Bishop Of Worcester Research Articles

Archbishop Wulfstan of York and the Danish Conquest of 1016

Abstract Wulfstan, archbishop of York (1002–1023) and bishop of Worcester (1002–1016), occupies a pre-eminent place in the political history of eleventh-century England, yet surprisingly little is known of his life and career. The consequences of this ignorance are particularly acute for the years surrounding the Danish Conquest of 1016. The upheavals of this period led Wulfstan to compose his most well-known homily, the Sermo lupi ad Anglos (1014), resign from the see of Worcester (1016), and transfer his loyalty from the English king Æthelred to the Danish conqueror Cnut. Yet while the years 1013 to 1018 left discernible traces in Wulfstan’s thought, the particular circumstances that produced these traces can be perceived only dimly. The means by which Wulfstan maintained his status through the years of conquest are significant for more than just their impact on his career and evolving political vision. While his role as a leading legislator during the reigns of both Æthelred and Cnut has been taken as evidence that he managed to emerge from the Conquest relatively unscathed, Wulfstan’s influence at the royal court during these years was inconsistent at best and his success in navigating the change in power was not inevitable. Wulfstan’s approach to the complicated politics of the Conquest thus provides a useful case-study of the various ways in which the Church, its leaders as much as its institutions, balanced competing allegiances to king and conqueror.

Edward Stillingfleet and the 17th Century Episcopacy

The 17th century was a difficult time for bishops in England. Throughout the century, the country was beset with religious and political conflicts and violence, both verbal and physical. This situation was compounded by factions within monarchy, parliament and Church. The Church, in its widest sense, was roughly split between three entities: dissenters, Anglicans and Roman-Catholics. Before the Interregnum, the Episcopacy had been abolished although bishops did not lose their clerical status. Edward Stillingfleet (1635-1699), ordained in 1658 before the Restoration of 1660, believed that Episcopal oversight was the best method of Church jurisdiction. He noted that neither Christ not the Apostles had decreed any specific of Church government. If individual Churches or ministers stayed true to accepted practices and beliefs, there would have been less need for the Episcopacy. After the Glorious Revolution in 1689, Stillingfleet became the Bishop of Worcester. Throughout his career, Stillingfleet continually defended the Episcopacy against attacks by Dissenters who were against Episcopal authority and by Roman-Catholics who felt the bishops had deserted the true Christian faith.

Bishop Morley of Winchester, 1598–1684: Politician, Benefactor, Pragmatist, by Andrew Thomson

Born at the end of the Elizabethan era, George Morley played pivotal roles in the turbulent political and religious developments of the Restoration period. This book paints a detailed portrait of Morley’s life and deeds, from his early life, through his exile and subsequent career as dean of Christ Church Oxford, bishop of Worcester and bishop of Winchester, to his death and benefactions. The book’s subtitle, ‘Politician, Benefactor, Pragmatist’, encapsulates Andrew Thomson’s three main strands of inquiry. He focuses particularly on Morley’s involvement in debate about whether the re-established (Anglican) Church should pursue uniformity, comprehension or toleration. Some believed that doctrinal uniformity was the only way to regain control following the restoration of the bishops, while others felt that the best course was to compromise with, or even tolerate, other Protestant groups. Previous commentators have concluded that Morley was determined to enforce uniformity and quash dissent, whereas Thomson suggests that...

Sacred Memory and Monastic Friendship in Eadmer of Canterbury’sVita S. Oswaldi

Between the years of 1113-1116, Prior Nicholas and the monks of St. Mary’s, Worcester, petitioned Eadmer of Canterbury to re-write the vita of their monastic founder St. Oswald. The years preceding this request were a period of hardship for the community of St. Mary’s, as the brethren coped with the burning of their church, the death of monastic elders, and the installation of a royal clerk as bishop of Worcester. In the face of such trials, the monks of Worcester turned to St. Oswald to justify their continued existence and consolidate their corporate identity. Yet, their decision to solicit Eadmer raises questions about the devotional function of the new Vita S. Oswaldi for the brethren of Worcester. While Eadmer modelled his text on Byrhtferth of Ramsey’s eleventh-century biography, he altered the nature of St. Oswald’s sanctity by subordinating the saint’s virtuous development to the leadership of the archbishops Oda and Dunstan of Canterbury. Eadmer incorporated St. Oswald into a new sacred hierarchy, whereby the saint’s virtuous life served to support Canterbury’s contemporary claims to English episcopal primacy. The monks of Worcester had maintained an amiable relationship with Canterbury since the Norman conquest, and Nicholas’s decision to commission Eadmer likewise reflects how the chapter of St. Mary’s perceived itself in relation to Canterbury. Nicholas and the monks of Worcester hoped to benefit from Canterbury’s predominance in the English Church, especially regarding the preservation of their corporate rights and influence in future episcopal elections. This article explores the reception of sacred history in the community of St. Mary’s, Worcester, and the manner in which the brethren used the memory of their corporate past to reaffirm their place, identity, and continuity as a monastic body. It further argues that the episcopal priories of Worcester and Canterbury maintained a historical support network, in which members of each community recast information about St. Oswald and England’s ecclesiastical past to reaffirm bonds of monastic friendship and share in sacred prestige.

