The Church enters into all interstices of national life with its 42 mainland cathedrals and more than 16,000 churches, Frank Field writes in The Times of April 15. The established Church was grounded in the post-Reformation idea that the Church and State were one and the same.
As Richard Hooker put it in the 1590’s in his Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity,“there is not any man of the Church of England but the same man is also a member of the Commonwealth — nor any man a member of the Commonwealth which is not also of the Church of England.”
The essence of this lingers today where the Church enters into all interstices of national life with its 42 mainland cathedrals and more than 16,000 churches and trained ministers serving every inch of the community and open to every local inhabitant. There are political benefits to the state in the understanding of everyday life that arises from such an involvement. As Lord Hurd of Westwell has remarked, such an understanding can be a constant irritant to government, none more so than with the publication in 1985 of Faith in the City, critical of Thatcherite policies which led to Margaret Thatcher in her memoirs wishing there was “a training camp for bishops”.
Though the Church has 26 bishops in the Lords, representing only 3 per cent of membership, the Church never dominates but ensures that the voice of ethos and faith is heard. That reflects, too, a consciousness and moral approach to the problems of our time.
The bishops are not whipped, they may vote differently on the same issues, but their vote rarely decides the outcome. Three bishops did sway the vote against a supercasino for Manchester, a victory over mammon, when the Bill was lost by three votes in the Lords.
A disadvantage of establishment to the Church is that all church legislation must be approved by Parliament. This did not play well when Parliament rejected the Prayer Book Measure in 1927. The Church called Parliament “an alien and improper master”. Nor did it play well when Parliament held up a Church Wardens’ Measure and rejected a new system for consecrating bishops.
The Church has turned this disadvantage into an advantage and welcomes this ultimate Parliamentary overview of its legislation.
The argument for disestablishment is that we live in a secular society where there is no place for an established church. On the BBC The Big Questions programme, one secularist suggested that the Queen should decide whether she wished to be head of state or supreme governor of the Church.
Disestablishing the Church would lead inevitably to scaling back the presence in —and service — to all communities to which the Church is presently committed. It would risk undermining the place of popular church schools, threaten the universal chaplaincy in prisons, hospitals and the armed services, and strengthen the hand of those campaigning to keep religious voices out of the public arena.
The Church should get the best out of its relations with the State, and the State the best out of its relations with the Church. The last government reaffirmed this commitment and the present government has given no indication it wishes to deviate from this.