I am so constantly asked in the course of my inspection of the Churches
in the Archdeaconry of Winchester what are the duties and responsibilities
of Churchwardens, that I have thought it might be useful to publish the
following remarks, which were in substance delivered in my charge to the
Clergy and Churchwardens of the Archdeaconry of Winchester in the Spring of
1889. Many requests were then made to me that I would publish my
charge as a manual for Churchwardens, and it is in consequence of those
requests that this publication has been put forth.
Let me first refer to the origin of the office. The name appears
in connection with the ecclesiastical history of the fourth century.
St.
Augustine refers to certain officers in the Church called seniores
Ecclesiastici. These officers were not ordained persons, but yet
had some concern in the care of the Church. They were entrusted with
the treasure and management of the outward affairs of the Church.
These persons may be looked upon as the ecclesiastical ancestors of our
present race of Churchwardens. [2] In Lyndwood’s Provinciale there
are allusions in some of the Provincial Constitutions of the fourteenth and
fifteenth Centuries which seem to point to officers in connection with the
Church corresponding to our present Churchwardens. It is not,
however, until after the Reformation that we find their duties distinctly
defined in successive Canons, as in 1571 (Cardwell’s
Synodalia, I, 122), in 1597 (Cardwell’s Synodalia, I,
160), and in our own Canons of 1603.
It is not desirable on the present occasion to trace the variations in
the duties of Churchwardens through successive centuries. Each age has, of
course, its own special features, and may require different treatment to
its predecessor, but there is no doubt whatever as to the fact that ever
since the Reformation Churchwardens have been recognised as officers of the
Church, with their position and duties distinctly defined both by canon and
statute law. Before particularising their duties I must point out
what is the law as to their election.
Who, then are qualified to be Churchwardens?
Aliens, Roman Catholics, Jews, children under ten years of age, and
persons who have been convicted of felony are absolutely disqualified.
The following cannot be compelled to serve the office if they personally
object to do so:
Peers, Sheriffs, Clergymen, Members of the House of Commons,
Magistrates, Barristers and Solicitors, Physicians and Surgeons, Dissenting
Ministers, Officers in the Navy or Army on full pay, men in the Militia or
Army Reserve, Registrars of Births, Deaths, and Marriages, Officials
of the Customs, Excise, or Post Office, and those already acting as
Churchwardens elsewhere.
With these exceptions the law of the land is that, if a householder
dwelling in the parish be legally elected to the office, he must serve as
Churchwarden. In old parishes dissenters, if elected, may appoint a
deputy to be approved of by the Vestry. [4] But in parishes formed
under the Acts 1 and 2, Will. IV, c. 38, sec. 16; 6 and 7 Vict., c. 37,
sec. 17; or 19 and 20 Vict., c. 104, which re-enacts 6 and 7 Vict., c. 37,
sec. 17, with reference to this point, it is expressly en-acted that
Churchwardens must be Churchmen. Churchwardens ought to be elected in
new parishes twenty-one days after the consecration of the Church
thereof.
Females, although there has been no legal decision authorising their
appointment, are occasionally, if otherwise eligible, appointed to serve
the office, but it is not likely that the Courts, if called upon, would be
so ungallant as to compel a female householder, if elected, to serve
against her will.
In my own Archdeaconry there are several ladies who have been elected
Churchwardens, and they do their duty right well.
A Churchwarden must be resident in the parish for which he is elected to
serve. The contrary has been held to be the law for some years past,
but a decision of the Court of Queen’s Bench, reported in the
Times of Nov. 20th, 1889, decides absolutely that both in new and
old parishes none but residents are qualified to serve as Churchwardens. [5]
With reference to this point, the following memorandum has been issued
for use in the diocese of Rochester by Chancellor Dibden:—
It is desirable, wherever practicable, to be careful that the persons
chosen “live” in the parish. It sometimes happens,
however, that it is difficult to find suitable persons inside, and the
parish wish to appoint an outsider. This should never be done if
objection is raised even by a single parishioner, because the appointment
is technically faulty, and could be set aside on mandamus on the
application of even one individual. If, however, the parish vestry are
unanimous, and the appointment is desirable in other respects, no harm will
ensue from the fact that the chosen churchwarden is technically
ineligible. Unless and until his position is challenged, as by a
mandamus, he will have the same powers and rights as any other
Churchwarden. For the election of a disqualified person as
Churchwarden is not absolutely ineffective, but the person so elected, when
once admitted, can do all lawful acts belonging to the office until he has
been displaced.
