of Lords for further scrutiny and debate.   “As usual, those in favour of euthanasia claim that significant safeguards are in place to prevent misuse of the law – but in every country where such law has been enacted, safeguards arguably melt away and we see numbers of mentally-ill people and other vulnerable individuals who ‘choose’ death this way, rising steadily. In Canada for example, euthanasia accounted for 4.7% of all deaths in 2023, with 15, 343 people dying by this route. This is now the fifth most common cause of death in Canada. Belgium saw a 17% increase in euthanasia cases in 2024, including individuals under 40 and even including children. In the Netherlands, 5.4% of deaths (169,363 people) were by euthanasia in 2023.” The Church of England became embroiled in the abortion and euthanasia issue. More than 200 Church of England clergy, including a number of bishops, signed a letter describing abortion up to birth as “a dangerous change”.   In the letter, which has been seen by The Telegraph , the clergy said that unborn children were “deserving of compassion and… [need] protection under the law”. They also warned that should unrestricted abortion become law then both women and their unborn children will be “at even greater risk of harm than previously”.   On euthanasia, London Bishop Sarah Mullally, former Chief Nursing Officer of the United Kingdom and the Church of England’s lead bishop for health and social care, pleaded with members of Parliament not to usher in new levels of later-term abortions and state-approved suicides, before they did so.   “If enacted, this legislation would come into force amid serious shortfalls in adult social care, a post code lottery in palliative care and well documented pressures on the NHS, multiplying the potential risks to the most vulnerable. It does not prevent terminally ill people who perceive themselves to be a burden to their families and friends from choosing ‘assisted dying. And it would mean that we became a society where the state fully funds a service for terminally ill people to end their own lives but shockingly only funds around one third of palliative care.   “Every person is of immeasurable and irreducible value, and should be able to access the care and support that they need—a principle that I know is shared by those of all faiths and none. We must oppose a law that puts the vulnerable at risk and instead work to improve funding and access to desperately needed palliative care services.”   But they lost the debate in parliament when the numbers were counted. Ditto for assisted suicide AKA euthanasia. You may knock yourself off with greater ease now which apparently pleases the failing national health system (NHS) which is losing money keeping the dying alive.   ***** The Rt. Rev. Shane Parker, Bishop of Ottawa, was elected the 15th Primate of the Anglican Church of Canada on June 26, 2025, at St. Paul’s Cathedral in London, Ontario, during the 44th session of the General Synod.   Primate-elect Parker has served as the Bishop of the Anglican Diocese of Ottawa since 2020. Prior to that, he was dean of the Diocese of Ottawa and rector of Christ Church Cathedral in Ottawa for two decades. Primate-elect Parker will be installed in his new role during a worship service at St. Paul’s Cathedral in London, Ontario, on Sunday, June 29, 2025. Parker is a 24-carat liberal on sexuality issues. Samizdat, an orthodox Canadian blogger noted this about Parker; “the bishop affirms the sanctity of life for 2SLGBTQI+, but conveniently forgets about the unborn. In advance of Ottawa’s Pride March, the bishop of Ottawa urged us all to read his letter “Global Interfaith Commission on LGBT+ Lives”. The heading for the letter is: “Declaring the Sanctity of Life and the Dignity of All”. Not quite all as it turns out. The hand wringing is reserved for 2SLGBTQI+ people because “all sexual orientations, gender identities and gender expressions are a precious part of creation and are part of the natural order.” ***** Abortion and the pill. Abortion has become slightly more common despite bans or deep restrictions in most Republican-controlled states, and the legal and political fights over its future are not over yet. It’s now been two and a half years since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade and opened the door for states to implement bans.   The policies and their impact have been in flux ever since the ruling in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. The availability of an abortion pill has clearly changed the equation.   President Trump has applauded himself for his role in the ruling, since he nominated three of the Supreme Court Justices who voted to overturn Roe in 2022. He called the ensuing flood of state-level restrictions “a beautiful thing to watch.” But when running for a second term amid polling that shows Americans largely support legal abortion, he attempted to soften his stance and said that he would not push for a national abortion ban as president. Apparently, he has not been quite the savior the right wanted.   ***** Cranmer’s Church Then and Now. A new book on the history and theology of Reformation Anglicanism landed on my desk this week. The Rev. Canon Chuck Collins volume on the history of Reformation Anglicanism is a must read for anyone, young or old who needs a refresher course in Anglican history and how we came to be. The book covers the theological and historical underpinnings of Anglicanism vis a vis Thomas Cranmer and those who declared for the Protestant faith. Collins answers all the hot button issues like Justification, the Eucharist, the primacy of Scripture, Baptism and much more. You can buy this slim volume for $5.99 at Amazon here: Cranmer's Church: Then and Today: Collins, Chuck, Pearson, Andrew: 9780999290484: Amazon.com : Books   *****   Donald Trump dropped the f- bomb this week and there was not a squeak of disapproval from the vast sea of his evangelical supporters. Why? Would Jimmy Carter have ever used language like that before 300 million Americans? Evangelicals had nothing much to say about Trump’s earlier “grab them by the p***y”, and the Access Hollywood tapes. It took a courageous Mike Pence to face down Trump and he paid the political price. Evangelicals who love to bash adulterers and fornicators with good cause are amazingly silent in the face of their president using language like this because he is allegedly slaying the woke dragon. *****   VOL holds a unique place in Anglican news gathering. While we report on the news, we believe it is important to interpret the news to readers searching for answers to hot button issues. Our team of writers spare no effort getting the word out. We may wait to get the full picture but it is worth it. We hope you think so too. VOL’s news gathering is comprehensive, analytical and, we believe faithful to Scripture and our Anglican tradition. We keep you informed about global Anglicanism as few services do. We wake up each day and ask the question what do our readers need to know to keep them informed so they can make good decisions. We are here because of readers like you. Would you consider 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 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 attention from across the globe. You can access my Substack 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 can be seen here: https://davidvirtue2.substack.com/publish/posts/detail/165868897?referrer=%2Fpublish%2Fposts

By Chuck Collins Pembroke Street Press 137pp $5.99 Available from Amazon Cranmer's Church: Then and Today: Collins, Chuck, Pearson, Andrew: 9780999290484: Amazon.com : Books   Reviewed by David W. Virtue, DD www.virtueonline.org June 25, 2025   Few books on church history, especially Anglican Church history, are as concise, readable and brief as this fine volume by reform thinker and theologian/historian Chuck Collins.   The author brings to this slim volume decades of thinking about Anglican issues; its history, its theology and how it has been practiced over the centuries. It has not always been ‘guns n’ roses’. Broad Church Anglicans, progressive/liberal/revisionist Anglicans, Anglo-Catholics and Reformation Anglicans have duked it out over the centuries with less than commendable results. These positions remain entrenched to this day.   In this book, Collins introduces us to the history and doctrine of the Anglican Church from a Reformation Anglican perspective. He prioritizes the Anglican confessional statements and defining liturgical documents. It is clear that the author believes strongly that a true understanding of the Anglican Church is rooted in the Reformation and his hero Thomas Cranmer.   I can do no better than to quote the author himself. “The English reformers were willing to die for certain doctrinal beliefs that are core to Christianity. They were a diverse bunch, to be sure, but they were united in their commitment to the supremacy of Holy Scripture, to the central doctrine of the New Testament – justification by grace alone through faith – to the priesthood of all believers, and to a sacramental understanding that the grace of Holy Communion is Christ’s spiritual presence in the hearts and affections of the faithful recipients. These inviolable Anglican doctrines are enshrined and preserved in the Elizabethan Settlement and the recognized formularies of the English Reformation.”   Collins is happy to point out that our unity is not some invented connection with the Archbishop of Canterbury, nor does the church’s origin have anything to do with Henry VIII’s divorce to look for a male heir, and its concomitant break with Rome.   Collins does not shy away from controversy. He is happy to take on Rome over the issue of justification and sanctification, the nature of the Eucharist, salvation and much more. He addresses issues of Baptism, Holy Communion, Prayer and the needed place of the Bible in our daily lives.   His hard-hitting, take no prisoners style, I found appealing especially as we live in a time when we are exhorted to be tolerant, diverse and inclusive. Collins will have none of it. “It is when we speak of the gospel that the wonderful peculiarities of what it means to be a Protestant Christian are seen,” he writes. “Job’s question is our question, and the question of every human heart: how can sinful men and women have fellowship with a holy and righteous God?”   How Catholics and Protestants answered this question represents the greatest divide between the two – a divide that still exists today. The Reformation’s biggest discovery, after the Bible, was finding and experiencing a way of righteousness and justification that was all but forgotten in the Middle Ages.   Collins has done the Anglican Communion and its many breakaways a great service in writing this book. It can be read by students of Anglicanism and by clergy and laity in developing countries with even a reasonable knowledge of English. It will provide anchors for your life, soul and worship. I heartily commend it.   Available from Amazon Cranmer's Church: Then and Today: Collins, Chuck, Pearson, Andrew: 9780999290484: Amazon.com : Books

