Two write in The Guardian and one in The Daily Mail
Gay cleric would stand little chance of winning discrimination case over failing to be promoted to bishop, say legal experts, The Guardian reports.
Jeffrey John would be unlikely to win any action against the Church of England over his sexuality according to legal experts, due to an exception in the Equality Act that allows churches to refuse to hire because of the religious beliefs of their members.
On Sunday it emerged that John, who was rejected for the post of bishop of Southwark in 2010, was considering suing his employers for discrimination over his being gay.
“Churches can’t be forced to employ people where a significant number of the religion’s followers object on theological grounds,” said Daniel Barnett, an employment law specialist at Outer Temple chambers, who said that John would have a difficult time proving his case.
In 2003, John’s appointment as bishop of Bedford generated huge controversy in the Church of England and elsewhere in the Anglican communion, of which it is a part. He was subsequently prevented from taking up the position.
More at:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jan/16/jeffrey-john-church-lawsuit-sexuality?newsfeed=true
Andrew Brown in his blog on the Guardian site asks: Why is this gay cleric considering suing the church if he won’t win?
Brown comments: Jeffrey John is reportedly planning a discrimination suit unless he is made a bishop. It will at least fly the flag for liberalism.
Jeffrey John is an extremely intelligent man who will never be a bishop in England. That much is clear. So why should he threaten a legal action that he is vanishingly unlikely to win, to force the church not to discriminate against him? The only possible answer seems to be that he wants to expose the fact of this discrimination. But I can’t believe in that one, either, if for no other reason that he has quite fiercely guarded his private life for the last 20 years, and any court case would make that more difficult.
Besides, he would still lose. Last year the Church of England published a legal opinion that makes it quite clear that it believes it is legal to discriminate against John, not because he is gay, since he is also celibate, but because he is not in the least bit ashamed of being gay. That is what sticks in the craw of the conservative evangelicals who oppose him. They have moved on from supposing that it is absolutely wrong to be gay. They now believe that it is OK to be gay providing that you are very unhappy about it.
The Rev George Pitcher writing for The Daily Mail, comments:
Dr Jeffrey John, the openly homosexual Dean of St Albans, has let it be known that he is minded to sue his employer, the Church of England, under the Equality Act 2008 if it fails to make him a bishop in fairly short order. That is indeed worrying – and not only for traditionalist anglo-catholics and evangelicals who tend to get the vapours at the mere mention of the love that dare not speak its name.
It should also be a huge worry for the liberal wing of the Anglican Church. Because Dr John threatens, in his impatience and ill temper, to put back the cause of homosexuals in the church by a couple of decades, maybe more.
As it happens, I wholly support the principle that Anglican bishops should not be required to conceal their sexuality, while priests and their flock are not. It’s a silly and dangerous hypocrisy and the sooner we’re confessed and absolved of that hypocrisy the better.