The apology-by-correction defence failed to contain the anger. Yes won by nearly two to one, and the result carried the feel of a wider indictment of judgement, symbolism and institutional drift, not merely a complaint about one withdrawn award.
The floor’s most-respected Yes case called for “No stunts that show moral cowardice”, casting the Archbishop as an unfit figurehead rather than a leader caught by an adviser’s error. Other Yes voters fixed on the date — “Doing this on the 25th anniversary is disgusting” — and widened the charge to the Church of England’s direction, from interfaith work to its handling of faith and identity.
No voters made a narrower, procedural case. Their strongest voice asked, “Did the Archbishop personally decide the recipient?”, while another argued that “the award was withdrawn already - that will suffice”; the mistake, on this reading, was serious but corrected once the old remarks surfaced. The two sides largely talked past each other: one treated the failure to vet as disqualifying, the other treated the rapid withdrawal as accountability already delivered.
Beneath the resignation question sat a live argument about what interfaith engagement should mean for a Christian institution, and whether tolerance can become moral confusion. A No voice said, “She is literally doing her job”; the sharpest Yes reply was that “There is a line between tolerance for other religions and seeming to embrace unacceptable practices.”
The verdict was not simply against the award, which had already gone, but against the idea that withdrawing it settled responsibility.
38 Opinions
She has shown harden to be weak and an incredibly poor figurehead for the Church of England. She should be encouraging engagement with the church from the countries citizens. No stunts that show moral cowardice. She started by saying she was tackling misogyny. Now meets a man whose views are very different.
Yes, as it’s becoming increasingly apparent that she is not a Christian. Her elevation was Political. She is overtly Political, woke, evasive, smug & relishes doing opposite of what she should be doing. At her enthronement her elevation was challenged which is part of the process. The cleric who did was bundled out, evidence how desperate the left was to anoint her. She rails against Jews but ignores massacre of Christian’s in Nigeria. Recent charade is appalling & tone deaf.
The Church of England is suffering for similar disease pretty much all British institutions are suffering. It was taken and ruled by Lefty, woke activists. Mullally (also Welby or Williams before her) have the same, distorted view of the world, fixated on equality, DEI and lefty politics rather than matters of the faith. The Hubert Walter Award winner this year is one of many disturbing things happening in Church, i.e. “Project Spire” fund (slavery repatriations fund) etc.
Doing this on the 25th anniversary is disgusting. Giving awards from the Archbishop of Canterbury to Muslims is just taking the pi$$. They just don't seem to care anymore whether we think they are betraying this country.
She is a dei hire that is so far left that she is supportive of the terrorist settlement of palestine! That alone should be enough for her to sacked. Anyone that supports terrorists should not be in roles like this, it's why Starmer had to go.
The Church of England did a DEI hire with Sarah Mullally and it's not working. It never does. See John Lewis chair, Arday, most charities and arts organisations.
Yes of course, but it's not just this. In other issues recently such as her African trip she has shown herself to be intellectually not up to snuff.
She does not represent the Christian faith and this is the final straw.
I mean come on, giving this award in the anniversary of 9/11. It couldn't be any worse. Gotta go.
Did the Archbishop personally decide the recipient? Most likely by committee, so no, no need to resign on this point. However, a far wider issue is the management of CoE. If Mullally goes, who is the next obvious successor? It takes far too long to appoint an Archbishop, during which time the whole CoE is in limbo. The CoE needs a radical overhaul to get back to teaching the Gospel of Christ. Is Mullaly the right person to lead the CoE in that respect? No.