Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T06:05:10.019Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Law, Theology and History in the Judgments of Chancellor Garth Moore

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 July 2008

Timothy Briden  and
Robert Ombres
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. As you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Research Article
Information
Ecclesiastical Law Journal , Volume 3 , Issue 15 , July 1994 , pp. 223 - 231
Copyright
Copyright © Ecclesiastical Law Society 1994

References

2. A biographical outline by Chancellor Michael Goodman is in (1990) 2 Ecc LJ 63.

3. SirOwen, John, St Paul's Church, Jarrow (1984) Chancery Court of York, unreported.Google Scholar

4. John Holden, in (1988) 1 Ecc LJ (3) 34 considers Garth Moore, and Chancellor Newsom, to stand in the list from Swinburn, Godolphin, Prideaux, Burn, Phillimore, Elphinstone and Wigglesworth: each an authority in his lifetime.

5. Briden, T. and Hanson, B., Moore's Introduction to English Canon Law (3rd ed.London, 1992) 1Google Scholar. This passage appeared in the first edition (1967).

6. In Re St Peter [1951] 2 All ER 53 at 58 he adverted to the need to bear in mind how important it is not to divorce judicial pronouncements from their context.

7. Re St Mary's, Barnes [1982] 1 All ER 458Google Scholar. The same principle was expressed in the first edition of the Introduction to English Canon Law, 132.

8. Bishopwearmouth (Rector and Churchwardens) v Adey [1958] 3 All ER 443.Google Scholar

9. Ibid.

10. Bishopwearmouth, supra and Re St Peter and St Paul, Leckhampton (Rector and Churchwardens) v Barnard and Others [1967] 3 All ER 1059.Google Scholar

11. Bishopwearmouth, supra 444.

12. Buckoke v Greater London Council [1971]Google Scholar 2 All ER 254 where the dictum of Lord Denning MR at 258 reflects the Introduction to English Canon Law (3rd ed), 58.Google Scholar

13. Bishopwearmouth, supra 446; Doe, N., ‘Toward a Critique of the Role of Theology in English Ecclesiastical and Canon Law’ (1992) 2 Ecc LJ 328–346 at 339.Google Scholar

14. Re St Nicolas [1961] 1 All ER 298 at 299; Leckhampton, supra 1060.Google Scholar

15. Leckhampton, supra 1059.

16. St Nicholas, supra 301.

17. Leckhampton, supra 1060; see also Bishopwearmouth, supra 445.

18. St Peter, Monkwearmouth (unreported).

19. St Oswald (1988) (unreported).

20. St Ann's Kew [1976] 1 All ER 461 at 464.Google Scholar

21. Bland v Archdeacon of Cheltenham [1972] 1 All ER 1012 at 1015.Google Scholar

22. In re Flenley [1981] Fam 64 at 70.Google Scholar

23. St Mary's Balham [1978] 1 All ER 993 at 996Google Scholar. In St Andrew & St Anne, Auckland (1983)Google Scholar (unreported) he held that the closure of a churchyard by Order in Council did not oust the faculty jurisdiction.

24. St Michael & All Angels (1989) (unreported).Google Scholar

25. ‘… or, to employ the technical language forced on me, whether there is danger of their becoming the objects of superstitious reverence’; Re St Peter, supra 59. The expression ‘;superstitious reverence’ was ‘unfortunate’ (ibid 60). A decade later Chancellor Moore added in brackets after the word ‘superstitious’, ‘(whatever that may mean)’; St Nicholas, supra 301.

26. Bishopwearmouth, supra 443.

27. St Peter, supra 62.

28. St Oswald (1986).

29. Mary, St, Beddington (1987) (unreported)Google Scholar. Compare Brandon, St, Brancepeth (1984)Google Scholar (unreported) where a similar conflict was resolved in favour of altering a 17th century re-ordering by Bishop Cosin on the grounds that ‘the needs of the living church carry the greater weight’. J. Holden has reflected that Garth Moore, together with Chancellor Newsom, has contributed by his administrative office and academic writings to the development and strengthening of a jurisdiction which might, otherwise, have lapsed or been abolished; (1987–1988) 1 Ecc LJ (2) 34.

30. St Oswald (1986). The text has been slightly amended. See also the observations concerning the establishment in the Introduction to English Canon Law (3rd ed) 14, 15 and 143.Google Scholar

31. St Peter, supra.

32. Bishopwearmouth, supra 443–444.

33. Matthew's, Re St, Wimbledon [1985] 3 All ER 670 at 672–673.Google Scholar

34. St Edward [1983] 1 WLR 364.Google Scholar

35. St Matthew, supra 672.

36. St Nicholas, supra 301.

37. John's, Re St, Chelsea [1962] 2 All ER 850 at 858.Google Scholar

38. Bishopwearmouth, supra 443.

39. St Peter, supra 61.

40. St Peter, supra 55.

41. Bishopwearmouth, supra 443–444.

42. St Nicholas, supra 301.

43. Mary's, Re St, Barnes [1982] supra 458.Google Scholar

44. Bishopwearmouth, supra 446.

45. Bland, supra 1017.

46. St Ann's supra 463.

47. St Nicholas, supra 300. Moore also said in this case that where the distinction is to be drawn between furnishings and ornaments is one of the great mysteries of Anglicanism.

48. St Nicholas, supra 300.

49. Leckhampton, supra 1060.

50. St Ann's, supra 463.

51. Ibid. 464, 465.

52. St Matthew's, supra 672; see Harte, D., ‘Doctrine, Conservation and Aesthetic Judgment in the Court of Ecclesiastical Causes Reserved’ (1987–1988) 1 Ecc LJ (2) 22–32 at 30.Google Scholar

53. St Oswald (1988).

54. St Oswald (1986).

55. See the review of the authorities on this topic in Re St John the Evangelist, Bierley [1989] 3 All ER 214.

56. For example, the reference to the watch-dog at Kew in St Ann's supra, was inspired by a couplet from Pope.

57. St Mary's, supra.

58. St Mary's, supra 998. In Re Woldingham Churchyard [1957] 2 All ER 323 at 324 he stated that he was prepared in the present case, though only out of consideration for the family of the deceased, to grant a confirmatory faculty.