Soon to be the Archbishop of Canterbury, Sarah Mullally, is just about universally regarded as an extremely kind person by all who have come to know her. Her evangelical opponents in the Church of England (CofE) say she has engaged with respect, most recently in her role as bishop of London.
Which disposition might explain her position on same sex marriage. She was one of the majority of bishops who voted for “blessings”, the prayers now able to be used in the Church of England to bless people in same sex relationships. She led the Living in Love and Faith project, which produced the prayers.
But as the evangelical CofE theologian Ian Paul wrote “In that capacity, she repeatedly reassured Synod that the Church’s doctrine of marriage, set out in Canon B30, that marriage is, ‘according to the teaching of our Lord, a lifelong and exclusive union between one man and one woman’ and that there were no plans to change this.”
He quotes a Church Times report: “Mullally reiterated that the Bishops had taken the view ‘that the doctrine of marriage was unaffected by the proposed prayers of blessing’, and that ‘the right context for sexual intimacy is within lifelong, committed, and faithful relationships… The doctrine of the Church of England on marriage as being a lifelong, faithful relationship between one man and one woman is unchanged…The Prayers of Love and Faith … do not indicate any departure from the orthodox doctrines of the Church of England.’”
Mullally appears to want to have same sex blessings of relationships, including sexual activity alongside woman–man marriage. Her statement dispels an earlier obscurantist position that the CofE’s new prayers blessed individuals rather than their relationship. If implemented, the Bishops would have married gay ministers, but they would not be married in church. Her position aligns with a 2023 report from the House of Bishops, which also foreshadows a decision on whether clergy should be able to have civil same sex marriages.
Mullally’s current position, of blessings for LGBTQIA persons but not marriage, ends up pleasing nobody. LGBTQIA activists and supporters want gay people to be married in church in the CofE, preferably in every church. Evangelicals in the CofE want differentiation, separate bishops of their own, if blessings continue. (And really don’t want those blessings to happen.) Conservative Anglicans, including the Gafcon and Global South Fellowship which together speak for 75 to 85 per cent of global Anglicans, want the CofE to pull back and simply have traditional marriage and chastity for the unmarried.
America’s Episcopal Church was, with Canada, the early adopters of same sex marriage within Anglicanism. Back in the early 2000’s the main Episcopalian progressive lobby was called “Claiming the blessing“, supporting gay blessings as a compromise position. This was a way station. The Episcopal Church adopted same sex marriage in 2015 which Claiming The Blessing describes as “extraordinary progress.” Further “progress” was made in 2018 when conservative bishops were sidelined so that same-sex marriages could take part in their dioceses despite a bishop’s opposition. Strikingly, at each stage the Episcopal moves towards same sex marriage have been presented as compromises.
The Other Cheek does not know if Archbishop elect Mullally’s position is also a way station, until a two-thirds majority on the General Synod is assembled. But the Claiming The Blessing strategy, of moving towards a progressive position in small steps, or “salami slicing,” hangs over the CofE. But in any case, it is likely an “implausible belief” that won’t last long, more a tactical position than a theologically-anchored practice.
As an aside, Mullally’s position echoes those of conservative Christians during the marraige postal survey debate. It was argued that some form of civil registration of same sex relationships should be set up, only not to be called marriage. It had the same ring of not pleasing anyone in the long term.
Taking Mullally’s disposition to kindness into account. Ian Paul fears incoherence. “The danger here is that Sarah will, out of kindness, want to reassure ‘conservatives’ of various colours. But, out of kindness, her natural instinct will also be to reassure those who are campaigning for the doctrine of the Church to change, and those who do not abide by the discipline of the Church in their relationships. Without the guiding and shape of other theological and institutional insights, the result could be incoherence and contradiction—neither of which end up being kind.”
A dilemma also exists for conservative, complementarian evangelicals who want to stay in the Church of England. (Complemetarian describes a belief that men and women are equal in value and worth but have different, complementary roles and responsibilities in the family and church.) As part of the church legislation that provided for women bishops their churches have the option of being looked after by a “flying Bishop.” Currently, it is the Bishop of Ebbsfleet, Rob Munro, a Sydney-Anglican-style minister who studied at Oak Hill College in London which is somewhat similar to Moore Theological College.
The selection of Sarah Mullally as the next Archbishop of Canterbury, puts Munro in a difficult position as a bishop,who does not believe women should be senior ministers in churches or bishops.
Munro has released a paper A Theological Reflection on upholding Complementarian Integrity with a female Archbishop, to explain his position. A key passage draws a distinction between the spiritual and legal powers of a bishop: “When fellowship with a bishop is impaired, it is primarily their spiritual ministry and authority that is impacted, their teaching, discipline, example and ability to make peace that is compromised. It is those aspects of oversight that a minister and parish require from an alternative bishop, to whom the suitable delegation of jurisdiction is made. Where spiritual ministry has been delegated, it is to that bishop that spiritual headship belongs….
