Sarah Mullally is the Archbishop of Canterbury. She has just made a five-day visit to Israel, where she did not meet with Israelis but only, it seems, with those she calls “Palestinians” (including Israeli Arabs), and delivered herself of a series of anti-Israel comments. More on her visit can be found here: “The Archbishop of Canterbury is blind to the true enemies of Middle East Christians,” by Jake Wallis Simons, Telegraph,
Which country offers the strongest legal protections and lowest risk of persecution for Christians in the Middle East? Where do believers enjoy the greatest safety and the richest opportunities to flourish? The answer, of course, is Israel.
According to a US State Department report on international religious freedom, this is because “the country’s laws and Supreme Court rulings protect the freedoms of conscience, faith, religion, and worship, regardless of an individual’s religious affiliation”, and it “criminalises actions that damage or desecrate religious sites or restrict access to worshippers”.
Anybody following the new Archbishop of Canterbury’s pilgrimage to the Holy Land last week, however, would be encouraged to think rather less favourably of the Jewish state. Unlike Justin Welby, who in 2017 met leaders from both sides (yet was hardly free from Israelophobia himself), her schedule seemed to be rammed with set-pieces designed to cast a cloud over Jerusalem.
Several photo-ops, all liberally shared on the Archbishop’s social media platforms, sought to highlight “stories of the immense hardships” facing Palestinian Christians, apparently at the hands of Israel.
At the end of her pilgrimage, Mullally got political, releasing an open letter to Anglicans calling for an end to the “occupation” and a “viable two-state solution”, with Jerusalem as a “shared capital”. Strangely, she did not mention that Ramallah had previously rejected this precise offer, such as when Ehud Olmert tabled it in 2008. As a professional nurse rather than foreign policy expert, perhaps she had no idea….
Here is what Sarah Mullally, Archbishop of Canterbury, did, or failed to do, while in Israel:
She failed to visit the kibbutzim where Hamas tortured, raped, mutilate, and murdered 1,200 Israelis on October 7, 2023.
She failed to utter a syllable of sympathy for the victims of that attack.
She visited Bethlehem, but failed to express alarm about the beleaguered Christians in Bethlehem, where the percentage of Christians in the town’s population has plummeted from 86% in 1950 to 8% today, the result of the hostile atmosphere of the town’s Muslims toward its Christians.
She failed to visit the Western Wall, unlike her predecessor Justin Welby, who did so on his visit to Israel in 2017, with the Chief Rabbi of the UK, Ephraim Rivlis, accompanying him.
She failed to visit any of the other Jewish religious sites, including the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron, the Tomb of Rachel just outside Bethlehem, and the Tomb of Joseph in Nablus, all of which have been the objects of “Palestinian” vandalism and arson. She did not visit Masada or any other sites that provided evidence of the 3500-year history of the Jews in the Land of Israel.
Accompanying her everywhere was Archbishop Hossein Naoum, the head of the Anglican church in the Holy Land, for carefully arranged visits with Palestinian Christians who, as if on cue, told of the sufferings of the faithful at the hands of the Israelis. But the only suffering Christians endure in Israel/Palestine is that which the Muslim population inflicts. Israel is the safest place for Christians in the entire Middle East.
She repeatedly expressed sympathy for the “Palestinians,” demanding that they be given a state of their own, “with Jerusalem as its capital.” She said nothing about the Israeli claim to Judea and Samaria, based on the Mandate for Palestine and on 3,500 years of a continuous Jewish presence in the land, some 2,000 years before a single Muslim appeared. She apparently believes that “peace” will be achieved when Israel is made to squeeze back within the 1949 armistice lines, with a nine-mile-wide waist from Qalqilya to the sea. As the celebrated British military historian B. H. Liddell Hart has written, with such borders an invasion force from the east could cut Israel in two within a matter of hours.
She at no time acknowledged the fact that the Palestinian Authority supported terrorism through its “Pay-for-Slay” program. She said nothing about any of the terror groups — Hamas, Hezbollah, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestin — that have made life so difficult for Israelis, who are constantly under the threat of terror attacks.
She did not visit a single one of the synagogues in the Four Holy Cities of Judaism — Jerusalem, Hebron, Safed, and Tiberias — that have over the years been the objects of Arab attack.
