Charity Commission Re-defines 'Religion'?

The Charity Commission's recent refusal to register The Gnostic Centre as a charity raises interesting issues about the Commission's criteria in defining religion and its apparent extension of existing legal boundaries. The Commission considered that the Centre is not charitable as it:

does not advance education because it promotes a specific point of view and encourages people to adopt a particular viewpoint does not promote the moral or spiritual welfare or improvement of the community since "there was no evidence of a clear and identifiable moral or ethical code or framework within Gnosticism" and so has no beneficial impact on the public does not advance religion, as it does not have an identifiable, positive, beneficial moral or ethical framework and confines its benefits to too few people This decision brings religious charities back into the spotlight raising issues about the Commission's regulation of this sub-sector. Although the Commission distances itself from matters of theology and doctrine where possible, it cannot avoid the issue where it is fundamental to registration. However, the extent to which it can, of its own volition, make judgements about theology and doctrine is likely to be controversial. Two issues are of particular concern:

1. how the Commission decides what is and is not a religion. In this case the Commission has taken several leaps from the position stated in a 1931 case to stating that a religious charity must encourage "common standards, practices or codes of conduct...