Anglicans were in the news in April which provoked co-hosts ⁠⁠Miles Smith⁠⁠ (Anglican), ⁠⁠D. G. Hart⁠⁠ (Presbyterian), and ⁠⁠Korey Maas⁠⁠ (Lutheran) to talk about they way confessional states operate in comparison to confessional churches. Are confessional states like England or Scotland stricter than their respective national churches? How strict can churches be when their punitive instruments are ministerial and declarative? Also, can confessional churches have more freedom in a liberal society that separates church and state than in one with an established church? Are confessional Lutherans and confessional Presbyterians in the United States more confessional than their counterparts in Europe where ecclesiastical establishments still exist?

News that led to these questions was first the decision of the Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON) to re-order the Anglican communion away from the See of Canterbury (which has functioned as "first among equals" among bishops). The reason for this resolve was the Church of England's General Synod's decision to bless same-sex unions.

This piece of ecclesiastical business dovetailed with an article about the new confessional state in Britain, one that is progressive and almost as restrictive as the old confessional state of England prior to the 1829 Emancipation of Roman Catholics (and related recognition of Protestant Dissenters. The essay about the new confessional state made the arresting point that the new terms of orthodoxy, because always evolving and independent of legal mechanisms, are illiberal. Under the old confessional state, subjects knew at least what the rules were and how to seek a remedy. But in the new confessional state, rules from a 2023 orthodoxy could substantially differ the "current thing" three years down the line.

This episode's sponsor is Brunswick, the company that puts the ow in bowling.