Archives

By Gerald McDermott, Op-ed contributor www.christianpost.com January 27, 2025   PHOTO: People participate in a Jewish solidarity march on January 5, 2020, in New York City. The march was held in response to a recent rise in anti-Semitic crimes in the greater New York metropolitan area. | Jeenah Moon/Getty Images   Since October 7, 2023, the ancient serpent of antisemitism has returned to deceive and kill. After the most barbaric attack on Jews in a century, they are now being blamed for defending themselves. We Christians who follow a Jewish messiah ought to be the first and loudest defenders of the Chosen People when they are on the run again (which ought to remind us of the Church’s failures a century ago), so it is doubly tragic that we are starting to see antisemitism among our own.   Therefore, those of us who have been enlightened by the insights of Reformed theology welcomed November’s Antioch Declaration against antisemitism. We were not surprised that this was written and signed by leading Reformed thinkers, for Calvinist theologians have resisted the Lutheran temptation to pit Gospel against law. Calvin and Edwards saw that God’s Law, first stewarded by the Jewish people, is a gift to the world and Church and is in fact a form of grace.   This Declaration seems to have been spearheaded by the formidable Doug Wilson, author of nearly one hundred books and creator of what might be called a conservative Reformed civilization centered in Moscow, Idaho, with its own college, seminary, denomination, publishing house, and classical Christian school network.   Wilson regularly steps where angels fear to tread. In the last century, his witty jousts with the New Atheists often put them on the back foot, and in this century he dared to challenge the iconic Tim Keller for being political while claiming the opposite.   So, it is not surprising to see that a Wilson-led Declaration recognizes the “carnal desire in fallen man to seek out a scapegoat for sin and social corruption,” resulting in “conspiracy theories” that have often made Jews their “easiest target.” It argues that Jews “are objects of wrath just like the rest of us,” and as a people, they are “an object of God’s providential care.” The Puritans were right to realize that “in God’s good time, multitudes of Jews will come to faith in Christ and be added to the true commonwealth of Israel.”   Apparently, Wilson and his Reformed confreres are addressing new antisemitism within their own ranks coming from writers promoting “Christian nationalism.” The term has caused hysteria among many, but Wilson has rightly argued over the years that secularism has become America’s national religion and that efforts to restore Christian faith to the public square need not be coercive or theocratic.   But the ways that some Reformed writers are promoting Christian nationalism have been either troubling or nasty. Among the troubling has been Stephen Wolfe, whose The Case for Christian Nationalism has been the most impressive book on the subject.  It was published by Wilson’s press and promoted not only by Wilson but also by the founder of the National Conservatism movement, Jewish political philosopher Yoram Hazony.   Wolfe does not say anything that is overtly antisemitic in his book. But there are ambiguities that raise questions. No nation, he writes, “is composed of two or more ethnicities,” and an “ethnicity” emphasizes “particular features that distinguish one people group from another.” Wolfe insists he is not promoting white nationalism, but he also writes of “blood relations” and “community in blood.” He denies the notion “that ethnic majorities today should work to rescind citizenship from ethnic minorities,” but adds that “perhaps in some cases amicable ethnic separation along political lines is mutually desired.”   Perhaps then we should not be surprised that in a January response on X to The Babylon Bee's Jewish CEO who wondered why Christians don’t share Paul’s heart for Israel, Wolfe wrote, “Believing that Israelis are ‘of my own race’ is a mental disorder.”   To be fair, Wolfe was responding to Seth Dillon’s use of an English translation of Romans 9:3 where Paul supposedly refers to “my own race.”   But one still wonders what Wolfe means. When “race” in today’s culture usually denotes skin color, is Wolfe ignoring the fact that 45% of Israelis are Ashkenazi Jews with white skin? Or does he mean that because most Israelis are Jewish they cannot have any connection with Christians, even Jewish Christians like Dillon?   Two things must be said about Wolfe’s suggestion that Jews (“Israelis”) are a race completely disconnected from American Christians. First, Paul never refers to his Jewish people as a “race.” The passage in Roman 9:3 (συγγενῶν μου κατὰ σάρκα) is better rendered as “my kinsmen according to the flesh.” And another Romans 9 phrase often wrongly translated with the word “race” is from Romans 9:5 (ἐξ ὧν ὁ χριστὸς τὸ κατὰ σάρκα) which is actually “from whom is the Christ according to the flesh.” Paul was writing these words when ancient Israel — like today’s Israel — was a “mixed multitude” composed of people with different skin colors which we mistakenly refer to as “races.” Neither the Bible nor science supports the existence of race as anything more than a sociological phenomenon.   Second, Paul said the Jews are God’s Chosen People. He referred to his fellow Jews who did not accept Jesus as still “beloved [by God] because of the Fathers [the patriarchs Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob]. For the gifts and calling [κλῆσις, God’s calling the Jews as his Chosen] of God are irrevocable” (Rom 11:28-29).  “Calling” means invitation to join God’s family, as when Paul tells the Corinthian Christians they should consider their “calling [κλῆσιν] — not many of you were wise by worldly standards” (1 Cor 1:26).   For Paul, then, Jews of his day were still God’s Chosen, even after a majority had rejected Jesus. He wrote, “To them belong [present tense] the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the worship, and the promises” (Rom 9:4). He was not speaking of the eternal destiny of every Jew but of God’s continuing covenant with the descendants of the Patriarchs. Just as Jesus said those called to him could not presume their salvation unless they persevered in faithfulness to him (Matt 24:13), so too Jews were called into God’s family but were required to keep his covenant.  They retained their calling as His Chosen even if many failed to persevere and thereby lost the rewards of the covenant.   If Wolfe is ambiguous, Thomas Achord and Andrew Torba have been downright malicious. Achord, a Calvinist who has been co-host of the Ars Politica podcast with Stephen Wolfe, has written under the alias Tulius Aadland that “a random shooting of Antifa members hit 100% jews [sic] and 100% pedos,” complained of “the Yiddish roots of antifa,” and hoped for “no more Jew wars.”   Torba, co-author of a book on Christian nationalism recommended by Wilson, wrote in November 2022 that the GOP needs to be destroyed before another “Zionist bootlicker” is voted into office. He complained that “the Jews in positions of power” worry that your freedom of speech will give you “the freedom to reach a lot of people and criticize their power and oversized influence in our culture, government, and society.” Torba reposted a charge that Jews are “psychologically and spiritually castrating citizens.”   The Antioch Declaration is to be congratulated for its forthright denunciation of antisemitic conspiracy theories and Holocaust deniers. But it too is a bit disturbing.   Why should we think of Jews as the “easiest target” of conspiracy theories? Why not radical Muslims, who are by all accounts the source of most terrorism today, and by their own admission are trying to take over the world? Readers can be forgiven for wondering if the Antioch authors suggest by “easiest target” that there are legitimate reasons for antisemitic conspiracy theories.   And why regard the Jewish people as simply “an object of God’s providential care”? That is true of Cambodian Buddhists and Indian Hindus. One cannot read the Bible and conclude that Jews are no different from Buddhists and Hindus in God’s providence. This ignores Paul’s declaration that his Jewish brothers, even while denying Jesus as messiah, were still “beloved” of God and their “calling” to be God’s Chosen is “irrevocable.”   This odd language in the Declaration suggests what most supersessionists (those who think God’s new covenant with the Church supersedes and replaces his covenantal love for the Jewish people) have concluded, that God has given up on the Jews. But Paul specifically denied that. “Has God rejected his people? By no means!” The remnant that has seen its Messiah is proof that the “whole lump” of Israel is still “holy” (Rom 11:1, 16). Paul warns the Gentiles in Rome not to be “arrogant” toward the “branches” of Israel that have been broken off: “Remember it is not you who support the root [Jewish Israel], but the root that supports you” (v. 18). The Jews and Gentiles who have seen the Messiah are mysteriously connected to the root of Jewish Israel, even those parts of the root that have not seen Jesus yet.   The Antioch Declaration implies that the “commonwealth of Israel” is the Christian Church. But the phrase refers to Jewish Israel in Ephesians 2:12, from which the gentile Christians in Ephesus had been “alienated” before their conversions, but to which they were now connected because of their oneness with the Jewish Messiah.   Many of the Puritans recognized this. They rejected Calvin’s totalizing transfer of God’s Old Testament promises to the Gentile Church, for they discerned that many OT promises were specific to the Jewish people. Unfortunately, Calvin missed this.  He wrote that because the Jews did not “reciprocate” as willing partners in God’s covenant, “they deserve to be repudiated” (Institutes 4.2.3). He therefore denied that the 1,000 repetitions of the land promise (God’s giving the land of Canaan to Abraham’s descendants as in Gen. 12:7 and 17:8) still applied to the Jewish people.  Or that God’s “everlasting covenant” with “Abraham’s seed throughout their generations” (Gen 17:7) was still in effect.   But Henry Finch (c. 1558–1625) was a Puritan member of Parliament who rejected this hermeneutic. He and many other Puritans followed the Reformation’s plain sense hermeneutic, preferring the literal or plain sense to more spiritual and obscure senses.   Where Israel, Judah, Zion, Jerusalem, etc. are named in this argument, the Holy Ghost meaneth not the spiritual Israel, or church of God collected of the Gentiles, no nor of the Jews and Gentiles both (for each of these have their promises severally and apart), but Israel properly descended out of Jacob’s loins.   Increase Mather was another Puritan who rejected Calvin’s ascription of all OT promises to the Gentile Church.  In his The Mystery of Israel’s Salvation (1669) he asked, “Why should we unnecessarily refuse literal interpretations?” Like Finch, Mather insisted that promises about earthly inheritance should not be spiritualized away. He took seriously the Old Testament’s land promise and predicted that the Jews would regain their ancient land before general renewal falls upon them. It would be only “after the Israelites shall be returned to their own Land again” that the Spirit would be poured out on them.   Jonathan Edwards was a Reformed thinker who believed that God had future plans for both the Jewish people and their land. In his Blank Bible, he wrote that just as the “restoration” of an individual at first involves only his soul but then later his body at the general resurrection, so too “not only shall the spiritual state of the Jews be hereafter restored, but their external state as a nation in their own land ... shall be restored by [Christ].”   The Puritans were Reformed Christians who rejected the supersessionism of their Calvinist brethren. They knew that they were connected spiritually to Jewish Israel, and that to renounce that connection was to ignore the Bible and risk injustice to the Jewish people.   Little did they know, however, how supersessionist assumptions would lead German and other European Christians in the twentieth century to look the other way or actually join the Nazi program to do away with Jews.  After all, these Christians reasoned, if God is done with the Jews, we should be too.   Let me close with this: Supersessionism is problematic but not the same thing as antisemitism. There are many supersessionists who love the Jewish people and do not think through the logic of their replacement theology. And the Reformed are not alone: there is plenty of supersessionism (and antisemitism) in other Christian communions, Protestant, Catholic, and Eastern Orthodox.   We need to heed Paul the Jew’s warning not “to be arrogant toward the [broken off] branches” (Rom 11:18), and to remind ourselves that the Jewish people are “beloved for the sake of their fathers” (Rom 11:28).   Gerald McDermott teaches at Reformed Episcopal Seminary and Jerusalem Seminary. He is the author of Israel Matters: Why Christians Must Think Differently about the People and the Land and A New History of Redemption: The Work of Jesus the Messiah through the Millennia.

