Read it all here:

The previous mandate of the Journal, as specified in the handbook of the General Synod, is to be “a national newspaper of interest to the members of the Anglican Church of Canada, with an independent editorial policy and not being an official voice of or for the church.”

The new mandate reads, “the General Synod shall produce and distribute journalistic content of interest to the members of the Anglican Church of Canada, whose purpose is to connect and reflect the Church to internal and external audiences, providing a forum for the full range of voices and views across the Church.”

The Journal has always had a bias towards theological liberalism, so for all intents and purposes, it has always been a mouthpiece for the Anglican Church of Canada. The only difference now is that it is no longer pretending to do otherwise.

There is one thing that could change, though: currently, the Journal receives over $500,000 yearly from Canadian Heritage – from our taxes – but only if it maintains editorial independence.

Consequently, the print edition, once distributed with gay abandon – even I used to receive one – now has to be requested:

The article go on to note:

The new editorial policy states that the Journal is expected to “adhere to the highest standards of journalistic responsibility, accuracy, fairness, accountability and transparency” and publish journalism which is “fact-based, fact-checked and in-depth, tackling important issues, asking and answering difficult questions.”

This is Newspeak for “The new editorial policy will adhere to the highest standards of journalistic responsibility by promoting same-sex marriage, climate change activism, anti-capitalism, anti-Trumpism, abortion and euthanasia insouciance, anti-Israel bigotry, fossil-fuel phobia and ecclesiastical wokeness, even when the subject at hand has nothing to do with those topics”.

I hope it doesn’t disappear altogether: less to make fun of.

From here:

The Anglican Journal’s print edition may be discontinued after a “lengthy transition period” and its mandate as an editorially independent news source may be changed under possible scenarios now being considered by a working group, the Council of General Synod (CoGS) heard Friday, June 1.

The paper is presently editorially independent: in other words, it isn’t the official voice of the church. This doesn’t mean that it is unbiased, of course: it is so biased in favour of the liberal theology of the Anglican Church of Canada that discarding editorial independence would make little difference to the content and would at least be more honest. The reason for maintaining a façade of independence is the yearly $596,627 subsidy from Canadian Heritage, only granted if it maintains editorial independence.

Sixty-five per cent of the 400 randomly surveyed Anglicans said they thought the Anglican Journal should be “the official voice of the Anglican Church of Canada” with only 35 per cent preferring that it retain its current status as “An independent, ‘arm’s length’ observer of the Church.”

Bishops “were asked a different question, but it was a parallel question and less than 50% of bishops think that the current mandate of independence is important, and they estimate that about a third of their folks find it important. And, lo and behold, it was a third of the folks who answered the survey,” said Alexander. “I have the sense that bishops have their finger on the flock fairly closely.”

On the other hand, over half of General Synod members and about 75 per cent of diocesan editors feel the Journal’s editorial independence is important, he said.

“Having an independent editorial policy makes the paper more credible as a news source,” Alexander quoted a respondent of the General Synod survey as having commented; “As an unofficial, and, as it were, non-partisan paper, the Journal acts as a fair dealer, offering news from a variety of perspectives,” wrote another.

The Anglican Church of Canada has developed a neurotic dislike of all things binary: there are no definitive decisions or conclusions. It seems to me obvious that this is because the ACoC is too cowardly to take a stand, preferring obfuscation and ambivalence in the hope that no-one will notice that it no longer believes in anything of import.
The fact that the ACoC is so opposed to binary decisions is a strong indicator that there must be something good about them. Musing along those lines, it occurred to me that the real world which is generally regarded as analogue in nature, may in fact be a digital creation masquerading as analogue. Rather like an analogue quartz watch whose hands don’t move smoothly, but appear to at first glance. This might provide an elegant solution to Zeno’s paradoxes.

I bet the “we” mentioned below typed this on a digital computer using nasty binary logic:

“We’re beginning to realize it’s not a binary discussion… ‘either you’re an official voice, and therefore you’re some kind of Pravda, or you’re independent’,” he said. “Editorial independence and diversity of views are not necessarily yoked together.”

For years it’s been a standing joke that the Anglican Journal is the Anglican Church of Canada’s Pravda because it has such a strong bias towards theological liberalism and the political left. Just like the organisation it is there to report on.

At the same time, the Journal claims to be editorially independent, a requirement if it is to continue to receive a yearly grant of $409,866 from Heritage Canada, otherwise known as Canadian taxpayers.

Now, it seems the claimed editorially independence is under review by the Council of General Synod, prompting a CoGS member to finally catch on to what the rest of us have known for some time: the Anglican Journal is in danger of becoming – I would make that has become – The Anglican Pravda.

From here (emphasis mine):

A request by the diocese of Rupert’s Land to no longer have a print version of the Anglican Journal distributed in the diocese has led to the raising of questions about whether the newspaper should be produced in print form at all and whether it should continue to be free to determine its own content, Council of General Synod (CoGS) heard Saturday, June 24.

[…..]

In a question-and-answer session after Egan’s presentation, the issue of the Journal’s editorial independence prompted, instead of a question, a strong statement from one CoGS member. Jason Antonio, from the ecclesiastical province of Rupert’s Land, who also introduced himself as managing editor of the diocesan newspaper The Saskatchewan Anglican, condemned what he termed the report’s “attack” on the Anglican Journal’s editorial independence.

“It’s a leap in logic for me to think that because Rupert’s Land News shut down we have to question the editorial independence of the newspaper,” he said. “The Anglican Church of Canada does not need another mouthpiece…To attack the Anglican Journal, then, and take it over is an authoritarian move. We might as well just rename it Pravda,” said Antonio, alluding to the former news organ of the Soviet Union’s communist party.

But none from the Permanent Office of Foreign Media Organization, People’s Republic of China. Maybe next year.

From here:

The Anglican Journal received 24 awards, including eight awards of excellence, at the joint convention of the Canadian Church Press (CCP) and Associated Church Press (ACP) held April 27 to May 1 in Toronto.