§ THE LORD BISHOP OF NORWICH moved to resolve, That in accordance with the Church of England Assembly (Powers) Act, 1919, this House do direct that the Faculty Jurisdiction Measure, 822 1938, be presented to His Majesty for the Royal Assent. The right reverend Prelate said: My Lords, I do not know how many of your Lordships may have read the Report of the Ecclesiastical Committee—a Joint Committee of your Lordships' House and of members nominated by another place—with reference to this Faculty Jurisdiction Measure. That Committee's Report makes the whole matter very clear, and in my humble judgment offers very good reasons for the passing of the Measure and its presentation for the Royal Assent. At the same time, and even if your Lordships have all read that Report, I myself feel, and I have said it in this House for many years now, that it is the work of the House itself and not of the Ecclesiastical Committee to pass judgment on these Measures of the Church Assembly. I should be sorry to think that the Ecclesiastical Committee was in any way expected to replace your Lordships' House or act as a kind of substitute for it.
§ I would venture to point out a few of the salient features of this Measure. It deals with the beauty and safety of our churches, and it owes its origin to a report made by a committee, presided over by Sir Lewis Dibdin, whose death many of us here deeply deplore, to the Archbishops with reference to the faculty jurisdiction in conection with the preservation of our churches. At the time it had been suggested that our churches were being mishandled and that their beauty was being spoiled by acts which had received the approval or had not received the approval of the Chancellor of the diocese. That committee went into the matter very fully. While on the one hand it said that the injury to our churches had been considerably exaggerated and was not as much as had been represented, it went on to urge that it was very important that faculty jurisdiction should be made as good as possible, and that our churches both in regard to their safety and in regard to their beauty should be safeguarded. The committee very rightly pointed out that our churches are not museums but are places for the worship of God.
§ As a result of that report, presented by Sir Lewis Dibdin and his colleagues to the Archbishops, some years afterwards the Church Assembly took up the matter. We all feel, I suppose, that our churches 823 are not the property of those who are the trustees of the care of them for the moment, and that in some cases the whole country is interested in their preservation and in seeing that nothing is done to harm their loveliness. It was recommended by the committee of Sir Lewis Dibdin, and it is recommended in this Measure, that the right to appear before the Chancellor in the Consistory Court should be conferred on others interested in the matter. It is proposed that the right should be extended at least to the Archdeacon in order that it may be made quite clear that we are of opinion that the churches belong to more than the present authorities and that they claim the interest of wider circles than parochial officers.
§ The Report of the Ecclesiastical Committee deals with the Measure clause by clause, but I am afraid I should weary your Lordships if I attempted to do anything of the same kind. I should, however, like to point out one or two of the salient features in the Report. The committee of Sir Lewis Dibdin recommended that there should be set up in the various dioceses advisory committees to help the Chancellors sitting in Consistory Courts in matters of taste. The Measure which is before your Lordships' House does not fix any particular way in which these advisory committees should be constituted. In the diocese of Norwich I always preside at the meetings of the committee. We have, as your Lordships no doubt know, some very beautiful churches. The Chancellor himself is a member of the advisory committee and so is the Registrar and various other capable persons nominated because of the help they give to the committee. This Faculty Jurisdiction Measure gives a definite locus standi to these advisory committees.
§ Certainly the sooner the committees are consulted the better, and in the case of the committee in the diocese of Norwich we consider the erection of a new window or the putting up of a chapel or some other form of memorial in the very early days before it goes to the Consistory Court. Often, I hope, we are able to help by recommending or criticising the procedure parishioners can adopt in carrying out their intentions. The work, of course, has to be done with sympathy 824 and not with anything like æsthetic rigidity. Advisory committees do not exist to control the ways of mourners who wish to commemorate those they loved or to control parishioners who wish to do this, that or the other. But the parishioners themselves are very grateful for the skilled and sympathetic advice which they are able to receive from such a committee. These committees do not for a moment reduce the position of the Chancellor. The responsibility is his, and it remains his. But it is found that the Chancellors themselves very gladly turn to these advisory committees to help them in matters of taste with which the Chancellors themselves may not happen to be very well acquainted. It is not only matters of taste that are concerned. In such questions as the introduction of electric light into a church, questions which are very important, the advisory committees are able to suggest methods by which the architects may be guided in what they have to do. The Chancellors can consult them if they please, and I believe, as in our own diocese, the Chancellor does most frequently turn to the advisory committee. We owe a great deal to our Chancellors, who sometimes have a rather thankless duty, for the care and pains they take for the preservation and the guarding of the beauties of our churches. It is something for which we are very grateful.