The misstep creates worldwide headlines   By Mary Ann Mueller VOL Special Correspondent www.virtueonline.org January 26, 2025   The Episcopal Church is in the news again for all the wrong reasons. This time it is because Bishopette Mariann Budde (IX Washington, DC) took newly-reinaugurated President Donald Trump to task over his southern border policies designed to stem foreign asylum seekers from flowing across the US/Mexico border without first going through proper immigration channels as my own Norwegian-born mother did 100 years ago when she came through Ellis Island.   My mother, Ragnhild Sather, was one of the 12 million Norwegians, Swedes, Germans, Italians, Irish and others who came seeking a new life in America who, from 1892 through 1954, were legally processed through the Ellis Island immigration portal.   Mother first went to her family in Minnesota. Her Aunt Hannah (Grandma Belinda Sather's sister) settled in Otter Tail County. Then Mother headed to Washington State where she met and married my father, Robert Mueller, in Seattle and where I was born. And it was in Seattle that she also died when I was yet a babe-in-arms.  I have no memory of her, and that has always haunted me.   Getting back to Bishopette Budde. The National Cathedral has historically played a super-sized role in the spiritual life of the nation.  It is there that the country comes to pray as a nation since the Episcopal cathedral is considered a house of prayer for all people; grieve as a nation (state funerals), rejoice as a nation (post-inaugural presidential prayer services); and be spiritually unified as one nation under God invisible (9/11).   Most recently the National Cathedral hosted former President Jimmy Carter's state funeral, drawing together then-sitting President Joe Biden, former presidents Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama; and then President-elect Donald Trump under a single vaulted cathedral ceiling regardless of their political persuasion (Democrat or Republican) to show their unified respect to the man who once preceded each of them to the Oval Office and now precedes them in death.   On Tuesday (Jan. 21), less than 24 hours after President Trump took the Presidential Oath of Office, Bishopette Budde used the occasion of a National Cathedral-hosted prayer service to lambaste the new President from her Episcopal pulpit over his immigration policies.  She turned the raised carved stone Canterbury pulpit into a political bully pulpit and the world took notice.   Quickly the Episcopal bishopette was dubbed the “Woke Bishop” by the media.   It's not the first time that an Episcopal bishop – or Presiding Bishop – has held his captive audience slack-jawed.   In May of 2018 the XXVII Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church crossed “The Pond” to preach at Prince Harry's Church of England royal wedding to black American actress Meghan Markle. The black Presiding Bishop Michael Curry decided it was time to school the British Royal Family on 19th century Southern slavery and American civil rights referencing Martin Luther King, Jr.  to emphasize his point.   Members of the Royal Family sat in shock with their mouths agape.   Both Episcopal bishops felt they were “speaking truth to power.” In both instances their messages fell flat but they did manage to garner worldwide headlines.   Another Episcopal bishop, who was not shy about garnering headlines was – and occasionally still is creating press attention – Bishop Vicky Gene Robinson (IX New Hampshire).  Where Bishopette Budde is dubbed the “Woke Bishop” by the press Bishop Robinson's headline moniker is the “Gay Bishop.”   Bishopette Budde, Presiding Bishop Curry, and Bishop Robinson have each, in their turn, twisted their pulpits into bully pulpits to rail against some perceived injustice – immigration (Budde); racism (Curry); or the gay pride agenda (Robinson).  Since the National Cathedral looms large in the American spiritual psyche each of these three bishops have preached from its pulpit.   As bishops Jesus Christ should be the sermon topic from any pulpit a bishop – Episcopal … Roman Catholic … Lutheran … Methodist … et al – preaches.   It is a bishop's responsibility to see to it that the Gospel is powerfully preached, with the Sacraments are being faithfully celebrated and joyfully received thus leading their flock into a closer relationship with God through Jesus Christ, God’s one and only dearly begotten Son.   However, the National Cathedral has intersected with politics for more than a century.   It has hosted five presidential state funerals including: Dwight Eisenhower (1969); Ronald Reagan (2004); Gerald Ford (2007); George H.W. Bush (2018); and most recently Jimmy Carter (2025).   It also conducted six presidential memorial services including: Warren Harding (1923); William Taft (1930); Calvin Coolidge (1933); Harry Truman (1972); and Richard Nixon (1994). And other memorial services were held for civil rights leader, Martin Luther King, Jr. (1968); anti-apartheid activist, Nelson Mandela (2014); and the Queen of England, Elizabeth II (2022).   Then, of course, there are the ten post inaugural Presidential Prayers Services which are designed to help prayerfully launch the new president into his administration.  Those services include: Franklin Roosevelt's second administration (1937); Ronald Reagan’s second administration (1985); George H.W. Bush’s only administration (1989); George W. Bush's first and second administrations (2001 & 2005); Barack Obama's first and second administrations (2009 & 2013); Donald Trump's first administration (2017); Joe Biden's only administration (2021); and Donald Trump's second administration (2025).   Also, several national, political, military and civil figures are also interred at the National Cathedral including: the only Admiral-of-the-Navy George Dewey (1917); President Woodrow Wilson (1924); Secretary of State and Noble Peace Laureate Frank Kellogg (1937); First Lady Edith Wilson (1961); disability advocate Helen Keller (1968); and gay activist Matthew Shephard (2018).   In addition, eight Episcopal bishops and one Episcopal priest are buried within the walls of the Cathedral Church of Saint Peter and Saint Paul which is the formal name of the National Cathedral.   Historically the Episcopal bishops of Diocese of Washington are buried within the confines of their Cathedral including: Henry Satterlee (I Washington) 1908; Alfred Harding (II Washington) 1923; James Freeman (III Washington) 1943; Angus Dun (IV Washington) 1971; William Creighton (V Washington) 1987; John Walker (VI Washington) 1989; Ronald Haines (VII Washington) 2008; and Thomas Claggett (I Maryland) 1816.   The Episcopal Diocese of Washington was sliced out of the Diocese of Maryland in 1895. Bishop Claggett is the first Episcopal bishop to be consecrated in America and he also served as Chaplain to the US Senate which earned him the honor of being reinterred in the National Cathedral. He was initially buried in the Claggett Cemetery in Croom, Maryland but moved to Washington, DC in 1898.   The VIII and IX bishops of Washington – John Chane and Mariann Budde, respectively – are still living.   In addition, the V. Rev. Francis Sayre, Jr. is also interred at the National Cathedral. He holds the distinction of being the longest tenured Dean of the National Cathedral, serving from 1951 to 1978.   At this point in time there are no other Episcopal clergy buried within the National Cathedral.   Slowly through the years as the National Cathedral rolled out its Episcopal red carpet of welcome the cathedral's spiritual emphasis has shifted from a purely Anglican Book of Common Prayer Christocentric focus to interdenominational ecumenical ceremonies and eventually intertwining an interfaith spiritual expression which includes active non-Christian participation.   Bishopette Budde has crossed swords with President Trump before.  She was livid in June 2020 when the President ventured across Lafayette Square for an ill-advised photo op at St. John's Episcopal Church during the height of the George Floyd Black Lives Matter protests. The President displayed a Bible in front of the St. John's church sign. “The President just used a Bible, the most sacred text of the Judeo-Christian tradition, and one of the churches of my diocese, without permission, as a backdrop for a message antithetical to the teachings of Jesus," the Washington bishopette said in 2020. “He took the symbols sacred to our tradition and stood in front of a house of prayer in full expectation that would be a celebratory moment.”   The Washington bishopette's disdain for President Trump stems back to his first administration when she came to consider him inflaming violence through speech and actions and having a divisive and immoral leadership style. She participated in the Black Lives Matters protests.   On January 21, 2017, as the IX Episcopal Bishop of Washington, DC, a post she has held since 2011, Mariann Budde warmly welcomed the newly-inaugurated first term President to her “house of prayer for people to mark this moment of political transition” for an Episcopal interfaith prayer service. There was no scathing sermon, merely unified prayer albeit interdenominational – Episcopal, Evangelical, Roman Catholic, Greek Orthodox, Presbyterian, Baptist, and non-denominational Christian – as well as interfaith –  Mormon, Jewish, Islamic, Sikh, Hindu, Buddhist,  Baha’i and Navajo.   Eight years later a similar cast of religious characters showed up for President Trump's second interdenominational and interfaith presidential prayer service on January 21, 2025.   It was the V. Rev. Randy Hollerith, the XI Dean of the National Cathedral, who welcomed the worshippers to the Service of Prayer for the Nation, not Bishopette Budde.  She had something else up her  rochet’s snowy-white sleeve.   This time the cast of pray-ers included: Episcopal, Baptist, Methodist, Mennonite, Presbyterian, Lurheran, Native American, Jewish, Momon, Hindu, Islamic, Buddhist, and Sikh.   Then Bishopette Budde ascended the pulpit and skewered President Trump thus making ongoing worldwide headlines and shifting the focus from what should have been a spiritual emphasis into a political dagger.   Bishopette Budde's sermon sent shockwaves through the Anglican world. Episcopal priests are having to deal with upset parishioners – regardless of their political persuasion – who are hurt and confused and angry that an Episcopal prayer service at the most prominent Episcopal cathedral in the nation was turned into a political event.   Anglicans are the best when it comes to ecclesial pomp and ceremony. The Church of England did a masterful job at conducting Queen Elizabeth II's funeral or hosting Royal weddings.   Most recently (January 9, 2025)  the National Cathedral conducted President Jimmy Carter's State Funeral with aplomb and without missing a step.   The National Cathedral knows how to put its best foot forward and show to the world the majesty and splendor of Anglican worship giving honor and glory to God.   But when it came to last week's Presidential Prayer Service the cathedral tripped over a bishop's crozier.   Mary Ann Mueller is a journalist living in Texas.  She is a regular contributor to VirtueOnline

Staff writer  CHRISTIAN POST 27 January 2025   Christians recently gathered in London to find out how they can better support people struggling with unwanted same-sex attraction. (Photo: Getty/iStock)   They heard from James Parker, an ex-gay Christian from Australia who regularly speaks to churches and faith groups about how they can engage with these issues as a church and in wider society.   Parker told stories of hope about people who have been helped by therapy for unwanted same-sex attraction or gender dysphoria, including people who were formerly drug dependent and caught up in prostitution, and people who have become happily heterosexual or are experiencing greatly diminished same-sex attraction.   Despite these positive experiences of change, several Australian states have introduced draconian conversion therapy bans that threaten to impose huge fines and imprisonment for breaches, which potentially include suggesting chastity or offering prayer. Some supporters of a conversion therapy ban in the UK see the Australian states as a model for what could be introduced here.   "Even if you want therapy and even if it's proven to be beneficial and even if you've got people supporting you and you're saying 'please, please, please', nope, that's criminal," said Parker of the situation in Australia. He called the bans "totalitarian" and said he feared a "slippery slope".   "Will this bring about ultimately ... the eradication of the Lord's Prayer from the state of Victoria? Highly likely, yes," he said.   Meeting church and faith leaders around the world, Parker said that many of them are "scared" to speak up on the issue and that it is up to the grassroots to work for change.   "We are in World War Three, it's just that it's an invisible war and it is literally [trying] to decimate an entire generation in our land," he said.   Despite the challenges across many countries, especially in the West, he said that people continue to be set free.   "The hunger is out there (for help) and the work is happening," he said.   "There are literally hundreds of thousands of stories out there that we need people to start sharing on social media ... We need others to know that change is possible and it's not about even being gay or straight.   "It's about the fact that we all need to move towards a place of holiness and we all need to move away from those layers of maturing sin towards maturing dignity and righteousness as well."   He urged churches to be places of welcome for LGBT people and to speak the truth in love, recognising that it is about a person's soul and that "souls need to understand mercy". Seen in this light, he said it was important not to be "preachy" or "imposing" but to do it in such a way as to open up discussions.   "God is calling people to Himself, God's doing it but we the church for the most part aren't ready to receive them or to understand them or to walk with them," he said.   "I hope there is respect, compassion and sensitivity in the way I speak. There comes a point in all our lives when ultimately the truth needs to be spoken but it's a great injustice to pour truth upon somebody when they have no understanding of mercy and forgiveness."   He continued, "When you give people an environment in which to be able to discuss these things and they feel that they're not going to be judged, then what happens is people are often really quite quick to tell you what some of the hurdles are that they've never got over and need to get over."   He added, "If we're not careful, we still see it as a 'them' and an 'us' ... The more that we see this as a collective of all of us and not an 'us' and 'them', the sooner we will also see an advancement of the Kingdom and the healing power of the Lord able to be at work."   Anglican Mainstream and the MSC recently hosted ex-gay leader, James Parker, live/zoom/recording, on the 6th January 2025, in London.  His journey, from angry gay activist to ex gay heterosexually married father, is very encouraging! You can watch it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wajG-KPPz_0 Attachments area An ex-gay on how Christians can engage effectively with the LBGT question   By Lisa Nolland  CHRISTIAN TODAY January 21, 2025   "When it comes to children and sexuality, we're in World War 3." James Parker brought this warning to a hybrid (in person and online) conference based in a London church on Monday January 6.   Gay conversion therapy bans   Himself a former gay activist, James warned that the Change or Suppression (Conversion) Practices Prohibition Act passed in Victoria State in Australia in 2021 would be used as a foundation for introducing similar laws around the world.   In a crackdown more akin to a Marxist approach of silencing any dissenting view, the legislation makes it a criminal offence to help anyone move towards heterosexuality or suggest it is 'normal' or affirm their biological sex; to suggest embracing chastity or offer Biblical insight on sexual mores.   James noted that many institutions around the world have been influenced by a very few people with very loud voices arguing that it is a human right to express and practice same-sex orientation and behaviour, and a crime to suppress it.   Loving the lost into the Kingdom   Our self-perceived sexuality is formed through our emotional responses to our environment. To those who have embraced a gay identity, James stresses that the question to pose is 'Do you want/need more loving?', and to lead them thus to Jesus, the Great Lover, and his mercy, grace and forgiveness.   For James, people who have felt unloved need to feel loved. Christians are called to cooperate with God's Spirit here, and realise they cannot walk alongside such individuals unless they realise they too have missed the mark - i.e. sinned - and are broken. Don't we all need a Saviour and on a daily basis?   Local church leaders were encouraged to welcome and care for the LGBTQ while not approving their behaviour. In this context, the excellent work of Living Waters, which equips and resources the church, was promoted.   Bridge-building is key. James presently speaks to (and prays with) lesbian activists, for instance, and partners with Gays Against Groomers to protect children. James appreciates process, sees the person first and appreciates how many are victims of all sorts, including of child sexual abuse (as was he).   Those 'committed SS relationships'   James goes where few will go, and says the unsayable about 'committed SS relationships'. While with his perfect boyfriend, Steve, he had 200 or so other sexual partners. Steve is now dead, as are almost all his other gay mates from his past. Though there are perhaps many happy exceptions, 'faithfulness' is not automatically exclusive (i.e. monogamous), yet most heterosexuals have little idea such is the case.   War on children   James showed the alarming clip from the San Francisco Gay Men's Choir: 'We'll Convert Your Children': think Blitzkrieg. The track goes on to say, 'We'll convert your children, happens bit by bit, quietly and subtly, and you will barely notice it ... We'll make them tolerant and fair'.   Many Christian entities appear blissfully ignorant, apathetic or complacent about the pan sexual revolution impacting youngsters marinated in all things LGBTQ. Sometimes it is a case of DADT (Don't Ask, Don't Tell). Sadly, the church is often loathe to engage in these minefields, and prefers to invest in 'safe', politically-correct topics when not 'preaching the Gospel'.   However, in this case, silence is not golden but culpable.   Aslan on the move   James gave encouraging example after example of ex-LGBTQ groups and networks around the globe. They are comprised of individuals who have changed and are continuing to change for the better. Some are able to marry and have their own children, such as James.   Perhaps the most encouraging thing James said was how God is speaking directly to gay individuals and working in their lives, quite apart from any human involvement. HE is seeking and saving the lost, moving them out of often tragic, dark lifestyles and into far happier, holier, healthier ones. Aslan is on the move!   Wake up call   Parents were urged to examine school sex education programmes, which frequently groom youngsters to engage in high risk sex 'when they feel ready'. Those promoting the gay agenda seek to influence children to believe that all forms of sexual behaviour are equal in value. This is part of an attack on the basic identity of humanity, the image of God in two genders brought together in marriage, in preparation for the marriage supper of the Lamb.   Questions from participants were raised and addressed throughout the four-hour conference which has been recorded. Participants were urged to encourage Christian leaders to recognise the fundamental clash with a biblical view of life posed by the gay activists, but that they also had, in the love and mercy of God in the gospel and the community of the local church, the means to bring healing from the effects of unhealthy factors during people's childhood and adolescence.   Dangerous place   Albert Einstein's insight comes to mind in terms of both the GCT bans and children's welfare: 'The world is a dangerous place to live; not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it.'   Dr Lisa Nolland is CEO of the Marriage, Sex and Culture Group, London.

Embracing LGBTQ, Secularism And New Age, Under The Leadership Of Colin Bloom   From: Save Barnabas Aid January 29, 2025   This post is to make you aware of some changes at Barnabas Aid UK and Barnabas Aid International (formerly called Nexcus). Barnabas used to be a Biblically conservative organisation.  But things have changed under the leadership of Colin Bloom, who took charge in April 2024. It has now become an inclusive organisation, whose staff may have any sexual orientation or practice, and follow any religion or none.   Criteria in recruiting staff   The below wording is now appearing in some Barnabas job adverts on the Barnabas Aid website. This quotation comes from the advertisement for a “Projects Administrator – East, Central and Southern Africa”:   “Barnabas Aid is committed to equality of opportunity. It is our policy and practice that entry into employment and progression within employment will be determined only by criteria which are related to the duties of a particular post and its appropriate salary level. No applicant or member of staff will be treated less favourably than another because of their age, disability, ethnicity, marital or civil partnership status, parental status, religion or belief, sex, or sexual orientation. However, there may be an occupational requirement to be a Christian in order to carry out some of our roles.”   On 28 January 2025, there were 13 vacancies advertised on the Barnabas Aid website. Of these, seven specified that the applicant must be a practising Christian. Three of these seven were Finance roles. The other four were regional coordinators for London, Wales, the South-East (of England), and the South-West (of England); for these four vacancies the applicant had to be “a practicing Christian who is engaged in his/her local church”.   The other six vacancies – those which did not require the applicant to be a practising Christian – were all based in Swindon, UK, and included three vacancies in the Projects department, a Head of Facilities, an Email Campaigns Coordinator, and a Talent Acquisition Lead.   It appears that in Colin Bloom’s Barnabas Aid those who work directly with persecuted Christians, communicating with them about their situation and project requests, do not need to have a personal faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.  Nor does the person who will be in charge of emails to Barnabas Aid supporters.  Nor does the person who will fill the newly created role of “Talent Acquisition Lead” i.e. recruiting future staff for Barnabas Aid.    Please note that the board of Barnabas Aid UK has nothing to do with these advertisements and is not kept informed by Barnabas Aid International about vacancies, redundancies, staff leaving, staff discipline, recruitment or any other staff matters.   Spiritual care of staff   On 11 June 2024 Melissa Breukel from Nexcus’s HR department emailed staff (probably all the UK-based staff) announcing: “With immediate effect, we have implemented our new Employee Assistance Program, designed to support your overall well-being both at work and at home.”  Contact details were given so that staff could contact the organisation appointed to give this assistance, which is called Wellbeing Solutions. https://www.wsm-wellbeing.co.uk/   Wellbeing Solutions is not a Christian organisation. A major part of its help with mental wellbeing is to encourage the practice of mindfulness.  Here is a quote from their website:   “In our fast-paced modern world, mindfulness has become an increasingly popular practice for enhancing mental health and overall wellbeing… Mindfulness is about paying attention to the present moment with openness and without judgment. Originating from ancient meditation practices, it has been scientifically proven to offer numerous benefits for mental health.”   Why did Colin Bloom and Nexcus appoint a non-Christian organisation with a New Age ethos to support the wellbeing of Barnabas staff in the UK, when there are many Biblically conservative Christian ministries which could have offered such help?    What do the Nexcus leaders think?   It is curious to see this shift taking place in Barnabas Aid, not only Barnabas Aid International (Nexcus) but also Barnabas Aid UK which is still completely under the control of Colin Bloom, although he was not appointed by the Barnabas Aid board.   It is understandable that Colin Bloom himself would be happy with this shift in ethos and values.  But what about others on the Nexcus board?   Rev. Michael Hewat from New Zealand broke away from the Anglican Church on the issue of LGBTQ and is a leading figure in the conservative Anglican movement GAFCON.  Rev. Ian Clarkson from Australia is very active on pro-life issues yet Crowell and Moring, the law firm Nexcus had appointed, frequently does pro bono work for pro-abortion causes as well as LGBTQ causes. John Marsh in the USA would describe himself as a conservative Christian. Then there is Andrew Carey, not officially linked to Nexcus in any way, yet clearly in a position of favour, influence and constant communication with Colin Bloom and the rest of the Nexcus board, in particular Lord Reading. Andrew Carey edits the Church of England Newspaper, which has the reputation of being a conservative Christian voice. How do these conservative Christians justify supporting a position which contradicts Biblical values?   END

By Stewart Whittingham & Tom Mullen THE TELEGRAPH January 29, 2025   The Bishop of Liverpool has denied allegations of sexual assault outlined in a Channel 4 News investigation.   The Right Reverend Dr John Perumbalath has been accused of assaulting two women, the programme said.   It said one woman was allegedly assaulted in the diocese of Chelmsford in Essex, where he was Bishop of Bradwell, on separate occasions between 2019 and 2023. A female bishop also told Channel 4 News she was sexually harassed by him.   In a statement, Bishop Perumbalath said he had "consistently denied" the allegations, adding police had investigated them but taken no further action.   Channel 4 News said Bishop Perumbalath, who was enthroned Bishop of Liverpool in 2023, was interviewed voluntarily under caution by police in March last year.   Bishop Perumbalath said: "The allegations set out in this programme are in relation to encounters that took place in public settings, with other people present.   "I have consistently denied the allegations made against me by both complainants.   "I have complied with any investigation from the National Safeguarding Team.   "The allegations raised in Essex were also investigated by the police who took no further action.   "Whilst I don't believe I have done anything wrong, I have taken seriously the lessons learnt through this process addressing how my actions can be perceived by others.   "I will comply with any investigation deemed necessary.   "I take safeguarding very seriously and work hard to provide proper leadership in this area".   'Learning outcome'   The Church of England said it had also investigated the complaints, with a complaint of alleged misconduct first made in early in 2023.   A spokesperson said the investigation "concluded that there were no ongoing safeguarding concerns, but a learning outcome was identified with which the bishop fully engaged".   "The complaint was also investigated by the police which resulted in no further action."   The statement continued: "Shortly after the start of this process a further disclosure was made by another woman.   "The information brought by the second complainant was explored and assessed not to be a safeguarding matter but a matter of alleged misconduct.   "Pastoral support has been provided throughout for the second complainant and is ongoing."   Originally from Kerala in South India, Bishop Perumbalath was ordained into the Church of North India in 1994.   He moved to the UK in 2001, first taking up positions in the Diocese of Rochester.   The BBC reports here: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvg4dw5nnvxo   The Times reports here that: One of the women claimed that Perumbalath sexually assaulted her on separate occasions between 2019 and 2023 in the Chelmsford diocese. Her detailed allegations include instances of non-consensual kissing, groping and other inappropriate behaviour, which she reported to senior Church figures, including the Archbishop of York, the Most Rev Stephen Cottrell, in 2023.   The Archbishop of York is himself facing calls to resign over claims he allowed the Rev Canon David Tudor, a sexual abuser, to continue working   The allegations are likely to place further pressure on Cottrell, who is facing calls to resign himself over claims he allowed a sexual abuser to continue working in the church. Allegations of sexual misconduct against the Rev Canon David Tudor were allegedly passed to Cottrell during his time as Bishop of Chelmsford between 2010 and 2020, but Tudor was able to continue serving as a priest in Cottrell’s area. Cottrell has said he did not have the legal power to sack Tudor, who was banned for life from serving as a priest by a church tribunal last year, adding that he suspended him as soon as a new victim came forward to police in 2019.   END

