A Christian lecturer, theologian and father of six will appeal an employment tribunal ruling which concluded that it was ‘reasonable’ for a Bible college to sack him for misconduct for one tweet defending Christian sexual ethics.
Supported by the Christian Legal Centre, Dr Aaron Edwards, 39, had taken legal action against Cliff College in Derbyshire on the grounds of harassment, discrimination and unfair dismissal.
Dr Edwards had worked for seven years at Cliff College, but in February 2023, everything changed for him and his family.
At the time, the Church of England (CofE) was debating whether it should allow same-sex blessings in their churches. As a theology lecturer with a strong understanding of the wider implications of these issues, Dr Edwards posted a message on Twitter:
“Homosexuality is invading the Church. Evangelicals no longer see the severity of this b/c they’re busy apologising for their apparently barbaric homophobia, whether or not it’s true. This *is* a “Gospel issue”, by the way. If sin is no longer sin, we no longer need a Saviour.”
He also tweeted: “That *is* the conservative view. The acceptance of homosexuality as “not sinful” *is* an invasion upon the Church, doctrinally. This is not controversial. The acceptance is controversial. Most of the global Church would agree. It is not homophobic to declare homosexuality sinful.”
He added that: “I expressed the conservative view as a doctrinal issue, re. the implications for sin/the Gospel. It was not an attack on individuals, it was addressed to evangelicals. It seems that holding the view that homosexuality is sinful is only welcome if it remains “unexpressed”.
A Twitter storm followed. Dr Edwards insisted, and clarified in subsequent tweets, that the post was not ‘homophobic’ and that it was addressed to evangelicals who agree with his message, but felt they couldn’t say so for fear of backlash.
Furthermore, he added that the aggressive response to the tweet illustrated the problem it addressed.
Instead of supporting Dr Edwards’ freedom to share a Christian evangelical perspective on these issues, Cliff College, which holds itself out as an Evangelical College, released a statement which publicly disowned him and sought to solicit complaints. Before the Tribunal it was said that the College had thrown Dr Edwards under the bus.
They asked Dr Edwards to take the post down, which he refused to do as he believed doing so would go against his conscience and be an admittance that he had intended to deliberately cause trouble for the college, however he repeatedly tweeted following the maelstrom that the views expressed in the tweet were his own and not that of the college. Further he clarified that the tweet was an expression of a deeply held belief which he believed was necessary to express.
Following an investigation and disciplinary hearing, however, Dr Edwards was sacked for misconduct for “bringing the college into disrepute”.
The impact of the sacking on Dr Edwards has been significant, he has not been employed since, and evidence he gave in court in June revealed he was admitted to hospital with cardiac symptoms due to the stress the situation caused.
Following the dismissal, he and his wife and their then five young children had to move out of their house and he had to resort to crowdfunding to cover his family’s living costs while he made new long-term plans.
Free Speech not protected
Giving judgment in court this week, however, Employment Judge Jim Shepherd appeared to avoid engaging with the substance of the case and dismissed each of Dr Edwards’ claims.
He concluded that Cliff College had been ‘reasonable’ in their actions but gave very little detail on why and how he had reached those conclusions.
In a concerning conclusion for Christian freedoms and free speech, Judge Shepherd did say that Cliff College was justified in restricting Dr Edwards’ rights to freedom of belief, religion and expression due to the need to protect its ‘brand’ and ‘reputation’.
Judge Shepherd found that Dr Edwards’ right of religion was not engaged:
“The Tribunal has found that the claimant’s Article 9 rights [freedom of thought, belief and religion) are not engaged in this case. This is because the claimant did not suffer the treatment on basis of his religious beliefs in and of themselves or because of a manifestation of his beliefs. The treatment of the claimant by the respondent was not because of his expression of views rooted in Christian beliefs but because of the severe reaction to them.”
Based on this reasoning, any belief expressed by a lecturer in an educational setting or outside of that setting, could lead to them being sacked if enough of a ‘severe reaction’ was brought against them by students and members of the public.
At every stage, Cliff College and the tribunal has also refused to engage with the fact that many students and members of the public did not react ‘severely’ to Dr Edwards’ tweet but supported him and in fact were concerned with the college’s actions of ‘throwing Dr Edwards under the bus’.
‘Now’t as Queer as Methodists’
The tribunal hearing had also revealed that after Dr Edwards’ had been sacked, his appeal was heard by Rev. Michaela Youngson, a former President of the Methodist Conference and senior member of the Methodist Church of Great Britain’s Connexional Team.
