by Barbara Gauthier
How do people interpret what they see going on around them? Each of us has a unique perspective through which we view the world, an interpretive lens that assists us in understanding and making sense of the world around us, people and events. There are two competing worldviews at work in modern culture — religious faith and secular — and thus two different narratives emerging from the same events depending on which interpretive lens one has chosen.
An example of this phenomenon is how recent ACNA allegations are being seen and interpreted. The secular worldview promoted by mainstream news and social media views people and events through a lens that divides people into identity groups. It interprets conflict by assigning to those involved either the role of either forever victim or the role of forever oppressor — and the only acceptable outcome is the destruction of the oppressor.
The Christian religious worldview, on the other hand, is based on Scripture as the revealed Word God, which the Church received and has understood as “the faith delivered once and for all to the saints.” A biblical Christian view understands such events as resulting from human sin — a situation rectified by repentance, forgiveness, restitution and restoration leading by God’s grace to reconciliation and peace for both sides.
The recent Washington Post articles on allegations against ACNA bishops are an excellent example of how a secular progressive worldview interprets events and individuals. Josh Hollon provides the biblical Christian view that sees such events from a more positive perspective — an opportunity for the Church and all involved to learn from our human missteps, mistakes and misunderstandings and develop more fully those Godly virtues that will enable us as a Church to “stand mature and fully assured in all the will of God.” (Colossians 4:12)
Bryan Hollon begins with a premise that is radically different from the Washington Post’s take on the Anglican Church in North America. “The Church is not broken,” he says.
“The discipline taking place in our Province is not a sign of a broken church. A broken church is one that fails to discipline, so that option needs clearly to be avoided. Nor is this institutional self-protection or damage control. Godly discipline – which we are all striving for – is the fruit of a Christian community abiding in the Word of God. When the body functions rightly, it maintains both unity and holiness through mutual care and accountability.”
He traces the ACNA’s apparent lack of discipline back to the Episcopal Church [which had ruled in 1996 that the Episcopal Church had no “core doctrine” of morality and ceased to discipline clergy for “moral” issues]. When orthodox dioceses, clergy and laity disassociated from the Episcopal Church, they had to “let goods and kindred go” and took with them the Prayer Book, the liturgy and the three evangelical, charismatic and catholic streams within the Anglican river. But since the Episcopal Church had failed to administer discipline consistently or in a balanced way, the orthodox departed without any working models for discipline packed in their ecclesial suitcases.
“Faithful Anglicans needed a province where the faith would be guarded, where bishops would be accountable for affirming and guarding the “faith once and for all delivered to the saints,” and where discipline would be administered justly. Now we see what that looks like: discipline actually taking place. The cases under review are concerning, yes. But the fact that discipline is being administered in orderly, canonical fashion is a sign of health.”
“The ACNA is fragile – not a centuries-old institution with massive endowments, but a new work still building the processes and structures that will sustain generations. This is all playing out with total transparency among Christian clergy and laity, in a province under the authority of God’s Word, striving to remain faithful.”
What does that faithfulness look like? It is being steeped in God’s Word and letting it shape our thinking and reactions. It is also a commitment to “pray without ceasing.”
“We should pray for all our leaders, laity, and the whole of Christ’s church. We must pray for our accused bishops and those who have accused them and for everyone involved in overseeing these processes. We should pray for all the families who will suffer during these processes. Pray for congregations and seminarians watching. Pray for justice and mercy. Pray that truth will come to light and God be glorified in all things. Pray specifically for faithfulness – that we all, leaders and laity alike, would be faithful to our callings, our vows, and the gospel we have received.
“This is hard and uncomfortable, but faithfulness in difficult times is what the church has always demanded of her members.”
How do we respond to these seemingly unceasing attacks from social media?
“You will see critics on social media use these Washington Post stories and the ongoing disciplinary cases as occasion to attack the ACNA. They are and will continue to be… merciless. We are all – every single one of us – accountable to Christ alone for our words and deeds. The judge we answer to is not the court of online opinion, but the Lord Jesus Christ, before whom ‘we will all stand’ to give account (Romans 14:10).
“The critics who wield the ACNA’s struggles as a weapon have their own struggles and sins. They will have their own day before the Judge. Our task is not to defend ourselves against their attacks, but to remain faithful to our vows and to the gospel. Let them judge. We answer to Christ.”
Hollon’s caution here is incumbent on everyone — those within the Church and those on the outside.
“We must absolutely not rush to judgment. The allegations may very well be false or exaggerated – false accusations have destroyed good leaders, and in our increasingly litigious culture, we must proceed carefully and justly… accounting for the needs of accusers and the accused. But we can trust that a just process is being established. This process deserves our prayers and patience.”
Hollon concludes with this vision of hope for the future.
“Discipline is not a sign the church is dying. It’s a sign the church is serious about holiness, that we believe our vows matter, and that Scripture’s standards apply to everyone. The ACNA was born because we needed a province where faith would be guarded and leaders held accountable. We are seeing what that looks like in practice. It’s messy and painful but necessary. And in the midst of it all, we trust not in human leaders but in the Lord Jesus Christ, who is building his church and against whom “the gates of hell will not prevail” (Matthew 16:18).”
Currently there are four ACNA bishops who have had allegations of some form of misconduct lodged against them. These cases are in different stages of process, ranging from initial complaints being filed to having been brought to a definitive conclusion.
The case againstAbp. Steve Wood has garnered the most attention, with complaints being filed with the Province just a little over a week ago. Arlie Coles provides an excellent summary of what has happened thus far:
“The Most Rev. Steve Wood, the Archbishop and Primate of the Anglican Church in North America, is facing ecclesiastical charges for alleged sexual misconduct, financial misconduct, plagiarism, and bullying behavior, according to an October 23 Washington Post report. Four priests and seven lay members filed the charges on October 20 against Wood, who is also bishop of the ACNA’s Diocese of the Carolinas and the rector of St. Andrew’s Church in Mount Pleasant, South Carolina.”
But the process has hit an unexpected snag. It seems to be somewhat unclear whether a presentment requires the complainants to also provide an additional statement of attestation to their allegations’ truth “under penalties of perjury.
Though the complainants were numerous enough to meet the canonical threshold for making a formal complaint, their charges are in limbo. One complainant, the Rev. Rob Sturdy, told the Post that after the sworn complaint was submitted, the ACNA’s provincial office returned it, asking all 11 complainants to sign again with an additional statement of attestation to their allegations’ truth “under penalties of perjury.”
