Placing Richard Hooker (d 1600) within the history of European thought has never been easy. The work of this Elizabethan defender of the English Church seems to defy exact categorisation. Publication in the Folger Library Edition of Hooker's complete works has, however, made knowledge about him easier to acquire than it once was, and in particular it makes possible a more accurate assessment of a question of interest to readers of this Journal. How much did he know about the ius commune, the amalgam of Roman and canon laws that governed practice in the tribunals of the Church? More than that, because the Folger Edition includes all Hooker's surviving writing—even his sermons and autograph notes—it is possible to discover more about the ways in which Hooker made use of the legal sources at his disposal, including those from the Roman and canon laws.

In an article in this Journal recently Peter Smith set out the history of what he called a most peculiar property, the advowson. He finished by mentioning the introduction of the current legislation, the Patronage (Benefices) Measure 1986. This article seeks to take up where he finished by reviewing the practice of appointments under the 1986 Measure, and considering some of the lessons of the last few years. I shall also argue that the time is right to review the Patronage (Benefices) Measure Code of Practice, in the light of some of the legal issues I highlight.

Being given a title is like being given a very broad question in an examination paper. At first sight it seems obvious what should be put forward by way of answer and on closer inspection one becomes less sure! So I tender my thoughts for inspection, conscious that some will feel there are gaps and perhaps others who will think I am stating too much of the obvious.

There is adventure about—both at home and abroad. More especially, events are taking place in respect to the place of visual art in the witness of the Church that a generation ago, or even less, would have been laughed out of court: for the counsel of this committee or that, whether at parish vestry or cathedral chapter, would have looked askance at what, today, seems to be accepted almost on the nod. Examples of what is occurring, and especially in cathedrals up and down the country, are easy to cite. One need think only of recent exhibitions at Salisbury; the use of video (Bill Viola's The Messenger) at Durham; the appointment of an artist in residence at Gloucester; Sculpture for Winchester, the 1998 exhibition arranged in part across the Inner Close of the cathedral; an exhibition in November 1999 of Sussex artists in the North Transept at Chichester, conducted with a view to raising funds for the continuing restoration of the cathedral; Anthony Green's Resurrection, An Act of Faith at Christ Church, Oxford; or the planned (at the moment of writing) millennial exhibition, Stations, the New Sacred Art, to be held in 2000 both at the cathedral in Bury St Edmunds and at twelve associated parishes. Varied as these examples are, they all share a very distinct characteristic—the temporary nature of the arrangements, for which no formal permission or approval was legally required from any supererogatory body or bodies. Reasons for this development are complex, and the outcomes— which frequently create controversy—are often fiercely debated. What has received less attention, however, is the foundation of the present relationship between art and the Church, a relationship that can be seen to stretch back to a judgment made by George Bell, then Bishop of Chichester, in his own consistory court in 1954, concerning a design for a mural by Hans Feibusch in the parish church at Goring-by-Sea.

The church declares and witnesses to a changeless God beyond the confines of time and space. However, at the same time the church responds to change in the same way as other social institutions, and it is impossible to understand the Church of England without reference to its history.

I have been privileged in recent years to be able to see the work of national church institutions from the perspective not only of a General Synod member, but also as a member of a modern trade union, which came into being in August 1994. It is one thing to be concerned with the role, status and conditions of service of the clergy, as a parish priest and as a member of a professional union—it is quite another to be made aware of the implications of change as they are viewed centrally, not the least of these being the cost of improved conditions of service.

Under the auspices of the Wolfsburg Catholic Academy, invited delegates from England and Wales, France, Germany, Poland, Hungary and Spain assembled in Canterbury for three days in September 2000 to consider the present state of the Church/nation relationship in their home jurisdictions and the possible implications of a variety of European developments.

The Second Colloquium of Anglican and Roman Catholic Canon Lawyers took place at St George's House, Windsor Castle, from 31st May to 3rd June 2000. The Colloquium was hosted by the Centre for Law and Religion at Cardiff Law School under the leadership of Professor Norman Doe, whose recent appointment to a personal chair at Cardiff University was a cause of much celebration amongst the participants. The Colloquium was designed to build upon the pioneering work of a similar venture convened last year in Rome by the Pontifical University of St Thomas Aquinas which, together with Duquesne University, Pittsburgh, USA, cosponsored the event. A report of the first Colloquium appears at (1999) 5 Ecc LJ 281.