Elaine Storkey: 'Don't shoot the heretics.'

My first sight of Elaine was at Greenbelt many years ago, at the old venue in Northants up the M1. Relatively new in this job, I was struggling with many aspects of the faith I'd been born into. Seeing this compelling, charismatic and striking young woman preach during the eucharist was a vital affirmation of the possibility of faith. It seemed scarcely possible back then that this visibly free spirit, laughing and dancing on the stage before a crowd of thousands breaking bread, could be an 'evangelical'. And now a judge is to decide, in effect, whether she can be. After her victory on Monday over Wycliffe, with unfair dismissal payment now pending of £20,000, another case in June is to look at whether she was the victim of religious discrimination. The judge has assigned a whole day for the tribunal to read papers on what constitutes a 'conservative evangelical' and what an 'open evangelical'. Once they've succeeded in doing in a day what no bishop has managed to do in two millennia, they will then decide whether it is possible for the 'conservatives' to discriminate against the 'opens' under the new religious discrimination regulations. Then they will decide whether this is indeed what happened to Elaine,  forcing her out of her two-day-a-week job after four years at  Oxford's top theological college. And all this in the middle of Gafcon and just before Lambeth.

On Gafcon, incidentally, George Conger has written an interesting piece about fears that it will inflame tensions in the area. An insider tells me:  'Its impact is really hard to assess at the moment.  It seems that they were foolish not to bring Suheil, the Anglican Bishop in Jerusalem, on board before they announced it, and even more foolish publicly to slap him and Michael Poon down when they exercised a bit of free speech about it.  Who is driving it?  Martyn Minns and American Right money, or Sydney and the puritans?  Do that many really have any enthusiasm to go to it?' Poon's dissent is extremely significant, as Graham Kings' earlier piece on his importance to the Global South would indicate. This might be why both the Peters, Nigeria and Sydney, are heading out to the Middle East to try and appease the ruffled Primate and his bishop.

(Update: another insider tells me that many Gafcon bishops are funding themselves and the conference is not dependent on funding from the 'American right'. In addition, many Anglican Catholic bishops are going, although I am not clear whether the West Indies primate Drexel Gomez is going. He is at present unavailable for comment, as he is leading a retreat for the Nigerian bishops.)

This is the interesting context in which the apparently parochial difficulties at Wycliffe come. Elaine, who is continuing her three days a week as President of TearFund and who has also been invited to be a member of high table at Newnham, must speak for many Anglicans when she gives her reaction to what is happening in Anglicanism at the moment.

She told me this afternoon: 'For me, this never started out as a battle between conservatives and open evangelicals. For me, this was trying to draw attention to the fact that we were unhappy with the style of management at Wycliffe Hall. But as time evolved, it started to feel more theological.

'I am alarmed at the way big walls between people and groups have started to emerge in the way they did not before. People had nuances and differences, but we all worked well together. From the Fulcrum point of view [Elaine is chairman of Fulcrum], it is not what we are wanting. We want to work with everybody rather than create a new camp.

'I am alarmed at the belligerence of the conservative camp, where they are seemingly going out of their way to make life as difficult as possible for the Archbishop of Canterbury. I cannot imagine what the reasons are. They are being destructive rather than constructive, finding something to argue about rather than working together to find a fruitful outcome.

'I am bewildered as to why anyone would want to spend their energy doing this when there is a world out there we should be speaking to of the love of God. And we should not just be speaking it, we should be living it, first of all, in the way we love one another, and also in the way we love them.

'What is the point of going out and trying to find heretics, so we can shoot them down? It seems so unloving and so unproductive. I cannot figure it out.

'Never before in the history of the evangelical church have we had so many evangelicals and of such talent. The whole way we could pull together with other people and other traditions of the church, it could be fantastic. But rather than do that, we end up squabbling. It is appalling. It is ridiculous. There is no victory there. It is just daft.'

Olly Hemans, the journalist who covered Elaine's pre-hearing review for the newsagency INS, has sent me some notes he took. In the quotes, I've changed the term, evangelism, to evangelicalism, so as to respect the senstitivities of the religiously literate readers of this blog. If Wycliffe's man Bruce Carr did indeed say 'evangelism', as quoted in all the reports and as Olly insisted when I checked, then perhaps the authorities at Wycliffe will instruct him better for next time.

Elaine said: 'I feel that the chairman of the trustees has colluded with the bullying of the principal. I believe that my dismissal is linked to my theological beliefs and my membership of religious groups the principal doesn't like. There may be other reasons as to why I have been treated unlawfully.'