Sturdy said the complainant group refuses to comply, calling it a “noncanonical requirement” that “attempt[s] to intimidate our signatories with potential legal action.”
So what do the ACNA canons actually say concerning “presentments” and “attestations”?
Title IV Canon 4.1 – Concerning Requirements for Presentment
[…]
Such charges shall be in writing, signed and sworn to by all the accusers and shall be presented to the Archbishop, the Archbishop’s delegate, or the College of Bishops. The grounds of accusation must be set forth with reasonable certainty of time, place and circumstance.
The debate seems to hinge on what the phrase “sworn to” actually means.
“Dr. Tiffany Butler, director of safeguarding and canonical affairs, made the demand [for a statement of attestation ‘under penalties of perjury’], calling it ‘the typical standard for any “sworn statement” and the standard applied to other presentments received under this administration.”
“However, Chancellor Bill Nelson, in consultation with the College of Bishops, has acknowledged that ‘no rigid formulation of the oath is required and, in particular, that it does not need to include the phrase under “penalties of perjury”.’
Once the swearing dispute is resolved, the matter then goes to the Dean of the Province, the Most Rev. Ray Sutton, who will appoint a Board of Inquiry consisting of five priests and five church members to determine whether there are reasonable grounds to put Wood on trial. If the matter goes to trial, Sutton will be responsible for selecting a prosecutor and a legal adviser for the court.
Abp. Wood has not been inhibited and will thus continue in all his other archepiscopal duties.
The case concerning allegations against Bp. Stewart Ruch is slowly inching its way to a conclusion. Complaints that were made four years ago have taken four years of wending an often meandering way through the current Title IV process. The trial that began in July, with several recesses along the way, finally concluded some three months later.
Bp. Stewart announced the news to his Diocese of the Upper Midwest:
“The trial concluded on Monday, October 13, and the Court is now in a period of deliberation. It will issue a final written Order within 60 days, on or before December 16.
“After waiting for over four years, diocesan witnesses and I had the opportunity to provide perspective on some of the serious concerns brought to our attention over the last several years.
“In order to preserve the integrity of the canonical process and uphold pastoral standards, the Court has ordered all parties to refrain from making any comments on the trial proceedings during this period. Once the Court deliberations are complete, it “will make its findings and decisions available to the public in a manner that is respectful, truthful, and in keeping with the Church’s canonical obligations.”
And just as Bryan Hollon counseled us above, the Bishop ends his letter with a call to prayer:
“Please continue to intercede with us for all members of the Trial Court and our Province during this time. Let us keep our eyes fixed on the Lord as we pray:
Almighty God, you sit on your throne giving righteous judgment: We humbly ask you to bless our Court; give them a spirit of wisdom and understanding, that fearing no power but yours alone, they may discern the truth and impartially administer justice; through him who shall come to be our Judge, your Son our Savior Jesus Christ. Amen.
–-Prayer for Courts of Justice (Adapted) p.654, BCP 2019
Our third case involved allegations of financial misconduct against Bp. Julian Dobbs of the Diocese of the Living Word and it was quickly resolved. The ADLW Standing Committee issued this statement:
“The Anglican Diocese of the Living Word has investigated allegations of financial misconduct committed by its bishop, the Rt. Rev. Julian Dobbs, and finds there is no truth in the allegations.
“After careful review of the public allegations made on September 23rd by Bishop Derek Jones regarding financial matters from 2017-2019, and having examined the independent forensic accounting review conducted by Paul Cursano CPA, the Standing Committee unanimously finds these allegations to be without merit and slanderous in nature.
“The CPA’s thorough investigation clearly demonstrated that all funds from the Jurisdiction of the Armed Forces and Chaplaincy were properly deposited, categorized, and designated for their intended purposes. No funds were misdirected or misappropriated.”
The fourth case involving Bp. Derek Jones seems to be a real mess. Allegations were filed with the Province complaining that Bp. Derek Joneshad an overbearing leadership style Bp. Jones heads up the Jurisdiction of the Armed Forces and Chaplaincy, which is a “special jurisdiction” of the ACNA and not technically a diocese. When Abp. Wood issued a Godly Admonition to Bp. Jones and asked him to agree to a third-party investigation of the charges Bp. Jones refused, claiming that since the Jurisdiction was not a diocese, it had its own rules for addressing misdemeanor allegations. Abp. Wood inhibited Bp. Jones on September 21 and the next day the Chair of the SJAFC Executive Committee sent a message to Archbishop Wood and Chancellor Bill Nelson indicating the Jurisdiction was withdrawing from the ACNA.
Arlie Coles picks up the narration from there:
“Two weeks after declaring disaffiliation from the Anglican Church in North America, the Jurisdiction of the Armed Forces and Chaplaincy, led by the Rt. Rev. Derek Jones, has sued the denomination for trademark infringement and unfair commercial competition. The lawsuit was filed on October 6 in the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina. The filing represents a further escalation in a conflict between the jurisdiction and the ACNA that publicly erupted in late September after the archbishop of the denomination, the Most Rev. Steve Wood, inhibited Bishop Jones from ministry pending an investigation into allegations against Jones of misconduct.
“When the jurisdiction announced separation from the ACNA in response, the church’s College of Bishops declared Jones’ seat vacant three days later and elected the Rt. Rev. Jerome Cayangyang, his former suffragan, into his place for continued ‘leadership, pastoral care, and oversight’ of ACNA chaplains.”
The main issue at hand seems to revolve around whether the Special Jurisdiction of the Armed Forces and Chaplaincy is‘Independent Entity’or ‘Canonical Ministry‘, and no one seems to agree on which it actually is. Coles explains it this way:
“If the use of Bishop Jones’ canons are at the heart of the jurisdiction’s internal conflict, the use of the ACNA’s provincial canons is at the heart of its external conflict.”
“The jurisdiction’s lawyers frame the jurisdiction not as a canonical structure of the ACNA, but as a business that offers chaplain endorsements as a service.
“The ACNA has identified the jurisdiction as a “canonical ministry” (though not a diocese) of the church. From the ACNA’s perspective, despite his statement of separation, Bishop Jones remains an ACNA bishop under the authority of its archbishop and canons.”
At present, although Bp. Jones remains inhibited from ministry with the consent of four senior bishops, no presentment of formal disciplinary charges has been laid against him to date. Thus, if the archbishop wishes to pursue the complaint formally, he must encourage that ecclesiastical charges be filed by three bishops or ten people, as required by canon.
