Final Report of Working Party Reviewing the Clergy Discipline
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Final Report of Working Party My Account Sign Out Search & Reviewing the Clergy Discipline Measure 2003 Friday 11 December 2020 Home UK World Comment Features Faith Books & Arts Regulars Audio & Video Archive Jobs Opinion Features Sunday’s reBadinookgs reviews Gazette Podcast Video Flawed cler gy discipLeaderline comm isenI tnrter ipeviews forFaith rfeaeforturNesew ti mtles Cartoons LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Columnists Reading groups Caption compet iLtioet tner s for publication should be sent 11 DECEMBER 2020 to letter [email protected]. Let ter s to the editor Visual arts Crossword Let ter s should be exclusi ve to the Church Measur e to be pr oposed would deal with complaints r egionally, andM ubesic mor e pragmaticOut of the questioTinmes, and include a full postal address. Your and theologically sound, says Peter Collier Per forming arts Diary name and address will appear alongside your letter. Fi lm 100 years ago TV Wine Radio Cooker y Week ahead Gardening Quotes Holidays Links THE main reason for replacing the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction Measure 1963 with the Clergy Discipline TOP FEATURE Measure 2003 (CDM) was that the former was complex, costly, and was leading the Church into disr epute. In 40 years, ther e had been only four cases deter mined under its provisions. Its replacem ent, the CDM, has opened wide the door: 1179 complaints wer e register ed in 14 years of operation. It is now subject to the same criticisms as its predecessor, and even more so. It is said to be as complex,24 mothre cosFebruarytly — and still 2021leading th e Church into disr epute. It was designed to deal with ser ious misconduct cases. In 1996, the General Synod asked that it should Yes, we should play God include a separate system for dealing with grievances. Regret tably, that never happened. But not the power ful bully of our own making, Of those 1179 complaints, 311 wer e summarily dismissed, and 200 have resulted in no further action says Tom Wright because either ther e was no misconduct or it was of a minor or technical nature. But all of these 511 have taken time, cost signi! cant sums of money, and involved signi! cant harm to many people. Recent public debate about the CDM has exposed its " aws and recounted the damage that it has done. jobs.CHURCHTIMES # er e is now widespread agreement that any new system must separate ser ious misconduct (i.e. conduct that would usually result in temporary or per manent prohibition) from grievances (which are APPOINTMENTS usually the product of some breakdown in relationships that need repair). Dir ector of Education 1 East Midlands But we must also recognise less ser ious misconduct that would usually be dealt with by rebuke and/or Per manent Full Time Salary Range: £65,000- some form of injunction: for example, to undertake further training. If that less-than-ser ious £70,000 depen ding on exper ience misconduct is not dealt with more simply, we fear that clergy will be le$ with many of the problems Find more jobs that the Sheldon Community has identi! ed — particularly the weaponisation of CDM procedures to e%ect resignations (News, 17 July). AFTER responses to our inter im report (News, 18 September ), the ecclesiastical working party looking at CDM ref orm has now re! ned its proposals and hopes to publish a ! nal report early in 2021. Adver tisement We propose that all complaints should be immediately investigated by a member of a regional assessment panel. # ese would be skilled people trained to national standards who would carry out an immediate investigation when a complaint was lodged, speaking to both complainant and respondent. # ey would maintain detailed records, and ensure that both sides wer e kept informed as the investigation progressed. # e regional framework would provide independence from CHURCH TIMES: ABOUT US diocesan structures, and, with someone always available, it would ensure a more agile and timely response to complaints than a monolithic central standards agency could muster. Reconci liation would be encouraged in cases of relationship problems. While resolution is not always possi ble, we believe that, in many cases, third-party involvement could enable reconci liation, and, occasionally, the bishop could be brought in to assi st. # at inquiry should be completed in 28 days. A report would then be made to the bishop, which would identify any misconduct and deter mine whet her it was ser ious. Extensi ve codes of conduct are not necessary to judge what is ser ious misconduct. You know it when you see it (obvious