Previously, a charity could be formed under the head of "Advancement of Religion" and that was taken as a charitable purpose. The 2006 Act introduced a new requirement that the charity must show that it is for the public benefit. It was always that case that a particular religion could be deemed not to be a charity but the legal position now is that no religion is deemed to be a charity ipso facto, there must be a demonstration of something else called "public benefit".
Public benefit is not defined in the Act and it has been left for the Charities Commission to consult on the matter. On this, see my previous post Charities Act and the secularist agenda which offers some analysis of the consultation process.
Andrea Minichiello Williams, barrister and public policy officer at the LCF said:
It is of concern that the Charity Commission has said it will interpret 'public benefit' in the light of 'modern conditions'. What this could mean for Christian charities that exist for evangelism or which promote traditional Christian teaching on family and life issues is unknown."Here is a link to the LCF's full response to the consultation (pdf)
1 comment:
This is yet another unfortunate but predictable legislative development from a government whose policy it is to secularise (dechristianise?) every aspect of British life; it is intent on the removal of Christianity, and its manifestation, from the public square, marginalizing it to a position where it continually has to justify its existence/value. Another legacy of Blair – the Catholic to be! Christianity is now treated as just another opinion. Perhaps the Queen’s title of “Defender of the Faith” should be removed too, or changed to “defender of faiths and none”. Consider this scenario: a Christian charity whose mission it is to promote traditional family life (i.e., chastity, the immorality of extramarital and gay relationships) etc., could lose its charitable status because some Westminster bureaucrat takes the view that there is no public benefit to this mission because it facilitates the discrimination of homosexuals, or undermines sex education in schools. So, it is likely that this could catch activities not, on the face of it, caught by the SOR’s, or policies on sex education for schools.
Well, early Christians had to gather in the catacombs; soon, 21st Century Christians will be living in ghettos. However, all is not lost as we have the Gospel of Life, and ... hmmm... I wonder if these bureaucratic decisions could be challenged under the Human Rights Act and ECHR... need to go away and consider this...
Post a Comment