Two very helpful commentaries have been posted. The first is from the Rev. David Roseberry, who provides background information putting the charges against Abp. Wood — “alleged sexual misconduct, financial misconduct, and bullying behavior” — in their ecclesial context:
- It is common for clergy to have discretionary or “mercy” funds for pastoral care and benevolence. These are often used for unbudgeted needs—groceries, rent, or help during a crisis. In my own parish, I used such a fund and consistently reported expenditures to the senior warden. That is not misconduct; it is pastoral discretion.
- As for the questions about a vehicle or personal expenses, that too is not unusual. Many clergy receive automobile allowances. Whether purchased personally or reimbursed through the church, such matters belong in normal financial oversight, not sensational headlines.
- Leadership style, however, is more complicated. Some have described him as overbearing. I’ve seen that kind of strength in many large-church leaders—decisive, directional, at times blunt. What one person calls bullying, another calls directional leadership.
However, Roseberry adds, “if an archbishop or any pastor has acted in a way that crosses moral or physical boundaries with another person, he should step down. Period. The Church must be a place of integrity and safety. The Church cannot heal by hiding.”
Like Hollon, Roseberry too perceives that the present issues around clergy discipline can be traced back to the trauma so many clergy and bishops experienced in their decades-long struggle within the Episcopal Church and the monumental price so many paid — materially, emotionally and spiritually — in the process of leaving and walking away.
“I also believe we must speak about a deeper wound within the ACNA movement. Many clergy and lay leaders in the Anglican Church in North America carry a kind of spiritual PTSD from the long years of conflict with the Episcopal Church. Those years were marked by lawsuits, betrayals, and seasons of siege. Churches were evicted from their buildings, pensions were frozen, and friendships were fractured.
“It was not merely an institutional split; it was a spiritual trauma. The cost of faithfulness was high. Many of us emerged grateful but scarred—strong in conviction, but sometimes cautious, defensive, or weary. We built a new church in the ashes of conflict, yet we may not always have tended to the wounds we carried. We should be more attentive, more prayerful, and more careful when choosing and forming our leaders. Skill and orthodoxy are essential, but so are spiritual health, emotional maturity, and healing from the past.”
Yet, Roseberry also is hopeful for the ACNA’s future.
Our Lord’s Church will endure this, as she has endured many storms. But endurance is not the same as indifference. We must learn, repent, and renew. May it lead us all—not to despair—but to deeper faith, greater honesty, so that we are all a truer reflection of the One we serve.
The Rev. Peter Frank perceives a divine course correction taking place within the ACNA. This now 16-year-old Church was formed from heroic clergy and laity disassociating from the Episcopal Church, having suffered so many losses and building from virtually nothing a growing and thriving new Anglican Province. June’s Provincial Assembly was a triumphant celebration of continuing strong growth in membership, new ministries being developed, new outreach initiatives and hopes for an even brighter future of vitality and healthy expansion. Abp. Wood spoke of preparing the soil in each diocese for the planting of new churches and the discipling and strengthening existing congregations. We were looking forward enthusiastically to a rosy future.
Frank contends that it’s high time for a reality check.
“The bottom line is that we are not the Church Triumphant. We are not the church that won its biggest battle when we walked away from our stuff and now only needs to follow saints and heroes on the wide road to heaven, confident that we are the good guys.
“We are still the Church Militant, still fighting the war and that battle rages both inside and outside. The line between good and evil runs right through the middle of every human heart, to paraphrase Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (who compared to Jeremiah chapter 17, verse 9 was a bit of an optimist!). It always does—even for us.
“And here is the opportunity: we could set aside our claims to be things we are not. We could begin to get better—starting with the College of Bishops and extending all the way down to congregational search and discernment committees—at choosing leaders who are humble and careful, both in what they say about our church and in what they believe about themselves.”
He forsees an even better future ahead if the ACNA chooses this path of humility and faithfulness.
“We are a church crying out for humble leaders with the character of Christ. That is more important than any congregational statistic or structure someone has built…. Sometimes I think it is because we have conflated our organizational growth with proof that we are the good guys in God’s sight.
“We need to rethink that. We need to slow down and value Christlike character most of all before we make any call to leadership. The Church will be better served and it will have servant leaders who look more like their Master.”
“Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others. Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant.” — Philippians 2:4–7
This is something to be desired not only for bishops and clergy, but also for every member of the laity — all of us together making up the Body of Christ, which is the Church.
Almighty and Eternal God,
by whose Spirit the whole body of your faithful people
is being made one and directed in accordance to your will:
Hear our prayer for all members of your holy Church
that each in his vocation and ministry
may serve you in sincerity and truth,
through our lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
Barbara
The Church Is Not Broken — Bryan Hollon (Substack)
What does a faithful church look like?
For those of us in the Anglican tradition, it means children and adult converts are being baptized and confirmed, faithful lay Christians are centered increasingly on Jesus Christ through Word and Sacrament – grounded in the biblically saturated liturgies of the Book of Common Prayer. It entails an appreciation for the apostolic faith guarded and transmitted over centuries and received through the English Reformation. It means leaders we can trust – bishops, priests, and deacons who serve under the authority of Scripture and take holiness seriously, bound by the doctrine set forth in the Thirty-Nine Articles and the canons of the Church. We expect to see all of this, but most importantly, we expect to meet Jesus in the breaking of bread, in the reading of Scripture, and in the prayers and fellowship of the faithful (Acts 2:42).
What, then, should we think when the church has to discipline its own leaders?
For many in the Anglican Church in North America, these aren’t theoretical questions. A recent series of Washington Post articles (here and here) have brought attention to multiple disciplinary proceedings underway in our province. For many of us who love the ACNA – especially young seminarians at Trinity and across our province – this news can create deep confusion and real anxiety. Indeed, the headlines might lead some Anglicans to feel a sense of betrayal.
The safe harbor some sought in Anglicanism now seems exposed to what Augustine called “the great torrent of human custom” – that flood of original sin that always threatens to sweep us into the currents of disorder, discord, and scandal, which have engulfed so many people and institutions.
But listen: the discipline taking place in our Province is not a sign of a broken church. A broken church is one that fails to discipline, so that option needs clearly to be avoided. Nor is this institutional self-protection or damage control. Godly discipline – which we are all striving for – is the fruit of a Christian community abiding in the Word of God. When we take Scripture seriously, believe that ordination vows genuinely bind us, and refuse to treat moral integrity as optional – discipline becomes a necessary and ongoing process for christian communities seeking to be faithful to Jesus Christ. The fact that we’re willing to scrutinize and correct our own leaders is evidence that we’re taking God’s Word seriously. It’s not necessarily evidence that the church is broken. It’s often evidence the church is functioning as it should.