“It is also true that this distinction between legal and spiritual oversight lies at the heart of the arrangements under which I express my episcopal ministry. I am fully, completely and spiritually a bishop, but my ministry is restricted only to those places where I have been granted legal authority. That is the same as a parish presbyter – spiritually you are a presbyter everywhere, legally you can only be the presbyter in the parish to which you are licensed.
“The implication of this is to recognise that being under the legal authority of a bishop or archbishop whose episcopal ministry you cannot receive, does not require you to be under (ie in obedience to) their spiritual authority.”
It is a de facto declaration of Independence. If Munro’s separation of the legal and spiritual role of bishops is holding for now, it is certain he and this view could come under greater pressure.
If the conservatives are unable to block the move to accept clergy being in civil marriages to same-sex partners the pressure on the evangelicals will be even higher than before. Inevitably, it will lead to bishops in public gay relationships – the issue that led to the breakaway Anglican Church in North America. Will Rob Munro’s idea of the separation of legal and spiritual responsibility of bishops withstand pressure for separation if the civil marriages for same sex ministers gets adopted by the CofE? Will it withstand having bishops in civil same sex marriages? There is a tiny Gafcon breakaway in the UK – will it grow in that scenario?
While setting up Rob Munro to look after complementarian churches in the CofE is a good faith effort he depends on the goodwill of a progressive House of Bishops, not to push things further. However, his remit applies only to the strictly complementarian parishes, but a larger number of evangelical local churches oppose same sex blessings, including the Holy Trinity Brompton network, New Wine, Church of England Evangelical Council and Church Society. They are directing funding away from official channels, and campaign for having their own bishops, and their own Archbishop
Rob Munro’s parsing of the role of bishops may not be enough to keep all these people in the CofE under further pressure. But it is clear many of them are hoping to stay in.
Churches with Bishops, where authority is concentrated in a person, will find it hard to serve two sides od a debate. The evangelical Gafcon movement was set up by conservative provinces (national Churches) to give succour to breakaway movements, mostly set up in reaction to same sex marriage liturgies and ministers. Brazil, Australia, New Zealand and the United States have new Anglican networks, supported by Gafcon and the Global South alongside the older South African Anglican church now known as REACH.
.
Sarah Mullally will have to decide whether she can keep evangelicals under the current authority structure. Presented with some sort of a “half a loaf” compromise, maybe more Rob Munros, the Evangelicals will have to decide whether some sort of compromise will be acceptable. Or do they join a breakaway?
Mullally’s time in office, which is limited as she is 63, may simply be one of stasis, holding off a gathering storm.
Evangelical outrage at Mullally
A round-up of the Gafcon viewpoint by Charles Brammall.
The Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON), begun in 2008, is a spiritual response to what many Anglicans, particularly in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, see as a theological crisis. The presenting issues were the ordination of non-celibate homosexual clergy and the blessing of same-sex unions in the US Episcopal Church and Anglican Church of Canada.
But Beneath that lay a deeper anxiety: that the authority of Scripture itself being eroded, and the Anglican Communion’s leadership structures failing to correct it.
So 100s of bishops, clergy, and lay leaders gathered in Jerusalem to affirm the ancient faith. That meeting birthed GAFCON— both as a movement for renewal and a moment of re-anchoring Anglican identity to Biblical orthodoxy.
It is a Global Orthodox Movement, not a breakaway denomination: a fellowship of Anglican churches, dioceses, and leaders who hold to historic Biblical teaching and wish to see the entire Communion reformed and renewed.
Its heartbeat is found in the Jerusalem Declaration (2008), a manifesto reaffirming confidence in the Bible as God’s Word, the centrality of Christ, and the authority of the creeds. Also the 39 Articles, the enduring value of the Book of Common Prayer, and the conviction that marriage is the union of one man and one woman.
It seeks to reform Anglicanism, restore its doctrinal clarity, and renew its missionary energy. It describes itself as “confessional rather than institutional”— defining Anglican identity not by loyalty to Canterbury, but by faithfulness to Scripture.
In practice, it functions as a network of encouragement, oversight, and mission, and holds large global conferences every 5 years— Nairobi (‘13), Jerusalem again (‘18), and Kigali (‘23). These gatherings attract 1000s of delegates from more than 50 nations. They are encouraged and challenged by Bible and theological preaching, prayer, song, and strategic planning. These are not just political summits, but spiritual festivals of conviction and fellowship.
It also provides alternative spiritual oversight to orthodox Anglicans whose diocesan bishops have embraced liberal theology. GAFCON helped establish the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA)after the U.S. schism. It also now supports parallel orthodox networks in Aust., NZ, Brazil, and the UK.