The 90th canon of 1603 (which is the date of the setting forth of the
existing code of canons) directs that “the choice of . . .
Churchwardens, or Questmen, Sidesmen, or Assistants, shall be yearly made
in Easter week.” An election at any other time is valid in law.
[6]
It is supposed that the Churchwardens were called Questmen or Searchers
from the fact that they were empowered and instructed to search for cases
of heresy, or open sin, in their several parishes, and report them to their
Ecclesiastical Superiors.
Two derivations are given of the title of Sidesmen. Some
suppose that they are so called because they are elected as assistants to
the Churchwardens to stand by their side; other suppose the word to be an
abbreviation of Synodsmen, because in ancient times the Bishops summoned
certain persons of credit from the various parishes in order to testify as
to the morals of the clergy and people. These witnesses were called
Testes Synodales, and hence some suppose the title of Sidesmen, or
Synodsmen, to have taken its origin. Of late years in populous towns
Sidesmen have often been elected, and are found to be of great help in
assisting the Churchwardens in the execution of their duties.
The Vestry at which the Churchwardens and Sidesmen (if any) are to be
elected must be duly summoned. The notice summoning the Vestry must
be signed either by the Incumbent, the Curate, one Churchwarden, or one
Overseer of the poor. [7]
It is obviously advisable that the signatures of the Incumbent and of
both Churchwardens should be attached to the notice of the Easter
Vestry. This notice specifying the particular business to be
transacted must be affixed on a Sunday, three clear days before the holding
of the meetings, at or near the principal door of all the Churches and
Chapels in the parish. [8a] The Incumbent of the parish is by law the
ex-officio Chairman of the Vestry. [8b] In his absence the
ratepayers present must elect a Chairman for the occasion. The Curate
does not necessarily take his place as Chairman, unless elected to do so by
the Vestry. The usual custom in parishes is for the Incumbent to
nominate one Churchwarden and the parishioners the other. Sometimes
the parishioners elect both. The canon [8c] indeed seems to point out the
election of both Churchwardens by the joint consent of the Minister and the
parishioners as the normal mode of action, and the nomination by the
Incumbent of one and of the parishioners of another as only to be resorted
to when they cannot arrive at a common agreement. But custom goes for a
long way in this matter, and the usual course is certainly for the
Incumbent to nominate one and the parishioners the other. In the
absence of the Incumbent the Curate has the same right to nominate one
Churchwarden as the Incumbent if present would have. [9a]
In whatever manner the election may be carried out, the two
Churchwardens subsequently stand on an absolute equality. The
Incumbent’s Churchwarden is not elected to look after the
Incumbent’s interests only, nor the parishioners’ Churchwarden
to look after the parishioners’ interests only. The interests
of both must be equally dear to the one and to the other. Nor can
they act except jointly. The Vestry even is powerless to clothe one
Churchwarden with authority to act against the will of his colleague in
office. [9b] Any election by the parishioners must take
place in the usual manner. Ratepayers present, whether paying directly
or indirectly (32 and 33 Vic., c. 41, § 19), have a right to vote, and
if a poll is demanded it cannot be refused by the Chairman. The votes
must be taken in accordance with the provisions of the Vestry Acts, 58 Geo.
III, cap. 69, sec. 2, 3, 4, and 59 Geo. III, cap. 85. If the votes
are equal the Chairman has by right a casting vote, in addition to whatever
number of votes he may have as an individual ratepayer. By 58 Geo.