After the hearing, she said: 'I would think £20,000 pounds would be the maximum amount but most of that will go on costs. I think in a sense it is fairly well established amongst my colleagues that there was bullying. I had intended to be there (Wycliffe Hall) until my retirement. It is not just me but probably a dozen staff have left in all. It is very, very sad to see a wonderful institution suffer in the way it has suffered. [The effect on the church] remains to be seen. That's the scary thing. I'm a unifier, everything in me wants to get everything together under the church's gospel. This hurts me enormously. It is no joy. It is not fun. On the other hand, justice is important. I was not expecting for one moment for this to happen. I had three very happy years. It was one of the happiest institutions that I have ever worked in.'

Bruce Carr, representing all parties from Wycliffe Hall, said: 'The respondent does not believe open evangelicalism is a religion as defined by the Act. She claims it is a free-standing religion as distinct from conservative evangelicalism. She's not saying: "I'm a Christian and I'm being discriminated against because of my Christianity. She's saying: "I have a particular type of Christian evangelicalism which stands distinct from conservative evangelicalism."

'To paraphrase, she's the wrong type of evangelical. The real question is: Are those differences there, and are those differences sufficient to amount to an independent religious belief. If there is no material difference between the two then that debate is in danger of being lost. It seems to me it needs to be resolved by experts rather than both sides picking their most articulate individuals.'

Robin Lewis, Tribunal Chairman, sitting as the judge in the pre-hearing review, said: 'It is certainly a concern that we will have; Learned theologians arguing in front of people with an entirely different skill set.' The tribunal panel will meet on Tuesday, June 10, which will be a reading day. On Wednesday, June 11, they will begin a two-day tribunal hearing on the religious discrimination matter. Friday, June 13 will be a remedy hearing at which they will resolve the exact amount Dr Storkey is to receive for the unfair dismissal award.

Update: I've just been sent the press comment fromWycliffe on the hearing:

1    At a Pre-Hearing Review in relation to Dr Elaine Storkey's claims of unfair dismissal and religious discrimination, the College accepted that she had been unfairly dismissed as the College had not, prior to dismissal, gone through the statutory procedures.  We are hopeful that a full and amicable settlement can be reached.

2    Nevertheless, we strongly refute any allegation that Elaine's dismissal from Wycliffe was in any way connected with her religious beliefs.  At Wycliffe Hall, our key priority is to equip men and women for modern ministry and this happens in an environment that encourages wide discussion and debate, reflective of the broad range of thinking within the Church as a whole.

3    We look forward to resolving the whole matter as swiftly as possible so that we can concentrate purely on our priorities of maintaining high standards of training, theological teaching and academic excellence at Wycliffe Hall, in equipping men and women fully for modern Christian ministry.

Comments

[observer]

Irene - no comment on my response to you?

[Dr. Irene Lancaster FRSA]

Minds cannot be be unpleasant, Peter Bradfield. They are the nearest we get to God Himself. The great medieval Spanish Jewish bible commentator, Abraham ibn Ezra, said that 'the angel between God and humanity is our mind'. This was endorsed by Maimonides, who influenced St. Thomas Aquinas.

If you tell me where you live, I'll try and avoid your patch.

A good cure for nausea is tea and ginger biscuits and/or meditating on loving kindness towards one's fellow creatures.

Maybe you could pass that on to Elaine Storkey as well.

[observer]

Peter Bradfield....were we told to "turn the other cheek" wihout conditions?

Or were we taught we did not have to turn the other cheek if "justice" for ourselves or our cause was not being achieved??

[Peter Bradfield]

There are some very unpleasant minds who read your column, Ruth. I have come across Irene Lancaster's vitriol before, and it actually makes me feel rather nauseated. I hope I never meet her.

I always enjoy Elaine Storkey, both on Thought for the Day and in her lectures (and I have heard not just one, but many). She is one of the best thinkers and communicators I have encountered. She has helped my own understanding of the faith and that of many. She also has shown us how to live.

It is clear to me and many who know the situation a little more than most of your pundits that the only reason this got to a tribunal was because there was no justice anywhere else. It was last May when the story about the bullying at Wycliffe Hall first hit the national press. It is now January. God only knows what misery those on the receiving end must have gone through between then and now. When Christians rely on collusion and silence from those they offend, they can hardly be said to be obeying biblical precepts. I salute Storkey's courage

Those who know little about a situation ought to find out more, before they rush to give their own crude verdicts

[Jon Trott]

As an American evangelical deeply aided in my own faith quest by Elaine Storkey (and N. T. Wright, among other Anglican spokespersons), I was deeply saddened by what appeared an American-style "massacre" of staff at Wycliffe Hall.