From the beginning, followers of Jesus have, of course, been deeply flawed. Judas betrayed his savior (Matthew 26:14-16). James and John argued about who would sit at his right hand in glory (Mark 10:35-45). Paul and Barnabas disagreed so sharply over John Mark that they split their missionary team (Acts 15:36-41). The New Testament epistles exist because churches were wrestling with serious problems – divisions (1 Corinthians 1:10-13), sexual immorality (1 Corinthians 5:1), and lawsuits between believers (1 Corinthians 6:1-8).
If we had only a newspaper account of the Corinthian church, we might have written it off entirely. Yet Paul loved that church enough to correct it, to call it back to holiness, and to remind its members who they were in Christ.
The church has always struggled with sin because it is led and populated by sinful people still “being transformed into the same image from glory to glory” (2 Corinthians 3:18) – a transformation that continues throughout our lives as the Spirit works in us (Romans 12:2). This is why the church bears responsibility for those within it: “Do you not judge those who are within the church?” (1 Corinthians 5:12). When the body functions rightly, it maintains both unity and holiness through mutual care and accountability.
Scripture itself commands discipline. Jesus establishes the process in Matthew 18:15-17 – beginning privately, moving toward restoration, involving the community when necessary. Paul emphasizes the importance of discipline throughout his letters. To the Corinthians he writes that sin, left unchecked, contaminates the whole body: “a little yeast works through the whole batch of dough” (1 Corinthians 5:6 ). He makes clear the church bears responsibility: “Do you not judge those who are within the church?” (1 Corinthians 5:12 ).
Paul also outlines qualifications leaders must maintain (1 Timothy 3:1-7; Titus 1:5-9), emphasizing that those in leadership are held to the same standard as any member. Indeed, they bear a greater responsibility for their example and influence – a truth underscored in the epistles of James: “not many of you should become teachers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness” (James 3:1).
Leaders must answer not only for their own holiness but for the souls entrusted to their care (Hebrews 13:17). The goal is always restorative: “if anyone is caught in any trespass, you who are spiritual, restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness” (Galatians 6:1). Yet discipline also protects the community. When sin is tolerated among leaders, it suggests that holiness doesn’t matter, vows can be broken and that the faith itself is negotiable.
The Church’s ancient ordination rites embody this same conviction. When a priest is ordained, the community is invited to speak – to name any impediment that would prevent ordination. The Bishop addresses the people: “Therefore if any of you know of any impediment or crime because of which we should not proceed, come forward now and make it known.”
When vows are taken, they are made “in the presence of Almighty God and of the Church,” binding not just before God but before witnesses. The language is unambiguous: “canonical obedience,” vows that “bind,” promises that cannot be casually broken. And when hands are laid on the ordained, the Church grants them authority to “bind and loose” and to forgive sins and to retain them. This ancient language echoes Paul’s conviction that the church must take responsibility for its own. It is not innovation; it is the recovery of what the Church has always known: that holiness matters, vows have weight, and leaders cannot be held to a different standard than the rest of the baptized. Indeed, they are held to a higher standard.
You may not know this, but the ACNA and GAFCON were created, to a significant extent, because The Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion failed to administer discipline consistently or in a balanced way. For years, heterodox bishops denied core Christian truths such as the uniqueness of Christ, the authority of Scripture, and the resurrection. And they remained in office. In 1974, eleven women deacons were ordained as priests in direct violation of church canons. The church’s disciplinary mechanisms simply didn’t function. When Gene Robinson, an openly gay priest in a same-sex relationship, was consecrated as Bishop of New Hampshire in 2003, it became clear the Episcopal Church had lost the will to maintain doctrinal boundaries as it failed to administer any discipline at all.
Likewise, the Anglican Communion issued the Windsor Report expressing concern, but it carried no teeth. The church’s discipline had become selective – applied to faithful clergy upholding orthodox teaching, while those departing from the faith faced little consequence. This went on for many years.
This imbalance created the conditions for the ACNA’s formation. Faithful Anglicans needed a province where the faith would be guarded, where bishops would be accountable for affirming and guarding the “faith once and for all delivered to the saints,” and where discipline would be administered justly. Now we see what that looks like: discipline actually taking place. The cases under review are concerning, yes.
But the fact that discipline is being administered in orderly, canonical fashion is a sign of health. Although it is painful and personal for many… it is necessary and gives cause for hope in our young province.
The ACNA is fragile – not a centuries-old institution with massive endowments, but a new work still building the processes and structures that will sustain generations. Yet even in fragility, we’re assured: “the gates of hell will not prevail against” the church of Christ (Matthew 16:18 ). In our ACNA churches, the Word is rightly preached and the sacraments rightly administered. We are, by God’s grace, a province under the authority of God’s Word. Even as our leaders disagree about the disciplinary “processes” – as they have in the Bp. Ruch trial – no one is attempting to cover anything up. This is all playing out with total transparency among Christian clergy and laity striving to remain faithful.
Despite what some critics are suggesting on social media, our province is not guided by celebrity pastors with unlimited power. In the ACNA, even our archbishop will be held accountable if the canonical process determines wrongdoing occurred. Now, we must absolutely not rush to judgment. The allegations may very well be false or exaggerated – false accusations have destroyed good leaders, and in our increasingly litigious culture, we must proceed carefully and justly… accounting for the needs of accusers and the accused. But we can trust that a just process is being established. This process deserves our prayers and patience. If the canonical process establishes that the allegations are substantiated, Abp. Wood will be removed and replaced by another who is equally accountable to God’s Word. The office is not permanent. No leader stands above accountability. This is as it should be.
As my friend and colleague, Jack Gabig, suggested to me just this week – the office of bishop is itself meant to safeguard the faith once delivered, the church from abuse, and the church’s mission. Yet, the entire three-fold order of bishops, priests, and deacons is temporary, derivative, and provisional.
Jesus Christ is our great High Priest, who has offered himself once for all (Hebrews 10:11-14), and in him the perfect ordering of priestly authority has already been established. Our bishops, priests, and deacons do not replace that reality; they participate in it, echo it, and point to it. We hold these offices as trustees of a governance that belongs ultimately to Christ and will be fully revealed when he subjects all rule and authority to himself and the kingdom is delivered to the Father (1 Corinthians 15:24-28).