By Jeff Walton THE LIVING CHURCH June 23, 2025   Attendance in the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) is up by double digits for the third consecutive year, according to congregational report data released June 19 during the denomination’s Provincial Council meeting at Trinity Anglican Seminary in Ambridge, Pennsylvania.   “We’ve grown in every category that we track,” said Dan Hassler, director of administration and operations. “We are at highest attendance and membership of all time.”   The denomination in 2024 reported a net increase of 14 congregations to a total of 1,027, an increase in membership of 1,997 (+1.5 percent) to a total of 130,111 and an increase in attendance of 11,354 (+13.4 percent) to a total of 96,148.   “It is humbling and incredible,” Archbishop Steve Wood said of the numbers in his opening address to the council. “And it makes me eager to see what the Lord is up to next.”   Provincial Council is the annual governance meeting of the ACNA, comprising a bishop, elected clergy, and two elected lay members from each of 28 dioceses, alongside delegates from a half-dozen ministry organizations with an official status.   The council is charged with producing a provincial budget and electing members to trial courts and the Executive Committee (a smaller governance body that meets monthly). Canonical changes are also reviewed and passed before they can be brought for ratification before the larger assembly, which convenes less frequently.   Congregational Reports   Hassler said leading indicators, including baptisms (+207, or 5.6%), confirmations (+656, or 15.8%), and weddings (+104, or 17.4%) are also up. These metrics are regarded as signaling the direction of future membership and attendance numbers. For the first time, 27 local churches now have an average attendance exceeding 500, up from 16 surpassing that number the year before.   Conversations with council delegates indicated different sources of growth, among them a post-COVID return, as well as an increasing number of people specifically seeking Anglican worship.   The Rev. David Drake of Church of the Resurrection in Timonium, Maryland, in a June 20 concluding panel interview with Archbishop Steve Wood, discussed the Asbury Outpouring, 16 days of continuous prayer and worship that began at Asbury University in Wilmore, Kentucky, on February 8, 2023.   Nearly all 41 churches in the Diocese of the Mid-Atlantic have grown in the past two years (Resurrection’s attendance grew 38%). The Baltimore-area rector said the guidance and direction of the Holy Spirit was responsible for the growth. Provincial Council organizers highlighted 1 Corinthians 3:7 (“So neither he who plants nor he who waters is anything, but only God who gives the growth”).   Provincial finances also improved—2024-25 is the first fiscal year since its 2009 inauguration that the ACNA has operated fully within financial sustainability, reporting a budget surplus of $435,000, Executive Director Deborah Tepley said. The Provincial Executive Committee will determine how to spend surplus. Tepley said it may go toward decreasing a $175,000 debt, establishing cash reserves, or investing in missional priorities such as church planting, leadership development, or the Common Life Commission (CLC).   The latter exists to address overlapping jurisdictions, work toward regionalization, and help mediation/training of diocesan leaders. Bishop Steve Breedlove, the CLC’s chairman, said the commission’s goal is for dioceses to not step on each other’s toes, work together in creating missionary dioceses that work collaboratively, and provide resources to one another “against a scarcity mindset.”   Governance   Among the first items addressed at a June 19 business session was the appointment of a vice chancellor for the province to assist safeguarding. Sexual abuse reporting and disciplinary canons have been a continued point of discussion within the ACNA. Bishop Stewart Ruch of the Diocese of the Upper Midwest has faced allegations of mishandling abuse.   This year the denomination implemented requirements for every diocese to have a protection policy for children and adults in place and published by the end of June and at least two reports receivers in place by the end of this year, neither of which can be a diocesan chancellor with conflicting legal responsibility.   “We have 91 percent of our dioceses reporting progress toward these improvements, and we will continue to support these efforts to ensure 100 percent of our dioceses meet these standards by the end of December,” Wood said in his address to the council. He cited a study, backed by the National Institutes of Health, finding that incidents of abuse in churches and schools decrease by an estimated 60 to 72 percent with improved reporting systems.   “I take this seriously and this is why you will hear a lot about safeguarding from me this year,” the archbishop said.   Among the changes ahead are a complete overhaul of the ACNA’s Title IV (disciplinary) canons.   “There have been structural inefficiencies baked into the system,” the Rev. Andrew Rowell, Governance Task Force chairman, told the council in outlining a case for comprehensive reform. “While the present Title IV system was designed to be flexible and simple, neither accusers nor accused trust the current system, since it lacks sufficient transparency.”   Rowell said proposals for a revised system will have explicit rules and powers “to establish clarity.”   The Task Force chairman outlined a year of review and comment beginning July 29 with the release of revised Title IV canons at a provincial town hall with Archbishop Wood and Rowell. The ACNA will release study materials, including analysis and commentary. In 2026, Provincial Council will vote on the revised canons. If the canons pass, a specially called Provincial Assembly will take them up for ratification, likely in the autumn of 2026.   Jeff Walton is communications director and Anglican program director for the Institute on Religion & Democracy in Washington, D.C.