We American evangelicals often seem to operate in a "binary" -- on and off only -- mode. I've thought British thinkers above such silliness. Yet here are Anglicans who seem not too far from our own Southern Baptist folks, infamous for stripping seminaries of all "moderates" (God forbid we have any of those) and women on faculty (God KNOWS we mustn't have any of those!).

Dr. Storkey is a Christ-centered feminist, a forward-thinking, biblically orthodox thinker of the first tier. As someone resonant with Britain's "open evangelical" movement (as articulated on their Fulcrum web site), I rejoiced in what to me seems a very gentle yet uncompromising balance re same-sex issues, one often missing in this country. (To this observer, the Episcopal Church seems intent upon making itself into a cartoonish, theologically vacuuous shell; your Anglican approach is ever so much more cautious, kind, and intellectually rooted.)

Here's one American who hopes heartily to see evangelicals in Britian avoid the hell of a "Christian Right" -- many progressive Christians here have stopped using "evangelical" as a descriptor, desperate to escape the stains that word now endures here.

Please. Learn from our many errors, and listen to the "open" evangelical folks. The irenic, inclusive discussion of important and potentially divisive topics is painful, but in the end will bear far better fruit than our almost total polarization (again best exemplified by the Southern Baptists' radical right turn). If British evangelicals do allow an expanding "Christian Right" such as that we have here, they will be victimized by political and social forces beyond their ability to either understand or see (as N. T. Wright, another great British evangelical Anglican puts it) the face of Empire.

I'll climb down off my little soapbox now.

Jon Trott / Chicago IL / USA

[observer]

Irene - I thnk some people were merely pointing out that you make everything about Israel..........

I am a supporter of both Israeli and Palestinian human beings! Both sides have good and bad people, of course....this is the problem with us humans...right from Cain and Abel onwards.

In terms of the politics, I wish both sides would listen to the good Jewish rabbi who said, "Do unto others as you would have them do to you". Luke 6:31

[Dr. Irene Lancaster FRSA]

A number of comments: those who are certain of Israel's demise and pontificate about it in a triumphalist manner, whilst still maintaining that they are Christians, are hypocrites. Jesus would be thoroughly ashamed of them and disown them.

A point of information, it is possible for letters to arrive in Israel on Christmas Eve, Christmas Day and Boxing Day.

In many Christian countries Boxing Day is not a holiday for starters, and I received a book in the mail over that period which took just two days to deliver. Ironically it was about Judaism of the Second Temple Period, a gift from a member of the Church of England, as it happens, for which I am most grateful.

I also found it most amusing to have received the Church Times on December 25th in Haifa, which was a working day here. It normally arrives on a Tuesday, together with the Tablet, sent by a friend from Manchester University.

The only concession was that in the middle of our normal choir practice at the Haifa Technion, which went on as normal, the choir master, a Rasputin look-alike originally from Russia, brought in some lovely chocolates, which he said were in honour of the New Year, and also kosher!!!

This was my original blog on the whole thing:

http://irenelancaster.typepad.com/my_weblog/2007/12/the-magic-of-ch.html

[David Palmer]

What narrow little world does Malcolm+ inhabit?

Apparently according to him, A/Bs Akinola, Jensen and several hundred Anglican Bishops are invading the diocese of the (Anglican) Bishop of Jerusalem.

No, they are going to Jerusalem, a city rich in historical significance for Christians, Anglican or otherwise.

[observer]

Bishop Broadbent....it sounds like you support Dr Storkey taking your brother bishop to a tribunal, is that right?

Do you want to see a point scored against Dr Turnbull?
I hope not. That would not fit with your record or faith - would it?

I would have expected a man like you to be bringing +Liverpool, even Dr Turnbull and Dr Storkey together in reconciliation and avoiding the sad, offputting witness of tribunals and winners and losers.....for the sake of the gospel, of course.

[Mike Homfray]

I don't want to shut you up, Irene, but you have certainly made me a lot less sympathetic to Israel by trying to defend the indefensible. 'demonisation'...no. Just telling the truth about Israel's illegal and unacceptable behaviour which will undoubtedly lead to its demise.