Until that day, we do not wait passively. We tend carefully to what has been entrusted to us – tested ecclesial order, proven over centuries, built with checks and balances that recognize the reality of sin and the necessity of accountability. This is not a perfect system, because we are not yet perfect. But it is a faithful one, and it reflects the mind of Christ for his Church in this present age.
So what should we do in this moment? Attend to the Scriptures. The Bible speaks liberally about leadership, discipline, grace, judgment, the holiness God requires and the mercy he extends. As always, we should steep ourselves in God’s Word; let it shape our thinking and reactions. We should pray for all our leaders, laity, and the whole of Christ’s church. We must pray for our accused bishops and those who have accused them and for everyone involved in overseeing these processes. We should pray for all the families who will suffer during these processes. Pray for congregations and seminarians watching. Pray for justice and mercy. Pray that truth will come to light and God be glorified in all things. Pray specifically for faithfulness – that we all, leaders and laity alike, would be faithful to our callings, our vows, and the gospel we have received. This is hard and uncomfortable, but faithfulness in difficult times is what the church has always demanded of her members.
One more thing: you will see critics on social media use these Washington Post stories and the ongoing disciplinary cases as occasion to attack the ACNA. They are and will continue to be… merciless. This is discouraging, especially for our young seminarians and those newly arrived in our province. But remember Jesus’s words to those ready to condemn: “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone” (John 8:7). We are all – every single one of us – accountable to Christ alone for our words and deeds. The judge we answer to is not the court of online opinion, but the Lord Jesus Christ, before whom “we will all stand” to give account (Romans 14:10). The critics who wield the ACNA’s struggles as a weapon have their own struggles and sins. They will have their own day before the Judge. Our task is not to defend ourselves against their attacks, but to remain faithful to our vows and to the gospel. Let them judge. We answer to Christ.
Discipline is not a sign the church is dying. It’s a sign the church is serious about holiness, that we believe our vows matter, and that Scripture’s standards apply to everyone. The ACNA was born because we needed a province where faith would be guarded and leaders held accountable. We are seeing what that looks like in practice. It’s messy and painful but necessary. And in the midst of it all, we trust not in human leaders but in the Lord Jesus Christ, who is building his church and against whom “the gates of hell will not prevail” (Matthew 16:18 ).ALLEGATION UPDATES — WOOD, RUCH, DOBBS, JONES:
ACNA Archbishop Faces Misconduct Charges — Arlie Coles (Living Church)
The Most Rev. Steve Wood, the Archbishop and Primate of the Anglican Church in North America, is facing ecclesiastical charges for alleged sexual misconduct, financial misconduct, plagiarism, and bullying behavior, according to an October 23 Washington Post report.
Four priests and seven lay members filed the charges on October 20 against Wood, who is also bishop of the ACNA’s Diocese of the Carolinas and the rector of St. Andrew’s Church in Mount Pleasant, South Carolina.
Central to the charges is an allegation that Wood made continual sexual advances toward Claire Buxton, the former children’s ministry director at St. Andrew’s, from 2021 to 2024. Speaking to the Post, Buxton alleged that the behavior began as inappropriate hugging, then quickly escalated into over $3,000 in unsolicited gifts from the rector’s discretionary fund, repeated sexual remarks in her presence, and attempts to follow her on mission travel.
Buxton, a divorced mother of three, resigned after Wood allegedly attempted to kiss her in his office in April 2024. The complainants, spurred by Buxton’s allegations and Wood’s appointment to the archepiscopate in July 2024, drafted their charges earlier this year and gathered the canonically required signatories by September.
The charges also allege that over several years, Wood “plagiarized sermons and bullied and disparaged church staffers” of St. Andrew’s and the Diocese of the Carolinas. The Post also reported that Wood’s alleged public “sham[ing] and curs[ing] at colleagues” and his use of a diocesan-funded $60,000 truck for hunting trips, prompted one church to leave his diocese for the overlapping ACNA Diocese of South Carolina, which is led by the Rt. Rev. Chip Edgar, in 2019.
“I was devastated when [Wood] became archbishop,” Buxton told the Post. “It was the responsibility of the bishops to vet him and they failed at it, horribly.”
In the ACNA, archbishops are selected by the College of Bishops, without participation from other clergy or laity. Though not canonically required, all archbishops since the denomination’s founding have been selected in conclave, with the bishops making “a vow together before the Lord” not to speak about their deliberations or vetting methods.
The extent to which the College of Bishops may have known about allegations of misconduct against Wood at the time of his selection in conclave is in question. Multiple sources with links to the Diocese of the Carolinas described to The Living Church a culture of clergy and employee turnover under Wood, which should have been known to other ACNA bishops.
Though the complainants were numerous enough to meet the canonical threshold for making a formal complaint, their charges are in limbo. One complainant, the Rev. Rob Sturdy, told the Post that after the sworn complaint was submitted, the ACNA’s provincial office returned it, asking all 11 complainants to sign again with an additional statement of attestation to their allegations’ truth “under penalties of perjury.”
Sturdy said the complainant group refuses to comply, calling it a “noncanonical requirement” that “attempt[s] to intimidate our signatories with potential legal action.”
An ACNA spokesperson told TLC that Dr. Tiffany Butler, director of safeguarding and canonical affairs, made the demand, calling it “the typical standard for any ‘sworn statement’ and the standard applied to other presentments received under this administration.”
“However, Chancellor Bill Nelson, in consultation with the College of Bishops, has acknowledged that no rigid formulation of the oath is required and, in particular, that it does not need to include the phrase ‘under penalties of perjury.’ Our hope is to have resolution on this matter as quickly as possible,” the spokesperson said.
If the swearing dispute is resolved, the matter will pass to the Dean of the Province, the Most Rev. Ray Sutton, who is also Presiding Bishop of the Reformed Episcopal Church, a subjurisdiction within the denomination. Taking the usual role of the archbishop in the disciplinary matter, he will appoint a Board of Inquiry consisting of five priests and five church members, who will determine whether there are reasonable grounds to put Wood on trial, according to an ACNA statement.
If the matter goes to trial, Sutton will be responsible for selecting a prosecutor and a legal adviser for the court, but unless Sutton inhibits Archbishop Wood from ministry by obtaining consent of four of the five most senior bishops, Wood will continue in all other archepiscopal duties (unless he recuses himself). An ACNA spokesperson told TLC that Wood is not currently inhibited.