LIVERPOOL BISHOP RESIGNS AMID SEXUAL ACCUSATIONS   By Mark Michael THE LIVING CHURCH January 29, 2025   Archbishop Stephen Cottrell with Bishop John Perumbalath | Anglican Taonga - photo John Perumbalath, Bishop of Liverpool, has resigned after being accused of sexually harassing two female clerics, including one of the Church of England’s bishops, according to a Channel 4 News report released January 28.   Perumbalath announced his retirement from active ministry on January 30. He denies all wrongdoing, but says that “this rush to judgment and my trial by media (be that social or broadcast) has made my position untenable.”   Stephen Cottrell, Archbishop of York and the Church of England’s acting primate, is accused by his critics of a coverup, because he reportedly knew of allegations against Perumbalath, a former protégé, before he was enthroned in Liverpool.   Last month, Cottrell faced calls for his resignation after a BBC Radio 4 report criticized him for failing to remove serial abuser David Tudor from ministry. Cottrell served as Bishop of Chelmsford from 2010 to 2020, before his translation to York.   “It could well be another example of a church coverup,” the Rev. Robert Thompson said to Channel 4 host Cathy Newman.   “I think one of the difficulties at the heart at the top of our church is that there is a protectionist culture between bishops in relation to bishops’ behavior,” Thompson said. “And lots of us know that this happens all the time. If this was an ordinary clergyperson, they would be treated in a very different way, I think.”   Thompson, a London vicar and a member of General Synod, was one of the authors of a petition signed by tens of thousands that played a major role in bringing down Justin Welby in November.   Andrew Graystone, a religion journalist, told Newman that both women came to him separately in the summer of 2024 with allegations against Perumbalath that they believed the church had mishandled.   Graystone is a well-known safeguarding watchdog in the Church of England, and his book and television reporting expoded John Smyth’s abuses — a scandal that eventually led to Archbishop Justin Welby’s resignation.   The bishop, who remains anonymous, complained of sexual harassment by Perumbalath to Cottrell and other senior leaders in 2023. She made a formal complaint under the Clergy Discipline Measure in 2024 with Cottrell’s support, but an independent judge rejected it because more than a year had passed since the alleged incident.   The program also included written testimony from an anonymous married female cleric of the Diocese of Chelmsford interviewed by Channel 4. She alleges that Perumbalath assaulted her on three separate occasions between 2019 and 2023, while he was serving as Bishop of Bradwell, a suffragan see of Chelmsford.   She alleges that in March 2019, at a diocesan retreat, the bishop held her and “kissed me forcefully on my mouth, which I did not like and I did not want. I tried to move away, but he was holding my mouth too tightly.”   At the end of a meeting in May 2022, she claims that he “ran his hands past the side of my breasts on both sides, with a medium pressure, until he reached the edge of the areola.”   In January 2023, she said that he approached her at a music evening and whispered “I love you” in her ear, and then “moved his mouth to just below my ear, on the pulse point on my neck. He opened his mouth, took a piece of my skin between his lips, and let go.”   The cleric says that after the final incident, she filed a report with a local priest, and was put in touch with the Church of England’s safeguarding team. According to a church representative, the team “concluded there were no ongoing safeguarding concerns, but a learning outcome was identified with which the bishop fully engaged.”   Meanwhile, Perumbalath, whose election to the See of Liverpool had been announced several months before the alleged incident, was formally confirmed in his new role.   Cottrell acknowledged in a March 2023 email to the alleged victim that he had known about the allegations some time before, but he did not intervene to halt Perumbalath’s enthronement as bishop a month later, a service in which he played a prominent role as leader of the province.   “In most areas of life — if he were the head teacher of a secondary school or a consultant in a hospital — there is no doubt that the person against whom these allegations had been made would be stood down in a neutral way while they were investigated and dealt with,” Graystone said.   “The church may say that they have investigated these allegations — they think it’s all fine — but at no point in that process did they choose to step John Perumbalath back from his responsibilities,” he added.   In November 2023, the Chelmsford diocesan cleric filed a police report about the incidents. Perumbalath agreed to be questioned by police in March 2024 “under caution” (as a potential suspect in a crime). The police took no action due to insufficient evidence.   The Church of England has reportedly paid for therapy for the accuser and Cottrell offered to write her an apology, but one has not yet been received.   Members of the Crown Nominations Commission for Liverpool, who selected Perumbalath for his role in 2023, also told Channel 4 News that the bishop had initially failed to secure the necessary two-thirds majority for election after failing a required safeguarding competency test.   They say that Cottrell and another senior bishop put pressure on them to disregard the test and give Perumbalath their full support. Crown Nominations Commission records show that Cottrell served on the panel along with the Rt. Rev. Stephen Croft of Oxford. Church of England officials dispute these allegations.   Newman also interviewed the Rt. Rev. Rose Hudson-Wilkin, Bishop of Dover, on the program. Hudson-Wilkin, who told a podcast last week that she believed Justin Welby had been mistreated by the church, said Cottrell had asked a barrister to look into the ways the church had handled the allegations against Perumbalath “in order to see if anything has been missed and also to suggest further possible ways forward.”   “We live in a world where we have proper processes,” Hudson-Wilkin told Newman. “We don’t just sack someone when there is an allegation. … We cannot just behave like a sort of lynch mob.”   In a January 28 statement, Perumbalath said, “The allegations set out in this program are in relation to encounters that took place in public settings, with other people present. I have consistently denied the allegations made against me by both complainants. I have complied with any investigation from the National Safeguarding Team. The allegations raised in Essex were also investigated by the police, who took no further action.   “Whilst I don’t believe I have done anything wrong, I have taken seriously the lessons learnt through this process addressing how my actions can be perceived by others. I will comply with any investigation deemed necessary. I take safeguarding very seriously and work hard to provide proper leadership in this area.”   A native of Kerala State in Southern India, Perumbalath began his ministry in the Church of North India before moving to England in 2001. He is the chair of the council of the College of the Resurrection, Mirfield, an Anglo-Catholic seminary, and serves on the Clergy Discipline Commission of the Church of England. He and his wife have one child, a daughter.   The Rev. Mark Michael is editor-in-chief of The Living Church. An Episcopal priest, he has reported widely on global Anglicanism, and also writes about church history, liturgy, and pastoral ministry.

By David Robertson  CHRISTIAN TODAY 24 January 2025   The Right Rev. Mariann Edgar Budde speaks to "The View" co-host Joy Behar on Jan. 22, 2025. (Photo: ABC)   Dear Bishop Budde,   That was some sermon you preached this week! Philip Pullman, the noted atheist author, loved it and suggested you should be the next Archbishop of Canterbury. Alastair Campbell, he of 'we don't do God' fame, declared that you should be made person of the year. He cited you as a prime example of someone 'speaking truth to power'. Does it not make you feel a little uncomfortable that those who don't believe in God think that your sermon was the best thing since the Communist Manifesto?   As a fellow preacher I thought your delivery was perfect. Clear, well enunciated and with the right tone – like an angel of light. I loved the theme of unity and indeed much of how you expanded that in the 15 minutes you had. But perhaps you will allow me, a poor Presbyterian minister who doesn't have the kind of pulpit to the powerful that you have, to also speak truth to your power?   You are in a powerful position. You belong to what has long been one of the most elitist denominations in the USA – the ultimate WASP church. You are a bishop in a prestigious cathedral, and you get to preach to presidents. (You preach to presidents about the poor, I preach to the poor about presidents). I would hope that both of us would preach Christ, and not our own politics – after all that is what we are paid to do.   I found it more than a little ironic that for 12 minutes and 30 seconds you spoke about unity and then, turning to the newly installed President, you addressed him in such partisan and political terms, that you contradicted and negated what went before.   Perhaps there is a role for such political comment (some might call it prophetic) but I suspect not at a service which is supposed to be about national unity, and at the end of a sermon which warned us about doing precisely that. I think you knew what you were doing. Every word of your sermon was carefully crafted. It is more than a little disingenuous to make a plea for unity and then issue what amounted to a personal political attack on the President. The result was - as you must have seen on X and in the rest of the media – that you again polarised the country you said you were seeking to unify. As you stated, "there isn't much to be said for our prayers (or sermons may I add) if we act in ways which deepen the divisions amongst us".   However, I agreed completely with your comments about the culture of contempt which seeks to demonise and threatens to destroy us - what is known as the outrage industrial complex. I assume you will also apply this to those who demonise people like President Trump – and that you will demand that people do not use your sermon to further stir up hatred and division?   In that regard it was less than helpful to scold the President about LGBT children who you said were scared – some for their lives. Even if this were true (and what is your evidence for this somewhat scary statement?), it is not your job to feed such false fears. Because false they are. President Trump has nowhere threatened the lives of LGBT children (incidentally as a bishop are you not more than a little concerned about the labelling of children in this way?). For you to imply that these fears were legitimate was either dishonest or ignorant. Stoking fear to make a political or even a theological point is something that no preacher should do. We should speak the truth in love. As you stated in your sermon, honesty is foundational to unity. At this point you were less than honest. Practice what you preach!   The same can be said about your remarks on immigration. The situation is not as simplistic as you put it. Although it has to be admitted that simple political (progressive) fundamentalism does allow you to engage in fine sentimental rhetoric, immigration is a much more complex issue than your 1-minute soundbite portrayed. Donald Trump and JD Vance both married immigrants – it is clear that they are not opposed to all immigration. The question is what should be done about illegal immigration? If you have any ideas, then engage constructively – don't virtue signal from a pulpit 12 feet above contradiction.   You will forgive me saying this but there was also an inherent contradiction in your statement about the dignity of every human being. Your denomination doesn't believe that. The Episcopal Church in the USA supports abortion on demand up to birth. That is an astonishingly evil and anti-Christ position to take. You cannot possibly take the high moral ground on humanity when you teach such anti-human doctrines. Your plea for mercy when you support such cruel policies is, to say the least, somewhat hypocritical. What about mercy for the most vulnerable human beings – those still in their mothers' wombs?   