Sunderland Minster refusing to comply with Supreme Court ruling

The Diocese of Durham has issued a statement on the issues at Sunderland Minster. Making clear that the Minster is its own separate entity. durhamdiocese.org/diocesan-news/a-statement-from-the-diocese-of-durham-sunderland-minster.php

Apart from the fact that the law was made in 2010 and clarified in 2025 - not to mention the H&S regulations for toilets at work whose date I can't be bothered to check.

[Not intending to shoot the messenger. Just thinking 'FFS'.]

To think I used to laugh when the CoE was described as "The Conservative Party at prayer". No more, it seems, for better or worse.

Well his views on safeguarding etc were dodgy to say the least.

Yes, well, the ex-Archbishop of Canterbury describing transition as a ‘sacred journey’ probably didn’t help matters.

Very odd. It sounds quite sinister.

So you feel uncomfortable using a facility that men are evidently going to be allowed in, so we will ‘escort’ you and stand outside the toilet while you have a p*s or a sht in the ‘women’s’ toilet.
Assuming this role will be taken on by a woman - or a transwoman - as you accept there’s no ‘threat’ - well that’s going to be fine and dandy.

Are they positing this as a ‘solution’ because they know most helpers/cleaners/volunteers in churches are women? Or is it that they wouldn’t dream of asking a busy, important man to do the menial task of standing outside the toilet while a transwoman takes a sht of a pis in the Men’s toilet? Unless that man was a transwoman in which case s/he could only possibly assist someone in the ‘women’s’ toilet - because no man would be free or prepared to stand guard to protect them in the ‘Men’s’ toilet - and round and round it goes…

I hope they’re inundated with requests to have an escort in the Women’s toilets. I imagine their veneer of Christian kindliness and acceptance would descend into a near mania 😂

Great to hear - 👀 will keep an eye out

I received this reply from Bishop of Durham's PA this morning. Let's see if they do 'investigate'. I didn't make a 'complaint' as such. I focused on the fact they were exposing themselves to risk of litigation and risk of reputational damage

As a 78 yo woman who lives in south Northumberland and who attends my local church, can I just say that I talk to a lot of similar age women and I haven't come across anybody who thinks that TWAW:

Similar for me, although 3 years younger but living in the South East.

But I have come across 50 year old women of the be kind school - some of the most discriminated against.......

As a 78 yo woman who lives in south Northumberland and who attends my local church, can I just say that I talk to a lot of similar age women and I haven't come across anybody who thinks that TWAW: my poor DH is frequently subjected to my rants when I read of yet more cases like this.

Thanks for the clarification!

Yes the minister is accountable for safeguarding, and this is not in line with Church of England safeguarding as you are asking random adults to take kids to the loos.

There is no training for that.

Aside from that this woman seems to follow the Jolyon school of law - oh wiggle wiggle guidance … needs properly sealed in wax and delivered by a stork…..

No you plainly stupid person. The law is the law. Even if the guidance is wrong you can be sued on the basis of the LAW. So never mind your 40 days your reference to FWS said you know the law and knowingly broke it.

I think it was @SexRealistic ?? who said that each minister is equally, personally and legally responsible for safeguarding, much the same way that school governors are individually legally accountable for decisions made by the Boards of Governors? @SingleSexSpacesInSchools

Perhaps we can get some clarification from them if they can respond at some point? Thanks!

Yes re the privilege.

I stayed recently with a vicar whose background is as privileged as it gets, and who was extremely concerned about the gender ideology movement but he wasn't a) gay or b) a middle-aged woman who sees it as her mission to be kind. Add to those c) clergy with trans-identifying family members and that is a good proportion of 'the cloth'.

Thanks for the article - the fact that the Rev Canon seems to be doubling down on her stance tells me she has no clue about proper safeguarding as we previously suspected. The trouble with many people of 'the cloth' is that their lives come with considerable privilege that they cannot see past it.

Every sacrifice this woman makes to her integrity and professionalism by placing a false ideology ahead of her Christian faith, will make it harder and harder for her trans-identified daughter to step back from her trans-identity. Genuinely, it is so sad.

Thanks for the archive!

Methinks the good reverend has no understanding of the law, what it means, when it came into force (2010), how it was clarified last year, how the guidance relates to the SC decision, how the 40 days' thing works, the fact that the law is already enforceable, or, indeed, how to think outside her own little "box."

It is astonishing to me that someone so narrow-minded should be in a position of authority, ostensibly helping to "guide" sometimes vulnerable or grieving people in their journey with Christ. Where is her humility? Where is her compassion for her female parishioners? How did she manage to get through divinity school with so little intelligence and such a lack of understanding of humanity's flaws? Is she always this certain about everything?

So there are a fair few of the commandments being broken here.

I am the LORD your God; you shall not have strange gods before me. (the Canon is worshipping at the Altar of trans ideology)

You shall not steal (Access to single sex spaces)

You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor (Telling someone they are a sex they are not fits here...)

You shall not covet your neighbor’s goods. (Single sex spaces, sports, prizes etc)

I expect they agree with La Bumba and the robotic doctor et al and think the nurses are transphobes.

Given that Sunderland and Darlington are only just over 50 miles apart, I am astonished that the clergy in Sunderland haven't heard of the Darlington nurses and their case.

And to signal Very Hard to your trans son.

Ah, but where is the opportunity to virtue-signal your holier-than-thou smugness in such a sensible solution?

edit: sp

Taken literally, that would be an argument that the bible supports unisex toilets. It does not however, provide any basis for letting some men into women's toilet.

But there’s a simple solution in any larger building, have a third space. We faced the issue in my last church so we converted the two single toilets (including basin) into unisex spaces then retained a men’s, women’s and unisex disabled toilet. Everyone is taken care of

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/05/28/pro-trans-church-brazenly-defies-law-on-womens-lavatories/

https://archive.ph/c4QYy