III, cap. 69, sec. 3, it is ordered that minutes of the proceedings shall
be written out before the close of the Vestry, and after having been read
be signed by the Chairman and any of the members present who may like to do
so. [10a]
In some new parishes there are select Vestries, but by the 14 and 15
Vict., cap. 97, sec. 23, in parishes formed under any Church Building Acts
before 1851 they are abolished, and it was enacted that after that date no
select Vestry should be formed. [10b]
The Churchwardens thus duly appointed must make the following
declaration before the “ordinary, or other person”
qualified to receive it:—
“We do solemnly and sincerely declare that we will faithfully and
diligently perform the duties of the Office of Churchwardens, to the best
of our skill and understanding, and that we will present such persons and
things as to our knowledge are presentable by the Ecclesiastical Laws of
this Realm.”
This declaration ought to be made at the visitation of the Bishop,
Chancellor, or Archdeacon next ensuing upon the election. Until this
declaration is made the Churchwarden is not legally qualified to act, and
could not enforce his authority as Churchwarden if objected to. In
case of the death of the Incumbent the parish would have no legal
representative to act as the custodian of the temporalities of the Church
in that particular parish. The fee payable by law at visitations is
eighteen shillings (30 and 31 Vict., cap. 135). [11]
If there is a dispute as to whether a Churchwarden is legally elected or
not, it is sometimes supposed that it is the Archdeacon’s business at his
visitation to decide the question. Of course Archdeacons are at all
times ready, willing, and anxious to advise any persons who apply to them
for advice to the best of their power. But it is no part of their
duty, nor are they by law authorised to decide a disputed return.
Their duty is simply that of returning officers to declare the election as
certified to them by the Vestry. A copy of the minutes of the Vestry,
in case of a dispute, should be laid before them, and the aggrieved party
can, if he wishes to do so, apply for a mandamus commanding the Rector and
Churchwardens to convene a Vestry to make a fresh election. It is for
the court to grant or to refuse the application. I hope I may not be
understood as recommending this course. I am merely stating what the
law is. [12] But all these matters should, if possible,
be settled out of court. Law-suits are apt to leave an unpleasant
taste behind. If such a case should unhappily arise it might be
advisable for the Archdeacon to suggest to the parties that they
should agree to submit to his decision of the disputed question, and waive
their right of appeal to a Court of Common Law. If this were agreed
to the case might be amicably settled at once without resource being had to
any external litigation.
If a Churchwarden duly elected ceases in the course of the year to
reside in the parish he does not ipso facto vacate the office,
though it is a good reason for resignation and the appointment of another
in his place. [13]
The Churchwardens being thus duly elected, and having made the legal
declaration at the visitation, continue in office until their successors
are elected, and have in their turn made the said declaration.
What, then, are their duties?
The Local Government Act, 1894, has in many ways affected them.
Churchwardens in rural parishes are no longer
ex-officio Overseers of the Poor. [14] An additional number of
Overseers may be appointed to replace the Churchwardens, and reference in
any Act to the Churchwardens and Overseers, shall, as respects any rural
parish (except so far as those references relate to the affairs of the
Church), be construed as references to the Overseers, and the legal
interest in all property vested either in the Overseer of a rural parish
(other than a property connected with the affairs of the Church, or held
for an Ecclesiastical Charity), shall, if there is a Parish Council, vest
in that Council.—V. 2, (a), (b), (c).
The Poor Relief Act, 1819, i.e., 59 Geo. III, cap. 12, enabled
Churchwardens and Overseers of a parish to acquire lands, &c., and they
were made a Corporation for that special purpose alone, and for the
specific purposes mentioned in the Act. Such lands, as regards rural
parishes having a Parish Council, now come under the management of the
Parish Council.
The Churchwardens of every rural parish are now only concerned as
Churchwardens with the affairs of the Church. What changes then, it
will be asked, are made with regard to Vestries?
Speaking generally as to rural parishes, the powers, duties, and
liabilities of the Vestry except (i) so far as relates to the affairs of
the Church or to Ecclesiastical Charities, or (ii) any power, duty, or
liability, transferred by this Act from the Vestry to any other authority
are transferred to the Parish Council.—6, a, 1, 2.
One word with regard to the expression, Ecclesiastical Charities.