The Revival of a Diocese: The Role of Bishop Morley at Worcester 1660-62

ABSTRACTGeorge Morley was Bishop of Worcester for only eighteen months but at a critical juncture: the Restoration of the Church and the Monarchy. The purpose of this article is to describe and assess his achievement. The episcopal apparatus had to be revived after fourteen years of abolition. In addition to routine activities, such as institutions of clergy, diocesan visitations, confirmations and the church court, the treatment of intruder clergy and a backlog of building repairs made his agenda particularly challenging. Worcester was an important diocese and was probably seen as a training ground for a top post in the Church. This article surveys Morley’s record as far as surviving documents allow and attempts to place it in context. Despite shortcomings, Morley more than fulfilled his promise which no doubt led to his swift translation to Winchester.

Peter Hoare and the Hurd Library at Hartlebury Castle, Worcestershire

The Hurd Library was founded in 1782 at Hartlebury Castle by George III’s favourite bishop: Richard Hurd, Bishop of Worcester from 1781 to 1808. It contains, as well as Hurd’s own collection, books from the libraries of Alexander Pope, Ralph Allen, and William Warburton, and is housed in a purpose-built room, constructed above the long gallery. As the only surviving library of an Anglican bishop still in its original setting it is of exceptional importance and of great value to students. For some 170 years it has had to face spasmodic threats to its survival in situ but now, thanks in part to the support of many advisers, such as Peter Hoare, and bodies connected with the preservation of historic libraries, it faces a more secure future.

The Employment Status of Clergy Revisited: Sharpe v Bishop of Worcester

The Employment Status of Clergy Revisited: <i>Sharpe v Bishop of Worcester</i>

Sharpe v Bishop of Worcester

Sharpe v Bishop of Worcester

Volker Steenblock/Hans-Ulrich Lessing (Eds): Vom Ursprung der Kultur. Mit einem Gespräch mit Günter Dux

There is a popular anecdote about Darwin’s theory of evolution, which, while it may not be true, nevertheless seems to illustrate the extent to which his thoughts put an affront upon many of his Victorian contemporaries. In one version it is told that the Bishop of Worcester’s wife had been listening to a scholarly debate on Darwin’s Origin of Species and, after the scientists had left, said to her companion: ‘‘Let us hope it is not true. But if it is true, let us hope it does not become generally known’’ (Gratzer 2002, 88). Looking at the discussions in philosophy of culture, one could for a long time get the impression that philosophers took a similar attitude towards evolutionist views on man by remaining conspicuously silent with respect to nature. Luckily, the situation is now changing as a number of significant publications and research projects have begun to appear in the recent years (e.g. Gerhardt and Nida-Rumelin 2010; Gerhardt et al. 2011 etc.). This development is, on the one hand, due to an increasing open-mindedness on the side of philosophy (cf. e.g. Welsch 2012), and, on the other hand, due to the emergence of more compatible theories like Tomasello’s theory of communication on the side of the natural sciences (cf. Tomasello 2006). The present book brings up a delicate subject in this context, namely the highly controversial question of the origin of culture. The problem of the beginning of culture has to deal with the relationship between natural and cultural history. In order to avoid a reductionist view—be it either naturalistic or culturalistic—the editors propose a multiperspective and differentiated approach to the transition from nature to culture, thereby taking recent scientific results into account. Still, the contributors of the volume take different paths according to their different disciplinary backgrounds. One of the merits of this book is that it includes social theory as well as philosophy. Since the publication has its roots in a dialogue with the sociologist Gunter Dux, his ‘‘historico-genetic theory of culture’’ (Dux 2011) is obviously one of the common reference points of this volume.

