Law & Religion UK has this exclusive report:
Alternative Anglican Ordinations: seven South African deacons
Seven lay ministers from dioceses across the Church of England were ordained in May 2025 by a visiting Anglican bishop from South Africa. In this guest post, Andrew Atherstone provides the first report of this event, based on interviews with several of the leading participants.
On Wednesday 21 May 2025, the Archbishop of York received notification from the Reformed Evangelical Anglican Church of South Africa (REACH SA) of their plans to ordain “missionary clergy” for ministry in England…
Curious. Their names are being withheld so they are hardly practicing a public ministry. They are going back to thiet parishes to practice a lay ministry, so what is the point of being ordained deacon?
Curious indeed.
Who is the ‘deputy director of the Cornhill Training Course’ – presumably a C of E presbyter, holding a bishop’s licence in London or Southwark diocese or both?
And which side is the ‘commentator’ from Oxford batting for, one wonders, or hedging his bets at the moment?
I’ve checked out the website and can’t find any personnel named. Very odd. Who would shell out over £1k per term without knowing who would be teaching them, and what their qualifications are?
Can a licensed lay minister continue to be licensed having undertaken a step like this? Just asking.
The report doesn’t say that they are licensed – and indeed how could they be, as licences to minister come from diocesan bishops and no Church of England diocesan with any sense would be likely to issue a licence under such circumstances. So their authorisation comes from two directions – from their diaconal orders, which cannot take effect in this country, and from their home parishes if they have received any form of lay commissioning there. All in all the effect of this action seems to have been to reduce rather than expand the ability of the Church to recognise… Read more »
I was assuming that some of them were already employed in some parishes as lay ministers. Ministering without any authorization beyond the local PCC?
Seven people who believed they were called to ordained ministry have put themselves in a position where they will not be able to exercise ordained ministry. What a good idea.
Atherstone: ‘Why then get ordained? Their primary rationale is that it connects them with global Anglicanism and gives their ministries a form of public recognition. REACH SA orders are valid, and legally accepted, throughout the Anglican Communion.’ I agree that it’s all rather odd. And, paradoxically, places an emphasis on the ontology of orders rather that their function (which sounds more ‘catholic’ than ‘reformed’ to me). But maybe they are playing a long game, in terms of ministry in the CofE, and an international game, in terms of relationships with the pluriform animal that is global Anglicanism. Perhaps they will… Read more »
Andrew Atherstone: “In a departure from the Book of Common Prayer, there was no Holy Communion. The service was followed by tea and cake, a typically English way to celebrate.” Tea and cake! Why didn’t I get an invite? Although I suppose the Eucharist would have been better at setting the ordinations in their true ecclesial context. Indeed, are they valid without the Eucharist?
Of course not. The Bible is very clear about that.
This departure from the Ordinal is bizarre given that the ordinands had been asked to assent to the Book of Common Prayer prior to their ordination.
They can exercise ministry, just possibly not in the CofE (although many evangelical CofE churches hire non ordained ministry staff).
I agree it will be interesting to see if +London or +York do anything or if more and more steps of differentiation will be taken by conservatives.
Conservatives would be pressing very hard for bishops to exercise some legal authority if liberals did something equivalent, or conducted a same sex marriage. And bishops would probably cave in and do something, as happened when Conservatives got very upset when Jeffrey John was nominated to Reading. But the bishops seem very disinclined to discipline Conservatives. I think as Perry Butler comments above, it would be sensible to withdraw the license from these licensed lay ministers. But I am not holding my breath.
Do not bishops realise – with respect to ConEvos – that the appetite only grows with feeding?
Martyrdom complex!
Ordained but not recognised by the Church of England? How will they present themselves to people? Will people make a mistaken presumption of their authority? (Note the chaos physician assistants have brought to the medical profession). Who do people complain to if there are issues? What safeguarding training do they have? Will they be under the clergy discipline system? Frankly it looks to be a train wreck in the making!
It rather depends on what they are actually doing. Presumably they are based in parishes and the incumbent supervises them.
sadly that’s what they said about physician assistants – drs will be supervising, but in practice… That doesn’t make safeguarding or discipline straightforward…
If you’re not a Licensed cleric, or one with Permission to Officiate from a Diocesan Bishop, I don’t think the CDM can reach you. This is part of the problem of imbalance within CofE ecclesiastical discipline. Lay people can be awful to clerics (and each other), but unless they break the law of the land it can be hard to address the situations they create. If clergy tread out of line in any way a CDM or the possibility thereof lurks ominously in the background, or leaps out to bite. I guess these irregular deacons employed and functioning as lay-workers… Read more »
When is a vicar not a vicar? When is a minister not a minister? When is a South African a South African? When is a C of E church not a C of E church? This reminds me of those “unwelcoming teams” that block the door and try out their elaborate and unpleasant hand “shakes” on everybody. Freud, Reich and Kinsey obsessed about orientation and obviously those religion bosses that follow them feel they need to make an issue of our private emotions. I think “church blessings” are overrated but church weddings are a custom. Did the mentors of the… Read more »
“The new deacons have now returned to their Church of England parishes, where they will continue to minister in a lay capacity…,” writes Andrew Atherstone. What class of ecclesiological b*ll*cks is this?
Some of these self-righteous evangelical “Christians” become more and more horrible every day.
Is that bullocks, Father?
I don’t think the term employed by (Mr? Rev?) Atherstone, an insider, “celebrate”, is appropriate.
BTW Proverbs 21: 10-31 reads very much like a description of women vicars to me.