GAFCON invests heavily in theological education, church planting, sharing the Gospel, and support for persecuted Christians, especially in the Global Sth. And it regularly issues public statements on key moral and doctrinal issues— not to fight culture wars, but to defend what it believes is the integrity of the Christian gospel.
The Kigali Gathering was a Turning Point.
Dominic Steele reported from Africa on the Kigali Commitment of ‘23 – GAFCON’s most recent declaration. There, its leaders, and the Global South. Fellowshipship of Anglican Churches (GSFA), declared that the C of E’s decision to bless same-sex unions constituted a serious departure from Biblical faith.
The statement concluded that the Archbishop of Canterbury. had forfeited his role as a focus of unity, and that moral and spiritual leadership within global Anglicanism had effectively shifted to the Global Sth, where most of the world’s Anglicans now live.
This was not said in anger, but in lament— an expression of grief that the historic centre of Anglicanism had, in their view, abandoned the faith it was charged to defend.
GAFCON represents the conscience of global Anglicanism, defining itself not by opposition to Canterbury, but by fidelity to Scripture. It stands for confessional clarity, Biblical orthodoxy, and a missional vision that unites doctrine and compassion.
It is intellectually serious, spiritually passionate, and pastorally grounded, and composed largely of churches that are growing— often rapidly— in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. And it believes that authentic unity is built not on institutional structures but on shared truth.
Its View of the New Archbishop:
With the recent appointment of Sarah Mullally as Archbishop of Canterbury, GAFCON leaders have spoken with both grace and gravity. While they acknowledge her personal gifts— compassion, administrative skill, and pastoral heart— they also expressed deep concern about her theological stance and her association with the C of E’s “Living in Love and Faith” process, with its blessings for same-sex couples.
To GAFCON, this development confirms a trajectory of theological revision. Their responses have therefore been firm, sometimes sorrowful, but never trivial.
Response of Evangelical Leaders’ Voices Globally:
AB Laurent Mbanda (Rwanda)-
He hosted the ‘23 conference, and recently said bluntly:
“This appointment abandons global Anglicans, as the C of E has chosen a leader who will further divide an already split Communion…
Due to the failure of successive Archbishops of Canterbury to guard the faith, the office can no longer function as a credible leader of Anglicans, let alone a focus of unity.”
His tone is not bitter, but sorrowful— the grief of a pastor watching a beloved house divide.
AB Foley Beach (Nth Amer.)-
Chair of the GAFCON Primates Council, he said in his presidential address at Kigali:
“With broken hearts, we must say that until the Archbishop of Canterbury repents we can no longer recognise her as the ‘first among equals’.”
Beach’s language is firm but pastoral. He speaks of repentance, not replacement— of reform, not revenge. He frames the crisis as a call back to fidelity and mission, not as an excuse for hostility.
Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC):
In a more restrained but equally clear statement, it said:
“We pray that God will enable Bishop Sarah to hold to the apostolic faith and call the Church of England to recommit to the historic doctrines and formularies entrusted to it…
Above all, our hope is that she will lead the Church of England in presenting the unchanging good news of the gospel afresh to our needy world.”
This is the tone of many within the English evangelical mainstream — critical of theological drift, but prayerful, constructive, and hopeful for repentance and renewal.
Why GAFCON is So Strong in Its Language:
Its strength of tone arises from its view of Biblical authority. GAFCON believes that blessing same-sex unions, or redefining sin and holiness, is not a matter of local, temporal, culture & custom, but of Gospel truth.
To bless what Scripture calls sin, is in their eyes, to invert moral reality. Hence, they regard such actions as a decisive breach— not merely a pastoral experiment, but a redefinition of faith and discipleship.
So when a new AB is appointed who has been closely involved in that trajectory, it cannot in good conscience affirm her spiritual leadership of the Communion. Their disagreement is not about personality, but principle.
So there are Evangelical Voices of Hope and Prayer. Not all responses are condemnatory. Many evangelical and moderate leaders— even those who disagree strongly with liberal trends— have spoken with warmth and hope.
They recognise Sarah Mullally’s gifts as a listener, reconciler, and experienced administrator. They pray that she may be used by God to restore trust, confront safeguarding failures, and shepherd a divided Church with integrity.
They know she faces immense challenges, and they hope she might surprise her critics by recommitting the Church to its historic faith. For them, the priority is not to humiliate but to heal.
So what are GAFCON’s Non-Negotiable Convictions?
Its red lines are clear and consistent.
First, they believe thd blessing of same-sex unions is incompatible with Scripture’s teaching on marriage and sexuality.
Second, the redefinition of sin or moral holiness— however nuanced— is seen as an abandonment of biblical authority.
Third, leadership that affirms or enables such departures cannot, in their view, credibly function as the Communion’s doctrinal centre.