Rev. Youngson had dismissed Dr Edwards’ appeal on every ground and described herself in evidence as ‘independent’.
Evidence was admitted as part of the case, however, which revealed that Rev. Youngson is a leading founder of the Global Interfaith Commission on LGBT+ Lives and has appeared at gay pride London events next to a sign which says: ‘Nowt as Queer as Methodists’.
The Global Interfaith Commission was founded by LGBT activist and member of the Church of England’s general synod, Jayne Ozanne.
The aim of the commission is to: ‘provide a strong and authoritative voice from religious leaders across the global faith community who wish to affirm and celebrate the dignity of all, independent of a person’s sexuality, gender expression and gender identity.’
The Commission is managed by the Ozanne Foundation, which has aggressively campaigned for same-sex marriages to be introduced to places of worship and which would be diametrically opposed to Dr Edwards’ beliefs and position on the issues.
However, on this issue, Employment Judge Jim Shepherd concluded that: “The Tribunal is satisfied that the appeal appeared to be dealt with impartially.”
‘Christian justice matters’
Responding to the ruling, Dr Edwards said: “I am very surprised at the judgment. I believe ours was an extremely strong case and was very well supported by the Christian Legal Centre.
“It is obvious from the ruling that the particulars of the extensive evidence and arguments were not sufficiently engaged in the judgement, which was conspicuously light on relevant details in terms of how the judgment was reached. I believe this perhaps evidences how entrenched LGBT+ ideology is even with the legal system, which now makes it increasingly difficult for anyone to uphold freedom of expression for views which stand strongly against LGBT+.
“This is something any serious Christian knows they must do when such views impose themselves upon the Church. As such, this judgment is a real shame upon our society. If upheld, it will have significant negative implications for Christian free speech in future years.
“If Christian leaders like myself cannot stand up for what most Christians in the world today see as a legitimate and important expression of a Christian view, what chance do the rest of the population have? Christians must be free to stand against the ideologies of the age which seek to trample upon the fundamentally good Christian norms and convictions upon which this once-great nation was built.
“I find it disappointing but unsurprising that Cliff College, in their statement about the ruling, reiterate that they welcome “differing convictions” with “mutual respect” and a “generosity of spirit”. Most evangelicals can see that this is manifestly untrue, and the college acted against their professed evangelical principles. Claiming to support “differing convictions”, they fired one of their longest serving lecturers on the faculty, who only ever tried to serve the evangelical cause of the college, less than three weeks after the expression of a legitimate “differing conviction” to defend the Gospel against worldly invasion.
“I worked very hard for many years to ensure the college would remain faithful to its evangelical convictions. It has chosen another way and can no longer be trusted as an evangelical institution that genuinely seeks to defend and proclaim the Gospel from a truly Biblical perspective. It has shown itself to be a severely compromised institution whose convictions become flexible at the right price. They want to have their cake and eat it. They want to be known as evangelical whilst denying the very evangelical convictions which are presently under attack in our time.
“Knowing of the many faithful Christians who have come through that college for well over a hundred years, I don’t mind saying that this convictional decline is genuinely disgraceful and the leaders should be ashamed of themselves for continuing to call themselves an evangelical college in light of what has happened. The college has become ashamed of the very call to Christian holiness which brought Methodism into existence and rather than standing against sin, it has chosen to stand with sin against those who stand against sin.
“Christian justice matters, and justice has not been done in this case. I believe the College leaders, if they search themselves, know this. I did not want to bring this upon the college, and certainly not upon myself. We will be appealing.”
Andrea Williams, chief executive of the Christian Legal Centre, said: “Judge Shepherd has simply not engaged with the substance of this case.
“Aaron was sacked because he challenged the church to uphold God’s teaching on human sexuality.
“Contending for that truth publicly meant that he lost the job that he was so good at.
“Judge Shepherd says Aaron’s tweet could have damaged ‘the brand’ of Cliff College. What is the brand of a Bible college if it no longer believes or is prepared to defend or teach what the Bible says is sin.
“It is deeply saddening to see a once renowned evangelical Bible college losing its way by no longer upholding the truth about marriage. What message does Aaron’s sacking send to the next generation of leaders and pastors, and the future of Christian witness.
“This case exposes a collapse in confidence in biblical truth in one of the very places where the next generation of Christian leaders is being trained.
“Our churches, and our society, desperately need courageous leaders. Aaron was committed to raising faithful preachers and pastors for the church. We need more lecturers and trainers like Aaron, not less, to build-up the next generation of Christian leaders to be unashamed of the gospel.”
Read more about Aaron Edwards’ case
Find out more about Aaron Edwards