[Pete Broadbent]

I think there is a tendency now for the Hall to represent this matter as just a failure of procedure, in an attempt to limit the damage. The assumption seems to be that if they own up to the unfair dismissal claim on the grounds that they had no proper processes in place, they can ignore the wider question of why they were seeking to rid themselves of these members of staff in the first place, and whether there was bullying/discrimination/prejudice against staff.

That way, they get to clean up their governance (which I know they intend to do anyway), but neither have to say sorry to those who were affected, nor own up to the their patterns of behaviour. Which I suspect is why the next claim (of religious discrimination) has to be taken up. A tribunal will do what the settlement did not do - bring the evidence into the public arena. Of course, they could just apologise unreservedly to Elaine Storkey and the other members of staff. That might save them from further reputational damage.

[Peter Farrington]

Tony B...Yes. There are lots of passages, and throughout the Desert Fathers too. The greatest example is that of Our Lord.

Abba Macarius while he was in Egypt discovered a man who owned a beast of burden engaged in plundering Macarius' goods. So he came up to the thief as if he was a stranger and he helped him to load the animal. He saw him off in great peace of soul saying, 'We have brought nothing into this world, and we cannot take anything out of the world.' (1Tim.6.7) 'The Lord gave and the Lord has taken away; blessed be the name of the Lord.' (Job 1.21)

[Tony B]

Is there something in the bible that says Christians should not seek justice if a wrong has been done to them?

[Chris Gillibrand]

To Mr Appel, whose comments are always worth reading!

Since modern quantum mechanics tells us of a world of at least a partially insubstantial but real existence, the number of angels that dance on a pinhead could once more be a quite important discussion. Perhaps the best answer is how ever many happen to be there at the time.

[Dr. Irene Lancaster FRSA]

I have plenty to say about Elaine Storkey on the New Testament as well. My main concern however is the constant demonisation of Jews, Judaism and Israel in some of the media, including the BBC, the universities, and the Church.

I was back in England last year and was visited by academics, journalists and church people, who were all as concerned as I am, if not more so. I was even taken to lunch by Lambeth Palace.

Hope this answers your question: and for more of the same, here you are:

http://irenelancaster.typepad.com/

Mike, you and your ilk will not shut me up. And if ever Ruth is forced to stop having me post on the blog because of 'vested interests', I will continue with mine.

[David Keen]

On Christians taking each other to court: 1 Corinthians 6 argues against settling disputes between Christians in the secular courts, but points out that the fact that Christians are doing it is a sign of failure in the church. Isn't it better to let yourself be cheated, says the passage, than parade the divisions in the church before a secular court?

So it cuts both ways: the Wycliffe structures have failed (and their statement admist as such), but I am uneasy about why this needs to be settled in a secular law court.

[observer]

Richard Winn....the bible does not say Christians should "make a stand" by taking other Christians to court......

[Malcolm+]

The conduct of the self-selecting "orthodox" on GafCon (or GaffeCon) has been interesting.

They managed to offend their friends more than their foes.

The slapdown of Dr. Poon was interesting enough. But their dishonest dodging about the Bishop of Jerusalem moves me to wonder just how stupid Peter Akinola thinks the rest of the world really is.

According to the GaffeMasters, +Jerusalem has no cause for complaint because they sent him a letter two days in advance telling him they were going to invade his diocese for a conference.

Of course, the two days prior was Christmas Eve. I don't know where the letter was mailed from, or what class of mail or courier was used, but anyone who believes a letter mailed Christmas Eve is going to travel internationally to Jerusalem in advance of Boxing Day is, to put it charitably, an utter numpty.

So, what are we to conclude?

Well, it is possible that every single person involved in GaffeCon is a complete idiot.

Or, it is possible that not a single person involved in GaffeCon give's a rat's backside what the Bishop in Jerusalem thinks.

All other theories would be derivatives of these two.

I will leave it to other gentle readers to conclude whether this Gaffe represents malice or incompetence - or both.

[Mike Homfray]

Though I am no fan of Storkey, I do find it faintly ridiculous when the only thing that seems to count to Irene Lancaster is her obsession with portraying a spotless picture of Israel.

It has nothing to do with this issue. Did you know, Irene, that Reform counts amongst its membership, Stephen Sizer - who I disagree with about everything except his accurate and truthful portrayal of the Zionist myth. Many conservative evangelicals have no time for Christian Zionism.

[Dr Alan Marsh]

Having had to endure a lecture from Dr Storkey, I can only say that it was worth £20,000 to move her on.