§
A faculty is, of course, a permission; it is not an order, and one of the difficulties that this Measure tries to remove is the false position in which the Chancellor may find himself placed if he gives to a parish a leave or licence to do certain things and a thing is not done. So far he has had no kind of coercive jurisdiction. In this Measure that position is to be remedied to some extent. Clause 2 (b) gives the Court power to
direct that, in default of the incumbent and churchwardens carrying out the work so authorised or any part thereof, a faculty shall issue to the Archdeacon authorising him to carry out the same.
And in the next clause it is laid down that the Court may order the whole or any part of the expenses of the proceedings or consequent thereon to be paid by a person acting without the necessary faculty. That gives a certain coercive power to the decisions of the Chancellor.
§ The Archdeacon s position under this Measure is one of considerable importance. Hitherto the right to attend in the Consistory Court and speak on the subject of the issue of a faculty has been confined to a very few people. It is held that the introduction of the Archdeacon concerned with the Church about which the question has been raised will be a great help. Parishioners may hesitate to go against what they believe to be the view of the incumbent or other members of the church council. The Archdeacon occupies a very independent position, and he is likely to take a larger and a wider view of the situation. It is felt that to give the Archdeacon the new right of attending at the Consistory Court would be singularly valuable for the purposes that we have in view. More than that, it is sometimes felt that the cost of a faculty is too great to fall upon those who are proposing to do some small thing in a church. This new Measure says that in regard to repairs to a church not involving any substantial alteration in the structure, or in regard to the redecoration of a church, the Archdeacon, after consulting the advisory committee, may either issue a certificate to say that the work may be done without a formal faculty being sought, or he may direct that an application shall be made to the Consistory Court. It is felt that this proposal would be welcome, and would much simplify and reduce the expense of some of the faculties that are sought.
§
Further, by Clause 6, this procedure
may he followed at the discretion of the Chancellor with regard to any other application which in his opinion is unlikely to give rise to any controversy or dissatisfaction in the parish concerned and is not of sufficient importance to justify the expense of proceedings for a faculty.
Faculties are not very popular, partly because of the expense; and very often, because of these legal expenses, those who are proposing to do something, like other people who are concerned with legal expenses, forget all the office work which is involved and the time spent by those who are responsible for carrying the work through. This cheaper way of securing permission to put up windows and do various other works in churches will be very welcome.
§ Hitherto, if an application for a faculty has been abortive, then the Registrar of the diocese has been in a rather unfortunate position, because he has not had the fees secured to him which should have been paid. Now it is proposed that a Rule Committee should be set up, and one of the functions of that Committee will be to see that time for payment of a faculty fee is fixed. Both the Report of 1914 and the Report of 1936 recommended that part of the fee for a faculty should be paid in advance on presentation of the petition, and retained whatever the result of the petition. The present fee is payable only if the faculty is granted. I think that I have said enough to give a general account of the purposes of this Measure. Of course, if any one of your Lordships wishes for any further information that I possess, I shall be very glad to answer any question according to my ability. I beg to move.
§ Moved to resolve, That in accordance with the Church of England Assembly (Powers) Act, 1919, this House do direct that the Faculty Jurisdiction Measure, 1938, be presented to His Majesty for the Royal Assent.—(The Lord Bishop of Norwich.)
§ On Question, Motion agreed to.