instances are THE CHURCH TIMES PODCAST sexual abuse, adulter y, and the$). Further work on professional standards may provide usef ul guidance, but a prescriptive code is unlikely to ser ve the Church well as the basi s of a discipline system. # e bishop would allocate anything ser ious to a ser ious-misconduct track, and allegations not admitted would be put bef ore a tribunal judge for directions. Early judicial involvement would Inter views and news analysis from the Church expedite matter s, and lead to a trial no more than six months a$er the ! rst directions hearing. Times team. Listen to this week’s episode online In the past 14 years, to give an idea of scale, ther e have been 239 cases — an average of 17 a year — in which prohibition has been imposed. Of these, 67 followed a secular conviction, and 148 an admission of guilt. Of 30 tribunal hearings, 24 resulted in prohibition. (# e other outcomes wer e: two dismissed, one conditional discharge, and three rebukes.) THE report from the regional panel in less ser ious misconduct cases should carry a recommendation about what should be done: the imposition of a rebuke, and/or an injunction, per haps for training; or a direction not to act in a similar way again — which would be recorded in the cleric’s blue ! le. No consent would be required for that penalty, although ther e could be a meet ing at which the cleric could argue why the bishop should not act as proposed. In cases of grievance, the assessor would report on what steps had been taken towards resolution. # e report would also advise on any need for inter vention, and any capability issues. # is is not only pragmatic: it accords with sound theology. # e Church’s approach to discipline since Jesus spoke the words recorded in Matthew 18.15-17 has always been to seek reconci liation in cases of relationship breakdown; and repentance, ref ormation, and restoration in cases of misconduct. ! e Rt Worshipful Peter Collier QC is chairman of the Ecclesiastical Law Soci ety’s working group on the Cler gy Disci pline Measure. He is the Vicar-Gen er al of York. OTHER STORIES CDM r efor m: national or UK news in br ief regional solutions? 04 Dec 2020 08 Dec 2020 Gener al Synod digest: Angela Tilby: Covid exiles revisions seek to beef up need ar mour of light safeguar ding and Cler gy 04 Dec 2020 Discipline Measur e 04 Dec 2020 Synod votes unanimously to Pr imate of Canada war ns of accept IICSA pandemic’s impact on mental recommendations health 25 Nov 2020 20 Nov 2020 COMMENT The bar r ier s to listening need Or bán holds the bishops close to be br oken down 11 Dec 2020 11 Dec 2020 ‘Remote islands’ Pr ess: Mail car es mor e for Dibley than for Bur nley 11 Dec 2020 11 Dec 2020 Paul Vallely: This necessar y Angela Tilby: Car ney asks us injection of pr inciple to ponder our values 11 Dec 2020 11 Dec 2020 OTHER TOPICS Columnists Faith Audio & Video Subscr ibe to newsletter Your email Subscribe About us Contact us Subscribe Adver tise Sitemap Topics FA Q Privacy policy ! " # $ % # is website uses cookies to ensur©e C thhuratc hy Toimu geset 2020. the Ablesl rtig exphts rereserienveced. OK View Privacy Policy Website by Impreza So$ware Development Final Report of ELS Working Party Reviewing the Clergy Discipline Measure 2003 Chapters Page 1. Introduction and Overview 4 2. The theology of discipline – some further thoughts 11 3. Our final proposals – the continuation of our journey 18 4. Our current context – IICSA and safeguarding issues 48 5. Our current context – The Lambeth Working Group 60 6. Our current context – Secular disciplinary processes 66 7. The way ahead – what can be done in advance of legislation 69 Annexes 1. Membership of the Working Party and Terms of Reference 75 2. A brief history of clergy discipline 77 3. Secular disciplinary processes 87 4. The Australian model 99 5. Evidence given to IICSA 104 6. To Heal and not to Hurt - Buckingham/Harper 114 7. Indicative flow chart 117 8. Some specimen case by category 119 9. Worked examples 120 10. Costings 139 11. Ecclesiastical Legal Aid 144 12. Training and training modules 149 2 13. CDC Statistics 154 14. Bishop’s Disciplinary Tribunal cases 157 15. Outline of a Measure 161 16. List of consultees and contributors 165 3 Chapter 1 Introduction and Overview 1.1 On 9th September 2020 the Ecclesiastical Law Society (ELS) Working Party published an Interim Report in relation to its review of the Clergy Discipline Measure 2003 (CDM). There is a link to it here, and to an executive summary here. 1.2 In that report in a section entitled ‘Introduction and Background’ we described how the Working Party came to be set up, how its membership was selected and the scope of its initial work.