I loved what you had to say about humility: "We are most dangerous when we are persuaded without a doubt that we are absolutely right and someone else is absolutely wrong. We are just a few steps from labelling ourselves the good people and others the bad people." Amen and amen. But then you taught your political doctrines as though they were self-evidently right – and anyone who disagreed with them must be absolutely wrong. You think that men can become women, that mothers have the right to kill their babies, and that those who want a more limited immigration are evil.   You certainly gave those who agree with you a loud and clear dog whistle. The trouble is that not only are you absolute in your political dogmas, but you preached them from a pulpit, by implication, stating that these were not just your opinions but God's! It's hard to be more absolutist than that!   Perhaps the one thing that bothered me most about your sermon was how little of Christ and his Word it contained. He was kind of a bit player – an illustration who supported your political ideology. But he was certainly not the centre.   Even when you quoted him, you misinformed. For example, you stated that Jesus said unity was the solid rock on which to build the nation. He said nothing of the sort. He did say that He is the rock. I would be really encouraged to hear you say that the nation of the US should be built on the rock that is Jesus – but would you say that? To your Muslim, Hindu and atheist friends? It's what should be said by a Christian minister, but I suspect it is not your position.   Finally let me end on a note of agreement (kind of). Your prayer at the end: "May God give us the strength and courage to honour the dignity of every human being, to speak the truth to one another in love and walk humbly with each other and our God for the good of all people in this nation and the world."   We do need to honour the dignity of every human being – including the child in the womb. We do need to speak the truth – God's truth as given to us in his word. If we are to seek the good of all the people in the world, then we must make sure that we proclaim the Good News of the Gospel, not the politics of this world. We won't get the plaudits from the world if we do so, but we will get the commendation of Christ – "well done, good and faithful servant". And in proclaiming His word we will do some good and bring that true unity – the unity of Christ – rather than the false unity of a partisan political ideology. Preach that, sister!   Yours,   David Robertson, Minister in Scots Kirk, Newcastle, Australia

“I am not a Nazi!”   By Mary Ann Mueller VOL Special Correspondent www.virtueonline.org February 5, 2025   Like St. Peter before him, the Rev. Calvin Robinson has a case of Hoof & Mouth disease.   Both Simon Peter and Calvin Robinson have the tendency to open mouth, insert foot and twist. And then act impetuously which has gotten them both in a lot of trouble.   Peter challenges Jesus over His upcoming Passion and Death. (Matt. 16:21-23)   Peter won't let Jesus wash his feet at the Last Supper. (John 13:6-10) Peter cuts off Malchus’ ear. (John 18:3-11)   Peter denies knowing Jesus three times. (Matt. 26:69-75; Mark 14:66-72; Luke 22:54-62; and John 18:15-27)   Peter argues with Paul over the place of the Gentiles in the Church. (Galatians 2:11-21) Such is the case now in the United States when Robinson conflates politics with religion.   Long story short Fr. Calvin Robinson crossed the rubicon of priestly etiquette and his Archbishop Mark Haverland stepped in and removed his faculties – license (permission) – to exercise his priesthood within the Anglican Catholic Church.   Now to the rest of the story …   First of all, Robinson is a British citizen. He was born in Mansfield, England 39 years ago. He immigrated to the United States in September 2024 to become the priest-in-charge at St. Paul's Anglican Catholic Church (ACC) a small congregation in Grand Rapids, Michigan.   VISA ISSUES   Robinson is a British immigrant, not an illegal border crossing migrant. Basically, he followed immigration law.   He did not fly to Canada – a British Commonwealth nation – and sneak across the Canadian southern border into the United States. He came to the United States with passport, documents and paperwork in hand.   However, the question has been raised whether Robinson followed American immigration law to the letter when it comes to the status of immigrating clergy. US Immigration law outlines the qualifications needed to apply for a US Religious Work Visa: “To qualify as an immigrant religious worker, for at least two years before a petition may be filed on your behalf, you must: (1) Have been a member of the religious denomination having a bona fide nonprofit, religious organization in the United States for which you are coming to work; and (2) Have been continuously carrying out the religious vocation or occupation that you intend to carry out in the United States.”   The Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS), U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) also states that to qualify for an immigrant visa as a “Minister of Religion” the cleric “must be entering the United States to work solely as a minister of your religious denomination.”   CHURCH HOPPING   Therein lies the problem. Robinson is a church-hopper. He has belonged to four different denominations in a space of three years. Not all of the churches are Anglican. He was initially a member of the Church of England (CofE) until he left for the Free Church of England (FCE) in early summer 2022. He then united with the Old Catholic – nonAnglican – Nordic Catholic Church (NCC) in late 2023. Less than a year later he gravitated to the Anglican Catholic Church (ACC).   It is not totally clear if he is still a priest in the AAC – albeit an inhibited priest – or is he a priest without a denomination.   VirtueOnline has reached out to Metropolitan Archbishop Mark Haverland (VIII ACC) for a clarification concerning Robinson's status with the Anglican Catholic Church. At the time of posting Archbishop Haverland has not responded to VOL’s query.   Like a man without a country Calvin Robinson is a priest without a parish. Former Church of England priest Gavin Ashenden feels that Robinson is indeed without a denomination.   However, as a result of Robinson's priestly ordination in the Nordic Catholic Church, which is not a part of the Anglican Continuum, he is “a priest forever after the Order of Melchizedek.” (Psalms 110:4)   Ashenden, himself, left the CofE after the Koran was read in Arabic at a 2017 Epiphany service at St. Mary's Cathedral in Glasgow, Scotland. The passage denied that Jesus is the Son of God.   This infuriated Ashenden. Giving up his royal chaplaincy to the Queen he eventually swam the Tiber in 2019 and is now a Roman Catholic layman.   “You (an ordained priest) belong to a denomination,” the former Queen's Chaplain explained on his recent YouTube program Catholic Unscripted. “The ACC message saying that Calvin had been released by removal of his license said in fact he's not part of the ACC. So they are not just deparishing him, they are dechurching him.”   For all practical purposes Calvin Robinson is a “Catholic” priest, albeit not a Roman Catholic priest but an Old Catholic priest, for he was ordained into the priesthood through the Nordic Catholic Church. He is not an ordained Anglican priest. Although he was ordained as an Anglican deacon in the Free Church of England he sought his priesthood elsewhere.   The Old Catholic tradition separated from the Roman Catholic Church during Vatican I (circa 1870) over certain doctrines such as papal authority and papal infallibility. Old Catholics are not in communion with Rome however the Nordic Catholic Church (NCC) is in ecumenical dialogue – not intercommunion – with the Free Church of England (FCE) and the Anglican Catholic Church (ACC).   The NCC was the bridge Robinson used to go from the FCE to the ACC picking up Old Catholic priestly ordination along the way.   Robinson initially started out seeking ordination in the Church of England (CofE). That failed.   The young Robinson got a degree in computer games design and programming from the University of Westminster. He then went on to teach computer science at St. Mary's & St. John's Church of England School in Hendon where he became head of the school's IT department before pursuing a path in religion.   He undertook seminary studies at St. Stephen's House, an Anglo-Catholic theological college at the University of Oxford.   But Robinson was at cross swords with the Bishopette of London — Sarah Mullally, who couldn't find a "suitable curacy" for him due, in part, to his strong political views.   He is a noted and popular conservative British political commentator with a large social media following who rails against homosexuality, same-sex marriage, the LGBTQ ideology, critical race theory, the ordination of women, the cancel culture, and abortion. Finding the CofE path to ordination blocked, Robinson turned to the Free Church of England as a gateway to ordination. The FCE accommodated him and ordained him a transitional deacon on June 25, 2022 and appointed him Minister-in-Charge at Christ Church in Harlesden. A position he held for nearly three years even though he became an Old Catholic priest midway through his tenure. His final service at Christ Church was celebrated on Trinity Sunday (May 26, 2024).   But, alas, Robinson didn't stay long in the FCE. He was seeking the priesthood on his own terms and found through the Nordic Catholic Church (NCC), an Old Catholic denomination of Scandinavian Lutheran patrimony. He was priested on Nov. 4, 2023 as an Old Catholic priest.   Next the new British priest set his sights on moving to the United States as a clergyman. But he had to find a continuing Anglican denomination which would accept his hopscotch patchwork of ordinations, provide him a High Church altar and pulpit, and grease the skids to a US religious minister's work visa. He found that in the Anglican Catholic Church (ACC).   The ACC is an outgrowth of the 1977 Congress of St. Louis which met following the 1976 Episcopal General Convention that approved women's ordination; set the stage for the adoption of the 1979 Book of Common Prayer; and provided equal rights to the LGBT movement including the love, acceptance, and pastoral concern and care of the Episcopal Church and equal protection under the law.   Robinson's honeymoon with his Michigan parish lasted a mere four months. His religious denomination has booted him out and he is barred from seeking another ACC pulpit.   However, a foreign clergyman is to “work solely as a minister of your religious denomination” to keep the US green card.   With the drop in priestly vocations, particularly in the Church of Rome, many bishops turn to foreign dioceses to find priests to fill their pulpits. Many Catholic priests now serving in the United States hail from Africa, India and Asia. Calvin Robinson is considered a “foreign priest” in the American Anglican world.   The Anglican Church in North America (ACNA), too, has close ties to Anglican churches in the Global South such as in various African Anglican provinces – Kenya, Rwanda, Nigeria – through GAFCON.   MERE ANGLICANISM KERFUFFLE   Robinson has danced with ACNA before and ACNA was stung. He was invited to be a presenter to a sellout crowd at the January 2024 Mere Anglicanism Conference hosted by St. Philip’s Church in Charleston, South Carolina.   The conservative high church Anglo-Catholic priest hit the hot button issue of Women's Ordination in a gathering that was being held in an ACNA diocese which allows females in the priesthood and women clergy were in the audience.   Fr. Robinson’s presence at the conference was a mismatch from the beginning. The young priest is a passionate Anglo-Catholic with a strong commitment to traditional biblical values concerning the priesthood, marriage and the family, along with same-sex and transgender issues. However, the Mere Anglicanism Conference is a low church evangelical event based in the ACNA Diocese of South Carolina which supports ideology that Robinson strongly opposes, particularly that of women in the priesthood.   The match up was disastrous. As a result, Robinson’s wings were clipped and he was asked to stand down from the concluding panel discussion.   However, the young-not-yet-40 priest failed to humbly accept his chastisement silently, turning to prayer and keeping mum. He immediately started posting on social media and hit the YouTube circuit defending himself while being critical of his Mere Anglicanism hosts.   Robinson is passionate. He is controversial. He is committed. He is provocative. He is outspoken. He is conservative. He is opinionated. He is polemical. He is basically a High Church Anglo-Catholic with an Old Catholic priesthood.   ACC SACKS ROBINSON   Robinson started dancing with ACC in October of 2023 when he first visited the ACC’s Provincial Synod in Orlando, Florida and subsequently expressed an interest in serving a parish in the US.   “After undergoing the necessary procedures, he was received in orders and licensed to serve at the parish of St. Paul’s, Grand Rapids, Michigan,” the ACC fleshed out on its website Monday (February 3). “As of January 29th, 2025, he had served in the ACC a little over four months.”   Taking all things into consideration apparently the ACC attempted to rein in their newly-immigrated priest Calvin Robinson.   Last week (January 29) the ACC initially posted: “Mr. Robinson had been warned that online trolling and other such actions (whether in service of the left or right) are incompatible with a priestly vocation and was told to desist.” Then the AAC referred to their priest as “Mr. Robinson” rather than “Fr. Robinson,” or even “Rev. Robinson.”   This week even the “Mr.” designation has been dropped. The ACC is clearly fed up with Calvin Robinson.   “He (Robinson) was not hired by the ACC to be an official spokesman, social media influencer, or to provoke the ‘hysterical liberals’ (his words) in online culture wars,” the ACC explained. “He was licensed by an ACC bishop to serve as a parish priest.”   It seems that the ACC's strong admonition fell on deaf ears. As a result, Robinson was canned … fired, or as the British say, “sacked.”   “Clearly, he has not (listened), and as such, his license in this Church has been revoked,” posted the ACC in a statement about Robinson's situation. “He is no longer serving as a priest in the ACC.”   Monday the ACC fleshed out: “He was repeatedly warned not to engage in the sort of behavior that he displayed at the National Right to Life Conference, and he did not comply. As such, his license to serve in the ACC was revoked. In doing so, the bishops acted in accordance with ACC canons.” “I have not been defrocked. My licence was revoked. This means I cannot minister in ~250 ACC churches,” Robinson explains in an email missive defending himself which he sent on Monday (Feb. 3). “I am still a priest.”   ROBINSON’S MANY CANCELLATIONS   The ACC priest seems to be taking the cancellation of his priestly license to minister in stride.   “Not wanting to labour the point. I made a silly joke, I will accept the consequences for it. I have been cancelled before,” he emailed. “I am a man; I can take it.”   Yes, Robinson has been cancelled before. Several times before.   Wikipedia says that until 2021 Robinson was a frequent contributor to The Telegraph, the Daily Mail and Sp!ked with no explanation why he no longer writes for those British publications.   In October 2023 GB News axed him, as well as TALK RADIO.   Then in March 2023 he was also booted from the Royal Academy of Dance’s subcommittee on education for opposing a children's “Drag Queen Story Hour” at a London library.   Mere Anglicanism clipped his wings in January 2024 and he was cancelled from the concluding roundtable panel. Finally last week Robinson was cancelled by his own video game and news website staff.   PCGamer, a British website that monitors the gaming world, reports that the editorial staff of “God is a Geek” website walked out last week following Robinson's behavior at the pro-life summit event.   “Calvin Robinson is a far-right political commentator and former games journalist who founded and still owns the gaming website God is a Geek,” PC Gamer posted. “On Thursday (January 30) the entire editorial staff of God is a Geek resigned.”   However, the British priest is clearly upset that Archbishop Haverland has not been in direct contact with him.   “Bishop Chandler Jones broke the news, but he is not my bishop, and he is not responsible,” Robinson wrote in his email. “Archbishop Mark Haverland revoked my licence. He is yet to have a conversation with me about any of this …” PRIESTLY DISOBEDIENCE   “As a direct response to the cancel culture bandwagon, the Archbishop of the Anglican Catholic Church, where I serve, removed my licence without so much as a conversation,” he emailed. “I will not go into that further, as I believe in being obedient to one’s bishop and would like to give him the benefit of the doubt.”   But as an ACC priest Father Robinson has not been obedient to his bishop as he proclaims.   Repeatedly he has been admonished by his ecclesial authorities about his political leanings, engagement and rhetoric. He was asked to be a simple parish priest – to attend the Altar, celebrate the Sacraments, preach the Word and be a pastor to his flock.   “When Robinson was received into the ACC, he was told that there was a distinction of offices between political activist and parish priest. His bishops made it clear to him that he had been received into the Church to minister to a parish, and as such, he would have to eschew the provocative political behavior that characterized his prior career as a TV presenter, blogger, and social media influencer,” the ACC posted. “He has not done so, and what happened at the National Right to Life Summit was not an isolated incident.”   The ACC is a part of the G3 Synod which is a grouping of Continuing Anglican bodies which are a full Communion ecumenical partnership with each other. The current membership of the G3 consists of the Anglican Catholic Church (ACC); the Anglican Church in America (ACA); and the Anglican Province of America (APA). These three Anglican bodies are working towards full unification in much the same way that the member organizations of the Common Cause Partnership joined forces in 2009 to form the Anglican Church in North America.   Bishop Chandler Jones is the II Presiding Bishop of the Anglican Province of America. He is in full communion with Archbishop Haverland.   The Episcopal Visitor for Robinson's ACC Diocese of the Midwest – which encompasses Kentucky, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Illinois, and Indiana – is Bishop Patrick Fodor who is the III Bishop of the ACA Diocese of the Missouri River Valley. He, too, is in full communion with Archbishop Haverland. Robinson's ACC diocese has been sede vacante since August 21, 2023 when the VI Bishop of the Midwest Rommie Starks died.   The British priest first approached the ACC in early October 2023, six weeks after Bishop Starks died.   THE PRO-LIFE SUMMIT SALUTE   The event which pushed the Anglican Catholic Church over the edge came as the result of a very questionable and ill-advised hand motion at the close of Robinson's address at the National Pro-Life Summit in Washington, DC, on January 25, the day after the 52nd Annual March for Life.   Even before Robinson moved to the USA, he had endeared himself to the religious and political right. He has hobnobbed with then Presidential Candidate Donald Trump, former Catholic Bishop of Tyler Joseph Strickland, and laicized Priests for Life national director Frank Pavone.   Last week (Jan. 25) he was with some pro-life heavy weights at the National Pro-Life Summit including: Matt Walsh from the Daily Wire, Dr. Ben Carson former Secretary of the US Department of Housing and Urban Development, Shane Winnings of Promise Keepers, and Abby Johnson formerly with Planned Parenthood.   This was the political backdrop that Robinson was stepping into. He appeared in a floor length black Roman cassock topped with a mozzetta sartorial cape. He is always stylishly dressed.   Through the years his diaconal/priestly demeanor has changed. As a man of color – his mother is a British gentlewoman and his father’s folks come from Jamaica making him a light-skinned mixed-race child – he initially wore a full Afro hairdo. Then following his ordination as a Old Catholic priest his hair became closely cropped. Then after coming to the United States, he has started wearing a beard with a few tell tail grey hairs beginning to show.   At the pro-life summit the then-ACC priest encouraged his American audience to stay the course in defending preborn life. A fight he feels has already been lost in England.   “Every country in Europe is embracing death. America, as I can see, is the only country fighting for life,” he said. “God bless all of you for what you are doing.”   Then, using very poor judgement, he added a controversial hand motion. “Please keep doing it. I hope I can encourage you …” he continued. “and my heart goes out to you …” he said as he placed his hand on his heart and then reached out to the crowd. “God bless.”   As he left the podium he was met with laughter, applause and cheers.   What the crowd was responding to was the questionable hand motion. The stiff-armed 45⁰ salute was seen only days before when Elon Musk forcibly gave a similar stiff-armed salute during Trump's Inauguration Day festivities. It was his way of thanking American voters for returning Trump to the Oval Office.   Robinson was apparently trying to imitate Musk. Whereas Musk’s salute was forcefully done three times while grimacing. Robinson's hand-to-heart one time salute was more natural in an attempt to convey heartfelt emotion rather than political rhetoric.   “At the end of an encouraging pro-life speech, I gave a cheeky nod to Elon Musk, mocking the ludicrous response he received to sending his heart out to the crowd in his excitement at the inauguration,” Robinson explained in Monday's email missive. “I sent my heart out to the wonderful audience at the pro-life summit. It was well received at the time and immediately afterwards. That is, until the hard-Left caught hold of it and decided to label me a nazi.”   Yet the similarity between Musk's and Robinson's salutes and the WWII Nazi salute are striking and can easily be misconstrued, landing the priest in hot water making him lose his parish and possibly jeopardizing his American immigration status as well.   19th CENTURY FLAG SALUTE   Historically the Nazi Salute is a corruption of what is called the “Bellamy Salute” that American school children initially used when reciting the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.   The Rev. Francis Bellamy, a Baptist pastor, penned the first publicly recited version of the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag in 1892 to commemorate the 400th anniversary of Christopher Columbus’ sailing the ocean blue and landing on San Salvador in the Bahamas on October 12, 1492.   A Presidential Proclamation called for the special national holiday honoring Christopher Columbus to take place on Friday, October 21 rather than October 12. This is when Bellamy's Pledge was first recited as a part of an initiative to bolster the Schoolhouse Flag Movement to get Old Glory into all American schools. Bellamy's Pledge of Allegiance was coupled with Bellamy's straight – not 45⁰ – stiff-armed flag salute.   The change in date was to account for the switch between the Julian and Gregorian calendars.   Bellamy's original words were: ‘I pledge Allegiance to my Flag and the Republic for which it stands, one Nation indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all.”   Wikipedia explains: “The recital was accompanied with a salute to the flag known as the Bellamy salute.”   This flag salute was created by James B. Upham as the gesture that was to accompany the Pledge of Allegiance of the United States of America, but the salute was named after Francis Bellamy who wrote the text.   The Bellamy flag salute was inherently used by school children until late 1942 the year after the United States entered World War II.   The straight stiff-armed flag salute was officially replaced by the now familiar hand-over-heart gesture of respect when the 77th Congress amended the Flag Code on December 22,1942 when Public Law 77-829 was enacted.   The joint Flag Code resolution was passed to codify and emphasize existing rules and customs pertaining to the display and use of the United States flag. It was enacted because the familiar Bellamy flag salute was usurped by the Nazis in the 1920s and 1930s in the run up to World War II.   The Nazi salute shows allegiance to a single person – Adolph Hitler – not a country, nor a flag. And it has remained associated with him ever since.   ROBINSON'S MISSTEP   Musk's 45⁰ stiff-armed gesture is not as furious as portrayed. But for Robinson, an “Anglican” priest, it was very bad optics. Such as in 2020 when President Trump went to St. John Episcopal Church on Lafayette Square for a photo op holding up a Bible during the height of the George Floyd/Black Lives Matter protests.   Robinson's bishops saw the gesture as a “pro-Nazi salute” which was the straw that broke the camel's back in dealing with their new politicized priest.   “At approximately 3:00 pm today (1/29) members of the College of Bishops of the ACC were made aware of a post made on X showing the end of a speech made by Calvin Robinson at the National Pro-Life Summit in Washington, DC,” the ACC posted last week. “In it, he closed his comments with a gesture that many have interpreted as a pro-Nazi salute.”   Robinson is young, not yet 40, and he is an inexperienced priest. The oils of ordination haven't fully dried from his palms and the Character of the Priesthood hasn't fully formed him. He has yet to learn prudence, humility, charity and obedience to his superiors. He has an ego perhaps from his strong Internet presence as a religious and political influencer.   Nor did the Anglican Catholic Church fully understand Robinson when it took him under its wings. And apparently it wasn't understood that the British priest would be that political, provocative and problematic coupled with polemical rhetoric as well as hard to leash and tether to his parish.   In today's hyper politicized world any stiff-armed salute naturally draws references to the Nazi regime especially since the 80th Anniversary of the Liberation of Auschwitz would occur in two days (January 27).   The ACC initial statement had strong words to say about the optics Robinson presented.   “We condemn Nazi ideology and anti-Semitism in all its forms. And we believe that those who mimic the Nazi salute, even as a joke or an attempt to troll their opponents, trivialize the horror of the Holocaust and diminish the sacrifice of those who fought against its perpetrators.” the ACC posted. “Such actions are harmful, divisive, and contrary to the tenets of Christian charity.”   Robinson went on Facebook to defend himself chalking it up to British dry wit. “For the record, in case it needs saying: I am not a Nazi,” he posted. “My attempt at dry wit, in that typical British way, was not a joke at the expense of WWII, nor an admission of my membership in the Nationalist Socialist Party.”   The English priest has his detractors, but he also has his passionate supporters. But the optics he created has reflected negatively on his denomination, the wider Church and Christianity. The Gospel failed to be faithfully represented.   LIMITED OPTIONS The ACC is emphatic about Robinson's future with them. He has burned his bridges behind him. His options are very limited.   “He may seek a new Church to affiliate with, or continue an independent online ministry,” the ACC explains. “What he may not do is serve in the ACC or with its ecumenical partners.”   This means he cannot approach the Anglican Church in America; or the Anglican Province of America seeking an altar, pulpit and rectory.   Calvin Robinson is a priest and not a politician. His place is behind a pulpit and not a podium. On Candlemas Sunday (Feb. 2) he did not have a parish family to celebrate the Eucharist with and his stay in America may be precarious due to the dictates of his religious work visa.   Mary Ann Mueller is a journalist living in Texas. She is a regular contributor to VirtueOnline.