[Richard Winn]

Delighted that Elaine Storkey is making a stand. She is a much respected theologian and commontator with a breadth of vision and experience. Her action might bring some sense into the narrow nature of many conservative evangelicals who look upon we lesser christians as beyond hope.
Thankfully Christ told us what real love is.

[Stephen Marsden]

Dr Lancaster should cheer up. Perhaps, having trousered £20K, Dr S won't need to do 'Thought for the Day' any more. Bliss. (As long as they don't turn to a certain Sarf London bishop instead.)

[Rosemary]

Elaine Storkey is quoted as saying .. 'I am bewildered as to why anyone would want to spend their energy doing this when there is a world out there we should be speaking to of the love of God. And we should not just be speaking it, we should be living it, first of all, in the way we love one another, and also in the way we love them.” And .. “I'm a unifier, everything in me wants to get everything together under the church's gospel. This hurts me enormously. It is no joy. It is not fun. On the other hand, justice is important.”

This doesn’t make sense. She wants the world to hear about the love of God, says we should be living in ways that demonstrate that love .. and yet she takes brothers and sisters in Christ to court? Receives MONEY for a wrong? Whatever happened to forgiveness? What happened to letting the Lord Judge? There’s something massively wrong here.

[observer]

Elaine Storkey says "I am alarmed at the belligerence of the conservative camp, where they are seemingly going out of their way to make life as difficult as possible for the Archbishop of Canterbury. I cannot imagine what the reasons are."

Well, could it be because he says different things to different people...with the result he is no longer trusted by many (on the "right" or "left")? One minute he says Lambeth 1.10 is the “mind of the Communion” and it is his job to uphold Communion positions and the next he is giving Communion to some who openly defy that position and condone behaviour “incompatible with scripture” and inviting TECUSA bishops to Lambeth 08 despite the fact that their actions have been in open defiance of the “mind of the Communion”….inconsistent?

Could it be because 5 years have passed since TECUSA "tore the fabric of the Communion" and the ABC has resolutely blocked any real action but just tried to keep everyone talking, avoiding decisions....and both sides are exhausted and feel let down badly by this lack of leadership.

Could it be because The Windsor Report said TECUSA bishops should not be involved in Communion councils until issues are resolved and unity is restored....but the ABC has invited to Lambeth 08 a couple of dozen people from TECUSA who consecrated Gene Robinson even if he has not (YET) invited the man himself?

Could it be because the ABC tells the Primates that the Lambeth Conference is authoritative and a meeting of the chief pastors and teachers of the Communion but he is himself supporting TECUSA in open defiance of a Lambeth resolution from 1998 which had clear majority support amongst the bishops of the AC...and still does.....so, is it surprising people lost patience with the ABC after 5 years of obfuscation and no decisions while the AC has slowly torn itself apart???

Could it be because all the delays and the resulting chaos appear to be only in the interests of keeping in the AC those who “tore the fabric of the Communion” but will not repent?

Dr Storkey seems to have rose-tinted specs when it comes to the record of this ABC and the damage done to AC unity under his “leadership”.... he certainly is not following the sound, biblical recommendations of Fulcrum as he bends over backwards to keep TECUSA in the AC while it refuses to repent of condoning behaviour the vast majority of Anglican bishops have consistently said is "incompatible with scripture"....this is the problem: the obvious agenda of the ABC appears to be "incompatible with scripture."

[emanuel appel]

a letter from America

Dear Ruth,

Oooh, how many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

Let me get this straight, a whole church full of people are barbecued in Kenya in a political/religious squable but the religious authorities in a pretigious school can find the time to get rid of a pest? Doesn't Kenya Christianity merit some attention? Jeez!

[Steven Carr]

The Holy Spirit is clearly working wonders in the world.

Well, perhaps not so clearly.

Well, perhaps there just isn't a Holy Spirit inspiring Christians.

[Robert Ian Williams]

The Good ship GAFCON has a ticking time bomb in its hold and its called lay presidency, which can be activated by Captian Jensen by his mere signature.

Can I challenge the Gafconites to define Biblical orthodoxy?They are rather free with these titles.

It is not divorce and re-marrage, for the Gafconitesa are split on this key area of morality.

It is not female ordination, because they are also divided on this.

It is not the 39 articles , as the Anglo-Catholic component repudiate the structures on eucharistic reservation, eucharistic worship and the invocation of saints.

It all boils down to homosexuality.

They are prepared to hide their differences and pretend they are orthodox and Biblical.....when they can't agree what the Bible meeans in other key areas.

With such an equivocal attitude to truth, I leave it to your readers to
asses whether the GAfconites are orthodox or even Biblical.

