On March 20, 2026, Pope Leo XIV addressed a message to the "Most Reverend and Most Honorable Dame Sarah Mullally, Archbishop of Canterbury," on the occasion of her enthronement.
This missive is not without raising serious questions, at various levels, which should not be left unanswered.
The letter stresses the "responsibilities" of the Lady, "not only within the diocese of Canterbury but also throughout the Church of England and the Anglican Communion."
Which immediately requires asking a first question.
Of which "Anglican Communion" Does He Speak?
Historical Background
The Anglican Communion currently has about 85 million members in some 165 countries, organized into more than 40 autonomous provinces.
Historically, this network of churches developed from the Church of England after the English Reformation and expanded globally through the British colonial presence and missionary work.
However, during the last century, the demographic center of Anglicanism has shifted considerably towards Africa and parts of Asia.
Especially as the British center became increasingly liberal, while the African periphery persisted in a conservatism increasingly opposed to Canterbury.
A Division that has Been Brewing for Nearly a Century
The "Anglican family," to use the words of the message, today is fully in chaos, even in a constituted break-up.
And the accession of Dame Mullally has a role in this situation. It is true that the division has deep historical roots.
In 1930, the Lambeth Conference of Anglican bishops approved the limited use of contraception, marking a significant turning point in moral doctrine.
The following decades were marked by further changes: many Anglican provinces began to ordain women, and in 2014 the Church of England approved the appointment of female bishops.
In 2015, the Episcopal Church of the United States authorized homosexual marriage and made it mandatory in 2018. Other Western Anglican churches have adopted similar policies and opened ordination to openly LGBT clergy.
Conservative provinces, particularly in Africa, have rejected these advances.
Churches such as the Anglican Church in Nigeria, Uganda, Kenya, and Tanzania have maintained their traditional teaching on marriage and do not allow women to be bishops in their jurisdictions.
Tensions flared up again in 2025 when Cherry Vann was elected Archbishop of Wales. She became the first female Archbishop of the Anglican Churches of the United Kingdom and the first openly lesbian bishop living with her partner to hold the office of primate within the Anglican Communion.
Henry Ndukuba, Primate of the Church of Nigeria – the largest Anglican province in the world – criticized the decision, seeing it as proof that certain sectors of the communion were abandoning what he called historical faith.
The most recent element of this confrontation was the election of Sarah Mullally as Archbishop of Canterbury.
Although she upheld the definition of marriage as the union of a man and a woman, she supported proposals allowing same-sex couples to be blessed and spoke of the need for the church to recognize the harm suffered by LGBT people.
The World Conference on the Future of Anglicanism (GAFCON)
GAFCON, the Global Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans, founded in Jerusalem in 2008, was born from this evolution.
The movement was created by conservative bishops who believed that doctrinal developments within the Western Anglican churches, particularly in matters of sexuality and ecclesiastical authority, went beyond what they considered to be biblical teaching.
Although the movement claims not to be an independent Church, its influence has continued to grow. Some provinces and dioceses, adhering to its theological perspective, have already distanced themselves from the traditional structures of the Anglican Communion.
The recent meeting in Abuja has only ratified a fragmentation that is already more or less established.
Meeting in the Nigerian capital during the first week of March, GAFCON leaders announced the establishment of a global leadership structure aimed at representing what the movement considers to be the majority of Anglicans faithful to "traditional" doctrine around the world: the Anglican World Council.
Faced with this situation, Tom Middleton, director of Forward in Faith, a group representing the English Anglicans, told OSV News that the Anglican communion no longer existed as a coherent organization: "Unlike the Catholic Church, it is at best a very loose federation."
Thus, Dame Mullally no longer represents anything but a Church of England, certainly rich in millions, but completely out of breath and on the brink of extinction.
An Impossible Communion
A passage from Pope Leo XIV’s letter quotes the Joint Declaration of 5 October 2016: "Despite much progress, our immediate predecessors, Pope Francis and Archbishop Justin Welby, frankly acknowledged that 'new circumstances have generated new disagreements between us.'"
Of what circumstances does it speak? The text of the Declaration makes it clear: these disagreements concern "in particular the ordination of women and more recent questions relating to human sexuality."
A well-informed actor, Msgr. Michael Nazir-Ali, who was received into the Catholic Church in 2021 and was a member of two Catholic-Anglican discussion commissions, shares his thoughts.
He admits that currently it is no longer possible to think of a union with Anglicanism. He adds: "We must be careful now, to measure Anglican doctrines and practices by what the Catholic Church teaches," he said. “The fact that Anglicans are so divided is a call to Catholics to be clear about what they stand for.”
In the meantime, Msgr. Nazir-Ali stated that the strong "Protestant trajectory" among contemporary Anglicans had made life more difficult for those who felt an affinity with the Catholic tradition, and predicted that conversions to the Catholic Church would continue.
And he recalled that the Catholic Church did not question the decision of Pope Leo XIII in an apostolic letter of 1896, Apostolicae curae, according to which Anglican ordinations are "absolutely null and void."
It is difficult to think that Pope Leo XIV is not aware of what has just been reported, especially since he tells his correspondent at the beginning of his letter that "you are starting these functions at a delicate moment in the history for the Anglican family".
What is the point of the title of archbishop granted to Dame Mullally by Leo XIV?
Since Leo XIV does not recognize any power of orders in the Anglican Church, and even less so if it concerns a woman, as recalled by the quotation from the Joint Declaration between Francis and Justin Welby, to what does the title of Archbishop so generously granted by this correspond to?
The terms of "responsibilities," the demand for the "gift of wisdom," and the inspiration of the Holy Spirit can only difficultly be compatible with pure "political" power.
But they rather mean that the title given by Leo XIV signifies recognition of a power of jurisdiction over the Church of England (name given to the Anglican Church in the United Kingdom).
And it is undoubtedly this aspect that attracts his interest: a "sister" Church, led by a woman, presents a good idea of what Leo XIV conceives, following Francis, concerning the power of jurisdiction.
The same idea is reflected in the final document of Study Group 5, on "women’s participation in the life and governance of the Church."
After the appointments of women to head dicasteries and the regular promotion of women in government positions, denying Dame Mullally the title linked to her election would be an intolerable backward step for the world and for the "synodal" members of the Church.
We thus find ourselves in the grotesque situation of a woman placed at the head of the Anglican Diocese of Canterbury, rejected by a majority of Anglicans – who see in this election a betrayal of the reformative ideal – but supported and encouraged by the reigning pope.
ŸThere is also a plan for the latter to receive Dame Mullally at the Vatican at the end of April on the occasion of her visit to Rome.
In these circumstances, the absurdity of ecumenism manifests itself with a very special acuity, which should cause reflection in all those who are not yet anesthetized by ambient modernism.
It is, in any case, a new manifestation of the state of necessity in the Holy Church.