<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.18812"></HEAD>
<BODY style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face="Comic Sans MS">Quick reply from the horse's
mouth</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face="Comic Sans MS"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face="Comic Sans MS">The whole issue of Ecclesiastical
Exemption is one of ongoing sensitivity - I wasn't referring to anything
specific. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face="Comic Sans MS"></FONT><FONT size=2
face="Comic Sans MS"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face="Comic Sans MS">As to undermining, any action that
concedes ground to EH or other bodies (e.g. local authorities) by allowing them
to have greater influence or power than their legal standing (or accustomed
practice) allows is, surely, undermining Exemption</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face="Comic Sans MS"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face="Comic Sans MS">The system, of course, has its strong
supporters and opponents both within and outside the Church (yes - the CofE). I
didn't intend to open that can of worms. My offering was simply aiming to
state that while Exemption is retained (and as long as the Church still
wishes it to be retained) then care is needed. Certainly bodies like the CCCBR
should not be wittingly or unwittingly compromising the chances or retaining
Exemption which, so far, the Church has fought hard to retain</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face="Comic Sans MS"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face="Comic Sans MS">CP</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face="Comic Sans MS"></FONT> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px"
dir=ltr>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=Chris@tz6qck3P_XIsmV9IvrC8v9uTl9x4VlTzDLWiDgSaQ9wv3XO2wqQd3HH1En0VsCNFOi3P8oVy8AvxC84Ovm6uxkhmTw.yahoo.invalid href="mailto:Chris@n_rAFF2xBoHXrzFvq32libBg4JX5z6bVviJ-oCbeu2ej9HTPCYVzieYmY-oP30ydlVicwIo6y7Fh6Yc.yahoo.invalid">Chris Frye</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
title=bellhistorians@yahoogroups.com
href="mailto:bellhistorians@yahoogroups.com">bellhistorians@yahoogroups.com</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, October 08, 2009 3:04
PM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [Bell Historians] CCCBR and
English Heritage</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><SPAN style="DISPLAY: none"> </SPAN>
<DIV id=ygrp-text>
<P>
<DIV class=Section1>
<P class=MsoNormal>On p995 of the 2<SUP>nd</SUP> October RW there is an
excellent letter from Chris Pickford covering a number of points. However
there was one point that I did not fully understand, probably due to my own
lack of knowledge. It was the part that said: “In terms of
conservation,<WBR>...the CCCBR and T&BC members currently representing the
exercise do not fully understand the delicacy of the situation regarding
ecclesiastical exemption – and are actually undermining the position on this
taken by the Church.” (“Church” = Church of England I
assume.)<O></O></P>
<P class=MsoNormal>I have some ideas what this may be about, but I would like
to know for sure. Can anyone explain what is the delicacy of the position and
in what ways it has been undermined?<O></O></P>
<P class=MsoNormal>If it’s too long to explain then a reference to a press
article or similar would be perfectly good. <O></O></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><O></O></P>
<P class=MsoNormal>Chris Frye<O></O></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><O></O></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><O></O></P></DIV>
<P></P></DIV><!--End group email --></BODY></HTML>