[NewbieAnglican]

She complains about "squabbling" among evangelicals, then engages in multiple legal actions against Wycliffe. Shame on her.

[peterNW1]

Is this story related to last September's news that Oxford's two Anglican colleges are not providing a rounded education for undergraduates and should no longer be allowed to admit school-leavers? ...

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/education/article2485410.ece

Seven of Oxford's colleges (known as "permanent private halls" rather than colleges) are run by religious bodies. Here are the seven ...

Blackfriars (Catholic, Dominican)
Campion Hall (Catholic, Jesuit)
Greyfriars (Catholic, Franciscan)
St Benet's Hall (Catholic, Benedictine)
Regent's Park (Baptist)
St Stephen's House (Anglican)
Wycliffe Hall (Anglican)

As it was only the two Anglican colleges that were accused of not providing a rounded education, one wonders what it is they're doing wrong that the Catholics and Baptists are doing right.

To an outsider, Anglicanism seems to be in freefall at the moment.

[David Smith]

Another wonderful example of what happens when you try to ever-increasingly legally regulate every aspect of human behaviour and disagreement.

The only real winners are the lawyers - not just in terms of their immediate fees, but in terms of the rich long-term pickings that shades of human opinion and the resulting actions in yet one more area will now provide into eternity.

[Gregory of Langres]

Since when was Wycliffe Hall "Oxford's top theological college"?

(rg writes: sorry, should have been 'one of'!)

[Chris Gillibrand]

Intra-factional dispute was the norm in the Early Church, which is one of the reasons, I don’t hold with this idea of going back to the “glories” of the primitive church. It lead to St Ambrose exclaiming in about the year 400

Non in dialectica complacuit Deo salvum facere populum suum
It has not pleased God to save his people by disputation.
De Fide ad Gratianum Augustum, Chap.5, Para. 42

Cardinal Newman quoted this much later in his Apologia, after having departed the Church of England, chased by controversy.

Perhaps this case will set a precedent, and Catholics can make back claims for the discrimination that they suffered for centuries. In at least two London churches, you have to go down steps as they had to comply with the law that did not allow Catholic places of worship at street level. A small symbol of a much wider discrimatory consensus, now almost gone in practice if not in thought.

[Dr. Irene Lancaster FRSA]

I couldn't resist doing a blog on it, as the Times Online article on her dismissal is so ambiguously funny:

http://irenelancaster.typepad.com/my_weblog/2008/01/dont-you-just-l.html

However, more seriously, she was absolutely dire on Thought for the Day, and especially hostile towards the Hebrew Bible.

I would accuse her, therefore, of having contributed to the very negative view there is of Judaism, and therefore of Israel, among British Christians.

And utterly condescending with it.

[Peter]

I'm glad that justice has been done regarding the unfair dismissal, but I very much doubt that under the law as it stands Elaine could prove religious discrimination.

Yes there is often a difference in mindset and outlook between CE's and OE's, but concrete theological differences are very few - women priests being the most obvious one.

I'm not an employment lawyer but I guess that Elaine would have to prove she were discriminated against because of one of these few concrete differences (so eg they booted her out because she supported women priests).

I think this would be very, very hard to prove, particularly in an institution that trains and employs women priests.

Maybe now's the time for Elaine to draw a line and move on.

[David Palmer]

"After her victory on Monday over Wycliffe, with unfair dismissal payment now pending of £20,000, another case in June is to look at whether she was the victim of religious discrimination. The judge has assigned a whole day for the tribunal to read papers on what constitutes a 'conservative evangelical' and what an 'open evangelical'"

Well, I hope this judge does better than the one assigned to sort out the conflict between two Christian Pastors and the Islamic Council of Victoria several years ago which led to a highly inflammatory and provocative decision by the judge in favour of the Muslims, a decision eventually after several years to be thrown out on appeal.

Trying to sort out theological issues in a secular court is fraught with difficulty. Whilst we can perhaps understand why recourse to the secular courts occurs, nevertheless it is disgraceful and brings no credit to the party or parties responsible.

Evangelicals, whether or not they use other labels as well, are supposed to consider the Bible as the authoritative Word of God and according to that Word, God has spoken clearly: 1 Corinthians 6.

[John]

The tribunal would be wise to avoid any temptation to define doctrine for the CofE. If those concerned can't work out the difference between evangelical and evangelism there is no hope whatsoever of sorting out Ms Storkey's alleged differences with the movement, real or imaginary.