THE DIVISION OF THE DIOCESE OF WINCHESTER. [To the Editor
of the SPECTATOR.]
SIR,—Many people, even outside the Diocese of Winchester, will be glad that more time has been given for the consideration of this difficult subject. Will you allow me to mention a few points on which some measure of agreement might perhaps be found ?
First, it would go far, I think, to meet objections if the Church leaders in the Diocese could see their way to give an assurance that no funds will be sought for the endowment of new Bishoprics until the poorest livings in the Diocese have been brought up to something like £300 a year. Rightly or wrongly, there is a strong feeling that that claim ought to take precedence. If that question were once settled, the ground would be cleared for further effort.
Secondly, I would venture to ask those responsible to examine yet once more the possibility of improving the present system without altering its main lines. The govern= ment of this Diocese by a Bishop with two Suffragans is part of a policy widely adopted in the Church. It has been attended with a great measure of success. And it is not easy to recast the old Dioceses of this country except as part of a general national plan. I hope the Committee may be willing to consider afresh whether it is quite impracticable, on the one hand, to increase the authority of the Suffragans, so as to enable them to take over more work from the Bishop, and, on the other hand, to organize arrangements—money and transport could be provided—for bringing the Clergy, when that is needed, more easily into touch with the Bishop himself. These things may prove too difficult. But the Bishopric of - Winchester has such traditions that no one would wish to divide it until every possible method of preserving it had been explored.
Thirdly, if that policy fails, and if by general agreement
the need for some division of the Diocese is allowed, then I would-ask the Committee again to consider whether a division into two Bishoprics, as was proposed some years ago, might not prove more practicable than a division into three. Pro- posals for a separate Diocese in Hampshire and for trans- ferring the Surrey area to the Bishopric of Southwark have been made. -But whether the Surrey area were transferred
to Southwark, or the important area North-East and North- West of Farnham were formed into a new Diocese, the main object, I submit, should be to preserve at Winchester one great Bishopric worthy of the name, maintaining most of its old associations and something of its old dignity and splendour, including the great Southern towns within its borders, and establishing, possibly near Southampton, a new home for the Bishop more convenient if less stately than the old.
Lastly, if any scheme of division be ultimately recommended, I would urge that ample time should be afforded to work out the proposals in detail ; to allow the ruri-decanal and the parochial assemblies to examine and approve them before they are adopted ; and to consider—if any new Bishopric be created—how best to accumulate in these difficult days a very substantial sum of money before financial commitments of a grave kind are incurred. We need not grudge time if we are to reconstitute on a satisfactory basis a Bishopric which has lasted already for a thousand years.—
Previous page
