At the February 1990 Group of Sessions of the General Synod Amending Canon No. 14 was promulged. This Canon is part of the package of amending rules which have modified the Election Rules of the three Houses of the General Synod in preparation for the elections to take place in July to October this year.

Several matters of legal significance were dealt with by the Governing Body of the Church in Wales at its April 1990 meetings at St. David's University College, Lampeter. Amendments to the Constitution were passed concerning two matters of nomenclature, the preparation of inventories, the qualification of parish audiors and pension arrangements for the clergy. In addition two bills were successfully passed and became Canons of the Church in Wales.

In his article ‘The Religious Dimension of the Education Reform Act 1988’ (Ecclesiastical Law Journal No. 5, July 1989, pp 32–52), J. D. C. Harte has provided a helpful summary of the new legal framework in the context of the legal history. His interpretation of the implications of the legislation for the theory and practice of religious education in the schools is less satisfactory, and the theological assumptions of his article are at least questionable. It is thus as a religious educator and (if you like) a theologian specialising in educational problems that I would like to respond. In order to appreciate the exposition of Mr Harte, it will be necessary first to have some insight into the history and recent developments of religious education.

The seal of the confessional was part of the canon law applied in England before the Reformation. It was also part of that law which was continued in force at the Reformation, as is confirmed by the proviso to canon 113 of the 1603 Canons. This proviso is still in force and proprio vigore binds the clergy of the Church of England. By the Act of Uniformity, 1662, the hearing of confessions was enjoined upon those clergy in certain circumstances; the law places no limit upon the frequency of their being heard. It is unsurprising that there are infrequent references to the seal of the confessional since the Reformation; such cases as there are are inconclusive. Nevertheless, although the seal of the confessional may be waived by the penitent, the refusal by an Anglican clergyman to disclose what was said within sacramental confession is based upon a duty imposed on him by the ecclesiastical law rather than upon an evidential privilege. An Anglican clergyman in breach of that duty would be in grave danger of censure by the ecclesiastical courts and such censure might well lead to his deprivation and possible deposition from Holy Orders. The ecclesiastical law is part of the general law of the land and must be applied in both the ecclesiastical and secular courts. Both courts must therefore enforce that clerical duty and uphold any refusal by an Anglican clergyman to answer questions in breach of the seal of the confessional.

A distinction which has been much discussed by those concerned with the laws governing churches, especially perhaps the Church of England and to a lesser extent the Church in Wales, is that between canon law and ecclesiastical law. At times, the terms appear to be used synonymously, whilst at others, there is a clear distinction. It is submitted that both views can be correct. However, they are correct only while certain conditions prevail.

In the January 1990 issue of the Journal, Professor McClean gave some account of the first meeting of the European Consortium for Church and State Research and of the position as to State support for Religious Education in the countries of the European Community. This article, based on his contribution to the March Conference of the Society, looks at the wider question of State Finance for the Churches, their ministry and worship.