Open and liberal evangelism?
You may have seen that my college, Wycliffe Hall, has been in the press again. Yesterday the college authorities settled with Elaine Storkey, admitting that she had been unfairly dismissed. Astonishingly however, that is not the end of the matter.
Storkey is now suing James Jones, the bishop of Liverpool and chair of Wycliffe’s trustees, for religious discrimination! I was quite astonished when I read this:
The case has now been adjourned until June, at which point the three members of an employment tribunal will have to decide whether Storkey’s liberal feminist brand of evangelical Anglicanism constitutes a religion, as compared with other evangelicals running Wycliffe Hall.
...
Following the resolution of the unfair dismissal claim, Charles Crow, representing Storkey, turned to the remaining matter.
“Within Christian evangelism there are two determinate strands; conservative evangelism and an open and more liberal evangelism,” he said.
“Those are open and definable strands and as an open and clear proponent of one of those strands, she [Storkey] has been discriminated against.”
First, I think it’s amusing that Storkey’s own lawyer doesn’t understand the difference between ‘evangelism’ and ‘evangelicalism’. Given that, what understanding can he really have about the theological debate? (Either he got it wrong, or he was misquoted by the Grauniad..)
Second, what does she think she’s doing? Does she really want to separate ‘open’ and ‘conservative’ evangelicalism legally? Such a result could surely have no effect but to divide further the evangelicals in this country.
Third, my friend Custard asks if there really is such a thing as ‘open’ or ‘liberal’ evanglicalism. Certainly ‘liberal evanglical’ is ‘oxymoronic’, given that evangelical theology is by nature conservative, and in part a reaction against liberal theology. The question of an ‘open’ evangelical is perhaps not quite the same. To be sure, some mean ‘liberal’ by it, but others mean ‘not quite as hard-line as some of the conversatives I know, and not quite as whacky as some of the charismatics I know’. This discussion is probably for another blog post.
Finally, I am pleased that the chairman of the tribunal has shown some common sense:
Arranging a preliminary tribunal hearing for June 10 this year,
Robin Lewis, chairman of the tribunal, highlighted the difficulties inherent in a theological dispute being thrashed out in a secular forum and urged the two parties to reach an agreement.“One part of the tribunal’s regulations was not to resolve theological disputes within certain colleges at Oxford.
“It was to protect people from discrimination.
“I very much hope that the remaining hearing that has been timetabled won’t be necessary. I hope that it can be resolved.
“What I would ask the parties is how useful an adjudication might be by the three of us, sitting in this building, on theological matters?”
Hopefully Storkey can be convinced to drop the case, which is a mis-use of the employment tribunal, potentially very damaging to the church in the UK, and ridiculously unbiblical.