She did not visit with a single Jewish family, to find out how they are doing, given the five-front war the embattled Jewish state is now fighting. She did not examine even one of the bomb shelters to which hundreds of thousands of Israelis are forced to run to several times a day when an alarm about incoming missiles and drones is sounded.
She did not visit Yad Vashem.
somehistory says
“They will say, ‘did we not expel demons in your name, and perform powerful works in your name,?’ And then Jesus “will say to them, ‘Get away from me, you workers of lawlessness.'”
‘Narrow is the gate and cramped the road leading to life; And few are the ones finding it.”
somehistory says
I forgot the other thing Jesus said He “will say” at that time, when addressing those like this woman who refuses to be obedient to His Commandments. “I never knew you.”
One reason He says He will say that is because, they have never gotten to know Him.
They refuse to be observant hearers and refuse to obey His Commandments.
This woman, who wears a high-falutin title, sets an example of what those who want Jesus to reward them should *not* do.
Rod says
So you know mote than the leader of the Anglican Church does, about how Jesus would like her to conduct her life.
Might I ask how you have received this high and blessed state of wisdom?
You’re not breaking one of the Commandments, by any chance?
somehistory says
The Bible lays it all out. Even ignorant people can find out what His Commandments are. so, if she doesn’t “know” what they are, then I say, I yes, I know more than she does.
And….no, I’m not *judging* her….just looking at her rotten fruit. Guess you are too blind to see that.
Patton says
This C U next Tuesday, is a good argument for never allowing women to occupy the position of an archbishop in any church. She is an evil bitch to her core an emblematic of why the United Kingdom will shortly not be British at all. F-her. She is willfully, ignorant, and blind, and is nothing more than a useful idiot for the evil subhuman Moose Slums. There is a reason why there are almost no Christians left in Bethlehem. All these dumb ass stories from people on the left and so-called people on the right like Tucker Carlson, Megan, Kelly, and that pathetic mental midget Canned Ass Owens about the alleged mistreatment of Christians in Israel by the Jews it’s just so much bullshit. The Israelis would never borrow this woman from visiting Israel, the way, the Britz bar conservatives from coming there and speaking their mind. She ought to take a trip to Saudi Arabia and count the number of churches there. How in the hell did she ever become archbishop of Canterbury? That alone speaks volumes about the status of the church in the UK. I would say shame on her, but people like that never feel shame.
gravenimage says
Sadly, the past several Archbishops of Canterbury–men–have been as bad.
C. Cristi says
You got that damn right right there. Tucker Candace and that whole crew would never address christians in Muslim countries, only Israel.
A customer told me they have to pay Muslims money to have their business work in the Muslim country in Africa, I don’t know which one. They also said their girls need accomplices to take them anywhere, like school. The men work on a schedule. Three men switch on days and take the girls to school, the women to the bazaar of wherever.
This also filters down into aid distribution there apparently. And that same church probably helps Muslims more than Christian Africans, they say so at least. And also I don’t know the details but this area he grew up, it was vast majority Christian before he was born. And then they moved in to work. But their populations went up up up. And they became threatening more and more. And I guess the violence stops if you pay these Islam chiefs of some sort, maybe it’s an imam?
These same chiefs “tolerate” you, in your own homeland for a “fee”. Also the source of the problem is these men have multiple wives, and they have children quickly, this gives these new populations a population superiority.
With the killings, he says they happen but it is all swept under the rug, and it’s called a robbery or this or that, but really they are Islamic shake downs, or female taken away never to be seen because their family could not organize protection and got too comfortable or they were “open minded”.
He says the Muslims move across this line that he’s from and move the line further and further back. And the more inside the Islamic line you are, the more danger and the more you must pay up, or create good strong relationships with these Muslim chiefs, and also politicians can protect you.
Another thing there was these papers papers papers. Really you have to pay off a Muslim who is operates separate from these “chiefs” but a whole another level, a person who is an official of the government. So now your margin is even.
So when the Christians eventually leave, they sell to Muslims Pennies on the dollar. The , the Muslims cannot run whatever was going on before them. This makes economic pressure for these Muslims to once again move across the Christian line, where these Christians again let their guard down.
Rinse and repeat.
Beans🫘 says
Very interesting Christy. What country was this? I am guessing Nigeria.