At any time, accused bishops in the ACNA may “confess to the truth of the allegation(s) and submit to the discipline of the Church” and avoid trial. Wood denies the allegations and said on October 21, “I do not believe these complaints have merit. I trust the process outlined in our canons to bring clarity and truth in these matters.”Trial Conclusion and Next Steps — Bp. Stewart Ruch (Midwest Anglican)
Dear Brothers and Sisters of the Upper Midwest,
Today the Province sent this letter with an update from the Ecclesiastical Trial Court. The trial concluded on Monday, October 13, and the Court is now in a period of deliberation. It will issue a final written Order within 60 days, on or before December 16.
After waiting for over four years, diocesan witnesses and I had the opportunity to provide perspective on some of the serious concerns brought to our attention over the last several years. (For background, see our FAQs.) I am especially grateful for you, your trust in God, for all those who participated in the trial, and for your prayers.
I know that significant questions remain for many of you. In order to preserve the integrity of the canonical process and uphold pastoral standards, the Court has ordered all parties to refrain from making any comments on the trial proceedings during this period. Once the Court deliberations are complete, it “will make its findings and decisions available to the public in a manner that is respectful, truthful, and in keeping with the Church’s canonical obligations” (Court letter, July 8, 2025).
So, we continue to wait and hope for a clear and just resolution. Please continue to intercede with us for all members of the Trial Court and our Province during this time. Let us keep our eyes fixed on the Lord as we pray:
“Almighty God, you sit on your throne giving righteous judgment: We humbly ask you to bless our Court; give them a spirit of wisdom and understanding, that fearing no power but yours alone, they may discern the truth and impartially administer justice; through him who shall come to be our Judge, your Son our Savior Jesus Christ. Amen.”
-Prayer for Courts of Justice ( Adapted) p.654, BCP 2019
I give thanks for all of you and for how all of our churches are witnessing to Jesus’ redeeming love in our hurting world.
Love,
ADLW Dismisses Financial Malfeasance Claims Lodged Against Bp. Dobbs — Standing Committee (Diocese of the Living Word)
https://anglican.ink/2025/10/04/adlw-dismisses-financial-malfeasance-claims-lodged-against-its-bishop/
September 25, 2025
After careful review of the public allegations made on September 23rd by Bishop Derek Jones regarding financial matters from 2017-2019, and having examined the independent forensic accounting review conducted by Paul Cursano CPA, the Standing Committee unanimously finds these allegations to be without merit and slanderous in nature.
The CPA’s thorough investigation clearly demonstrated that all funds from the Jurisdiction of the Armed Forces and Chaplaincy were properly deposited, categorized, and designated for their
intended purposes. No funds were misdirected or misappropriated. The QuickBooks audit trail confirms no alterations were made to any transactions after the allegations were raised. Standard nonprofit fund accounting practices were properly followed throughout.
We affirm our complete confidence in Bishop Julian Dobbs’ integrity and financial stewardship. The independent review conclusively refutes all allegations of financial impropriety. We consider this matter closed and call upon all parties to focus on the mission and ministry of the Church.
The Standing Committee expresses its concern about the damage such unfounded public allegations cause to the reputation of our Diocese and its leadership, and we stand firmly with Bishop Dobbs as he continues his faithful service to Christ and His Church.
In Christ’s Service,
The Standing Committee
Anglican Diocese of the Living WordInhibited Bishop [Jones] Sues ACNA — Arlie Coles (Living Church)
Two weeks after declaring disaffiliation from the Anglican Church in North America, the Jurisdiction of the Armed Forces and Chaplaincy, led by the Rt. Rev. Derek Jones, has sued the denomination for trademark infringement and unfair commercial competition. The lawsuit was filed on October 6 in the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina.
“ACNA has flatly disregarded Plaintiff’s warnings and has continued to appropriate Plaintiff’s protected marks, usurp Plaintiff’s ecclesiastical and commercial identity, and disparage Plaintiff and its leadership,” the lawsuit says. The jurisdiction seeks to recover damages of at least $1 million, and potentially as high as $2 million for unauthorized use of the term [Special] Jurisdiction of the Armed Forces and Chaplaincy, the term Anglican Chaplains, or the logo of the jurisdiction.
The filing represents a further escalation in a conflict between the jurisdiction and the ACNA that publicly erupted in late September after the archbishop of the denomination, the Most Rev. Steve Wood, inhibited Bishop Jones from ministry pending an investigation into allegations against Jones of misconduct.
When the jurisdiction announced separation from the ACNA in response, the church’s College of Bishops declared Jones’ seat vacant three days later and elected the Rt. Rev. Jerome Cayangyang, his former suffragan, into his place for continued “leadership, pastoral care, and oversight” of ACNA chaplains.
The jurisdiction’s lawyers frame the jurisdiction not as a canonical structure of the ACNA, but as a business that offers chaplain endorsements as a service. Through its communications about the controversy and its assumption of the jurisdiction’s name and chaplain-endorsing functions, they argue, the ACNA has confused government agencies, chaplains, and the public, engaging in unfair competition, cutting into the jurisdiction’s revenue, and causing “irreparable harm” to the jurisdiction’s “business reputation and goodwill.”
The lawsuit claims that since Jones’ inhibition, the jurisdiction has lost half its income, half its chaplains, a fifth of its staff, and two-thirds of its missions, chapels, and parishes, since many chaplains have chosen not to follow the jurisdiction’s disaffiliation from the ACNA.
“Because of the ACNA’s actions, [the jurisdiction] is a mere shell of what it was just over two weeks ago,” wrote David van Esselstyn, chairman of the jurisdiction’s board, in a request for injunctive relief from the civil court. “It is barely alive as an organization.”
‘Heavy-Handed and Vindictive’
Some chaplains currently and formerly associated with the jurisdiction hold that the damage to its good name has been caused not by the ACNA but by Bishop Jones. At least 18 complaints against Jones formed the basis of his initial inhibition from ministry, all centering on alleged misuses of ecclesiastical disciplinary processes that several have described as “heavy-handed” and “vindictive.”
A copy of the jurisdiction’s canons obtained by TLC shows a centralization of financial control in the bishop that is uncommon in ACNA dioceses. Under the canons, the bishop possesses “general authority and responsibility for budgetary and fiscal management” and creates accounting regulations subject to the approval of an executive committee appointed by the bishop.
The canons also introduce a special definition of Good Standing that requires member chaplains to tithe directly to the jurisdiction or face discipline. Chaplains must certify their Good Standing annually—including their compliance with the bishop’s tithing policy, which requires a 10 percent payment from full-time, part-time, and bivocational chaplains, as well as from volunteer chaplains without tithing obligations from other churches.
