The crisis facing the ACNA is fundamentally a crisis of integrity, stemming directly from this unwillingness to speak plainly. For the Church, confession is not merely an institutional duty; it is the covenantal key to healing.
Our tradition holds that true restoration is rooted in specific, humbling admission. The Apostle James lays out the standard for the community of faith:
“Therefore, confess your sins one to another, that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous person has great power as it is working.” (James 5:16, ESV)
The Failure to Confess for Healing
By substituting abstract spiritual language for concrete admissions, the bishops prevent the very healing they pray for. Healing—for the wounded, the Province, and the College itself—requires a clear definition of the injury and the sin. A nebulous confession attempts to bypass the painful process of public truth-telling.
The College’s statement reads like a carefully worded legal brief designed to limit exposure, rather than a pastoral lament seeking forgiveness. This is where the corporate double speak does its deepest damage. By using generalized terms, the bishops are engaging in semantic evasion—a classic tactic of risk management—that seeks to confess only what is legally or institutionally unavoidable. We see a leadership that is prioritizing image control over truth-telling, sacrificing its spiritual integrity for the sake of its organizational stability.
Has the ACNA College of Bishops' effort at confession been undermined by its method of communication? Fr. Randall Graf writes "we needed specific admissions of procedural failures, suppressed information, or concrete acts of omission." https://t.co/kh66Y1hW5z
— Jeff Walton (@jeffreyhwalton) December 10, 2025