This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jun/18/church-would-be-unharmed-recruiting-clergyman-who-had-same-sex-wedding
The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Recruiting married gay priest would not have harmed church, bishop admits | Recruiting married gay priest would not have harmed church, bishop admits |
| (35 minutes later) | |
| A bishop who refused to recruit as hospital chaplain a clergyman who married his same-sex partner, yesterday said the appointment would not have harmed the Church of England but that his decision was made “to maintain the doctrine of the church”. | A bishop who refused to recruit as hospital chaplain a clergyman who married his same-sex partner, yesterday said the appointment would not have harmed the Church of England but that his decision was made “to maintain the doctrine of the church”. |
| The bishop, the Rt Rev Richard Inwood, was speaking at an employment tribunal in the Nottingham Justice Centre. The case was brought by the clergyman, Canon Jeremy Pemberton – who wed his partner in April 2014 in defiance of guidance from Church of England bishops – against Inwood, who later refused him the chaplain post. | The bishop, the Rt Rev Richard Inwood, was speaking at an employment tribunal in the Nottingham Justice Centre. The case was brought by the clergyman, Canon Jeremy Pemberton – who wed his partner in April 2014 in defiance of guidance from Church of England bishops – against Inwood, who later refused him the chaplain post. |
| Related: Church doctrine on marriage is 'lousy definition' of matrimony, bishop says | Related: Church doctrine on marriage is 'lousy definition' of matrimony, bishop says |
| Pemberton claims the bishop’s decision to revoke his permission to officiate as a priest in June 2014, and the job refusal, breached the Equalities Act 2010. | Pemberton claims the bishop’s decision to revoke his permission to officiate as a priest in June 2014, and the job refusal, breached the Equalities Act 2010. |
| Yesterday at the tribunal, Inwood, former acting bishop of Southwell and Nottingham, was asked if Pemberton’s breach of the rules had made the church’s position “a busted flush”. Pemberton replied: “If you put it like that, I have to agree with you, sir.” | Yesterday at the tribunal, Inwood, former acting bishop of Southwell and Nottingham, was asked if Pemberton’s breach of the rules had made the church’s position “a busted flush”. Pemberton replied: “If you put it like that, I have to agree with you, sir.” |
| The church maintains that the issue of marriage between a man and a woman is enshrined in church doctrine. Pemberton’s lawyers claim the issue is not one of doctrine, and that by his actions the bishop had breached the law. | The church maintains that the issue of marriage between a man and a woman is enshrined in church doctrine. Pemberton’s lawyers claim the issue is not one of doctrine, and that by his actions the bishop had breached the law. |
| Inwood was asked by Sean Jones QC, acting for Pemberton, what harm he thought it would do the Church of England to have granted a licence to allow the 59-year-old to be appointed as chaplain. “We know that Canon Pemberton wanted to join. In your view he was perfectly capable, you had no reason to believe he wasn’t. He was the trust’s preferred candidate, and that when you refused the licence, at very least, the man responsible for making recommendations to the trust was anxious to get you to think again. We know the House of Bishops guidance did not require you not to grant. And you say you took the decision. What was it you feared would happen? What harm would arise if you gave Canon Pemberton the licence?” | Inwood was asked by Sean Jones QC, acting for Pemberton, what harm he thought it would do the Church of England to have granted a licence to allow the 59-year-old to be appointed as chaplain. “We know that Canon Pemberton wanted to join. In your view he was perfectly capable, you had no reason to believe he wasn’t. He was the trust’s preferred candidate, and that when you refused the licence, at very least, the man responsible for making recommendations to the trust was anxious to get you to think again. We know the House of Bishops guidance did not require you not to grant. And you say you took the decision. What was it you feared would happen? What harm would arise if you gave Canon Pemberton the licence?” |
| Inwood replied: “It is not a matter of danger but by my own oath of honour and obedience, under authority, to maintain the doctrine of the church. It’s my own personal decision.” | Inwood replied: “It is not a matter of danger but by my own oath of honour and obedience, under authority, to maintain the doctrine of the church. It’s my own personal decision.” |
| Jones asked: “You weren’t anticipating any harm, whether to him, to you, or the trust? The bishop replied: “Certainly no harm to the trust or the church.” | Jones asked: “You weren’t anticipating any harm, whether to him, to you, or the trust? The bishop replied: “Certainly no harm to the trust or the church.” |
| The tribunal judge, Peter Britton, picking up on this answer, suggested it left him with a conundrum. He asked the bishop: “If it would be no harm to the church, and the doctrine is about protecting the beliefs of the church, then haven’t you got an innate conundrum? If it so fundamental to the doctrine, thus the breach would cause harm. But if you think it is of no harm to the church surely that means the reliance on this being fundamentally doctrinal, as to otherwise bring down harm on the church, is a busted flush isn’t it? | The tribunal judge, Peter Britton, picking up on this answer, suggested it left him with a conundrum. He asked the bishop: “If it would be no harm to the church, and the doctrine is about protecting the beliefs of the church, then haven’t you got an innate conundrum? If it so fundamental to the doctrine, thus the breach would cause harm. But if you think it is of no harm to the church surely that means the reliance on this being fundamentally doctrinal, as to otherwise bring down harm on the church, is a busted flush isn’t it? |
| Inwood agreed but later added that he would have felt granting the licence would have been incompatible with guidance issued by the Church of England’s bishops in March 2014. | Inwood agreed but later added that he would have felt granting the licence would have been incompatible with guidance issued by the Church of England’s bishops in March 2014. |
| The bishop spoke of receiving a social media and letter-writing campaign by supporters of Pemberton’s marriage to Laurence Cunnington. “Some of those emails I received were bonkers, frankly. Some were well argued, some insulting, and some cast aspersions on my own marriage.” | The bishop spoke of receiving a social media and letter-writing campaign by supporters of Pemberton’s marriage to Laurence Cunnington. “Some of those emails I received were bonkers, frankly. Some were well argued, some insulting, and some cast aspersions on my own marriage.” |
| Asked if it had affected him, he said he had found it very difficult to handle, but described himself as thick-skinned. | Asked if it had affected him, he said he had found it very difficult to handle, but described himself as thick-skinned. |
| The tribunal also heard that the bishop of Lincoln issued Pemberton a formal rebuke because of his marriage to Cunnington, at around the same time, but had otherwise taken no further action. | |
| Inwood said he understood the Church of England was now in a period of “facilitated conversations” on issues of sexuality, and expected that process to take two years. | Inwood said he understood the Church of England was now in a period of “facilitated conversations” on issues of sexuality, and expected that process to take two years. |
| The tribunal continues. | The tribunal continues. |