These words include a charity, the endowment whereof is held for some one
or more of the following purposes:—
(a.) Any spiritual purpose which is a legal purpose,
or,
(b.) For the benefit of any spiritual person, or
ecclesiastical person as such, or
(c.) For use, if a building, as a church, chapel, mission
room, Sunday School, or otherwise by any particular church or denomination,
or
(d.) For the maintenance, repair, or improvement of any such
building as aforesaid, or for the maintenance of Divine service therein,
or,
(e.) Otherwise for the benefit of any particular church or
denomination, or of any members thereof as such (Sec. 75, i).
Any endowment of a charity other than a building held in part only for
some of the purposes aforesaid, will be dealt with by the Charity
Commissioners on the application of any person interested.
The expression, Ecclesiastical Charity, includes any building which in
the opinion of the Charity Commissioners has been erected or provided
within forty years before the passing of this Act, mainly by or at the cost
of members of any particular church or denomination.
The expression, affairs of the church, includes the distribution of
offertories or other collections made in any church (sec. 75).
It may be well to add that the expression Parochial Charity, when used
in the Act, means a charity the benefits of which are, or the separate
distribution of the benefits of which is, confined to the inhabitants of a
single parish, or of a single ancient ecclesiastical parish
divided into two or more parishes, or of not more than five neighbouring
parishes. (Ibid.)
These also come under the management of the Parish Council.
The provision of parish books and of a vestry room or parochial office,
parish chest, and the holding or management of parish property not being
property relating to affairs of the Church or held for an Ecclesiastical
charity, are also in rural parishes transferred to the Parish Council.
The custody of the registers of baptisms, marriages, and burials, and of
all other books and documents containing entries wholly or partly relating
to the affairs of the Church or to Ecclesiastical charities, except
documents directed by law to be kept with the public books, writings, and
papers of the parish, remains as provided by law before the passing of the
Local Government Act, i.e., in the hands of the incumbent.
The Parish Council have a right to reasonable access to all such
books and documents referred to above, and the incumbent and Churchwardens
have a similar right with respect to books, etc., in the custody of the
Parish Council (xvii, 8).
There is one matter connected with the particular section of the Local
Government Act, 1894, now under consideration, which has given rise to some
discussion. In whose custody should the Tithe Map and Award be
placed? Should the Incumbent or the Parish Council have the charge of
them? Now, I am no lawyer, and I should be very sorry to be supposed
to give any opinion on a question which admits of so much argument on both
sides. But I do very strongly deprecate any litigation on the
matter. It is a very doubtful point, and he who takes the question
into a Court of Law must at any rate be prepared to have to back up his
opinion with a well-filled purse. The final paragraph of Section 17,
Sub-section 8, almost seems as if the draughtsman of the act expected
questions to arise under it. It runs thus:—“The Incumbent
and
Churchwardens on the one part, and the Parish Council on the other, shall
have reasonable access to all such books documents, writings, and papers,
as are referred to in this Sub-section, and any differences as to custody
or access shall be determined by the County Council.” Is it not
just a case in which, if there is no cause for complaint, and no reasonable
access refused, these documents should remain in their existing custody
(usually that of the Incumbent), and that if differences arise, an amicable
appeal should be made to the County Council, and the decision of that body
acquiesced in by both parties?
This is evidently the opinion of the President of the Board of
Agriculture (Mr. Chaplin), who on February 8th, 1897, in the House of
Commons, replied as follows to a question on this subject:—
I am aware that questions have arisen with regard to the custody of
documents under Sub-section 8 of Section 17 of the Local Government Act,
1894. The Act contemplated that this would be the case, and has
provided that any questions as to such custody shall be determined by the
County Council. The Local Government Board have no
jurisdiction to determine questions as regards the Tithe Map, and it has
been their practice to inform Parish Councils to this effect. I am
advised that Tithe Maps are under the Tithe Commutation Act, 1886, to be
kept “with the public books, writings, and papers of the
parish,” and the Sub-section to which I have referred requires
therefore that they shall either remain in their existing custody or be
deposited in such custody as the Parish Council may direct.
It may be well to mention here that when there is in a rural parish an
existing Vestry Clerk appointed under the Trustees Act, 1850, he shall
become the Clerk of the Parish Council, holding office by the same tenure
as before, and while performing the duties shall not receive less salary or
remuneration than before (sec. 81, 2, 4).