By Rev. Dr. Chris Sugden https://anglicanmainstream.org/ Feb 5, 2025   With the resignation of Archbishop Welby and the Archbishop of York being under a cloud due to a failure in safeguarding, the Church of England appears to have lost moral authority. It is also riven with doctrinal differences, chiefly over the desire of many bishops to bless same-sex unions. All is not lost, however. Here Rev Canon Dr Chris Sugden explains how 2025 might pan out and notes developments that could encourage evangelicals   Archbishop Welby’s legacy is a mixture.   He introduced a centralised management process into the Church of England (C of E), with the House of Bishops taking a dominant role in shaping policies and proposals. Parishes have been amalgamated, and more diocesan officials appointed.  In response, a ‘Save the Parish’ movement has started to preserve a parish church and vicar in each community.   Preserving unity   Archbishop Welby also sought to preserve what he called ‘unity’ by making concessions to a small but powerful elite lobby, including some bishops, senior clergy and lay church officials. This lobby has been loudly pressing for over 20 years for concessions to a liberal lifestyle.   They wanted same sex relationships to be blessed and recognised in church services, and for clergy to enter same-sex marriage. However, their wishes do not match those of their parishioners; most parish congregations are by and large orthodox in belief and practice.   Red line   Under Welby, a ‘fudge’ was introduced in an attempt to keep everyone happy. It had the opposite effect and opened up divisions within the Anglican Communion. For most orthodox Anglicans, a red line was crossed in December 2023, when prayers for same sex couples within a regular service of worship were first permitted.   Welby’s reputation on the global stage has plummeted. He forfeited the allegiance of many Anglican Primates (the senior Archbishops in their countries), who represent the majority of Anglicans around the world. These international Archbishops have refused to acknowledge the Archbishop of Canterbury as the senior bishop in the Anglican Communion.   As a result, an international Anglican body has formally recommended that Welby’s successor as leader of the world’s Anglican Archbishops should not be the Archbishop of Canterbury but be chosen from the Primates.   Celibate lives   Meanwhile in England, orthodox clergy and lay leaders came together to form The Alliance, a network that represents the majority of Anglican churchgoers. It comprises the Holy Trinity Brompton (Alpha Course) network, the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC), Church Society, ReNew, New Wine, Forward in Faith (an Anglo-Catholic High Church network) and Living Out (people with same sex attraction who live celibate lives).   The objective of The Alliance is to achieve a parallel province in which orthodox congregations and clergy can be ‘overseen’ by orthodox bishops who stand for the traditional Anglican and biblical teaching on sex and marriage.   Despite the managerial moves in recent years, the Church of England is not a centralised organisation. Each parish is ‘independent’ and receives oversight and fellowship from its diocese.   Separate congregations   Some orthodox C of E clergy and lay people have left the national Church to form separate congregations, but remain Anglicans. They belong to the Anglican Network in Europe (ANIE), formed in 2013, which is part of the Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON). ANIE has its own bishops, who are recognised by many Anglican Primates around the world.   But the ANIE alternative arrangement cannot be a complete solution for all orthodox Anglicans. ANIE’s departure does indicate significant disagreement with the same-sex blessings that have been allowed to take place, but it is far from certain that the General Synod and House of Bishops would actually agree to recognise them.   Furthermore, many parish congregations are central to their local community life; they are in general orthodox and they would be unhappy about receiving a new ANIE bishop rather than their area or diocesan bishop. So while there may be internal disagreements over same-sex blessings, these parishes will not vote to leave the Church of England.   Bishops’ moves   At the time of writing, the House of Bishops has been working on a series of proposals to allow for same-sex blessings to take place in a separate church service, for same-sex marriages to take place in church and for clergy to be allowed to enter same-sex marriages. The bishops’ plan has been to get the General Synod to vote to accept all their proposals by a simple majority.   The orthodox objection to the House of Bishops’ current proposals is that such changes represent a change in the Church of England’s doctrine of marriage. A change of doctrine requires a two-thirds majority in all three ‘houses’ of the Synod: bishops, clergy and lay people.  The bishops know they will not be able to secure this because more than a third of laity and probably of the clergy members of Synod are against such a change.   Just this last month a press release from the House of Bishops indicated a delay in their process, noting that any proposals will not be ready for presentation in July. It is quite possible that the orthodox bishops in the ‘house’ have stood firm in their objections at the first meeting which will not have been chaired by Archbishop Welby.   Meanwhile speculation has developed about who will be the next Archbishop of Canterbury. The elite gay lobby is understood to be pushing the candidature of Bishop Guli Francis-Deqani, the Iranian-born British Bishop of Chelmsford since 2021, who would be the first woman Archbishop. She is known to be in favour of same-sex marriages.   What matters now is that the members of the Alliance, the orthodox bishops and clergy should remain firm in their stand for biblical teaching and practice.   Some parishes have gone so far as to send to the dioceses only the money they will then receive back from the diocese to cover the cost of their clergy. Normally all parishes contribute a ‘parish share’ to cover the expenses of the diocese as well.   Refusal to pay   The refusal to pay this is causing some dioceses significant financial pressure.  Some parishes have taken advantage of the overseers commissioned by the Alliance to provide oversight in place of their own ‘heterodox’ diocesan bishops.   But some evangelical clergy have been hesitant to take a stand as they want to be ‘nice’ to everyone and remain united. However, as Canon John Dunnett, the Executive Officer of the CEEC has written: “The question still remains as to ‘unity in or around what’. The unity that Jesus prayed for was not institutional…[or] based on the status quo.   “And unity in Scripture always goes hand-in-hand with truth. CEEC is absolutely committed to unity across cultures, continents and centuries with all those who hold to the apostolic faith as we have received it.”   Canon Dr Chris Sugden is chair of Anglican Mainstream, an orthodox network and website www.anglicanmainstream.org founded in 2003 to uphold biblical teaching, especially on sex and marriage. He is a Canon in the Anglican churches of both Nigeria and Ghana. He was part of the organising team of the first Global Anglican Future Conference in 2008

By Rev. Dr. Chris Sugden https://anglicanmainstream.org/ Feb 5, 2025   With the resignation of Archbishop Welby and the Archbishop of York being under a cloud due to a failure in safeguarding, the Church of England appears to have lost moral authority. It is also riven with doctrinal differences, chiefly over the desire of many bishops to bless same-sex unions. All is not lost, however. Here Rev Canon Dr Chris Sugden explains how 2025 might pan out and notes developments that could encourage evangelicals   Archbishop Welby’s legacy is a mixture.   He introduced a centralised management process into the Church of England (C of E), with the House of Bishops taking a dominant role in shaping policies and proposals. Parishes have been amalgamated, and more diocesan officials appointed.  In response, a ‘Save the Parish’ movement has started to preserve a parish church and vicar in each community.   Preserving unity   Archbishop Welby also sought to preserve what he called ‘unity’ by making concessions to a small but powerful elite lobby, including some bishops, senior clergy and lay church officials. This lobby has been loudly pressing for over 20 years for concessions to a liberal lifestyle.   They wanted same sex relationships to be blessed and recognised in church services, and for clergy to enter same-sex marriage. However, their wishes do not match those of their parishioners; most parish congregations are by and large orthodox in belief and practice.   Red line   Under Welby, a ‘fudge’ was introduced in an attempt to keep everyone happy. It had the opposite effect and opened up divisions within the Anglican Communion. For most orthodox Anglicans, a red line was crossed in December 2023, when prayers for same sex couples within a regular service of worship were first permitted.   Welby’s reputation on the global stage has plummeted. He forfeited the allegiance of many Anglican Primates (the senior Archbishops in their countries), who represent the majority of Anglicans around the world. These international Archbishops have refused to acknowledge the Archbishop of Canterbury as the senior bishop in the Anglican Communion.   As a result, an international Anglican body has formally recommended that Welby’s successor as leader of the world’s Anglican Archbishops should not be the Archbishop of Canterbury but be chosen from the Primates.   Celibate lives   Meanwhile in England, orthodox clergy and lay leaders came together to form The Alliance, a network that represents the majority of Anglican churchgoers. It comprises the Holy Trinity Brompton (Alpha Course) network, the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC), Church Society, ReNew, New Wine, Forward in Faith (an Anglo-Catholic High Church network) and Living Out (people with same sex attraction who live celibate lives).   The objective of The Alliance is to achieve a parallel province in which orthodox congregations and clergy can be ‘overseen’ by orthodox bishops who stand for the traditional Anglican and biblical teaching on sex and marriage.   Despite the managerial moves in recent years, the Church of England is not a centralised organisation. Each parish is ‘independent’ and receives oversight and fellowship from its diocese.   Separate congregations   Some orthodox C of E clergy and lay people have left the national Church to form separate congregations, but remain Anglicans. They belong to the Anglican Network in Europe (ANIE), formed in 2013, which is part of the Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON). ANIE has its own bishops, who are recognised by many Anglican Primates around the world.   But the ANIE alternative arrangement cannot be a complete solution for all orthodox Anglicans. ANIE’s departure does indicate significant disagreement with the same-sex blessings that have been allowed to take place, but it is far from certain that the General Synod and House of Bishops would actually agree to recognise them.   Furthermore, many parish congregations are central to their local community life; they are in general orthodox and they would be unhappy about receiving a new ANIE bishop rather than their area or diocesan bishop. So while there may be internal disagreements over same-sex blessings, these parishes will not vote to leave the Church of England.   Bishops’ moves   At the time of writing, the House of Bishops has been working on a series of proposals to allow for same-sex blessings to take place in a separate church service, for same-sex marriages to take place in church and for clergy to be allowed to enter same-sex marriages. The bishops’ plan has been to get the General Synod to vote to accept all their proposals by a simple majority.   The orthodox objection to the House of Bishops’ current proposals is that such changes represent a change in the Church of England’s doctrine of marriage. A change of doctrine requires a two-thirds majority in all three ‘houses’ of the Synod: bishops, clergy and lay people.  The bishops know they will not be able to secure this because more than a third of laity and probably of the clergy members of Synod are against such a change.   Just this last month a press release from the House of Bishops indicated a delay in their process, noting that any proposals will not be ready for presentation in July. It is quite possible that the orthodox bishops in the ‘house’ have stood firm in their objections at the first meeting which will not have been chaired by Archbishop Welby.   Meanwhile speculation has developed about who will be the next Archbishop of Canterbury. The elite gay lobby is understood to be pushing the candidature of Bishop Guli Francis-Deqani, the Iranian-born British Bishop of Chelmsford since 2021, who would be the first woman Archbishop. She is known to be in favour of same-sex marriages.   What matters now is that the members of the Alliance, the orthodox bishops and clergy should remain firm in their stand for biblical teaching and practice.   Some parishes have gone so far as to send to the dioceses only the money they will then receive back from the diocese to cover the cost of their clergy. Normally all parishes contribute a ‘parish share’ to cover the expenses of the diocese as well.   Refusal to pay   The refusal to pay this is causing some dioceses significant financial pressure.  Some parishes have taken advantage of the overseers commissioned by the Alliance to provide oversight in place of their own ‘heterodox’ diocesan bishops.   But some evangelical clergy have been hesitant to take a stand as they want to be ‘nice’ to everyone and remain united. However, as Canon John Dunnett, the Executive Officer of the CEEC has written: “The question still remains as to ‘unity in or around what’. The unity that Jesus prayed for was not institutional…[or] based on the status quo.   “And unity in Scripture always goes hand-in-hand with truth. CEEC is absolutely committed to unity across cultures, continents and centuries with all those who hold to the apostolic faith as we have received it.”   Canon Dr Chris Sugden is chair of Anglican Mainstream, an orthodox network and website www.anglicanmainstream.org founded in 2003 to uphold biblical teaching, especially on sex and marriage. He is a Canon in the Anglican churches of both Nigeria and Ghana. He was part of the organising team of the first Global Anglican Future Conference in 2008   By Rev. Dr. Chris Sugden https://anglicanmainstream.org/ Feb 5, 2025   With the resignation of Archbishop Welby and the Archbishop of York being under a cloud due to a failure in safeguarding, the Church of England appears to have lost moral authority. It is also riven with doctrinal differences, chiefly over the desire of many bishops to bless same-sex unions. All is not lost, however. Here Rev Canon Dr Chris Sugden explains how 2025 might pan out and notes developments that could encourage evangelicals   Archbishop Welby’s legacy is a mixture.   He introduced a centralised management process into the Church of England (C of E), with the House of Bishops taking a dominant role in shaping policies and proposals. Parishes have been amalgamated, and more diocesan officials appointed.  In response, a ‘Save the Parish’ movement has started to preserve a parish church and vicar in each community.   Preserving unity   Archbishop Welby also sought to preserve what he called ‘unity’ by making concessions to a small but powerful elite lobby, including some bishops, senior clergy and lay church officials. This lobby has been loudly pressing for over 20 years for concessions to a liberal lifestyle.   