Address by the Bishop of Liverpool, the Rt
Rev James Jones
Legal Service at York Minster
for the North Eastern Circuit
9 October 2005
I am honoured that the High Sheriffs of the North East
should join forces with the Dean and Chapter of York to invite me to preach
here at York Minster. This Cathedral has a special place in my affections,
it was here I was consecrated Bishop of Hull eleven years ago.
I remember my first institution of a vicar was in a charmingly named benefice
of Langtoft with Foxholes, Butterwick and Thwing. Our children who had lived
in Croydon (which doesn’t have quite the same ring to it) danced around
the house singing “Daddy’s going to Langtoft with Foxholes, Butterwick
and Thwing”.
I think it was there that the Church Warden who was twice my age and had become
Warden before I was born insisted on carrying my heavy case up the hill to
the church. I failed to dissuade him from such exertions. When I asked him
if he’d lived there all his life he replied “Not yet Bishop!”
I remember too that when a well known TV journalist rang directory enquiries
to find the number for the Bishop of Hull the lady said “Is that a pub?”,
“No” he said “We’re talking mitres and crooks!”
To which she responded “Where’s Hull?” And this was before
all the call centres in England were transferred to Hyderabad!Although I am
not a historian I imagine that never in our society has it been harder to
administer justice. The climate has changed, at first imperceptibly; but now
we feel the difference as various social, psychological and moral emissions
circulate in the atmosphere creating a new milieu for ancient principles.
The judiciary like the church has to adapt and adopt new practices.
I like the story of the newly appointed Bishop presiding at his first staff
meeting. “Gentlemen”, he said, calling them to order, “It’s
time to bring this diocese into the twentieth century”. “My Lord”,
interrupted the Archdeacon, “Don’t you mean the twenty first century?”
“Mr. Archdeacon” the Bishop replied “One century at a time,
please”.
I want to list a number of features which affect the climate in which the
judiciary operate. Individually they may not represent any threat to the climate
but cumulatively they could be as devastating as a hurricane and more importantly
have us all examining the base on which we stand.
Firstly, I sense a shift in moral practice. Politicians will rightly want
to argue about this but for an observer it seems to me that it is a given
in our society that being economical with the truth is now an acceptable way
of life. People will lie easily to get off work, to escape a fine, to take
goods back to a shop, to save themselves money and to save their own skin
and the fact that some politicians might be thought to do this does not cause
moral outrage. This is not just because of any low esteem in which they are
held but because such behaviour is no longer such an offence to the conscience
of the general public.
Secondly, guilt is out of fashion. It is seen now as a suitable case for treatment
rather than punishment. Guilt is a prescription for therapy not judgement.
But paradoxically it is the experience of guilt that proves a person’s
human dignity. If a convicted rapist expresses no guilt, no remorse whatsoever,
his capacity for humanity is in serious doubt. It is moral guilt that reveals
a person’s moral responsibility and their humanity.
Furthermore, “the causes of crime” syndrome places the blame beyond
the perpetrator. It pulls the rug from beneath society’s feet; from
telling people from negative backgrounds “the fact that you are here
may not be your fault, but it is your responsibility how you deal with it”.
The third point is about the media. They create the world in which we live,
move and have our being. They satisfy that blood-lust so cruelly satiated
in previous times and in other cultures by public floggings and executions.
The media famously polarise issues. They lack nuance and subtlety and don’t
deliver the detail of a case that the court hears, that the jury weighs and
on which the judge sentences. Media frenzy at the outcome of certain trials
leaves the public dissatisfied with the verdicts for they are not enabled
to understand the complexities of certain cases. The danger is that they can
leave the judiciary feeling alienated from the society it is serving.
Fourthly, the tensions between the Government and the judiciary over civil
liberties add to the division in society at a time when cohesion is most threatened
and yet most needed. It is for the legislature to legislate and for the judiciary
to interpret and apply the legislation. When the government exceeds its powers
it is for the courts to insist that the law is obeyed until it is changed.
But the encroachment on civil liberties is insidious, for it surfs the crest
of the wave of public fear. Politicians who have access to the camera and
microphone as part of the tools of their trade can stir up public anxiety
and leave the judiciary looking out of touch with changing times and moods.
The judiciary who are the protector of the citizen’s rights and liberties
are then portrayed by the media as the enemy of the state’s security.
When that happens we have reached a dangerous pass.
Fifthly, notwithstanding all that I said earlier about the “causes of
crime” there is a constant erosion of the bonds that bring solidarity
to society with the weakening of both the extended family and local community.
This is the root of the lack of respect in Britain today. The Government encourages
both parents - it actually provides incentives - to leave the home and the
children as early as possible for paid employment elsewhere and to hand the
nurture of their children over to those outside the family. There are no incentives
anymore for one of the parents to give themselves to the full-time nurture
of their children. All the surveys reveal that parents wish it could be economically
possible to spend more time in the family and two recent surveys have shown
that children raised during their early years in the home are significantly
better adjusted. This is where children learn self-esteem, to value themselves
and to respect others. The other day I saw a gang of eight year olds vandalising
our local park. When I warned them that the police were patrolling they shouted
back “We’ll take our chances”. Lack of respect in the home
rolls out into the streets, into the parks and eventually into the courts.
It leaves magistrates and judges frustrated by the surly indifference and
lack of respect for the courts and their judgements.
I have said enough about the drift of our society and of the bad news with
which we are all too familiar. But I have rehearsed it in this way for a reason.
Firstly, to say in such a service as this which affirms your vocation that
we the laity understand some of the pressures you are under. And secondly,
to bring you to a place and to a person in which we might find hope. I want
to draw your attention to the words of a judge. This judge was a man of many
parts and being a judge was not what he was most famous for - at least in
the public eye. The fact that the person is not best known for being a judge
is again a symptom of the age in which we live. This age would rather focus
on his healing, his counselling, his friendship and his empathy. He did possess
all these things. Yet he did so while at the same time being in no doubt about
his authority to act as a judge and execute judgement. I am, of course, talking
about Jesus who apart from the Kingdom of God and money talked more about
judgement than anything else. I’d like to ponder briefly on this saying
of his “As I hear, I judge; and my judgement is just”. I don’t
know if Law Lords devise their own heraldic shields but these words would
make an excellent motto.
“As I hear, I judge; and my judgement is just”.
There is a clarity and even charity in these words; and there is confidence.
These are virtues to cherish in the current uncertain climate when all is
change. I do not see the forces I’ve depicted losing their power in
the immediate future. What it means for you and FOR US is that more than ever
do we need to find and see in the judiciary this administration of justice
with such clarity, charity and confidence: “As I hear, I judge; and
my judgement is just”.
Interestingly Jesus went on to explain the justice of his judgements:
“Because I seek not my own will but the will of him who sent me”.
Justice, for him, was not about doing what he wanted to do; it was certainly
not about doing what others wanted him to do, either the people in the crowd
or the people in power though both pressed him to do their bidding. As they
will press you to do theirs. It was simply about doing what Justice required
of him or to put it in his own terms what God willed.
That’s why this service is so vitally important for you, for us and
for our society. Many, of course, will not see beyond the robes and the ritual.
But here in this service is a well for us to drink from. There will be much
clamouring in the years ahead for the judiciary to bend their will to the
will of the media-drugged public or to the will of a powerful Government.
It is important for us that you are sustained at such a time. Let this be
your motto “As I hear I judge; and my judgement is just, because I seek
not my own will (or that of others) but the will of him who sent me”.