In our canons, which date from 1603, no fewer than eighteen refer to the
duties of Churchwardens. One canon enjoins them to present to the
ordinary those guilty of notorious crimes and scandals, hinderers of the
Word of God, disturbers of Divine Service, and non-communicants at
Easter. Other Canons refer to their duties in not allowing loiterers near
the Church in time of Divine Service, in providing bread and wine for the
Holy Communion, and marking those who present themselves at the
Lord’s Table. Others enjoin them to take care that no stranger
be admitted to preach in Church without showing his licence; to provide a
sure coffer for the safe keeping of the registers, and to see that the
proper entries are therein made; to provide for the Church service books,
font, Communion table, and pulpit, and a chest for alms; and further, to
see that the Church is kept in sufficient reparation, that neither the
Church or Churchyard be in any way profaned; that the bells be not rung at
any time without good cause to be allowed by the minister of the place and
by themselves; to see that the parishioners duly resort to their Church
upon Sundays and holy days; that none stand idle in the Churchyard, or make
any disturbance in the Church or Churchyard during the time of Divine
Service; and further, call upon and exhort such as are
negligent in resorting to the Church that they fail not to amend their
ways; to keep the accounts connected with these matters; and, “last
of all, going out of their office they shall truly deliver up to the
parishioners whatever money or other things of right belonging to the
parish which remaineth in their hands, that they may be delivered over by
them to the next Churchwardens by bill indented.” [22]
In the fulfilment of these duties it is, in my opinion, difficult to
exaggerate the influence for good which a Churchwarden may exercise in the
parish in which his lot is cast. Of course it is possible to perform
the duties perfunctorily, or to let them slide altogether; but if his heart
is really in his work, if he is anxious to do all in his power that the
ecclesiastical machinery in the parish should work smoothly, I will
undertake to say that he will find plenty of scope for his energies.
If lethargic or antagonistic he may greatly hinder the Church’s work;
but if in a friendly spirit and with words of wisdom he is always ready to meet
the Rector and consult as to the advisability of this or that particular
course of action, the office becomes neither a surplusage nor a
sinecure. There is nothing worse in a parish than either clerical or
lay clan-ship. Isolation is good neither for the one nor the
other. The interests of both are the same, and surely their hands
should be joined together for common action in the common Master’s
cause.
And as it seems to me this side of his office comes into prominence in
connection with the induction of a new Incumbent. For the entering
upon a new cure is of undoubtedly great and solemn importance to the Parson
himself, but it is hardly less so to the parish. How much depends, as
regards the future peace, happiness, and prosperity of the parish, upon the
relations existing between Pastor and flock. No doubt the character,
zeal, energy, devotion, and even the idiosyncrasies, manner, and general
bearing of the Incumbent are of vital importance. Courtesy begets
courtesy. Consideration for the feelings of others is met in the same
spirit. But sometimes, I fear the Laity suppose that the peace of a
parish depends almost entirely upon the Clergyman. He is but a unit
in the parochial system. If one thing is more absolutely necessary
than another for the harmonious working of Clergy and Laity in a parish, or
the welfare of the whole, it is that there should be no suspicions the one
of the other. Perfect confidence and a generous trust should be the
rule of all dealings between Incumbents and Churchwardens.
It cannot but be expected that an Incumbent on first coming into a
parish should find some things which he would prefer otherwise. The
special hobbies, so to speak, of his predecessor may not be his. His
energies may not be put forth on exactly the same lines as those of the
Incumbent whom he succeeds. And then sometimes the staunch friends of
the former ministry may look coldly and askant upon the new Rector’s
labours and think that his very efforts in fresh and hitherto untried fields
are reflections upon the past. It should not be so. All men are
not cast in the same mould. One branch of ministerial work may be
more congenial to one parish priest than another, and it is only natural
that he should be more devoted to that particular portion of work in which
he seems to be most successful. But changes are not synonymous with
reflections upon a former régime. A man should not be
made an offender for a word. A Churchwarden should be prepared in all
good faith to transfer his allegiance, if called upon so to do, from one
Incumbent to another. It is no disloyalty to do so. The
“King is dead; long live the King” is loyalty alike to the past
and to the newly reigning Sovereign. If old customs are changed, old
practices discontinued, the Churchwarden should find out by private inquiry
from his Rector the why and the wherefore, and if the change is for the
better he should not let love of existing practice be stereotyped into a
desire of a never changing system, which may perchance easily slide into
lethargy and somnolent repose. In these days it does not do
merely
“Stare super antiquas vias.”