They wanted same sex relationships to be blessed and recognised in church services, and for clergy to enter same-sex marriage. However, their wishes do not match those of their parishioners; most parish congregations are by and large orthodox in belief and practice.   Red line   Under Welby, a ‘fudge’ was introduced in an attempt to keep everyone happy. It had the opposite effect and opened up divisions within the Anglican Communion. For most orthodox Anglicans, a red line was crossed in December 2023, when prayers for same sex couples within a regular service of worship were first permitted.   Welby’s reputation on the global stage has plummeted. He forfeited the allegiance of many Anglican Primates (the senior Archbishops in their countries), who represent the majority of Anglicans around the world. These international Archbishops have refused to acknowledge the Archbishop of Canterbury as the senior bishop in the Anglican Communion.   As a result, an international Anglican body has formally recommended that Welby’s successor as leader of the world’s Anglican Archbishops should not be the Archbishop of Canterbury but be chosen from the Primates.   Celibate lives   Meanwhile in England, orthodox clergy and lay leaders came together to form The Alliance, a network that represents the majority of Anglican churchgoers. It comprises the Holy Trinity Brompton (Alpha Course) network, the Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC), Church Society, ReNew, New Wine, Forward in Faith (an Anglo-Catholic High Church network) and Living Out (people with same sex attraction who live celibate lives).   The objective of The Alliance is to achieve a parallel province in which orthodox congregations and clergy can be ‘overseen’ by orthodox bishops who stand for the traditional Anglican and biblical teaching on sex and marriage.   Despite the managerial moves in recent years, the Church of England is not a centralised organisation. Each parish is ‘independent’ and receives oversight and fellowship from its diocese.   Separate congregations   Some orthodox C of E clergy and lay people have left the national Church to form separate congregations, but remain Anglicans. They belong to the Anglican Network in Europe (ANIE), formed in 2013, which is part of the Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON). ANIE has its own bishops, who are recognised by many Anglican Primates around the world.   But the ANIE alternative arrangement cannot be a complete solution for all orthodox Anglicans. ANIE’s departure does indicate significant disagreement with the same-sex blessings that have been allowed to take place, but it is far from certain that the General Synod and House of Bishops would actually agree to recognise them.   Furthermore, many parish congregations are central to their local community life; they are in general orthodox and they would be unhappy about receiving a new ANIE bishop rather than their area or diocesan bishop. So while there may be internal disagreements over same-sex blessings, these parishes will not vote to leave the Church of England.   Bishops’ moves   At the time of writing, the House of Bishops has been working on a series of proposals to allow for same-sex blessings to take place in a separate church service, for same-sex marriages to take place in church and for clergy to be allowed to enter same-sex marriages. The bishops’ plan has been to get the General Synod to vote to accept all their proposals by a simple majority.   The orthodox objection to the House of Bishops’ current proposals is that such changes represent a change in the Church of England’s doctrine of marriage. A change of doctrine requires a two-thirds majority in all three ‘houses’ of the Synod: bishops, clergy and lay people.  The bishops know they will not be able to secure this because more than a third of laity and probably of the clergy members of Synod are against such a change.   Just this last month a press release from the House of Bishops indicated a delay in their process, noting that any proposals will not be ready for presentation in July. It is quite possible that the orthodox bishops in the ‘house’ have stood firm in their objections at the first meeting which will not have been chaired by Archbishop Welby.   Meanwhile speculation has developed about who will be the next Archbishop of Canterbury. The elite gay lobby is understood to be pushing the candidature of Bishop Guli Francis-Deqani, the Iranian-born British Bishop of Chelmsford since 2021, who would be the first woman Archbishop. She is known to be in favour of same-sex marriages.   What matters now is that the members of the Alliance, the orthodox bishops and clergy should remain firm in their stand for biblical teaching and practice.   Some parishes have gone so far as to send to the dioceses only the money they will then receive back from the diocese to cover the cost of their clergy. Normally all parishes contribute a ‘parish share’ to cover the expenses of the diocese as well.   Refusal to pay   The refusal to pay this is causing some dioceses significant financial pressure.  Some parishes have taken advantage of the overseers commissioned by the Alliance to provide oversight in place of their own ‘heterodox’ diocesan bishops.   But some evangelical clergy have been hesitant to take a stand as they want to be ‘nice’ to everyone and remain united. However, as Canon John Dunnett, the Executive Officer of the CEEC has written: “The question still remains as to ‘unity in or around what’. The unity that Jesus prayed for was not institutional…[or] based on the status quo.   “And unity in Scripture always goes hand-in-hand with truth. CEEC is absolutely committed to unity across cultures, continents and centuries with all those who hold to the apostolic faith as we have received it.”   Canon Dr Chris Sugden is chair of Anglican Mainstream, an orthodox network and website www.anglicanmainstream.org founded in 2003 to uphold biblical teaching, especially on sex and marriage. He is a Canon in the Anglican churches of both Nigeria and Ghana. He was part of the organising team of the first Global Anglican Future Conference in 2008

Demoralised clergy speak of church in freefall and crisis of trust in run-up to governing body meeting   By Harriet Sherwood THE GUARDIAN 8 Feb 2025   Mutiny may be in the air when the Church of England’s normally staid ruling body, the General Synod, meets for a five-day session next week.   The gathering of the 500-member church parliament follows a series of tumultuous events that have resulted in the unprecedented resignation of the archbishop of Canterbury, repeated calls for the archbishop of York to stand down, and the sudden departure of the bishop of Liverpool. Behind all are cases of abuse, alleged abuse and the church’s failure to deal with abuse.   In recent days, demoralised clergy have spoken of a church in freefall, a crisis of trust between grassroots members and the national leadership, serious reputational damage and a fear of more to come.   As a poll this week shows that only one in four members of the public have a favourable view of the C of E, some are asking if the church can ever again provide moral leadership. Even Stephen Cottrell, the archbishop of York and now de facto leader of the C of E, has acknowledged that people are “disgusted” by the country’s established church.   Amid rumours of a no-confidence motion in Cottrell, some female members of synod have written to the archbishop to say it is inappropriate for him to give the opening address on Monday in the circumstances. In response, Cottrell has promised to “make space for silence and prayer as well as offering reflections on how we can be a church which is more transparent and accountable”.   Behind the scenes, efforts are under way to secure fundamental change. Some church members are calling for parliamentary intervention or a royal commission to examine the C of E’s governance. Supporters of such a move say bishops and archbishops are unaccountable and inherently resistant to reform. “What’s needed is a higher authority to step in, and I don’t mean God,” said one.   Fr Robert Thompson, a London priest and synod member who was among those calling for Justin Welby to quit in November, said next week’s meeting would be very tense. “Synod is usually highly managed and controlled, but a lot of people feel this is part of the problem,” he said.   Some felt Cottrell was not the right person to steer the church through the crisis because there were many questions over his own failure to act against alleged abusers. “But because he has massive support among the bishops, he feels he can ride this out,” Thompson said.   Rev Alex Frost, a vicar in Burnley and another synod member, said there were “two parallel universes” in the C of E. “The hierarchy of the C of E that is in disarray, and the local churches that are going about their day-to-day ministry, doing their best against the backdrop of a church that seems to be in freefall,” he said. There had been a “huge breakdown in trust and honesty and integrity, and unless we regain that, we will lose more and more people”.   The Ven Miranda Threlfall-Holmes, the archdeacon of Liverpool, said there was a “real crisis of trust and a real sense of needing to look at how hierarchies are structured and how accountability and transparency works”.   According to Rev Dr Charlie Bell, another synod member, local parishes were “frustrated and irritated” at waves of bad news coming from the C of E hierarchy. People were fed up that good work at grassroots level, such as running food banks or hosting meals for elderly people, were being “endlessly swamped” by bad news from the top of the church.   Bell said he was not confident of there being honest debate about the way forward at next week’s synod. “The issues are being weaponised in a distasteful and unpleasant way.”   Other synod members claimed the issues of abuse and safeguarding were being used by some people as proxies to attack Cottrell and others who were seen as liberal on issues such as same-sex marriage.   Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.   Bishops were closeted at an away day last week as their colleague John Perumbalath, the bishop of Liverpool, became engulfed in allegations of sexual misconduct. “We were very, very deeply shaken,” Philip North, the bishop of Blackburn, told a briefing hosted by the Religion Media Centre.   “I can’t deny there is huge reputational damage done to the church at a national level, to the standing of bishops and to the perception of the church, and we feel very much on the back foot, very much on the defensive … I think we do now need to get on to the front foot, demonstrate that we can put in place the necessary safeguarding reforms, and start to change the language.”   Synod members will take two important decisions next week. One is about transferring safeguarding staff to an external body free from church influence or control – a recommendation made a year ago by Prof Alexis Jay, the former chair of the national child abuse inquiry, but not yet adopted.   The other concerns long overdue changes to how clergy are disciplined. Under a new measure, the 12-month time limit for claims of serious misconduct will be abolished, bishops will be almost entirely removed from disciplinary processes, and a central team will investigate the most serious cases.   Both measures will be seen as steps towards putting the C of E’s house in order.

By Chuck Collins www.virtueonline.org February 9, 2025   John Hooper was burned at the stake February 9, 1555, one of 282 Protestants ordered killed by Bloody Mary in her five-year reign as Queen. Hooper is remembered as the "Father of Puritanism."   Puritanism is a nasty thing almost always when it is mentioned. C.S. Lewis’s demon Screwtape declared to his apprentice Woodworm that  “the value we have given to that word [Puritanism] is one of the really solid triumphs of the last hundred years.” The Puritans were profoundly committed Anglicans whom historian Patrick Collinson calls  the “hotter sort of protestants.” Nigel Atkinson points out that their tendency was to out-reform the reformers, and he noted how John Hooper changed from the usual Reformation principle (that anything can be used, provided that it is not contrary to Scripture), to his insistence that anything used in worship must “have the express Word of God to support it.” This came to be called the Regulative Principle (as opposed to the Normative Principle). J. I. Packer loved the Puritans and viewed them as the conscience of the English Reformation: “The great Puritans were men of outstanding intellectual power and spiritual insight, in whom the mental habits fostered by sober scholarship were linked with a flaming zeal for God and a minute acquaintance with the human heart. All their work betrays this unique fusion of gifts and graces. They had a radically God-centered outlook. Their appreciation of God’s sovereign majesty was profound; their reverence in handling His word was deep and sustained. . .they understood the ways of God with men, the glory of Christ the mediator, and the work of the Spirit in the believer and in the church, more richly, fully, and accurately, perhaps, than any since their day.”   John Hooper spent the early 1540s in exile in Zurich with other Protestant exiles, and when he returned home, he was appointed the bishop of Gloucester. But he refused the appointment and chose instead to spend a month in Fleet Prison rather than be vested with the “popish rags redolent of superstition” (Alec Ryrie). He came to believe that the vestments of the clergy were not matters of indifference (adiaphora) when they crudely display the church’s wealth and power, and mislead people into believing that the minister is a mediator who offers propitiatory sacrifices for their salvation. For Hooper, the gaudy Medieval robes communicated a theology that is not consistent with a Protestant understanding of ministers and Holy Communion that mean only to point people to Christ. He was finally persuaded that “vestments” are not a mountain to die on, especially if they kept him from opportunities to minister the gospel. Until his death he served faithfully as bishop in the Church of England.   There is a generosity in historic Anglicanism that distinguishes gospel issues from adiaphora (matters indifferent): essentials from nonessentials. This is the original "via media" of the Church of England. This generosity distinguishes the English Reformation from some other Reformation traditions. Nonconformist Puritans sometimes violated this generosity, prohibiting what was not specifically prohibited in Holy Scripture for fear that Anglicanism would spin into lawlessness. The generosity in Anglicanism is no less needed today than in the 16th century: Oliver O’Donovan stated that “There was nothing particularly ‘middle’ about most of the English Reformers’ theological positions - even if one could decide between what poles the middle way was supposed to lie. Their moderation consisted rather in a determined policy of separating the essentials of faith and order from adiaphora . . . Anglican moderation is the policy of reserving strong statement and conviction for the few things which really deserve them . . . But it is precisely that, and not some supposed ‘middleness’ between Catholic and Protestant, which gives it a critically important role in twentieth century ecumenism.” Anglicanism at its best is thoroughly biblical, theologically orthodox, pastorally generous, and liturgically beautiful. Considering Hooper on the anniversary of his death is a reminder of the “pastorally generous” part, and the unwavering English commitment to the gospel essentials, and generosity in matters for which biblical Christians can and will disagree.   Dean Chuck Collins is a reformed Anglican theologian and historian