Why I began to study modern heresy

 A very long time ago, in 1999, a suggestion was put forward in some quarters of the Church of England that Don Cupitt might be tried for heresy. (Cupitt’s Official site; Wiki; Sea of Faith) 

I was appalled by the idea and published an article about the futility of the proposal in the Modern Church journal Modern Believing. 

Having taken my stance I then had to work out why I thought the issue was important. After all, I only  knew Don Cupitt by repute so this was about me much more than about him. The idea and substance of heresy has proved to be sufficiently interesting to keep me ferreting round and round the issue for the subsequent twenty years.

I have been a member of the Church of England ever since deserting my natal Methodism In my teens. I was ordained in 1988, my bishop telling me at the time that he would never have ordained me if he had believed what the training course had told him about me. Perhaps both were right; I’ve never asked to see my file. In all this time I have never felt that I truly belonged, and I never understood how the organization really worked. Perhaps it's not surprising that I have become so attached to heresy and heretics (and other assorted insider-outsiders).  

I am now retired (and thus officially peripheral). I am author of The Church beyond the Church: Sheffield Industrial Mission 1944-1994 here and elsewhere. 

The threat to Don Cupitt was seen off in the Church of England’s synod. Yet I have continued to explore questions of heresy in the modern age: its nature, incidence, function and impact. 

I knew in my gut that accusations of heresy, and trials of doctrine, were wholly unacceptable in modern Christianity; I just needed to work out why. I looked back to the Act of Toleration (1689) as a reasonable starting point. The almost bloodless invasion of William and Mary reset the religious clock for the benefit of most, in my opinion, outside Ireland and Scottish episcopalianism.  

I have been surprised both that there were so many cases and that, over 300 years, there were so few.  At the time of writing I am aware of 183 cases, most of individuals:

1689-1749 29

1750-1799 32 (and 2 cases of blasphemy)

1800-1849 38 (and 9 students; and 1 case of blasphemy)

1850-1899 56 (including one person for whom I have as yet no information)

1900-1949 15

1950-present 13 (of whom 6 were Roman Catholic)

I continue to come across cases I have not met before and so I very much doubt that this is exhaustive.