Some persons I know are so constituted that they suspect the existence
of a snake under every blade of grass. It is not a happy disposition
either for the person who is possessed with this idiosyncrasy, or in its
reflex action upon others. True charity thinketh no evil. It is
far better to be over sanguine in our charitable estimate of other
men’s motives, even if we do sometimes ultimately find that our
estimate was wrong, than to be constantly living in an atmosphere of
suspicion. Suspicion and consequent mistrust often produce the very
effects which otherwise would never have had any existence at all.
I have ventured to say these few words because I feel very strongly how
much the ecclesiastical peace of a parish depends upon the harmonious
action of the Incumbent and Churchwardens. It is not often that the
case is otherwise. Generally speaking they work zealously and actively
together, ready as occasion may arise to adopt, if necessary, new methods
of warfare in the conflict against sin and evil as fellow-workers with the
Clergy in the great work of the Church on earth.
Let me then state, as briefly as I can, some of a Churchwarden’s
duties.
I suppose him to be duly elected, and to have taken the declaration at
the visitation either of the Bishop, the Chancellor, or the
Archdeacon. It would be well that the first step should be to look to
the fences of the Churchyard and the general state of the fabric of the
Church—the roof, the tiles, the tower or spire, and the general
fittings of the Church. If any of these are found to be seriously out
of order, counsel should be at once taken with the Incumbent as to the
proper course to be adopted. In these matters a stitch in time often
saves nine, and though we have now no compulsory Church-rate to fall back
upon for Church expenses, yet in an harmoniously worked parish there really
ought to be no insurmountable difficulty in raising the sum necessary for
the due repairs of the Church and for the services of the Sanctuary.
Offertories and subscriptions can be made to supplement one another, and if
what is necessary in the way of repair is really honestly done year by
year, it will be much easier to raise the funds wanted than if by neglect
and postponement a large outlay is suddenly found to be absolutely
necessary in order to avoid some dreadful catastrophe.
In this general preliminary survey the state of the Churchyard will
naturally come under his notice. The Churchyard is the freehold of
the Incumbent, which he holds in trust for the service which it is intended
to subserve. Sometimes an arrangement is made by him with the
Churchwardens as to the keeping the Churchyard tidy. No doubt the
Churchwardens are bound to see that the proper measures for this purpose
are taken by themselves or the Incumbent. But although our Churches,
speaking generally, are in good repair, yet it seems to me that in many
cases sufficient attention is not paid to the keeping of the Churchyard in
proper order. The days are gone by when horned cattle were allowed to
find sweet pasture in the resting-place of the dead, but sheep still linger
in some country districts. And there is often a temptation not always
successfully resisted—when the Churchyard is large—that the
crop of grass during the summer months should be allowed to grow without
interference by scythe or machine, until fit to be cut for hay. But I
do feel strongly that the temptation should be resisted.
Nothing so quickly awakens doubtful feelings in the breast of a passer-by
as to the zeal, energy and devotion of the Incumbent, as a Churchyard
untidy and unkempt, paths full of weeds, hedges untrimmed, grass long and
straggling. Nothing, on the other hand, is so grateful to all the
parishioners of a particular parish as the Churchyard well kept and looked
after, the graves neat and trimmed, the whole place by its very appearance
asserting its right to the title of God’s Acre. I do not like
to see the Parsonage garden filled with lovely flowers, and in beautiful
order, while the adjoining Churchyard is starved. Let each
receive the attention which is its proper due.
