This letter is also available as a .pdf file here.
September 23, 2026
Dear Sisters and Brothers in Christ,
I write to you about an issue that touches something fundamental to our Christian faith: the sacredness of every human life and our calling to protect those who are vulnerable especially the unborn.
Our Christian conviction concerning the sanctity of life begins with our Sovereign Creator. Every human being is created in the image and likeness of God (Genesis 1:26–27), and therefore possesses a dignity that is not bestowed by the state, determined by usefulness, or dependent upon age, ability, health, independence, or circumstance.
Our own Anglican Church in North America speaks clearly about this. The Canons affirm that “God, and not man, is the creator of human life. The unjustified taking of life is sinful. Therefore, all members and clergy are called to promote and respect the sanctity of every human life from conception to natural death.” (Title II, Canon 8, Section 3)
This is part of what Pope John Paul II memorably called “the Gospel of life.” In the encyclical Evangelium Vitae, he wrote that the Gospel of life stands at the very heart of the message of Jesus and must be proclaimed as good news to every generation and culture.
That Gospel of life is broad and reflective of the goodness of God. We must remember that it is much larger than a single political issue.
John Paul II reminds us that threats to human life include not only abortion and euthanasia, but also poverty, hunger, war, the arms trade, drugs, environmental destruction, and other circumstances that assault human dignity and destroy human life. Christians cannot selectively defend human dignity. We are called to protect the unborn child, care for the mother in crisis, defend children from exploitation, stand with the poor, welcome the stranger, oppose human trafficking, care for the elderly and disabled, and resist whatever treats another human being as expendable.
To be sure, this is not fundamentally a partisan agenda. It is a Christian one.
Jesus consistently drew near to those whom others overlooked including the poor, the sick, children, outsiders, and those without power. Following him means learning to see human beings not primarily as political constituencies or social problems, but as people made in the image of God and for whom Christ died.
The Virginia Constitutional Amendment
It is within this larger Christian understanding of human dignity that I want to call your attention to the proposed “Fundamental Right to Reproductive Freedom” Amendment to the Virginia Constitution which will be on the ballot in just a few weeks.
The proposed amendment would establish a constitutional right for “every individual” to make and carry out decisions concerning reproductive freedom, including decisions concerning prenatal care, contraception, abortion care, miscarriage care, and fertility care. It would also substantially limit the Commonwealth’s ability to burden that right by requiring restrictions to satisfy a demanding constitutional standard.
There are several aspects of this proposal that I believe Christians should examine carefully.
1. The Protection of Unborn Human Life
First, the amendment raises profound questions concerning the protection of unborn human life.
The Christian Church has historically understood the child in the womb not merely as potential life or a blob of tissue but as human life deserving our protection and care. Scripture speaks beautifully of God’s knowledge and care for human beings before birth:
“For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb.” (Psalm 139:13)
The prophet Jeremiah heard the Lord say: “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you.” (Jeremiah 1:5)
And in Luke’s Gospel, John the Baptist responds to the presence of the unborn Jesus while both are still in their mothers’ wombs (Luke 1:39–45).
Our concern for unborn life must always be accompanied by compassion for women facing difficult pregnancies. The Church must never simply tell a frightened woman what she should not do. We must be communities prepared to walk with women and families through prayer, friendship, material assistance, adoption and foster-care support, counseling, and practical help.
To defend the child while abandoning the mother would be an incomplete Christian witness. We are called to love and serve both.
2. The Breadth of the Constitutional Language
Second, I am concerned by the breadth of the proposed constitutional language.
Constitutions are different from ordinary legislation. Once a right is placed in a constitution, future laws and governmental actions are measured against that constitutional guarantee.
The proposed amendment does not merely address one particular statute or circumstance. It establishes a broad constitutional right to “reproductive freedom” belonging to “every individual” and protects the individual’s autonomous decision-making against governmental interference except under specified circumstances.
That breadth deserves careful consideration.
Whatever one’s views on particular reproductive questions, Virginians should understand that constitutional language can have implications beyond the circumstances emphasized during a political campaign. Its meaning will ultimately be interpreted not only by legislators but also by courts in cases that may arise years from now.
3. Parents, Minors, Sterilization, and Gender-Transition Procedures
I am also deeply concerned about the potential implications of this amendment for parents and minors in other areas of reproductive medicine.
The amendment establishes a fundamental right belonging to “every individual” to make and carry out decisions concerning “reproductive freedom,” including contraception and fertility care, and places significant emphasis upon the individual’s autonomous decision-making. Significantly, Virginia law defines “contraception” to include sterilization procedures.
We should be precise about what the amendment does and does not say. It does not expressly mention gender-transition procedures, nor does it explicitly state that minors have a constitutional right to obtain sterilization or gender-transition treatment without parental knowledge or consent. We should not claim that it does.
