Comments About the Sizer Tribunal
Church Society was very clear as to where it stood in relation to the Sizer Tribunal.
“On Tuesday 6th December 2022, the judgment in Mr Sizer’s Clergy Discipline Measure case was finally reported. The question of whether certain of his activities were antisemitic was until then sub judice. We are very glad to see that this case has finally been decided by the Church of England’s due process, and concur with the tribunal that “his conduct was unbecoming to the office and work of a clerk in Holy Orders, in that he provoked and offended the Jewish community”, and in one instance was “unbecoming, in that he engaged in antisemitic activity.”
“For the avoidance of any doubt, Church Society – in line with the Church of England – accepts in full the IHRA definition of antisemitism, including its examples, and will take (and has taken) action against members who bring the Society into disrepute through espousing antisemitism and engaging in antisemitic activity, just as it has acted against other forms of racism (although it should be noted that this has only very rarely become necessary). It should also be noted that Stephen Sizer is not a member of Church Society, and was not a member at the time of his Clergy Discipline Measure case in 2012-2013, although it has never been our regular practice to issue public comments on CDM cases, even when people involved in them are members of Church Society.”
The Board of Deputies of British Jews was also very clear in its response to the judgement of the Sizer Tribunal.
The President of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, Marie van der Zyl was unequivocal in her response on behalf of the organisation.
“I commend the Tribunal’s decision in the case of Stephen Sizer. In an unprecedented judgement, it has been found that Reverend Sizer has engaged in “antisemitic activity”, repeated “conduct unbecoming” of a Church of England Minister and engaged in conduct that “provoked and offended” the Jewish community over a sustained period. He was also criticised for being “disingenuous in his answers”. I am grateful to the Tribunal for accepting the evidence of the Board of Deputies. The Board will always act to defend and protect the Jewish community. I also wish to thank my predecessor, Jonathan Arkush for his work in pursing this case with me on behalf of the Jewish community.”