Nearly six months after Justin Welby stepped down, it is time the Church of England assembled a conclave to choose his successor – or simply learn to do without, says Catherine Pepinster   THE INDEPENDENT 22 June 2025   Here’s a tale of two versions of the Church of England. This past week, I’ve been talking to some of the churchwardens, parochial church council secretaries and treasurers, curates and vicars, who not only put on services and keep food banks and lunch clubs going, but are responsible for repairing the roofs and rebuilding the buttresses.   And then there’s the other Church of England (CofE) – the one that is represented by its high-ups, that I usually come into contact with at this time of year when the Archbishop of Canterbury hosts his summer party at his Lambeth Palace home.   But this year, there is no clinking of glasses and the archbishop’s apartment lies empty. Justin Welby, who dramatically resigned in November, days after a report into a prolific child abuser associated with the Church of England, finally moved out earlier this summer.   If that departure took a long time, then finding his replacement is taking even longer, and is now predicted to last until the end of the year – 12 months on from his resignation. As my conversations with the people who attend and run Anglican churches highlighted, for them it is business as usual – regardless of Welby quitting just before Christmas.   Meanwhile, Stephen Cottrell, who has the CofE’s number two job as Archbishop of York, can sign off any urgent institutional business, while he offers spiritual leadership by way of his current tour of the North, talking about the Lord’s Prayer.   So, if the Church of England has carried on regardless, might it not just give up on the protracted process of finding a replacement for Welby? Well, it might not affect Matins in Maidstone or Evensong in Evesham, but it’s certainly a problem for the established Anglican Church.   The Archbishop of Canterbury is always one of the 26 Anglican bishops in the House of Lords, and Welby’s speeches were frequently reported on (including his final one, viewed as tone-deaf). Now there’s a void.   Then there’s the order of precedence; the Archbishop of Canterbury is always first after the Royal Family in this country, so when Donald Trump makes his state visit to Britain in the autumn, there will be an ecclesiastical-shaped hole at the state banquet (unless Cottrell returns from his tour of the North to play stand-in).   Welby’s most prominent moment, of course, as part of Establishment Britain, came with his crowning of the King at the Coronation. But there’s more to the relationship than that. Meetings may not be as frequent as the weekly audience of the prime minister, but the private talks between the archbishop and the regal Supreme Governor of the Church of England do happen.   It is this aspect of the Church of England – being the established church – that is causing the problem with finding a successor to Welby. A 20-strong Crown Nominations Commission (CNC) headed by former MI5 boss Jonathan Evans with representatives of the Church of England and the Crown is wading through paperwork, studying comments sent in by the public and assessing candidates.   A quarter of the CNC represents the global Anglican Communion. One can imagine the hours of discussion about hot-button topics such as same-sex blessings and whether the archbishop might be a woman this time. And after that, the chosen name must be submitted to the prime minister and approved by the King.   There is, of course, a simpler way of choosing a church leader. I know, as a Roman Catholic, that I will seem parti pris, and this will send Henry VIII spinning in his grave (no bad thing), but the Vatican knows how to make people focus on the task in hand.   So, Church of England: stick all the members of the CNC in a locked room and only let them out when they’ve made a decision. It worked for Rome. The conclave took just two days to elect Pope Leo XIV.   Why not have an Anglican conclave, put everyone out of their misery and send up some white smoke?