We noted that drawing general conclusions from a single finding is not a good practice, particularly when these are far-reaching, and to be considered “as a matter of urgency”. Those seeking a broader view of the involvement of the Church of England and its ecclesiastical courts on “contested heritage” will find links in Index – Contested heritage.

With regard to the recommendations on the selection and training of ecclesiastical judges, there are echoes of former Archbishop Carey’s comments in McFarlane v Relate Avon Ltd [2010] EWCA Civ 880. However, we note that The Church of England (Miscellaneous Provisions) Measure, GS 2272, which includes provisions on Ecclesiastical jurisdiction, – Judges: appointment and retirement (clause 7), Judges: training (clause 8), is due for First Consideration by General Synod in July 2022.

Freedom of religion and belief

On Tuesday in Westminster Hall, the Commons debated the forthcoming UK-hosted International Conference on the Freedom of Religion or Belief: you can read the Hansard here.

Collective worship in state schools

In a report to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, the UK Government has responded to the Committee’s call for a review of the requirement for all state-funded schools to hold a daily act of worship, as follows:

“130. In England and the Devolved Governments, schools must provide religious education and collective worship or religious observance for pupils, and promote their spiritual, moral, and cultural development. Parents may withdraw their children from any or all acts of collective worship or observance, and in some jurisdictions, pupils over 16 have the right to withdraw. There are currently no plans by UK Government, Welsh Government or Northern Ireland Executive to review this policy in state funded schools. Scottish Government is currently examining whether to review the policy on the right to withdraw.” [Emphasis added: with thanks to the National Secular Society.]

Faculty Jurisdiction (Amendment) Rules 2022

The Faculty Jurisdiction (Amendment) Rules 2022 came into force on 1 July, amending the Faculty Jurisdiction Rules 2015.

Rule 2 provides that persons proposing to undertake certain works must, as part of the procedure, provide an explanation of how they have had due regard to guidance issued by the Church Buildings Council on reducing carbon emissions. Rule 3 makes minor amendments to the procedure for consultation before faculty proceedings can begin, including by imposing a requirement that, where the online faculty system is used for the consultation, responses to the consultation should also use the online system. Rule 4 introduces the Schedule, which makes amendments to Lists A and B in Schedule 1 to the 2015 Rules. In particular, the amendments in Part 2 of the Schedule are concerned with promoting environmental protection (for example, fitting boilers which do not use fossil fuels and installing charging points for electric vehicles).

The Church House Legal Office has prepared an informal Keeling Schedule of the Faculty Jurisdiction Rules as they have effect from 1 July 2022, incorporating the amendments made by the Faculty Jurisdiction (Amendment) Rules 2022: available here.

Burkinis in Grenoble

The judgment of the Conseil d’État on the Grenoble burkini case is now available, here. Perhaps the key point in the judgment is this:

“9. The municipality of Grenoble … maintains that it introduced the adaptation … on the grounds of allowing users who would like to be able to cover their body more, whatever the reason for this wish. However …  the adaptation expressed by Article 10 of the new regulations must be regarded as having the sole purpose of authorizing bathing suits commonly referred to as “burkinis” … [and] is intended to satisfy a claim of a religious nature. Thus, it appears that this very targeted derogation actually responds to the sole wish of the municipality to satisfy a request from a category of users and not, as it asserts, from all users. While … such an adaptation of the public service to take account of religious convictions is not in itself contrary to the principles of secularism and neutrality of the public service … it does not respond to the reason for derogation put forward by the municipality [and] is, by its very targeted nature and strongly derogatory to the common rule, reaffirmed by the internal regulations for other bathing suits, without any real justification for the difference resulting treatment. It follows that it is likely to affect both the respect by other users of the rules of the common law …”

On that basis, the Conseil concluded that the Grenoble authorities had disregarded the conditions under which the manager of a public service could adapt it to the needs of users, “including to take account of religious convictions”. The appeal was therefore rejected.

• ECtHR Press Unit: Children’s Rights: factsheet.
• ECtHR Press Unit: Parental Rights: factsheet.
• Neil Foster, Law and Religion Australia: Biblical view of sex and gender “worthy of respect” after all: on the EAT ruling in Mackereth.
• Deborah Miller, Lexology: Dorothy the turkey, veganism and the Equality Act 2010: on Ms S Free Miles v The Royal Veterinary College [2022] UKET 2206733/2020 and whether a belief that animals’ lives have innate value and that humans have a moral obligation to take positive action to reduce or prevent their suffering, including trespass to expose animal suffering and the removal of suffering animals,; is a philosophical belief under section 10 of the Equality Act 2010: answer “No” – but well worth a read.
• Mark Movsesian, Canopy Forum: Restricting public worship during covid: The response of courts across the globe.
• Elizabeth Rough, House of Commons Library: Abortion in Northern Ireland: recent changes to the legal framework: on the Abortion (Northern Ireland) Regulations 2020.
• Scottish Episcopal Church: Statement from the College of Bishops on Aberdeen & Orkney: on alleged pastoral and governance issues within the Diocese.

And finally

This week it was reported that it is customary in some communities to get the married couple a present on their wedding day. However, one brother of the bride took gift-giving to the next level at his sister’s ceremony and surprised his sister on her wedding day with a lifelike waxwork of their dead father; the wax figure was made in a seated position and was wheeled down the aisle sat in a wheelchair.

Whilst our reaction would be “Yuk”, the India Times reported that the gesture was well received. The occasional “flash dance” might be OK in the C of E, but in the words of the Dad’s Army Verger, “his Reverence wouldn’t like it”. The Reverend Timothy Farthing was played by Frank Williams, who died last week. In his private life he had been member of the General Synod and served three terms as a representative of the diocese of London, where his on screen persona followed him; on one occasion when he was voting and went through the laity door and one of the tellers stopped him and to asked if he was going through the right one.