There are fears that a proposed terror-related Protect Duty will have serious implications for churches and impede public worship.
The concerns have been raised around a statutory duty that government intends to impose in relation to publicly accessible venues with capacity for at least 100 people.
Church leaders are urged to respond to a public consultation by 2 July.
Most church venues would be caught by the duty. The consultation document states that requirements for individual settings would be ‘reasonable and proportionate’.
However, the duty would nonetheless catch gatherings of just a handful of people who meet in a large chapel with capacity of a few hundred and more.
The Evangelical Alliance UK (EAUK) warned that the new law may have a detrimental impact on churches, including the costs of complying with the duty.
Issued under the pretext of ‘making the public safer’, the proposals are laudable in their aim against the background of continued terror threats across the UK.
The consultation paper acknowledges that all publicly accessible locations are potential targets.
And most Christians are perceptive enough to foresee that the church is increasingly likely to become a target by religious fundamentalists in the years to come, as is already happening in other countries.
But the paper also states that, where possible, interventions should be affordable and have no or minimal adverse impact on the operation of the site or ‘people’s experience’.
In practice, the proposals show little understanding either of the nature and meaning of public Christian worship or how places of worship operate.
In the case of places of worship with up to 500 worshippers, for instance, this could mean active security measures such as CCTV, checking bags at the door and action plans.
The EAUK said the measures ‘would inevitably deter the general public from attending, which goes against the call of the church. The accessibility of the church is important for people to have an opportunity to hear the gospel’.
It is also unclear who would be liable in the case of some church settings, for example churches who gather in venues such as schools or entertainment venues.
The Archdeacon of London, Luke Miller, said he feared that smaller churches might not be able to remain open for prayer or visiting on weekdays as a result.
Graham Nicholls, Director of Affinity, acknowledged the need for government to take all reasonable means to protect its citizens from terror attacks and the vulnerability of public spaces including churches, and said: ‘We also recognise our own responsibilities as churches to provide a safe environment for our congregation.’
‘However,’ he added, ‘we have grave concerns of churches being burdened with [this] – which goes far beyond what is proportionate and practical, especially for smaller churches.
‘It is suggested that each church with a capacity exceeding 100 would have to produce a risk assessment of terror threats and mitigations. Although there are bound to be templates produced to assist, this will be an onerous amount of work, especially for smaller churches, and does not seem proportionate given there is no evidence of churches being targeted by terror groups.’
Nicholls also commented that the proposals seem ‘a part of a bigger culture of intrusive regulation of churches which has accelerated during lockdown’.
• Churches can take part in the consultation at www.gov.uk/government/consultations/protect-duty
