New charity wants C of E to lose its right to discriminate

New charity wants C of E to lose its right to discriminate April 10, 2018

The Ozanne Foundation, launched this week and named after Jayne Ozanne, above, an LGBT member of the C of E’s ruling General Synod, says the Church of England should lose its protections under the Equalities Act that allow it to discriminate against people on the basis of their sexuality.

Jeremy Pemberton, left, and Laurence Cunnington
According to this report, the charity is being supported by Paul Bayes, the Bishop of Liverpool, and David Ison, the Dean of St Paul’s Cathedral, both of whom backed Jeremy Pemberton, a gay priest who was blocked from being a hospital chaplain after marrying his partner, Laurence Cunnington.
The Church of England is exempt from equality laws meaning it can discriminate on the basis of religion, requiring candidates for certain roles to be Christian. However it can also discriminate over sex, sexuality, marital history and gender identity.
Said Bayes:

We want to ask the churches to answer the question – if we mean what we say about opposing homophobia, if we believe what we say about wanting to include everyone, if we believe that God made every one they are, then what does that imply for our public polices?
We will advocate for a greater openness and the implication of that is we may have to re-examine the prohibitions that are there in law at the moment.

He added it was “unfortunate” Pemberton had been forced to step down.

I hope for a future whereby people like Jeremy can feel that their ministry can be exercised and that they can love the person they love freely. I don’t think we should just ignore what the government has done and I certainly don’t think the government should tell the Church what to do.
But I do think we should continue to advocate for greater freedom and in the end who knows what that will mean? It may mean that one day it will be possible for people in a same-sex relationship to have that relationship affirmed in a way that is now illegal and in that case we would have to change the law.

Ison, when asked whether he thought the Church should hold onto its protections in the Equalities Act, said:

No. We’ve have to got to come to terms with the reality of the world we’re in and we’re not doing that. That is why we’re becoming disconnected from society.
My view is that if there is a price to be paid for what you believe in conscience then you should pay that; you should not make other people pay the price for your conscience. That applies to abortion, to issues of sexuality and gender and right across the piste. If it is legal, decent and honest but you don’t believe it is right, then you have to deal with it.

The new foundation said it would:

Look to create opportunities for meaningful encounters with LGBTI people of faith with those of a more conservative mindset.

She said the Church’s equalities exemptions were “wrong” and needed changing.

A growing number of people recognise that. It is part of that whole welcome and support that the archbishop talks about. We need to look at how we discriminate. That is a very form which has caused a lot of upset and heartache to a lot of LGBT people like myself.
I believe the Church should take the initiative, to see the error of our ways. We should be going to the government and saying we wish it to be changed.

Alan Wilson, the bishop of Buckingham, agreed that the Church must lose its exemptions to stamp out:

Deep structures of abuse, homophobia and sexism.

"One of the feckless government cabinet did not know that the most frequently used channel ..."

Christian group slams Scotland’s new LGBT-inclusive ..."

Donald Trump was sent by God ..."
"> Televangelist Jim Bakker has been hearing voices – again!The voices in his head. BTW, ..."

Donald Trump was sent by God ..."
"Simon Calvert, Deputy Director of the conservative reactionary UK advocacy group . . .FTFY"

Christian group slams Scotland’s new LGBT-inclusive ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • CoastalMaineBird

    Is that a crack in the wall I just heard?

  • 1859

    Errrr let me get this straight: there is an equality law, but the Cof E has ‘exemptions’ to the law which it can exercise when it wants? Then how is that an ‘Equality Law’ ? -i t should rather be called a ‘Selective Equality Law’. It’s like there was a ‘law’ against speeding, but those who drive Porches and Robin 3-wheelers are exempt? One has to ask how, when the ‘Equality’ legislation was being debated, did the C of E argue its case for ‘exemptions’?
    @CMBird: What you hear is not a crack in the wall, but a shout from behind a closed door. Let’s hope someone has the courage and humanity to open it.

  • L.Long

    Crack in the wall? BFD!!! So long as their books O’BS say “HATE-KILL-Bigotry” then they will always be evil at their core! Remember the muslin was a very tolerant scientific leader, until some dumb assed fanatic decided to follow their book o’BS in a strict fashion! Now they oppress everyone!!! Look at so called moderates and the westboro baptists!!! Until they rewrite their books O’BS they can not be trusted!!! Intolerance is their bedrock!

  • barriejohn

    @1859: I’m not quite sure what you are asking, but there are bishops in the House of Lords for one thing, though RC bishops, too, made their views known. Some exemptions are sensible, but it is amazing to see “Priests, monks, nuns, rabbis and ministers of religion” excused en bloc.

  • 1859

    @bj: I’m just hopelessly naive – I see the word ‘equality’ and, being the idealist I am, stupidly think it must embrace the whole of the species to which I belong. It just doesn’t sit comfortably in my head when I see the two words ‘equality’ and ‘exemptions’ side-by-side. Yes, I now understand how HM the Queeny and Her Brood has to be exempt (is this a ‘sensible’ exemption?), so why not the rest of the Establishment? To be ‘exempt’ from the law is to be ‘above’ the law.

  • Brian Jordan

    Get the CofE disestablished: whereupon it becomes just a club.
    Then who, unlike Groucho Marx, would want to be a member of a club that wouldn’t accept them as a member?

  • barriejohn

    @1859: It’s similar to the “freedom of speech” debate. I can see how you need exemptions where programmes are devised for certain groups, or victims of violence are concerned; and you can’t have Warwick Davis suing because he was turned down for the role of Conan the Barbarian!

  • Daz

    If I remember rightly, the C of E, through some weird “compromise” struck during the passage of the bill to legalise same-sex marriage, is now the only part of our government which is not only allowed to discriminate, but required to. Any other church can choose to marry same sex couples or not. The C of E cannot, unless there is yet another change in the law.

  • barriejohn