The Christian aid always baffled me. Because even in the USA, christians are the main ones funding Islamic invasion armies into the west. I am always concerned about Christianity, though many ignore the teachings and follow common sense.
You can’t allow these people into your country, Christianity is our soft underbelly.
Enoch says
It all really begs the question:
Why did Israel allow her in in the first place?
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Is there a mainstream Christian sect anywhere in the world that doesn’t have an insane religious leadership?
somehistory says
Probably not. There is a verse in Revelation which anyone can read and ponder its meaning, which says “Get out of her my people, if you do not wish to share in her sins and receive part of her plagues.”
Christians do well to try to follow Jesus and not some imperfect human pretending to be righteous and all-knowing.
Beans🫘 says
Infidel
Even the Baptists are leaning into Islam to grovel now. I don’t trust any church organization though I know many fantastic christians.
Many Baptist churches implement “Good Neighbor” programs designed to lower the barrier between the church and the Muslim community by focusing entirely on immediate, physical needs:
Household Stabilization: This includes delivering “truckloads” of household supplies, furniture, and clothing. Baptist groups have been documented organizing “welcome kits” and baby showers for expectant Muslim refugee mothers to help them feel supported in a new country.
Logistical Integration: Volunteers frequently act as personal advocates, accompanying Muslim families to banks, grocery stores, and medical appointments to navigate language barriers and cultural isolation.
Language and Skills Training: Churches often host ESL (English as a Second Language) classes, either in their own facilities or at community centers, specifically tailored for Muslim refugee families to help them gain independence
Wellington says
A female Archbishop of Canterbury has absurdity written all over it as much as a man marrying a man does. Foolishly open Pandora’s Box and thereafter be surprised by nothing. And yes, the way of old, call it by the collective name of the Establishment if you will, was far from perfect but at least it was rooted in reason and common sense.
Pandora’s Box, once opened, is destructive to so much, including the evisceration of reason and common sense. This helps explain why the worst religion of all time, Islam, has apologies made for it even by Presidents, Prime Ministers and Popes, and if one cannot see a continuous thread from gay marriage to puberty blockers for 10 year-olds and breasts being cut off of 14 year-old girls, then that person has not learned nearly enough, has not reflected upon matters with maximum insight.
What a silly age we live in. There have been many other dark eras in man’s history but none sillier. Yeah, imagine a great civilization, i.e., Western Civilization, done in not by force but by silliness. Talk, eh, about a great civilization going out with a whimper rather than in some kind of noble fashion? Well, there is nothing noble in having a female Archbishop of Canterbury, two men marrying each other and excuses aplenty made for Islam This tragic descent in our time is due to the West losing both its balls and its reason.
Could anything be clearer? Not for me.
Edmund Carey says
“The Archbishop of Canterbury is blind to the true enemies of Middle East Christians.” I rather suspect that even if the Archbishop is perfectly well aware of who are the real enemies of Middle East Christians, she doesn’t care. Acknowledging that simply isn’t fashionable, it isn’t PC, it isn’t woke. Palestinians are victims, pure and simple, and for no particular reason they are the most cherished and commiserated with “victims” in the world, unless the reason is that their “tormentors” are Jews. But instead of being called out for this hypocrisy, you can rest assured that the Archbishop of Canterbury will only be commended for it, everywhere but here. And of course she knows that.
ploome says
Church of England bishops visit Israel and Palestine and call for governments to ‘protect Palestinians’
https://www.anglicannews.org/news/2026/02/church-of-england-bishops-visit-israel-and-palestine-and-call-for-governments-to-‘protect-palestinians’.aspx
she represents the attitude of her church, and the position her bishops and the position church hierarchy and elders
Now these are the “learned” leaders, seeped in religious studies and exegesis
this is what they are- she is no different than any of them
gravenimage says
Archbishop of Canterbury Visits Israel
……………………………………………..
Just sickening.
Winston 101 says
She did not go to Jewish sites because those sights are in Israel.
She didn’t go to Israel – she went to Palestine.
ploome says
Some think of the Palestinian-Israeli dispute as a clash of nationalisms. Others stress religious antagonism, while others yet see an East-West power struggle. But it is roundly agreed upon that a key element of the conflict is land. That land, for many years by many people, was called Palestine.
