BISHOPICS BILL. [H.L.] (Hansard, 3 July 1912)

§ VISCOUNT ST. ALDWYN
My Lords, in moving the Second Reading of this Bill I hope it may not be necessary for me to detain your Lordships at any length in explaining its provisions or defending the principles on which it is based. Under the present law it is impossible to found a new bishopric in the Church of England or even to alter the boundaries of an existing bishopric without a special Act of Parliament for that purpose. There are not a few cases in England where, owing to the growth of population, and, perhaps, also owing to the change in the conception of the duties of a Bishop, which is, if I may say so, very much to the advantage of the Church, the work of a diocese has become entirely beyond the strength of any single man. Some dioceses have been already divided. I think there have been nine such cases within the past few years, hut in each of those cases it has been necessary with great trouble and with great difficulty to pass through Parliament a separate 343 Act. The proposal of this Bill is that in future, where it is desired to found a new diocese by the sub-division of an existing diocese or to alter the boundaries of a diocese, it shall be done by an Order in Council. The Order will first pass through the office of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners, who will have to satisfy themselves that sufficient funds, not arising from their common fund, have been subscribed or obtained for the purpose of the new bishopric; that being done, the draft Order will be submitted by them to the Secretary of State and then to the Privy Council, and there is a provision that if the Privy Council approves of the Order it shall lie on the Table of both Houses of Parliament for thirty days, and if objected to it would, of course, be withdrawn.
I need not dwell, I think, on the necessity for the sub-division of several dioceses. If any of your Lordships would look into the question I am sure you would be satisfied of the necessity. But perhaps I may say that, if this Bill should happily become law, there are some very important cases in which its provisions might at once be carried into effect. The great arch diocese of York would be sub-divided by the creation of a Bishopric of Sheffield, for which I believe practically the whole of the funds have been already provided; and the dioceses of Norwich, Ely and St. Albans would also be sub-divided by the creation of two new bishoprics for Suffolk and Essex, in addition to the Bishoprics of Norwich, Ely and St. Albans, whose boundaries would, of course, be altered. There also I think I may say that practically sufficient funds have been provided for the purpose if Parliament would only give the necessary authority for the foundation of these new bishopics. It has been my lot to bring forward this Bill three times already, and your Lordships have been pleased to give it your assent. The only obstacle in the way is the difficulty of securing time in another place for its discussion, which I believe would not take very long. I commend it to His Majesty's Government, who I know wish it well, in the hope that they may be able to take some steps which will provide time for at any rate a short discussion if your Lordships see fit to pass it and to send it down to the House of Commons. I beg to move the Second Reading of the Bill.

THE LORD ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY
My Lords, on behalf of those who sit on the Bishops' Benches I would repeat what I have on each previous occasion been allowed to say as to the growing urgency of this matter. It is really vital to the well-being of the Church and to the efficiency of its working that facilities of this kind should as speedily as possible be given. The problem of managing dioceses on the scale which some dioceses have at present reached is becoming one that cannot be solved by the strength of any man, and the strength of the most valued kind in the Church of England has already been impaired most seriously by the overwork of some of the best and most effective among the Bishops of to-day. It is not merely a question of efficiency of work. It is a question of discipline; it is a question of raising money; it is a question of all the varied administration of a great area. In all these matters the Church would be the gainer and no human being could possibly be the loser by the passing of this Bill into law. I earnestly endorse the wish expressed by the noble Viscount that every facility will be given to enable this Bill to stand as soon as may be on the Statute Book.

§ EARL BEAUCHAMP
My Lords, I am glad to repeat what His Majesty's Government have said before when this Bill has been on previous occasions in your Lordships' House—namely, to express entire approval of it and to wish it well. But I am sure the noble Viscount would be the last person in this House to expect from me any pledge as to what is likely to take place with regard to this Bill in the other House, or whether His Majesty's Government will be able to find time for it. For myself, I venture to hope that the efforts of the noble Viscount will this year be crowned with success.

LORD KINNAIRD
My Lords, I wish to re-echo what has already been said as to the great necessity there is that there should be a multiplication of Bishops, but I consider that it should be carried out in a way which should command the assent of the majority of Churchmen, and not in any way against the feelings of any large number of members of the Church of England. On the other hand, there are some who think that the precautions with reference to the carrying out of the details 345 of this Bill are not such as would give sufficient protection to those who desire that certain illegal practices should not be carried on in the new dioceses to be formed under the Bill. They also think that until the recommendations of the Ritual Commission have been carried out, or are in a fair way of being carried out by the Bishop, the manner in which these proposals are now effected—namely, with the consent of Parliament—is probably the better way to protect the interests of laymen in the Church of England than the way proposed in this Bill. It is quite possible, I admit, that certain Amendments may be inserted in Committee so that these safeguards should be given. But I appeal to many of your Lordships whether it is not the case that the mere lying on the Table of an Order does not give that publicity to the proposal for the breaking up of old dioceses or the transferring of patronage or of property from one body to another, and I consider that safeguards are necessary before the power which Parliament now has to veto new Bishoprics is surrendered. As the noble Viscount has said, Parliament has shown every disposition in the past to consent to these proposals. I admit that the present process may be a little slower than that proposed in this Bill, but there are many who feel that there are certain questions which it is desirable in the interests of the whole Church should not be hurried through, and that Parliament is the best place in which the matter can be ventilated, so that there should not be a rapid carrying out of any transfer without its having been duly considered. May I again say that I agree with what has been said with reference to the great need of at once giving facilities to increase the number of bishoprics. The question is whether the scheme of this Bill is the wisest way of doing it and whether the safeguards are sufficient. I venture to hope that in Committee the noble Viscount will accept certain Amendments which will possibly meet the feelings of many who desire to see this carried out, but think the safeguards are not sufficient in view of what is going on in many parts of the country in certain dioceses where it is impossible to get what we believe to be the present law carried out because of the opposition of those in authority.