The Church Of England Went Woke, And Now It Is Broken

Conservative Woman reports that earlier this month (October 2025), "Dame Sarah Mullally was appointed the first female Archbishop of Canterbury. As is tradition, the appointment was approved by the Prime Minister and the King, but the nomination came from the Church." Mullally was a particularly progressive pick. Per the article, "she’s a supporter of LGBTQ+ rights and activism, she has strongly backed asylum and migration, she is a self-declared feminist, and she is both politically and it seems religiously progressive." And, "[a]s Bishop of London, she boasted about representing a diverse and multicultural city, and put her experience in handling diversity as one of the key qualifications and evidence of positive experience she could bring to being the Archbishop of Canterbury."

    But not all Anglicans approved of her. In fact, the majority of Anglicans--and the very third world inhabitants that Mullally delusionally believes she is advocating for--have rejected her:

    The Global Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans (also known as Gafcon) represent the Anglican faith in Africa. Their response was to declare publicly that they would no longer send delegates to Church meetings in the United Kingdom, no longer consider the Archbishop of Canterbury as first among equals or a seat of authority to which they deferred, and no longer consider themselves in the same communion as the Bishops and clergy of the Church of England within England. Perhaps even more tellingly, they asserted that they were the true Anglican communion, more loyal to the instructions of the Bible and Anglican interpretation of those than priests in England. There’s a subtle but powerful distinction there – they were saying not that they had broken away from an Anglican vision of Biblical instruction and Christian identity but that the Church in England had done so. 

    African Anglicans now assert that they are the true Anglicans, and that the organisation within the UK is not. And in terms of the number of people who follow their message, they are right to assert this. 

    In losing the African churches and the global, more conservative branch of Anglicanism, the Church of England has lost 80 per cent of Anglicans on the planet. 

    Imagine a company that lost 80 per cent of its customers. Or a political party that lost 80 per cent of its voters. Or a nation state that lost 80 per cent of its territory. These would in each case be recognised as unmitigated disasters. 

The problem, as noted by the author, is that the Anglican leadership are no longer Christian nor interested in Christianity. Rather, they are "concerned with politics, and specifically with always advocating for leftist politics and progressive politics." Thus "[t]he defining Christian religious offer of universal love from Christ for all humanity is twisted into a weird CRT-Christian fusion which says to black Christians ‘we will regard you as generally sacred but not listen to your opinions’ and which says to white Christians ‘we will relentlessly demonise and devalue you and regard you as morally good only if you are politically progressive’."  

    This should be viewed as a warning to all churches of the fruits of embracing leftist insanity.