Yet few people—including Middle East policy makers, journalists, historians and even lexicographers—know much about the history of the name “Palestine,” or what territory it has at one time or another encompassed.
The ancient Romans pinned the name on the Land of Israel.
In 135 CE, after stamping out the province of Judea’s second insurrection, the Romans renamed the province Syria Palaestina—that is, “Palestinian Syria.”
They did so resentfully, as a punishment, to obliterate the link between the Jews (in Hebrew, Y’hudim and in Latin Judaei) and the province (the Hebrew name of which was Y’hudah). “Palaestina” referred to the Philistines, whose home base had been on the Mediterranean coast.
[…]
The term “Palestine” was used for millennia without a precise geographic definition. That’s not uncommon—
think of “Transcaucasus” or “Midwest.” No precise definition existed for Palestine because none was required. Since the Roman era, the name lacked political significance. No nation ever had that name.
The Roman Emperor Hadrian (Publius Aelius Hadrianus), who reigned from 117 to 138 AD, is considered one of the most significant and controversial leaders of the Roman Empire. His conflict with the Jews and his attempt to eradicate Jewish identity and religion. His decision to rename Judea as Syria Palaestina and the suppression of the Bar Kokhba Revolt (132–136 AD) left an indelible mark on the history of the region.
(Jesus crucifixion happened approximately 100 years earlier)
Winston 101 says
ploome,
All you say is accurate and true. My comment was to say her actions tell you what she sees when she’s in Israel. She doesn’t have to chant it, her actions say it for her –
“From the River to the Sea”. She didn’t go to places or meet with people who would contradict that sentiment. Perhaps I was too cryptic ?
ploome says
not cryptic…..you are fine
Major Tom says
“Women should remain silent in the churches………for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.”
I Corinthians 14: 34-35. Ignoring this instruction gives us what we see today!
Alkflaeda says
Paul bases this instruction on the Law in 1 Corinthians 14:35 (since he says that it is an accepted position in all of the churches of the saints, he must be referring to the Jewish Law, rather than seeking to avert unnecessary scandal by working within local law). Do you know to which OT text(s) he refers?
carpediadem says
And what’s your brilliant reasoning for the male version of this person like the previous Archbishops?
gravenimage says
Good question.
Andrew Blackadder says
Perhaps she will follow the actions of the Vatican and open a prayer room for her lovely muslime friends.
I sure am glad Im not a follower of the Christian faith even though I grew up in the Church of Scotland.
It appears to me that leaders of her caliber and also that silly wee Popey fella in the Vatican that they are each a version of the anti Christ..
Alkflaeda says
If anyone were to suggest to a theological liberal that she or he was a rigid thinker, it would be akin to heresy in their eyes. And yet, refusal to move beyond accepted liberal positions is rigid thinking, as exemplified by the Archbishop of Canterbury.
dumbledoresarmy says
And meanwhile… thousands upon thousands of Nigerian Christians, many of them affiliated with the Anglican Communion… faithful, persevering people.. have been butchered by allahu-akbaring mohammedans.. and more are being killed, or driven from their homes, on land where their forefathers and foremothers lived for untold generations. every single day.
And in Myanmar, Christians belonging to non-Bama minority groups are also suffering… and in North Korea, if you are caught with a bible you end up in a gulag, worked and starved and tortured to death.
Not a word about any of this, from our Archbishop of Canterbury (nor from far too many other Christian leaders, regardless of gender)…no, it’s all about the Poooooor ‘Palestinians’ (you have to say ‘Palestinians’ with a special sort of simpering trill, and eyes uplifted to heaven…).
gravenimage says
+1
RJ Katz says
This is yet another example of how people who are disposed to bashing Israel and Jews will only seek out people who will support their prejudices and deliberately ignore the other side of the story.
MJ John says
What can we do? Islam is just red hot right now in the west. Even among the right wing, Israel has lost majority of the support, but Islam is red hot right now, though it hasn’t totally won us over.
Look at all the Islam conversions, look at the pro Palestine wave. The pro Hamas, look at how Islamic atrocities are universally ignored now by even the right wing influencers.
So what I see is that the Jews are taking the backlash from now on. These Muslim politicians are coming and coming, Jews must be ready. This isn’t a game, their numbers are not going down any time soon. They keep winning elections and increasing population.