CEC: "We accept the Holy Scriptures as the supreme authority in all matters of faith and conduct, and affirm their valid interpretation through the dual lenses of two millennia of tradition, alongside sanctified reason. We are enriched by the insights that the Holy Spirit has given to previous generations of Christians, and embrace what He is doing in our current day. We adhere to an expression of the Gospel neither diluted, nor polluted. We are a Church standing strong, breathing deep, ancient and alive."1
The CAC claims to draw from a broad range of traditions, including apostolic origins, Celtic influences, the Church Fathers, the Medieval Church, the Protestant Reformation, the Wesleyan Evangelical Revival, the Oxford Movement, and the Modern Charismatic Movement.1
These statements raise important theological questions. Cei Dewar's claim to represent "the historic Gospel of Jesus Christ" is open to scrutiny. The historic Protestant doctrine of sola scriptura maintains that scripture alone is the final and sufficient authority for faith and practice. By placing tradition alongside scripture as an authoritative guide, the position outlined departs from a strict sola scriptura framework and aligns more closely with classical Anglican and Roman Catholic approaches. While the CAC affirms the supreme authority of scripture, it also appeals to tradition and reason as interpretive authorities, situating its methodology nearer to mainstream Anglicanism than to a strict sola scriptura position. As a result, its rhetoric may appear to affirm sola scriptura while its practical theological framework qualifies that principle through the additional authority accorded to tradition and reason.
CAC: "We follow the threefold ministry pattern established by the early church of bishops leading and overseeing, presbyters teaching and ministering, and deacons addressing the needs of the people."1
This statement is not scriptural. In the earliest New Testament churches, the offices of bishop (episkopos, overseer) and elder (presbyteros) appear to have been one and the same. Local congregations were ordinarily governed by a plurality of elders or overseers, with passages such as Acts 20:17,20:28 and Titus 1:5-7 using the terms interchangeably. During the early second century, however, a more defined episcopal structure emerged in which a single bishop exercised oversight over presbyters and deacons. The claim that the bishop emerged as a distinct, monarchical ecclesiastical office after the apostolic period remains a significant position within Protestant scholarship, particularly among traditions influenced by sola scriptura. Episcopal traditions dispute this interpretation, arguing that the historic episcopate represents a legitimate continuation and maturation of apostolic oversight rather than a substantive innovation.
As a result of this core diversion from scripture a hierarchical clergy class evolved within the CofE and other denominations. The office of vicar is a later ecclesiastical role and does not appear in the New Testament. The term derives from the Latin vicarius (representative) and refers to a priest who ministers on behalf of a bishop or other church authority within a local parish. Reflecting its episcopal ecclesiology, the CEC maintains bishops and vicars and employs clerical garments that visibly differentiate clergy from the laity. In the United Kingdom, Ceirion (Cei) Dewar heads the Diocese of Providence and was formally "enthroned" as Bishop Ordinary during a September 2026 ceremony. A prominent CAC "vicar" is Chris Wickland. Wickland regularly issues first-person prophetic declarations, presenting them as direct communications from God. Critics argue that the failure of some predictions constitutes evidence against the validity of his prophetic claims, citing biblical passages that identify accuracy and fidelity as essential markers of genuine prophetic ministry (Deuteronomy 18:20-22; Matthew 7:15; 2 Corinthians 11:13-15). Cei Dewar's public endorsement of Chris Wickland is a matter of significant concern, particularly regarding standards of prophetic credibility and accountability.
Christendom is saturated with religious titles such as Reverend, Bishop, Archbishop, Apostle, Cardinal, Father, Pastor, and Pope. The New Testament certainly recognizes forms of leadership, including apostles, prophets, evangelists, shepherds, teachers, elders, overseers, and servants. The central question, however, is whether these leadership roles were ever intended to create a distinct religious class marked by honorific titles, hierarchical rank, elevated social status, and distinctive robes and vestments that set them apart from other believers.
The title "Reverend" is a post-biblical ecclesiastical honorific and does not appear in the New Testament as a title for Christian leaders. Moreover, Psalm 111:9 contains the only occurrence of the English word "reverend" in the KJV, where it is attributed to God alone. Consequently, critics question the appropriateness of applying to ministers a title that scripture reserves for God: He sent redemption unto his people: he hath commanded his covenant for ever: holy and reverend is his name. KJV
Jesus confronted this practice directly when speaking of the scribes and Pharisees. Their desire for public honor, prominent status, and distinguished forms of address provided the context for his instruction to his disciples.
Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples, “The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat, so do and observe whatever they tell you, but not the works they do. For they preach, but do not practice. They tie up heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on people’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to move them with their finger. They do all their deeds to be seen by others. For they make their phylacteries broad and their fringes long, and they love the place of honor at feasts and the best seats in the synagogues and greetings in the marketplaces and being called rabbi by others. But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all brothers. And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven. Neither be called instructors, for you have one instructor, the Christ. The greatest among you shall be your servant. Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted. (Matthew 23:1–12).
