In an article in this journal published in 1998 entitled ‘Digging Up Exhumation’, Rupert Bursell, Chancellor of the Dioceses of Durham and St Albans, surveyed the then existing case law on exhumation and identified divergencies of approach between the cases. He concluded: ‘A definitive decision from the Court of Arches and Provincial Court may, therefore, seem to be called for […]’. Shortly afterwards the Chancery Court of York had occasion to consider the matter in Re Christ Church, Alsager. This article considers that case as well as two cases subsequent to it where the impact of Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights has fallen to be considered.

The European Consortium for Church and State Research was established in 1989 and has its headquarters at the Istitutio di Diritto Internazionale of the University of Milan. Professor David McClean. who since its inception has occupied the place reserved for the United Kingdom, set out the background to the formation of the Consortium in his paper, European perspectives on Ecclesiastical Law and Religious Education (1990) 2 Ecc LJ 23–27. Since then the Consortium has met annually and considered a broad range of subjects concerning relations between states and relirious denominations in Europe from a historical, political and, particularly, juridical point of view. Its web page may be viewed at www.uni-trier.de/eurocon/. Professor Norman Doe was elected to the Consortium two years ago. having been involved in its affairs for some years. I was invited to attend the sessions in Reggio Calabria (1998), in Strasbourg (1999) and. most recently, in Vienna last November.

Readers of this Journal do not need to be told of the importance of legislation in forming and reforming ecclesiastical law. They are familiar with the division of legislative functions between Parliament and the General Synod in accordance with the Enabling Act and the conventions which have grown up around it. Where proposed Government legislation has an obvious impact on the interests of the churches, there will normally be consultation between the relevant Government department and the church authorities. The Churches Main Committee monitors and seeks to influence and headquarters staff have access to policy-makers in Whitehall.

There is adventure about—both at home and abroad. More especially, events are taking place in respect to the place of visual art in the witness of the Church that a generation ago, or even less, would have been laughed out of court: for the counsel of this committee or that, whether at parish vestry or cathedral chapter, would have looked askance at what, today, seems to be accepted almost on the nod. Examples of what is occurring, and especially in cathedrals up and down the country, are easy to cite. One need think only of recent exhibitions at Salisbury; the use of video (Bill Viola's The Messenger) at Durham; the appointment of an artist in residence at Gloucester; Sculpture for Winchester, the 1998 exhibition arranged in part across the Inner Close of the cathedral; an exhibition in November 1999 of Sussex artists in the North Transept at Chichester, conducted with a view to raising funds for the continuing restoration of the cathedral; Anthony Green's Resurrection, An Act of Faith at Christ Church, Oxford; or the planned (at the moment of writing) millennial exhibition, Stations, the New Sacred Art, to be held in 2000 both at the cathedral in Bury St Edmunds and at twelve associated parishes. Varied as these examples are, they all share a very distinct characteristic—the temporary nature of the arrangements, for which no formal permission or approval was legally required from any supererogatory body or bodies. Reasons for this development are complex, and the outcomes— which frequently create controversy—are often fiercely debated. What has received less attention, however, is the foundation of the present relationship between art and the Church, a relationship that can be seen to stretch back to a judgment made by George Bell, then Bishop of Chichester, in his own consistory court in 1954, concerning a design for a mural by Hans Feibusch in the parish church at Goring-by-Sea.

On 7 July 1990 the chairman of the Dioceses Commission told the General Synod that the sixteen members of the Commission were united in a ‘feeling of frustration’ about the difficulties arising from the provisions of the Dioceses Measure 1978. He said that the 48-page Report entitled The Dioceses Measure 1978, a Review (GS 925) put before the General Synod by the Commission was ‘a genuine cri de coeur’. This Report analysed the problems and suggested solutions with the obvious aim of obtaining some assistance from the General Synod in response to the cri de coeur.

This paper deals, in an introductory way, with the role which the canon law of individual Anglican churches plays in the wider context of the global Anglican Communion. Part I reflects on the two main experiences which Anglicans have concerning ecclesial order and discipline: that of the juridical order of each particular church, and that of the moral order of the global communion; it also examines canonical dimensions of inter-Anglican conflict. Part II deals with the contributions which individual canonical systems, the Anglican common law (induced from these systems), and the canonical tradition currently make to global communion. Part III assesses critically these contributions, their strengths and weaknesses, illustrates the potential of individual canonical systems for the development of global communion, and reflects on practical ways in which that potential might be fulfilled. Generally, the paper aims to stimulate discussion as to whether there exists a sufficient understanding of Anglican common law to justify: (a) the issue, by the Primates Meeting, of a statement of this, being a description, which itself would not have the force of law, of those parts of Anglican common law which deal with inter-Anglican relations, (b) incorporation of the statement by individual churches in their own legal systems, so that (c) each church has a meaningful and binding body of communion law. in order (cl) to enhance global communion and inter-Anglican relations, and to reduce the likelihood of inter-church disagreement.

