Sede vacante nihil innovetur

At 9.45 CET on 21 April 2025, Cardinal Kevin Farrell, Camerlengo of the Holy Roman Church, announced the death of Pope Francis at Casa Santa Marta, under the revised provisions of Ordo Exsequiarum Romani Pontificis. As we noted following the resignation of Pope Benedict XVI in 2013, during the sede vacante period, the central government of the Catholic Church becomes temporarily suspended as required by Universi Dominici Gregis (UDG). However, “sede vacante nihil innovetur“, so this will be a relatively quiet period for new “law and religion ” posts in this area.

Voting rights in the Conclave

But while we’re on the subject, a dispute has arisen over the eligibility of the former deputy Secretary of State, Cardinal Giovanni Angelo Becciu, to vote in the Conclave. Article 36 of Apostolic Constitution Universi Dominici Gregis on the Vacancy of the Apostolic See and the Election of the Roman Pontiff provides that:

A Cardinal of the Holy Roman Church … has the right to elect the Pope, in accordance with the norm of No. 33 of the present Constitution….On the other hand, Cardinals who have been canonically deposed or who with the consent of the Roman Pontiff have renounced the cardinalate do not have this right….

According to a report in the National Catholic Register, Pope Francis required Cardinal Becciu to resign his position and “the rights connected to the cardinalate” in 2020, following which he was convicted by the Vatican criminal court of embezzlement, aggravated fraud, and abuse of office – a conviction which he is currently appealing. [With thanks to Religion Clause.]

“Not in our name” ???

Scottish Legal News reports that a major row has broken out over alleged remarks by Maggie Chapman, Scottish Green MSP for North East Scotland and deputy convener of Holyrood’s Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee. According to the report, she told people at a weekend protest in Aberdeen against the judgment in For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers [2025] UKSC 16:

“And we say ‘not in our name’ to the bigotry, prejudice and hatred that we see coming from the Supreme Court and from so many other institutions in our society. Not in our name, never in our name.”

Her reported remarks have led to calls for her resignation. S.1(1) (Guarantee of continued judicial independence) of the Judiciary and Courts (Scotland) Act 2008 declares that “The following persons must uphold the continued independence of the judiciary—” and names “members of the Scottish Parliament” specifically at s.1(1)(d).

In a letter to the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee, the Dean of the Faculty of Advocates, Roddy Dunlop KC, wrote:

“For Ms Chapman to claim that they [the justices] were swayed by ‘bigotry, prejudice and hatred’ is outrageous. We are talking about the apex court of these islands, in this instance made up of a bench which included two of Scotland’s finest legal minds, as well as two women. No sensible person could read their dispassionate analysis and conclude that they were swayed by such matters.”

The Government’s response to For Women Scotland Ltd

In a statement in the Commons on Wednesday, the Minister for Women and Equalities, Bridget Phillipson, said this:

“I know that many trans people will be worried in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling, so I want to provide reassurance here and now that trans people will continue to be protected. We will deliver a full trans-inclusive ban on conversion practices. We will work to equalise all existing strands of hate crime, and we will review adult gender identity services, so that all trans people get the high-quality care they deserve. The laws to protect trans people from discrimination and harassment will remain in place, and trans people will still be protected on the basis of gender reassignment—a protected characteristic written into Labour’s Equality Act.”

The House of Lords and mandatory reporting of child sexual abuse

On 24 April, the Bishop of Manchester, the Rt Revd David Walker, (who is to be the Convenor of the Lords Spiritual at the end of May), said this in a Lords debate on tackling child sexual abuse:

“I want to pick up on mandatory reporting, which has been referred to already. For some in the Church of England, and for many in the Roman Catholic Church and some other churches as well, the tradition of the seal of the confessional has been honoured for many centuries and established in canon law in this land. There is an arguable case that the seal allows somebody—and it is more likely to be a victim or witness who comes to the confessional—to make a kind of protected disclosure, which then often would lead to them being helped to make a more public disclosure and allow a perpetrator to be taken to justice. I hope there will be careful discussions with religious bodies as to exactly where the seal of the confessional will fit in with this; I know my Catholic colleagues will particularly be concerned around that. We want what will produce the best safeguarding, but it is not simply that mandatory reporting or getting rid of the seal of the confessional will get better reporting at the end of the day”.

On behalf of the Government, Lord Hanson of Flint, Minister of State at the Home Office, replied:

“I am grateful to the right reverend Prelate for his approach to the issue. I hope I can reassure him that I have already had representations from churches, and I have received at the Home Office a delegation from a cross-religious group to discuss the very issue that he has mentioned about the relationship between the priest or vicar and the individual. I want to explore that and I have given a commitment to discuss that further with those from the churches who made contact with me, and we have had submissions on that. I cannot give him definitive, final positions today, but I hope that we can debate this during the course of the passage of the Bill in this House.” 

Eric Gill and the Methodist Church

Referring to the article by Rachel Cooke, ‘Eric Gill: can we separate the artist from the abuser?’ in his judgment Re St Margaret, Rottingdean (No. 2) [2021] ECC Chi 1, Hill Ch commented at [55]: ” it does not appear that there is anything to connect the abuse perpetrated by Gill, with the exemplary character of his student, Cribb”, whose work on the headstones was under consideration by the consistory court. 

However, the work of Gill himself, the watercolour “Annunciation”, is to be displayed again after extensive consultation between the Methodist Church and survivors. The Methodist Church’s statement reads, in part:

“Annunciation” is part of the Methodist Modern Art Collection and had been in the permanent touring collection until it was withdrawn in 2017 and placed in the Reserve Collection. It was also removed from the MMAC’s website.  Discussions restarted in 2022 about what should happen to the artwork, and the Methodist Survivors’ Advisory Group was consulted for its views. Extensive and careful consultations with the survivors resulted in a long-term goal of reinstating the artwork on the website, with a full explanation of Gill’s history in relation to the sexual abuse of his daughters and his sisters. Survivors felt this artwork should not be hidden away or ‘swept under the carpet’ as sexual abuse has been in the past”. 

The full statement is here. [With acknowledgements to the Religion Media Centre.]

Quick links

• John L Allen Jr, Crux: Electrifying, maverick Pope Francis leaves behind ‘roller coaster’ legacy, which ended “Pope Francis, to repeat, mattered. For any leader, it’s hard to imagine a better epitaph than that”.
• Equality and Human Rights Commission: An interim update on the practical implications of the UK Supreme Court judgment: which has already attracted considerable criticism on social media.
• Neil Foster, Law and Religion Australia: The meaning of “sex” – in the UK and Australia: comparing and contrasting the judgments in For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers and Tickle v Giggle for Girls Pty Ltd (No 2) [2024] FCA 960.
• Montserrat Gas-Aixendri, BYU Law: Francis’s Legal Revolution: A Reforming Impulse with Many Lights and Some Shadows.

And finally…I

For armchair canon lawyers, on 5 December 2024 The Irish Catholic carried the article “What is true in the Conclave film and what is nonsense? A fact check for the cinema release.

And finally…II

As various institutions, including Downing Street, celebrated St George’s Day on 23 April, The Times reminded everyone that the Rules to Order the Christian Year state that “When St George’s Day or St Mark’s Day falls between Palm Sunday and the Second Sunday of Easter inclusive, it is transferred to the Monday after the Second Sunday of Easter. If both fall in this period, St George’s Day is transferred to the Monday and St Mark’s Day to the Tuesday.”

And if Sheffield Wednesday falls on Maundy Thursday…