Diocese's controversial past

Bishop Kenn

Treason, land-grabbers and illegal incomes are just some of the things previous Bishops of Bath and Wells have been involved with over the Diocese's 1,100 year history.

Local historian Dr Robert Dunning unearthed these startling stories during his research for his book marking the Diocese's anniversary.

He discovered there were many questionable bishops - partly because they weren't appointed there to be holy, as the role was more political until things changed in the 19th Century.

Church politics

At the time, the bishop's job was heavily influenced by politics rather than religion as each bishop was appointed by the King as it meant the Church would pay for government officials, rather than the State. This meant that politics often influenced decisions.

In 1090, it was decided that the bishop was to move from Wells to Bath, a move which was politically motivated as Bath was a bigger place so it was felt the Bishop should be based there.

Bishops were in charge of the courts

Another reason for the move was that as bishops were in control of matters of state, the bishop had to move to Bath so that he could keep an eye on the Cotswolds, a place where at the time there were some political shenanagins going on.

This left Wells stranded. The staff were made homeless - a situation the bishop at the time did not seem to be too concerned with.

There was a huge gap between ordinary people and those running their own parish churches with the individual bishops.

Why the diocese was set up From 705 to 909 AD, the Bishop of Sherborne was responsible for an area which encompassed Dorset, Somerset, Devon, Cornwall, Gloucestershire and parts of Wiltshire. This was too big an area for one Bishop, so the King decided to divide the area up to more manageable chunks so the Diocese of Bath and Wells was born.

"The honest people at the bottom who were getting on with their religion, were a long way removed from the bishops who were taking their money," said Dr Gunning.

"They feared him as he was a big landowner, he had courts so could summon them for their misdeeds but if the people in parishes had been as bad as what the bishops had been, then we wouldn't have our parish churches now."

The church being involved with politics also meant that bishops did not spend a lot of time in their parishes - Bishop Stillington (1466 - 91) only visited Somerset once for three weeks - so they appointed suffragan bishops whose role was to ordain priests, confirm children and consecrate churches.

The bishops were in charge of the courts which were in turn looked after by clerical lawyers who made a lot of money so there were plenty of scandals.

Illegal income

It could be said that Bishop Stillington was not in his parish because he was busy being Lord Chancellor - or being tried for treason as he supported the Yorkist's monarchy so when the Lancastrians came to power, they thought he had been up to treasonable behaviour.

In Dr Dunning's opinion, one of the worst bishops was Savaric Fitz-Geldewin who decided to appoint himself as the abbot of Glastonbury Abbey so he could have that income as he decided he wasn't earning enough from Bath. Although it was illegal, he got away with it because he knew the right people.

Dr Dunning has always loved history

Not all of the bishops had morally questionably behaviour however. Bishop Reginald was a hero of Dr Dunning's.

"He was a very worldly man, but he decided to rebuild the cathedral at Wells. That was pretty generous of him as he would have paid for it all," said Dr Dunning.

People in those days thought that if they spent all of their money, then they wouldn't go to hell - Dr Dunning calls this 'fire insurance'.

Another Bishop who was morally upstanding was the 17th Century's Bishop Ken, a school master at Winchester. He wrote hymns for the school boys and was very keen that ordinary people would understand about religion and worship.

'Too much money'

It could be argued that the reformation in the 16th Century was the turning point in bishops becoming humble and more involved with their parishes.

After the break from Rome, the bishops became very poor as they lost a lot of their land and the government decided there was too much money in religion so they took away their incomes and closed down many monasteries.

Lord Arthur Harvey took over in 1850

Despite this upheaval, the bishops' relationship with their parish did not really change until 1869 when Lord Arthur Harvey took over. A previous parish priest, the appointment was not political. He took to his role with great aplomb; treating the diocese as if it were his parish.

Modern day technology helped him to become more involved with communities as the railway meant he could get around better.

"He was welcomed by some but probably terrified others," said Dr Dunning. "He didn't like bells and smells at all. He didn't like choirs much or people who wore robes but then on the other hand he knew what being a bishop was all about and he was very keen, as he put it, for people to be saved and he therefore wanted to make sure that the life of the church was real."

He set up teaching courses so people knew what to believe and also helped to build many new churches.

It was from this point onwards that the Diocese developed into what it is today. Bishops were appointed for the right reasons, and parishioners in turn respected them and turned to them for their religious needs.

To find out more, check out Dr Robert Dunning's book 'A Diocesan Celebration'.