Wulfstans kodex og Schumachers liste. Om den ældste fortegnelse over håndskrifter i Det Kongelige Bibliotek

Wulfstans kodex og Schumachers liste. Om den ældste fortegnelse over håndskrifter i Det Kongelige Bibliotek

Anglo-Saxon Prognostics: An Edition and Translation of Texts from London, British Library, MS Cotton Tiberius A.iii

Anglo-Saxon Prognostics: An Edition and Translation of Texts from London, British Library, MS Cotton Tiberius A.iii

EDWIN SANDYS, ARCHBISHOP OF YORK 1577–88, ‘STIFF-NECKED, WILFUL AND OBSTINATE’: CONFLICT IN THE ELIZABETHAN CHURCH

IN JANUARY 1577, William Cecil, Lord Burghley, wrote to Henry Hastings, 3rd Earl of Huntingdon and Lord President of the Council in the North, to inform him that Queen Elizabeth I had nominated Bishop Sandys of London to be the new Archbishop of York. His letter was also intended to enlist Huntingdon’s help in securing the houses of Bishopthorpe and Cawood for Sandys’ use.1 Edwin Sandys had risen from Bishop of Worcester to Bishop of London, and his progression through the ranks of the ecclesiastical hierarchy of the Elizabethan Church echoed the progress of his predecessor at York, Edmund Grindal. Having succeeded Grindal as Bishop of London he was once again to replace him, this time at York, whilst Grindal went on to be Archbishop of Canterbury. In contrast to Grindal’s career, Sandys left in his wake a trail of complaints about his financial dealings, which were often exacerbated by his rather irascible personality which seemed to engender disputes. At the end of April 1577 Sandys took ‘farewell’ as the key theme of the sermon he delivered at St Paul’s Cross prior to taking up his office at York. The sermon ‘For the Rest, Brethren, Fare ye well’ expressed Sandys’ genuine regret at leaving London, making comparison between his situation and that of St Paul, who was called away from his diligent labours at Corinth to preach elsewhere.2 Adamant that he would not forget those he left behind, he was keen to state that he was not a saint like St Paul, but that he too had loved his congregation and had sought to persuade rather than to use correction to reform transgressors.3 Sandys’ assertion that where there was

Roger, Bishop of Worcester (c 1134–1179)

Roger, Bishop of Worcester (c 1134–1179)

The Bishops of Worcester in the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries: Easy Come, Easy Go

In a church in which episcopal translation was common, Worcester was first in line. Over the period from the installation of Bishop Reynolds in 1307 through the translation of Bishop Alcock in 1486, the diocese had more bishops than any other (twenty-three, plus two quashed elections) which also meant the shortest average tenure. This article analyses the reasons for this rapid turnover through a study of the bishops themselves. As a mid-level diocese (in terms of resources and centrality) Worcester was treated as a proving ground for some men who would move to richer and more coveted sees, a sinecure for men with creditable records of service (mostly for the king) but no longer wanted or needed, and a terminal position for some who might rate a bishopric but who would die in office there. One bishop had been prior of the monastic cathedral, a few were from the aristocracy, most were well educated, and most were reasonably diligent regarding relations with the monks and their visitation record. Many were active players in the negotiations that accompanied the numerous instances of translation. In these regards Worcester is perhaps typical, but with more coming and going than in any other English see in these years.

The &lt;i&gt;South English Legendary&lt;/i&gt; “Life of St. Egwine”: An Edition

The Middle English verse “Life of St. Egwine” is one of the many hagiographic poems affiliated with the so-called South English Legendary or Legendaries (SEL) , a widely copied collection of vernacular devotional texts whose earliest compilation has been dated to the thirteenth century, and whose latest manuscripts date to the first half of the fifteenth. A minor saint, Ecgwine was the third bishop of Worcester and the founder of the monastic community at Evesham Abbey. One of the most striking features of his early hagiography is that the earliest version of his vita contains the only surviving account of a dispute between a monastery and a tenant to be dated to the Anglo-Saxon period. This is indicative of his cult's close association with the endowed properties of Evesham, an aspect of his hagiographic tradition that is also discernible in the SEL legend.

