Thursday 22 May 1975

[313-18] Agenda and preconization. Excused: R. Murray, W. P. Allen, J. Barnes, J. W. R. Sarkies, F. M. Cubbon, F. Hamer. Bishop's charge, followed by announcements.

Bishop ys statement on Bishopscourt

I feel I have a duty to make an up-to-date report to this convocation on the matter of Bishopscourt. This indeed will be the first opportunity I have had of speaking to all my clergy on this subject.

First, let me say quite definitely that when I was asked by the prime minister whether I would allow him to submit my name to her majesty the queen for this appointment, I was not allowed to see the diocese and the see house before giving my decision. As a result of discussions within the house of bishops in recent months, the archbishop of Canterbury has now cleared with Downing Street that in future, a person invited to accept a diocesan bishopric will be allowed privately to see the bishop's house of residence. Certain people have said that I should have done this in march of last year, but I state again this was not then permitted.

Second, all the see houses in England are owned and maintained by the church commissioners of England and the church commissioners are responsible for the maintenance of the house and its grounds, provide the staff to enable a bishop to administer his diocese together with his gardener [and] car. This did not apply to this diocese, but thanks to the action of the General Synod, a measure has been approved and is now awaiting the royal assent, which will bring this bishopric much more into line with those in England. But the church commissioners of England will not have responsibility for the see house of this diocese.

Third, following the decision of the diocesan synod, your church commissioners have approached [the] government to ascertain whether it would be prepared to purchase Bishopscourt for the Manx people. Following a reply, your commissioners are now meeting with the ecclesiastical committee of Tynwald to discuss the future, and this meeting will be held on 2 June. It is clear to me, as a member of Tynwald, that had we taken an alternative approach and asked for financial help to divide the house, as outlined at the diocesan synod, in the light of the present economic climate, such assistance would not have been forthcoming.