Time to go The established status of the CofE is unhelpful and dangerous, writes Edward Morrison


When I volunteered to write this article, I was astonished by the hostile reacion of some to me even broaching this subject. However, the accusations of extremism and even borderline mental illness I encountered have made me more convinced than ever that the established status of the Church of England is both unhelpful and dangerous. Such irrational reacions are the result of fear, a state of being unfiting for Christians and damaging to the Church. Tomas Aquinas tells us, ‘Fear is born of love, since man fears the loss of what he loves. Hence worldly fear is that which arises from worldly love – as from an evil root – for which reason worldly fear is always evil.’ Fear of disestablishment therefore comes from a love of establishment. Establishment for some has become a safety blanket. It protects us, shelters us, ‘gives us a platform’ as, no doubt, you will have heard its advocates claim. Tis sort of sentiment is not befiting of Christians because it cleaves to the world rather than to the cross and to Christ. Christians should always have confidence in the Lord, since we are heirs to his faithful promises.


Lack of confidence Te fear of much of the Church of England hierarchy is


borne out of the stake they have in establishment. Now fear is not always born from bad motives, indeed quite the reverse, but I do suggest that an underlying lack of confidence may be its source. I do not pretend to be ignorant as to why some of us might lack such confidence in this present time – it is perfectly understandable on one level. Church atendance has halved since the Sixties and continues to fall, and the recent census demonstrated a steep decline in Christian affiliation from 71% to 59% over ten years. Would the disestablishment of the Church of England thus be another page in the decline and fall of Christianity in Britain? Surely then as Anglicans is it not our duty to protect the privileges of the Church in this land? Plausible as this reasoning may seem on the surface, it is nonetheless a fallacy.


the Christian faith at the heart of our national life. Yet the results of this presence do not testify to such an assertion. Te 1967 Abortion Act and the 1969 Divorce Reform Act


were both passed in the face of such a Christian presence and have done great damage to family life in this country: 180,000 unborn children are killed every year; nearly half of children are born out of wedlock, and over 40% of marriages now end in divorce. Te state secondary school, once invariably an institution with a sound Christian basis, has been radically secularized. Hymns, prayers and the Bible have all vanished from this public domain where they were once bread and buter. We have vast swathes of the younger generation whose understanding of Islam is more sophisticated than that of Christianity – testament to the confidence and vitality of the Muslim faith in Britain. Where were our established bishops during this process? What did establishment do for our faith in the public sphere when this happened? One might argue that whatever the rights and wrongs of this


is it appropriate for us to continue to collude with what is effectively National Apostasy?


secularization process, regretable though it is, it has happened and as such disestablishment would be both simply reacionary and illogical – a tantrum akin to Enoch Powell’s zeal for full- scale decolonization aſter Indian independence. But the collapse of Christianity as the national religion does not in itself demonstrate


the the against the forces of secularization.


A hindrance to mission Te two recent political issues of women bishops and same-


Growing indifference At one time Parliament and the Church were of one mind


in fundamental maters of faith and ethics. MPs and Peers were, by and large, pracising Christians; bishops were more likely to defend the faith rather than seek the world’s approval – though not by any means all Catholics, most had a sound Catholic understanding of the Church as rooted in Christ and the tradition of its forebears. Tis is manifestly no longer the case. Since the Sixties the


state has changed from being at least a nominally Christian edifice to one completely indifferent to Christianity; and which therefore finds itself increasingly at odds with the Church. Tose with whom I have discussed the issue of disestablishment have regularly claimed that the presence of our bishops in the House of Lords has done much to promote


6 ■ newdirections ■ June 2014


sex marriage have, however, demonstrated clearly that the established status of the Church of England is a hindrance to its mission and witness in this country and should be abolished. Same-sex marriage in particular has highlighted the logical perversity of our head of state functioning as the Supreme Governor of the Church of England. Churchmen across the land should look on with astonishment that a bill which was so clearly and manifestly opposed to the teachings of the Church, and publicly deplored by the Lords Spiritual (at least officially) should be signed into law by the Supreme Governor. Such a situation makes a mockery of the Church of England as an ecclesial body, and is a clear example of how inappropriate the formal relationship between Church and state now is. It was rumoured that bishops in the House of Lords


equivocated on whether to vote on same-sex marriage legislation at all. John Bingham reported for theDaily Telegraph on 2 June 2013 that bishops ‘feared a large bloc of clerics turning up to vote down the bill could rebound on the Church, reopening questions over the right of bishops to sit in the Lords and even raise the prosect of disestablishment.’ It would seem the Vicar of Bray has been empurpled. Such secular and


need absurdity


disestablishment. It does, however, highlight


‘establishment’ acing as a vanguard


for of


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36