With regard to closed Churchyards the obligations of the Churchwardens
in rural parishes with respect to maintaining and repairing closed
Churchyards, wherever the expenses of such maintenance and repair are
repayable out of the Poor Rate under the Burial Act, 1855, [30a]
are transferred to the Parish Council. Provided that such obligations
shall not in the case of any particular parish be deemed to attach, unless
or until the Churchwardens subsequent to the passing of this Act shall give
a certificate as in the Burial Act, 1855, provided, in order to obtain the
repayment of such expenses out of the Poor Rate (sec. 6, II, b).
It has been decided that [30b] if a Churchyard is closed by
order in Council it must be kept in order by the Churchwardens, and if it
be a Cemetery formed by a Burial Board, then by the Burial Board.
In the former case the expenses would, under the Local Government Act, be
repaid to the Churchwardens in rural parishes by the Parish Council, on
presentation of the proper certificate as mentioned in the previous
paragraph.
If the Churchyard requires enlargement, and an adjoining piece of ground
can be obtained, it is well to remember that a special Act has been passed
(30 and 31 Vict., c. 133) for diminishing the expense connected with the
consecration of ground so added to an old Churchyard. The form of
conveyance is given in the Act; the powers given in the School Sites’
Act “to persons being seised in fee simple, fee tail, or for life of
and in any manor or lands of freehold, copyhold or customary tenure, and
having the beneficial interest therein, to grant, convey, or enfranchise by
way of gift, sale or exchange in fee simple, or for term of years, any
quantity not exceeding one acre of such land as a site for a school”
are “deemed to apply to all persons desirous of granting land for
the purpose of such enlargement” (of an existing Churchyard)
“in the same way as if the said land had been granted as a site for a
school.”
In cases in which it is wished to provide a burial ground under a burial
board, the first step to be taken is for a vestry to be summoned
seven days before the holding of such meeting, to take the subject
into consideration, and if it is agreed to proceed in the matter, a
requisition to that effect must be sent to the Home Secretary, and the
officials of the Home Office will send down full directions as to the mode
of procedure. [32]
The following general information on this subject may be found of
use:—
The enlargement of a Churchyard sometimes makes it necessary that graves
should be built over, or the bodies therein contained removed to another
part of the Churchyard, and it occasionally happens that the parties
interested object to the former but are prepared to agree to the
latter. It is well, therefore, to know that this removal can take
place
by faculty granted by the ordinary for that purpose without application to
the Home Secretary (20 and 21 Vict., cap. 81, s. 25). When a
Churchyard is closed and a cemetery has been provided under a burial board
to be used for interments, the custody of the old registers belongs to the
Incumbent, and he is entitled to the fees for certificates of burial
previous to the closing of the Churchyard, but the custody of the registers
of interments in the cemetery belongs to the chaplain or officer of the
burial board. The Act 52 Geo. III., cap. 146, s. 4, requiring
certificates of burials in any other place than the Churchyard of the
Parish Church to be sent to the Incumbent, has been repealed as far as
burials are concerned in grounds provided by the Burial Acts (20 and 21
Vict., cap. 81, s. 15).
Then I wish that it were universally acknowledged that the next step
should be for a new Churchwarden to inspect the Church goods which are
placed under his charge; to see that they tally accurately with the list
which ought to be kept in the iron chest of all movable articles
belonging to the Church in that parish. [34a] If this were
universally done we should not hear, as we do now unfortunately hear from
time to time, of Church goods having disappeared during a vacancy, or of
registers being missing which may be absolutely invaluable. Legally
speaking, the safe custody of the furniture of the Church rests upon the
Churchwardens. This list should be signed by the
Incumbent and Churchwardens, and kept in the parish chest, and include all
movable articles of Church furniture and belongings.
There should also be a report on the fabric of the Church, mentioning
the character, date, and cost of alterations made, the date of
consecration; if a modern Church the Act under which built. Any
specially characteristic features of the Church should be mentioned.
The inventory of Church furniture should include Church plate, with
copies of inscriptions and dates, Church linen, Service books of all kinds,
furniture of the vestry, ornaments for the Holy Table, special gifts,
brasses, lectern, everything in short that is moveable, the bells, with
inscriptions, if any, and the rules for ringers, the parish register books,
with dates carefully made of the first entry in each book. If there
are any gaps in the registers it is well to mention them.
