Sacked chaplain seeks judicial review into CofE’s handling of his case

A chaplain who was sacked after telling school pupils that they didn’t have to agree with LGBT ideology is looking for a judicial review into the dismissal of his misconduct grievance against the Bishop of Derby. 

Dr Bernard Randall lost his job at Trent College, Nottingham, over his comments in a 2019 sermon and was reported to the federal government’s terrorism watchdog, Prevent, and the Teaching Regulation Agency (TRA). After an investigation, the Diocese of Derby’s safeguarding team concluded that he was a safeguarding risk to children and he lost his licence to officiate. 

Prevent, the TRA, and the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) all said they’d not be taking any motion against Dr Randall.

Despite this, the Diocese of Derby has refused to renew his licence, meaning he stays barred from preaching.

He lodged a grievance against the Bishop of Derby, Libby Lane, under the Clergy Discipline Measure 2003, along with his lawyers claiming that the safeguarding team under her watch had reached its conclusions against Dr Randall “without evidence and without following official guidance”. 

His legal team alleged a “campaign of harassment” against Dr Randall and claimed that the diocese’s actions were motivated by opposition to the 52 yr old’s orthodox Christian beliefs on human sexuality and marriage. 

In his grievance, Dr Randall alleged that the bishop’s conduct had itself been abusive and that, “The nub of my case is that the bishop discriminated against me on the grounds of my orthodox beliefs on gender and sexual orientation.”

After the Archbishop of Canterbury refused to support a proper investigation, Dr Randall requested a review of this decision.

In response, lawyer Gregory Jones KC reviewed the case on behalf of the Church of England’s clergy disciplinary body and concluded in June last yr that the Diocese of Derby’s findings “don’t in my opinion support any finding of a ‘safeguarding’ issue as defined by the [Church of England’s safeguarding] Guidance”. He also questioned what evidence that they had for his or her position and stated that the Archbishop of Canterbury was “plainly unsuitable” to dismiss the grievance. 

Despite this, the Archbishop continued to carry that no further motion be taken, claiming that, “Bishops mustn’t intervene in safeguarding matters except in probably the most egregious circumstances, where they’ve prior notice of a gross error.” 

After Dr Randall sought a review of the Archbishop’s decision, the KC said that the Archbishop had “misunderstood the scope of his powers” and that he considered the case involving Dr Randall to be “egregious and the error gross”. 

The matter was then passed to the Church of England’s President of Tribunals, Dame Sarah Asplin, who ruled earlier this yr that the Bishop of Derby didn’t have a case to reply, although she acknowledged in her ruling that there gave the impression to be “serious errors in the method adopted” and that “the entire safeguarding procedure was flawed”.

The Christian Legal Centre (CLC), which is supporting Dr Randall, said that he has still not been contacted by the Bishop of Derby following this decision and that “there is no such thing as a sign of him being given his licence back”.

Having exhausted all avenues for treatment throughout the Church’s ecclesiastical courts, the CLC said that Dr Randall has “no alternative” but to hunt a judicial review. 

Dr Randall said: “In my case, safeguarding has been weaponised as a political tool against a theological position which is wholly consistent with the Church’s doctrine.

“I actually have been vindicated by numerous secular bodies, however the CofE, who, on paper, share my beliefs and must be supporting me, are refusing to present me my life back.”

He added, “The failure to carry anyone to account for such deeply flawed processes is a scandal.” 

CLC chief executive Andrea Williams said: “The evidence shows that even Jesus, let alone Bernard Randall, would have fallen foul of the Diocese of Derby’s approach to safeguarding and would have been marked a risk to children. 

“No evidence has ever been presented that shows that Bernard is a danger to children. From the start this scandalous blacklisting has been due to beliefs that he shares with Jesus, the Bible and, officially, the Church of England.” 

The Church of England said it couldn’t comment on the claims attributable to ongoing legal proceedings.