Exclusive – More on the Hereford Discrimination Case

I’ve been sent an internal Church of England document that indicates that both Hereford and Lambeth Palace are taking the tribunal ruling terribly seriously and that Church House isn’t quite panicking yet but is certainly in a bit of a tis. The following points are a mixture of my conjecture and what I’ve read / been told.

  • It looks as though quite a few dioceses have been in touch with Hereford as they are concerned about the consequences of the tribunal ruling.
  • The argument that I put forward here that the ruling actually strengthens the church’s position (in that it supports the idea that it can legally discriminate on clear grounds of doctrine and pastoral practice based on doctrine) has been suggested by others within the CofE hierarchy. There is a possibility that the Church of England as a whole may take the case forward to appeal on the grounds that even a loss would strengthen it’s case for future discrimination under section 7(3) of the 2003 Act by creating a judicial precedent in the interpretation of the Act.
  • The original defence for Hereford was paid for by an anonymous donor. Reaney was backed (including financially) by Stonewall and others. There is obvious concern that the costs of any appeal should not fall on Parish Share payers.
  • There is clear dissatisfaction amongst some in Hereford and beyond in the ruling that the Bishop was found guilty of discriminating directly. This may be another grounds for appeal as the judgement seems to some to be tenuous.

It seems then that the case will rumble on for some time yet. The bottom line is that if the funding can be sorted out, the case will very likely go to appeal and set clear precedents in the interpretation of the 2003 Act.

Posted in Secular / Christian, Sexuality
  • John Foxe

    So what’s your evidence that the Puritans said ‘no tradition at all thank you very much”?

    The Puritans were happy with traditions that could be supported by scripture and opposed the mandating of traditions that were not required by scripture. They saw scriptural support as necessary for how we worship God.

    Eirenically yours,

    The Foxe in his Hole.

  • http://www.peter-ould.net Peter Ould

    I have no idea Foxe how that relates to the post I made.

  • John Foxe

    Er, let’s try that again commenting on your previous post!

    JF

  • Semantically Confused

    To those who have studied the tribunal judgement Posts 1 & 3 would appear to have a have a degree of similarity with it.

About Peter


  • Welcome to An Exercise in the Fundamentals of Orthodoxy, the leading UK site exploring issues of Christianity and sexual identity. To find out more about Peter click here
  • Want to join the other subscribers to Peter's RSS feed? Click here.
  • Want to get in touch with Peter? Click here

Subscribe

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Anglican Cycle


14th Week after Trinity
Almighty God, you search us and know us: may we rely on you in strength and rest on you in weakness, now and in all our days; through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Recent Comments

Peter on Twitter

Two Final Things

Aber mit der Heimat
geht man immer herum,
durch die Welt,
dort und dort
Peter Handke

No one could describe
the Word of the Father;
but when He took flesh from you, O Theotokos,
He consented to be described, and restored the fallen image to its former beauty.
We confess and proclaim our salvation in word and image.
Kontakion of the Triumph of Orthodoxy