Incidentally was the room hired from the Baptists under false pretences (in unbelief)?
The statement in the report that the Church of England has about 350 ordinands when it need about 650 to sustain numbers is very disturbing. It reminds me of that line ‘How did you go bankrupt?, ‘Slowly at first and then quickly.’ We are past ‘slowly at first.
On the loss of those with vocations because they are unsure of their welcome or place in the CofE Atherstone only relates this as an issue for conservative Christians. The reality is that we have been losing (and actually refusing) gay men and women with vocations – and over a much longer period.
The point remains that HUNDREDS of clergy will retire this year and there is no one to replace them. This crisis means that many parishes will dwindle and close because there is no clerical leadership. This is a terrible failure by the national leadership of the Church of England.
People with SSA are about 2% of the population. A fall from 650 to 350 is about a 45% drop.
According to the 2021 census, ‘3.2% of the population identified with an LGB+ orientation (“Gay or Lesbian”, “Bisexual” or “Other sexual orientation”). 7.5% did not answer the question.’ There will be a much higher percentage of people who have gay friends or family, or who believe that discrimination against gay people is wrong. This isn’t the only issue of course. There are also those who don’t like the C of E’s misogyny, or who are appalled by abuse and the Church’s treatment of complainants and survivors. And so many working clergy are disillusioned and under extreme pressure, they aren’t minded… Read more »
Thanks James. But it was not the point I was making though. Nor do I consider this decline a ‘terrible failure by the national leadership’ of the church. It was not a bishop who made my vocation real to me 45 years ago. The hundreds of clergy now retiring (me among them and others on this TA thread) carry have some responsibility, even more perhaps? We were the ones charged with nurturing local faith and vocation. I can joyfully point to some but so wish it were more. We must own our failures. I also taught church history and it… Read more »
And yer there are clergy who are coming to the end of their curacy ‘contract’ with no job to go to nor any prospect of one. I do understand about financial constraints but surely this suggests a lack of foresight at the very least, and a dishonouring of their gifts and skills.
Thanks David, that’s telling. I’d be interested to know the detailed reasons behind such situations. Are these clergy unhelpfully limited (or self-limited) in terms of the nature, location and churchmanship of posts they are prepared to consider? Have their curacies been problematic in some way (for whatever reason), to the point that they are hard to place in posts of responsibility? Do they want to work in the church any more, or are they content not to? My sense from the list of vacancies in my diocese, which go through several iterations of advertising before ever filling, is that there… Read more »
Phil Groves has this to say: Alternative ‘Anglican Ordinations’ – A Crucial Question
https://viamedia.news/2025/06/26/alternative-anglican-ordinations-a-crucial-question/
Excellent piece by Phil Groves and it attracted an immediate
response from Andrew Atherstone in the discussion thread below it.
Well worth reading Phil Groves’ piece and Andrew Atherstone’s response. The timing says a lot: 21st Archbishop informed, 23rd Archbishop replies, but the ‘ordinations’ happened on 22nd. So no opportunity for engagement, discussion or courtesy. And now there are deacons back in their C of E parishes exercising lay ministry without the authority of their bishop but without their new status as deacons being publicly known. Their incumbents have some serious thinking to do.
Well looking on the bright side, it’s encouraging that the Anglican bishop who thinks it’s a good and Godly idea to carry out secret ordinations like this is normally 8500 miles away. I guess it brings a whole new dimension to the ridiculous concept of flying bishops. Matthew 23.15 comes to mind!
There is a lot in Andrew Atherstone’s rather one-sided and uncritical report I find myself pondering over. One might be the ethics of people who are willing to go through the selection processes and be fully funded to train for ministry in a church they are in fundamental disagreement with, and leave at the point of ordination. Meanwhile I wonder if Atherstone accidentally reveals what they were being ordained for. He attaches significance to the fact there are seven candidates – ‘a number with strong biblical resonance (Acts 6)’, he says. Well, er, in Acts 6 the deacons were ‘seven men’ chosen… Read more »
Tim Wyatt is assuming they are the same seven who were ‘commissioned’ last year at St Helen’s. That seems a fair reading of the information that we have, such as it is. At that time, the name of one of them was in the public domain, so someone who had the time could see whether his church operates a food bank?
I’m thankful for godly bishops like +Morrison of Gauteng who can minister to those who still believe in the doctrine of the Church of England regarding marriage and have been left behind during the LLF process without sufficient provision.
I hope that the English bishops will listen so that alternative ordinations like this will not be needed in the future.
These “ordinations” were not “needed”. They’re a matter of posturing that smacks of Donatism.
There wasn’t even a “LLF process” and the Bishop of Guildford has been trying to get one going.
The Church of England has not changed its doctrine of marriage.
A friend of mine – retired priest with PTO – has major concerns about what he sees as the very scanty training being received even by some “official” ordinands. This might just be the usual case of old people complaining that things are “not as they were in our day” (like over 30% of students graduating with Firsts for goodness’ sake), but perhaps he has a case?
He has a case!
As an old fogey I recall my cohort as being mainly school leavers who set about our rigorous residential training in a chosen – and respected – profession which set us up for a life of ministry. We knew our chosen vocation was not easy, but we were joining a trusted group of people often held in high esteem. Those days have disappeared. Trust of clergy is at an all-time low. No longer a respected profession; sadly it’s become a widely-ignored (or mocked) collection of amateurs whose views are often ridiculous, highly offensive or plain silly. I can’t understand why… Read more »