The jurisdiction’s latest annual income of $1.2 million stemmed “mainly from the gifts and tithes of its membership,” according to the lawsuit. “The tithes are how Jones funds his organization,” one chaplain told TLC, alleging that Jones has habitually chastised and shamed chaplains in hardship for their inability to pay. “We are his money pot.”
Chaplains can also lose Good Standing for attempting to plan a transfer out of the jurisdiction. Seeking a change in endorser is uncontroversial among military chaplains in general, one chaplain said, but even speaking to other endorsers has triggered threats of endorsement removal and disciplinary action by Jones. Another chaplain said that Jones has similarly harassed those seeking transfer out of chaplaincy entirely and into local ACNA dioceses.
According to the Good Standing regulations, chaplains may not “ma[ke] inquiry or contact to work with any other ecclesiastical authority without the knowledge of the Bishop.” The canons further specify that “any transfer of endorsement to another endorsing authority or agency will include release from or termination of Holy Orders.”
“I have never held onto anybody that didn’t want to be here,” Jones said in an hour-long video meeting September 22 in which he denied allegations of wrongful use of disciplinary processes and interference with outside employment opportunities. Chaplains who spoke with TLC disagreed, citing their experiences of a “controlling environment” from which it was impossible to “bow out peacefully” without having their livelihoods threatened.
‘Independent Entity’ or ‘Canonical Ministry’?
If the use of Bishop Jones’ canons are at the heart of the jurisdiction’s internal conflict, the use of the ACNA’s provincial canons is at the heart of its external conflict. Core to the jurisdiction’s request for civil damages is its claim to be an “independent ecclesiastical entity” whose canonical membership in the ACNA was “never finalized.” Its lawyers now argue that this prevents the ACNA from claiming the endorsement power the jurisdiction exercised on its behalf and realizing the “economic gains” associated with that power.
A September 29 jurisdiction press release similarly claims that “the ACNA is not currently, nor has it ever been, an authorized endorser” with the Department of War, and that the jurisdiction was the true endorser all along. Authorized endorsing agent rosters maintained by the Department of War’s Armed Forces Chaplains Board and the Department of Veterans Affairs list the Anglican Church in North America among their endorsers, rather than the jurisdiction.
The ACNA has identified the jurisdiction as a “canonical ministry” (though not a diocese) of the church. The Rt. Rev. Phil Ashey of the Diocese of Western Anglicans, who drafted the province’s Canon I.11 regulating the jurisdiction, said in a September 26 diocesan newsletter that the jurisdiction is subject to the ACNA bishops, and that Jones is without authority to separate its chaplains from the ACNA.
The jurisdiction disputes the legitimacy of Canon I.11 and has asserted that the ACNA deprived it of becoming a full diocese, but its claims of longstanding total independence from the ACNA are new. An amicus brief filed by the jurisdiction in 2025 called the jurisdiction a “diocese of the ACNA … under the authority of the ACNA,” and Jones said in a 2022 podcast interview that the jurisdiction was “fully embedded, fully ingrained” into the ACNA by 2014, even as it maintained concurrent membership in the Church of Nigeria at that time.
From the ACNA’s perspective, despite his statement of separation, Bishop Jones remains an ACNA bishop under the authority of its archbishop and canons, a provincial spokesperson told TLC. Though Jones remains inhibited from ministry with the consent of four senior bishops, no presentment of formal disciplinary charges has been laid against him to date.
Since Archbishop Wood’s administration began in 2024, the ACNA has adopted a de facto policy of delegating episcopal misconduct complaints to its new Director of Safeguarding and Canonical Affairs, Dr. Tiffany Butler, and its Vice Chancellor for Safeguarding, Jeannie Rose Barksdale. Butler and Barksdale anonymize and pass complaints they deem credible to the archbishop. If the archbishop wishes to pursue the complaint formally, he must encourage that ecclesiastical charges be filed by three bishops or ten people, as required by canon.
Jones has argued that any investigation before such a filing is uncanonical. The Most Rev. Laurent Mbanda, Archbishop of Rwanda and Chairman of the GAFCON Primates Council, issued a letter to all GAFCON primates on September 19, urging them not to communicate with Jones while the ACNA’s investigation proceeds.
COMMENTARY:
The Steve Wood Story and the Soul of the Church — David Roseberry (Substack)
The news story about Archbishop Steve Wood has shaken many in our Anglican family. It is painful, confusing, and for those who know him personally—as I do—deeply saddening. The allegations against him are serious and deserve to be taken seriously.
I have to say plainly: if an archbishop or any pastor has acted in a way that crosses moral or physical boundaries with another person, he should step down. Period. The Church must be a place of integrity and safety.
But the process must also be fair and truthful, measured by facts, evidence, and patient investigation by people committed to the truth.
A Friend and a Fellow Pastor
I’ve known Steve Wood for many years. When I was rector of Christ Church, he was rector of St. Andrew’s. We were peers—two pastors of large, lively congregations. Since his consecration as bishop, and more recently as archbishop, our paths have crossed again.
I call him a friend. My experience of him is that he is kind, funny, sharp-minded, and firm in his gospel convictions.
Steve can fill a room with his energy and optimism. He’s a natural storyteller—sometimes too much so. I’ve been with him when, in the course of ‘catching up’, he will share a detail or an observation that probably should have remained unsaid. He ‘overshares’, but not out of malice but out of exuberance, in my opinion.
Saying too much about someone or something can give the sense that you’re being brought into a person’s confidence: Steve’s confidence, his inner circle. It’s part of his charm—and, perhaps, one of his blind spots.
Steve is talented, but also a learner. He’s grown through adversity. His recovery from COVID—eleven days on a ventilator, months of rehabilitation—left him humbled and spiritually renewed. He has told the story often, and it always moves me.
He says he saw God’s mercy more clearly in that dark valley than at any other point in his ministry.
- Doctors warned him that his chances of survival were below fifty percent.
- Nurses prayed over him as he lay unconscious.
- It took three years to regain full health.
What is also part of his story is that his church complex burned to the ground! That too was a trial by fire, literally.
The conclusion to his story is always the same: “I don’t regret the fire. I don’t regret COVID, because I saw the Lord do extraordinary things I would have never seen otherwise.”
That kind of gratitude in suffering tells you something about a man’s soul.
About the Allegations
If the allegation of an attempted romantic advance toward a woman is true, then it is disqualifying. That must be said clearly.
At the same time, many details now being circulated deserve careful examination.