TheSouth English Legendary“Life of St. Egwine”: An Edition

The Middle English verse “Life of St. Egwine” is one of the many hagiographic poems affiliated with the so-calledSouth English LegendaryorLegendaries (SEL), a widely copied collection of vernacular devotional texts whose earliest compilation has been dated to the thirteenth century, and whose latest manuscripts date to the first half of the fifteenth. A minor saint, Ecgwine was the third bishop of Worcester and the founder of the monastic community at Evesham Abbey. One of the most striking features of his early hagiography is that the earliest version of hisvitacontains the only surviving account of a dispute between a monastery and a tenant to be dated to the Anglo-Saxon period. This is indicative of his cult's close association with the endowed properties of Evesham, an aspect of his hagiographic tradition that is also discernible in theSELlegend.

‘AD Sedem Episcopalem Reddantur’: Bishops, Monks, and Monasteries in the Diocese of Worcester in the Eighth Century

Alas! brother, alas! For almost everywhere in this land the rule of regular life falls away and the secular way of life thrives.Alcuin of York’s famous lament to Abbot. Æthelbald of Wearmouth-Jarrow at the end of the eighth century could serve as a neat summary of the traditional scholarly picture of eighth-century Anglo-Saxon monasticism: a movement in near-terminal decline with falling standards in religious observance and monasteries increasingly coming under secular control. The bishops of Worcester have been seen by many scholars as taking a leading role in the fight-back against this creeping secularization. It was not, however, that they played a key role in the drafting of conciliar legislation or that they produced texts condemning the lax standards of Anglo-Saxon monasticism. Rather, successive bishops of Worcester have been seen, since the eighteenth century at least, as challenging secularization through the property strategies they adopted. In order to challenge lay lordship, secularization and declining monastic standards the bishops of Worcester in the eighth century were, in Brooks’ words, ‘attempting, with mixed success, to persuade lords to bequeath their family monasteries to the see of Worcester’. This allowed the bishops to have greater control over the monasteries in tbeir diocese than existing legislation would otherwise have permitted. The bishops could directly intervene in the affairs of these monasteries and impose their own abbots and staff. As Thacker argues, the bishops of Worcester were attempting to ensure ‘independent proprietary monasteries were brought under their control and put in the charge of priests from the episcopalfamilia.

St Wulfstan and his World

St Wulfstan and his World. Edited by JULIA S. BARROW and N.P. BROOKS (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2005; pp. xx + 242. £50). WULFSTAN, bishop of Worcester (1062–95), is noteworthy both as the English bishop who lasted longest in the new world after 1066 and as the subject of a near contemporary Life, originally written in Old English by his chaplain Coleman but extant now only in the Latin translation by William of Malmesbury (a new edition appeared in Oxford Medieval Texts in 2002). As the last Anglo-Saxon bishop, Wulfstan is of interest to those seeking to analyse the Norman Conquest and its aftermath: how cataclysmic an event was it, what of the old order survived and what cultural fissions and fusions did it generate? And for those working on hagiography and cult there is Wulfstan the saint, for Coleman's Life was intended to secure public recognition of the bishop's sanctity. In this it was successful. Miracles occurred at Wulfstan's tomb, a ritual elevation took place in 1198 and finally the—very rare—privilege of papal canonisation followed in 1203.

A Date to Remember: 4004 BC

Archbishop James Ussher's fabled date of 4004 BC for the Creation of the World was not his, and was not introduced to English Bibles by him. Long before Ussher, the number 4004 had arisen from the period of Adam's captivity, four thousand years, to which had been added a four-year adjustment to the early Christian calendar. These two component numbers were wholly unrelated. Ussher's famous work Annals of the World cited dates in three ways: (1) according to the Julian Period, (2) as ‘Years of the World’ beginning at the Creation, and (3) as years Before Christ, or BC. Printing of dates BC in English Bibles, for example 4004 BC, was introduced in 1701, almost fifty years after Ussher's death, by William Lloyd, chronologer, scholar, politician and, at that time, Bishop of Worcester.

Diocesan Politics in the See of Worcester 1218–1266

The two bishops of Worcester between 1218 and 1266, William of Blois and Walter de Cantilupe, were in many ways very similar. Both were dedicated reformers, who made use of the cathedral chapter's churches for their own households for example. Yet their relationships with the monastic chapter of Worcester were very different. William's episcopate was marked by acrimony and dispute, Walter's by harmony and assent. The reasons for these differences are complex but include the personalities and backgrounds of the bishops, the chapter's growing awareness of the limitations of monastic chapters for bishops' patronage and political changes within England.