These positions are not negotiable, not because GAFCON is narrow or pedantic, but because they go to the heart of its identity as a Bible-based movement.
So how can we read GAFCON without charicature? It is important to see it as both pastoral and polemical. It is deeply missionary, planting churches, training clergy, and supporting the poor— even while publicly rebuking theological error.
Its tone may be severe at times, but its intention is protective, not punitive. Many of its leaders are gentle, humble, and Godly people serving under immense pressure.
Evangelicals still within the C of E are also responding not with triumphalism but with prayerful resolve. They continue to serve faithfully, even in structures they believe are faltering, trusting that God can still bring renewal.
Five Key Interviews and Their Insights:
(1) AB Kanishka Raffel (Sydney)— “What Now After Canterbury’s Leadership Implosion?”
Raffel spoke to Dominic Steele about the “Kigali Commitment.” He didn’t rush to outrage but reflected soberly on the gravity of the moment.
He lamented the erosion of trust in global leadership and emphasised that Christian unity cannot come at the expense of truth. Yet his tone was hopeful— urging prayer, reform, and renewed missionary zeal. His non-negotiables are the authority of Scripture and fidelity to historic Anglican doctrine.
(2) Bishop Rob Munro (Ebbsfleet, England)— Interview from Kigali:
An evangelical bishop still serving within the C of E, he spoke of the fellowship he found among orthodox Anglicans at GAFCON as “a taste of heaven.”
He insisted he was “not a lone voice” in the UK episcopate, reminding listeners that there remains a faithful remnant committed to Biblical truth. His approach is patient, loyal, and deeply pastoral, even amid disagreement.
(3) GAFCON Primates’ Council— Public Rebuke of Archbishop Welby on Sexuality:
The Primates’ Council issued a formal statement accusing Justin of “promoting the sanctification of sin by means of a divine blessing.”
They argued that even if the doctrine of marriage was not officially changed, the doctrine of sin was— a strikingly theological argument. This was not, in their view, a matter of politics or inclusion, but of spiritual integrity: we cannot bless what God forbids.
(4) C of E’s Evangelical Council and Allied Voices:
UK Evangelicals have chosen prayer over protest. They pray that the new AB will “hold to the apostolic faith and call the Church to recommit to its historic doctrines.”
Many express genuine hope that her administrative competence, empathy, and pastoral concern might serve gospel renewal— even as they remain wary of doctrinal compromise.
What These Interviews Reveal:
Taken together, these conversations show a movement that is both grieved and resolute.
There is an earnest desire for Biblical faithfulness, a deep sorrow over broken trust, and a persistent hope that repentance and renewal are still possible.
GAFCON’s leaders are neither culture warriors nor schismatics; they are pastors and theologians trying to hold the line where they believe Scripture draws it.
They see this moment not as an end, but as an opportunity— to recover the heart of Anglicanism: the Bible, the gospel, and Jesus’ mission to the nations.
The Bottom Line? GAFCON’s response to Sarah’s views is not driven by prejudice or partisanship, but by relationship, a desire to reconcile, conscience, and thinking God’s thoughts after Him. It celebrates her gifts, yet mourns the direction she represents. It prays for repentance and renewal, even while declaring that the moral authority of Canterbury has been forfeited.
In short, it believes that relational faithfulness must precede empty fellowship at any cost, and that truth must anchor loving unity.
It is a movement of courage and grief— resolute in doctrine, rich in compassion, and confident that the future of Anglicanism lies not in institutional politics, but in the unchanging Word of God.
Please pray for Sarah, her family and colleagues, and for our humility, love, teachability, and repentance:
Prayers:
Our Biblical God and truthful heavenly Father,
We beg You to protect every conservative evangelical from criticism, self righteousness, hypocrisy, and blindness. Empower us to humbly repent of it.
That we might adorn Jesus’ name with the beauty of our Christ-likeness,
Amen.
Dear compassionate Father committed to honesty,
Please fill GAFCON and us with Your truth, and prayer and love for Sarah, her family, and supporters.
Praise You that GAFCON take seriously and Scripturally the presenting issues of ordination of non-celibate homosexual clergy and the blessing of same-sex unions.
We beg You that Sarah, and we, might represent Jesus’ name with utter integrity,
Amen.
Our gracious God and loving Heavenly Father,
Praise You for GAFCON’s response to this crisis- not people-pleasing or double mindedness. But that with love, hope & prayer, it has responded spiritually to what many Anglicans, particularly in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, see as a theological crisis.
That Jesus’ Biblical name might be represented utterly loving and truthfully,
Amen.
Image: Archbishop Designate Sarah Mullally. Image Credit: ArchbishopofCanterbury.org
Thank you for this article. Especially thanks to Charles for such a helpful explanation, summary and commentary on the views of GAFCON and the godly reasons and motivations for those views.