- It is common for clergy to have discretionary or “mercy” funds for pastoral care and benevolence. These are often used for unbudgeted needs—groceries, rent, or help during a crisis. In my own parish, I used such a fund and consistently reported expenditures to the senior warden. That is not misconduct; it is pastoral discretion.
- As for the questions about a vehicle or personal expenses, that too is not unusual. Many clergy receive automobile allowances. Whether purchased personally or reimbursed through the church, such matters belong in normal financial oversight, not sensational headlines.
- Leadership style, however, is more complicated. Some have described him as overbearing. I’ve seen that kind of strength in many large-church leaders—decisive, directional, at times blunt. What one person calls bullying, another calls directional leadership.
These are not excuses, but context.
Still, these issues should be looked at honestly. The Church cannot heal by hiding.
A Larger Wound in the Church
I also believe we must speak about a deeper wound within the ACNA movement. Many clergy and lay leaders in the Anglican Church in North America carry a kind of spiritual PTSD from the long years of conflict with the Episcopal Church.
Those years were marked by lawsuits, betrayals, and seasons of siege. Churches were evicted from their buildings, pensions were frozen, and friendships were fractured. I lived through it too. It was not merely an institutional split; it was a spiritual trauma.
I’ve tried to describe some of this in my Christ Church Stories series. The cost of faithfulness was high. Many of us emerged grateful but scarred—strong in conviction, but sometimes cautious, defensive, or weary. We built a new church in the ashes of conflict, yet we may not always have tended to the wounds we carried.
That neglect may be showing now. The list of moral failures cited in the article are sobering. They should serve as a wakeup call for us all. And when I speak with bishops privately I hear a chorus of lament that so much of their time is spent dealing with clergy misconduct.
We should be more attentive, more prayerful, and more careful when choosing and forming our leaders. Skill and orthodoxy are essential, but so are spiritual health, emotional maturity, and healing from the past.
The Way Forward
I will continue to pray for Archbishop Wood, for those who have brought forward accusations, and for everyone whose faith is being tested. May the investigation proceed with both truth and grace.
In my view, Bishop Ray Sutton, who as I understand, will lead the investigation on this charge, is the perfect man for the position.
And we should all be thankful the ACNA has the structures in place to accomplish an investigation and to render opinions and findings. The Dean Bryan Hollon wrote about this here, saying:
The ACNA and GAFCON were created, to a significant extent, because The Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion failed to adminster discipline consistently or in a balanced way.
But for all of us who serve the Church, the story of Steve Wood—whatever the outcome—and the stories of others who have faced similar trials, stand as a sobering reminder: leadership is not ownership. The Church does not belong to us; we belong to her. Our calling is to serve, not to rule. And the higher the office we hold, the deeper the humility it demands.
Our Lord’s Church will endure this, as she has endured many storms. But endurance is not the same as indifference. We must learn, repent, and renew.
“For it is time for judgment to begin at the household of God.” — 1 Peter 4:17
May it lead us all—not to despair—but to deeper faith, greater honesty, so that we are all a truer reflection of the One we serve.Farewell to a Church Triumphant — Rev. Peter Frank (Epiphany Anglican)
https://epiphanyanglican.net/farewell-to-a-church-triumphant/ — Peter Frank
The current run of failures in leadership and difficulties applying our disciplinary processes won’t be the death of the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA). Far from it.
I make that prediction as one of a small group of people who witnessed the formation of the ACNA up close. The truth is, we have survived many near-death experiences over the years, even though most never made it into The Washington Post. We will survive this one as well. There is even something hopeful in the fact that we are a church that has a process for investigating and, if necessary, disciplining our own primary leader.
Still, there is both a warning and an opportunity for us in this moment of public accounting.
A Warning and an Opportunity
The warning is this: we need to think hard and honestly about how we got here. We need to recognize that part of the problem is us and the story we like to believe about ourselves.
That story goes something like this: a heroic group of men and women stood for the Gospel, the ethical teachings of Jesus Christ, and the discipline of the Church, even the unpopular bits. Because they did that, God blessed them and the organizations they led. Many lost their property and possessions, but our churches grew and flourished anyway. We got the people; the other guys got the empty buildings. Despite fierce opposition, something new and good was born, something on the leading edge of God’s work of saving souls and purifying His Church in our time.
This story is powerful and mostly, but not entirely, true. To begin with, there were both heroes and villains at work in the formation of the ACNA and still at work in it today. Churches will always attract both. This is why repeatedly vetting leaders and practicing safeguarding at every level and at every decision point is so important.
It also needs to be said: sometimes, growing churches and dioceses are not signs of God’s blessing and approval but rather time bombs built on ambition, personality, and manipulation.
Who We Are Not
The bottom line is that we are not the Church Triumphant. We are not the church that won its biggest battle when we walked away from our stuff and now only needs to follow saints and heroes on the wide road to heaven, confident that we are the good guys. We are still the Church Militant, still fighting the war and that battle rages both inside and outside. The line between good and evil runs right through the middle of every human heart, to paraphrase Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (who compared to Jeremiah chapter 17, verse 9 was a bit of an optimist!).
It always does—even for us.
And here is the opportunity: we could set aside our claims to be things we are not. We could begin to get better—starting with the College of Bishops and extending all the way down to congregational search and discernment committees—at choosing leaders who are humble and careful, both in what they say about our church and in what they believe about themselves.
We are a church crying out for humble leaders with the character of Christ. That is more important than any congregational statistic or structure someone has built.Choosing Who Will Lead Us
The good news is that there are many such leaders within the ACNA. There are thousands of humble and faithful clergy and laity already working sacrificially for the good of the Gospel. Our present weakness does not define who we are and it need not define our future.
But we are going to have to choose it.
That will not be easy. Sometimes it must mean prioritizing quiet faithfulness in small things over a big hero-story of great accomplishments for God. One of these moments should be when we elect a bishop or archbishop.
In all our ordination and election processes, it will mean digging deeper and asking uncomfortable questions rather than simply saying yes to the people we want to say yes to because they can draw others to them.
I serve as the chair of the Examining Chaplains in my diocese. I do not underestimate how difficult it will be to prioritize anything more than charisma, talent and a track record of success. We want and need those things so badly. But it is always worth asking ourselves why we want them. Sometimes I think it is because we have conflated our organizational growth with proof that we are the good guys in God’s sight.
We need to rethink that. We need to slow down and value Christlike character most of all before we make any call to leadership.
Doing so is worth it. The Church will be better served. It will have servant leaders who look more like their Master.
“Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others. Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant.” — Philippians 2:4–7
Received by email and reproduced with permission