Nevertheless, I am deeply concerned that the breadth of this constitutional language could increase the possibility that minors might gain access to consequential and potentially irreversible medical interventions including sterilization and some gender-transition procedures with diminished parental involvement.
The combination of a right belonging to “every individual,” protection for autonomous decision-making, and the requirement that governmental restrictions satisfy a compelling-state-interest and least-restrictive-means test raises serious questions about how existing or future parental-consent requirements could fare if challenged in court.
That concern is particularly significant because some gender-transition procedures can affect reproductive capacity. The amendment does not tell us whether a future Virginia court would treat such procedures as falling within “reproductive freedom,” and we should not pretend that the legal outcome is certain.
But neither should we dismiss the possibility.
Constitutional provisions are interpreted and applied through litigation, and broad constitutional language can have consequences beyond the circumstances most prominently discussed when it is adopted.
For Christians who believe that parents bear a God-given responsibility for the care and formation of their children, this is not a peripheral issue. Parents should not be treated as obstacles to a child’s well-being but ordinarily as those entrusted with the responsibility to protect, guide, and care for their children especially when minors face profound medical decisions with potentially lifelong consequences.
4. Religious Liberty and Pro-Life Ministry
I am also concerned about the possible implications for churches, pregnancy resource centers, medical professionals, and other ministries committed to protecting unborn life and supporting women who choose alternatives to abortion. The amendment does not prohibit pro-life advocacy or ministry, and we should not suggest that it does. However, by establishing reproductive freedom, including the right to an abortion, as a fundamental constitutional right and protecting those who aid or assist another person in exercising that right, it raises questions about how future laws and regulations might affect organizations or medical professionals whose convictions lead them to oppose, counsel against, or decline participation in abortion. These outcomes are not certain, but the potential implications for religious liberty, freedom of conscience, and pro-life ministry deserve careful attention. As we have seen in the United Kingdom, British laws designed to protect access to abortion facilities now restrict certain peaceful pro-life activities within designated zones around those facilities and can, in some circumstances, encompass vigils and even silent prayer intended to influence someone accessing abortion services.
5. Our Witness Must Be Larger Than What We Oppose
As important as these concerns are, I want to urge us toward something that goes beyond political opposition alone.
If Christians are going to speak about the sanctity of human life, our lives and churches must demonstrate what we mean.
The Gospel of life calls us to care about the woman experiencing an unexpected pregnancy and the child growing within her. It calls us to care for children who need foster and adoptive homes. It calls us to defend those who are trafficked and exploited. It calls us to care for people with disabilities and for the elderly whose dependence can cause society to regard them as burdens.
It also calls us to care about children living in poverty, families struggling to find food and housing, refugees displaced by violence, and Christians and others suffering persecution around the world.
John Paul II’s challenge remains powerful because he refused to allow the sanctity of life to become a narrow slogan. He connected attacks upon life with poverty, hunger, war, exploitation, drugs, and other forces that destroy human beings.
The Gospel of life means that no human being is disposable.
6. A Christian Response
So how should Christians respond?
First, pray. Pray for our Commonwealth, for those who govern us, for women and families facing difficult circumstances, for children before and after birth, and for wisdom as our neighbors consider significant questions about law and human life.
Second, learn. Read the proposed amendment itself. Understand what it says and what it does not say. Listen carefully to arguments being made about its possible consequences. Christians should be people of truth, and that requires us to resist exaggeration even when we feel strongly about an issue.
Third, speak with both conviction and charity. Our neighbors who disagree with us are not our enemies. Every person involved in this debate bears the image of God. We can hold deep moral convictions and without contempt for those who see these matters differently. Scripture commends us to “speak the truth in love.” (Ephesians 4:15)
And finally, serve. If we proclaim the dignity of human life, our churches should be places where vulnerable people encounter tangible love. We should support pregnancy resource ministries, foster and adoptive families, ministries to the poor, those combating human trafficking, ministries serving people with disabilities, and organizations caring for the elderly and dying.
Our witness becomes compelling when our actions demonstrate the convictions expressed by our words.
The Gospel of Life
Jesus said, “I came that they may have life and have it abundantly” (John 10:10).
That is ultimately why Christians care about human life.
Human dignity does not originate in government, and it cannot finally be secured by politics. It comes from the God who created us, knows us, loves us, and in Jesus Christ entered our humanity to redeem us. Therefore, in a culture that often measures human worth according to independence, usefulness, power, or desire, the Church must continue to proclaim a different word:
Human life is a gift.
Every person bears the image of God.
The vulnerable deserve our protection.
The suffering deserve our compassion.
And no human being is disposable, especially the unborn.
As your bishop, I encourage you to approach these matters prayerfully, thoughtfully, and faithfully. Read carefully. Pray earnestly. Speak graciously. Care for those who are vulnerable. And above all, bear witness in word and deed to Jesus Christ, who is himself the Way, the Truth, and the Life.
Blessings,
+Chris