Significantly, Paul defines leadership by character rather than by outward distinctions such as religious dress, hierarchical rank, ceremonial privilege, or institutional status.
If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task. Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not a drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. He must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive, for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God’s church? He must not be a recent convert, or he may become puffed up with conceit and fall into the condemnation of the devil. Moreover, he must be well thought of by outsiders, so that he may not fall into disgrace, into a snare of the devil. (1 Timothy 3:1-7 cf. Titus 1:5-9).
How we define Christian leadership is critically important. Scripture calls for honor without exaltation and respect without the creation of status distinctions. Jesus settled the question of greatness among his followers when he declared:
The greatest among you shall be your servant. (Matthew 23:11).
In the New Testament, honor is consistently linked to character, faithfulness, sacrifice, and service rather than to titles, rank, or privilege. Christian leaders are to be recognized not for elevated status but for exemplary conduct and humble service.
Peter described leadership in the following terms:
"..shepherd the flock of God that is among you, exercising oversight, not under compulsion, but willingly, as God would have you; not for shameful gain, but eagerly; not domineering over those in your charge, but being examples to the flock" (1 Peter 5:1-3).
Likewise, Paul instructed believers to appreciate and respect diligent leaders because of their work rather than because of any official title or position: But we ask you, brothers, to acknowledge those who work diligently among you, who care for you in the Lord and who admonish you. In love, hold them in highest regard because of their work. Live in peace with one another (1 Thessalonians 5:12-13).
The pattern is consistent. Christian leaders are to be honored for their character, faithfulness, and service to the body of Christ, not elevated through honorific titles, hierarchical rank, distinctive status, or external symbols of religious authority.
If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task. Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not a drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. He must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive, for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God’s church? He must not be a recent convert, or he may become puffed up with conceit and fall into the condemnation of the devil. Moreover, he must be well thought of by outsiders, so that he may not fall into disgrace, into a snare of the devil. (1 Timothy 3:1-7 cf. Titus 1:5-9).
How we define Christian leadership is critically important. Scripture calls for honor without exaltation and respect without the creation of status distinctions. Jesus settled the question of greatness among his followers when he declared:
The greatest among you shall be your servant. (Matthew 23:11).
In the New Testament, honor is consistently linked to character, faithfulness, sacrifice, and service rather than to titles, rank, or privilege. Christian leaders are to be recognized not for elevated status but for exemplary conduct and humble service.
Peter described leadership in the following terms:
"..shepherd the flock of God that is among you, exercising oversight, not under compulsion, but willingly, as God would have you; not for shameful gain, but eagerly; not domineering over those in your charge, but being examples to the flock" (1 Peter 5:1-3).
Likewise, Paul instructed believers to appreciate and respect diligent leaders because of their work rather than because of any official title or position: But we ask you, brothers, to acknowledge those who work diligently among you, who care for you in the Lord and who admonish you. In love, hold them in highest regard because of their work. Live in peace with one another (1 Thessalonians 5:12-13).
The pattern is consistent. Christian leaders are to be honored for their character, faithfulness, and service to the body of Christ, not elevated through honorific titles, hierarchical rank, distinctive status, or external symbols of religious authority.
The group known as the "Five Fathers" within the CAC includes Cei Dewar, Phil Harris, who uses the title "Canon", and Calvin Robinson, who is styled as "Father". Strangely, the identities of the other two purported "fathers" are not readily apparent from the available source material. Several CAC-associated clergy, including Brett Murphy, Chris Wickland and Cei Dewar, have participated in, or publicly supported, events linked to Tommy Robinson's Unite the Kingdom movement. Tommy Robinson (Stephen Yaxley-Lennon) is commonly classified by scholars, major media organisations, and monitoring groups as a right-wing, more specifically far-right, political activist, and is best known as the co-founder and former leader of the English Defence League (EDL).
My concern is that the CAC has emerged within a climate of dissatisfaction with the Church of England and wider political and cultural tensions, particularly immigration. While its public profile is strongly associated with opposition to contemporary "woke" ideology, it is less clear that its theological distinctives are more firmly rooted in scripture than those of other denominations. Consequently, its anti-woke emphasis may be viewed as a defining feature of its public appeal rather than evidence of greater biblical fidelity.
My concern is that the CAC has emerged within a climate of dissatisfaction with the Church of England and wider political and cultural tensions, particularly immigration. While its public profile is strongly associated with opposition to contemporary "woke" ideology, it is less clear that its theological distinctives are more firmly rooted in scripture than those of other denominations. Consequently, its anti-woke emphasis may be viewed as a defining feature of its public appeal rather than evidence of greater biblical fidelity.