Before its enactment, the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction Measure 1963 experienced a stormy passage during the debates in Church Assembly, being roundly attacked as unnecessarily complex and unwieldy by Garth Moore, who represented the University of Cambridge and was at that time Chancellor of the Dioceses of Durham, Gloucester and Southwark. In view of this, it is ironic that the first case under the disciplinary sections of that Measure should have occurred in the Diocese of Gloucester and should have been heard at first instance by Moore, sitting with four assessors, in July 1969.

The church declares and witnesses to a changeless God beyond the confines of time and space. However, at the same time the church responds to change in the same way as other social institutions, and it is impossible to understand the Church of England without reference to its history.

I have been privileged in recent years to be able to see the work of national church institutions from the perspective not only of a General Synod member, but also as a member of a modern trade union, which came into being in August 1994. It is one thing to be concerned with the role, status and conditions of service of the clergy, as a parish priest and as a member of a professional union—it is quite another to be made aware of the implications of change as they are viewed centrally, not the least of these being the cost of improved conditions of service.

The working party was set up in 1991, and has met on a number of occasions since then at various venues. It became clear that because of other commitments its members felt unable to make a thorough study of the subject, and it was decided to produce a working paper which would set out the points which would need to be addressed if a Bill to disestablish the Church of England was ever introduced. The working party is now dissolved, though there is still need for another group to forward the discussion at a time when the concept of ‘re-establishment’ is gaining favour. The members of this working party, it should be stressed, were themselves divided about the need, or otherwise, of disestablishment. Equally, members of the working party were drawn from the established Church of England and the disestablished Church in Wales. We also had some input from members living abroad.

I want to suggest that, for possibly the first time since the Second World War, we have a genuine opportunity for the Church of England to reform its mission and pastoral coverage, and its institutions, for good and for the furtherance of the Kingdom of God. Our changing culture is the main context for this reform, but it is being made possible by two external drivers—the financial meltdown which is currently taking place at national and diocesan level, and the decline in clergy numbers which has forced the Church at last to embrace the new patterns of ministerial priesthood and lay leadership proposed by John Tiller in 1983. It is clear to me that the Church of England as an institution only embraces change when it is forced to do so. It would be perfectly possible to ignore our changing cultural situation and to die quietly in a corner, were it not for our lack of money and priests. I am upbeat about this, because I do not believe that the forces of reaction and darkness will prevail this time. But I am worried that the framework of ecclesiastical law will delay and attempt to prevent the changes that are needed—and to this concern I will return.

Under the auspices of the Wolfsburg Catholic Academy, invited delegates from England and Wales, France, Germany, Poland, Hungary and Spain assembled in Canterbury for three days in September 2000 to consider the present state of the Church/nation relationship in their home jurisdictions and the possible implications of a variety of European developments.

The Archbishops' Council has set up a Review of the Dioceses and Pastoral Measures and related Measures, inter alia, ‘… to ensure flexible and cost-effective procedures which fully meet changing pastoral and mission needs…’. This article is mainly devoted to the Pastoral Measure, the current use of which may be of interest. There are about 200 pastoral schemes and orders a year, of which about one in six attract objections. These schemes result in a net reduction of about 70 benefices a year (1%). At the same time, around 20 churches are declared redundant a year (0.1%), of which 60% are found suitable uses and less than 20% demolished. However, not all uses provide a permanent solution and old cases often require re-visiting.

The Second Colloquium of Anglican and Roman Catholic Canon Lawyers took place at St George's House, Windsor Castle, from 31st May to 3rd June 2000. The Colloquium was hosted by the Centre for Law and Religion at Cardiff Law School under the leadership of Professor Norman Doe, whose recent appointment to a personal chair at Cardiff University was a cause of much celebration amongst the participants. The Colloquium was designed to build upon the pioneering work of a similar venture convened last year in Rome by the Pontifical University of St Thomas Aquinas which, together with Duquesne University, Pittsburgh, USA, cosponsored the event. A report of the first Colloquium appears at (1999) 5 Ecc LJ 281.