Benefactions should be noted; also the nature of the tenure of the parish
school, with an intimation as to where the trust deed is kept. A
terrier of glebe lands, with any exchange noted, should be made.
There should be a table of the customary fees charged, [35] and
of any payments due to the Ecclesiastical Commission or to Queen
Anne’s Bounty, with the amount of any receipts due from any public
body. It is clear that the more complete such a list can be made the
more valuable will it be for future generations.
It would also be very useful to keep in connection with this inventory a
complete list of the various services held, with the amount of the offertories
and the purposes to which they are devoted.
Then with regard to insurance of the fabric. It is most important
that this should be looked into. There is no excuse for any Church to
remain uninsured. The premium for insurance is now fixed at such a
low rate that the expense is really very small, and the Churchwardens
should do all in their power to persuade the Vestry, if persuasion is
necessary, to sanction the insurance of the Church for a proper sum.
I have sometimes found, after making enquiries on the subject and having
ascertained either that the Church was not insured, or, if insured, only
for a very small sum, that the churchwardens always supposed it was
“all right.” Very seldom have any held back from doing
their duty when it has been quietly pointed out to them. An
Ecclesiastical Buildings Fire Office has been established on a sound basis,
the offices of which are in Norfolk Street, Strand, London. It is doing a
very large business, and whatever surplus profits accrue are appropriated
to the support of Church work in the various Dioceses in proportion to the
amount of insurances in each, and to such special objects as are
recommended by the Bishop and Archdeacons. I may also mention Mutual
Fire Insurance Offices, such as the Hand-in-Hand (New Bridge Street,
London, E.C.) and the County Fire (Regent Street), which are
old-established offices, and which periodically return to insurers a
certain amount of the premiums paid on their policies in cases in which no
fire has taken place during the preceding few years. Of this I am
quite certain, that if an uninsured Church were unfortunately burned down,
those in the parish interested in the erection of a new Church would have
the greatest possible difficulty in raising the necessary funds, in the
face of such a manifest want of due caution and forethought on the part of
the proper authorities in past years.
It is, perhaps, hardly necessary for me to say that a strictly accurate
record of every sixpence that is spent upon these and such like
matters must be kept by the Churchwardens, so that at the close of their
year, when they pass on the parish books to their successors, they may be
enabled to lay before them a clear and detailed account of all the receipts
and expenses of the preceding year, with vouchers for all payments, and to
hand over the actual balance remaining after all liabilities have been
met.
It is often supposed that Church Rates are abolished. But such is
not the case. Compulsory Church Rates are done away with by 31
and 32 Vict., cap. 109, except in cases where the rates have been legally
mortgaged, or are subject to private Acts of Parliament. Section 6,
however, of the above Act states distinctly that “this Act shall not
affect vestries, or the making, assessing, receiving, or otherwise dealing
with any Church Rate, save in so far as relates to the recovery
thereof”; and Section 9 authorises the appointment of trustees, the
Incumbent, and two householders or owners or occupiers of land in the parish, to
be nominated, one by the patron, the other by the Bishop of the Diocese in
which the parish is situate. These trustees form a body corporate,
and may, as circumstances require, pay to the Churchwardens any funds in
their hands for the building, rebuilding, enlargement, and repair of any
Church or Chapel, and any purpose to which, as before defined in the Act,
Church Rates may be applied.
Questions are so often put to me as to the relation existing between
district parishes and the mother Church, that it may be useful if a few
points are mentioned with respect to which difficulties occasionally
arise. The preliminaries of marriage and the solemnization of the
rite itself are a fruitful source of difficulty. They have however,
as a matter of fact, been set at rest by a decision in the Court of
Queen’s Bench, in the case of Fuller v. Alford, before Mr.
Justice Cave and Mr. Justice Day, which affects all new parishes hitherto
created, or that may hereafter be created, under the Peel and Blandford
Acts. The question at issue was as to the right of the inhabitants of a
district parish to have their banns published and to be married in the
Church of the mother parish, and as to the right of the Incumbent of the
mother parish to publish the banns, solemnise the marriage, and receive the
fees for the same in the case of residents in the district parish.
The case is fully reported in the Times of March 9th, 1883.
Mr. Justice Cave, in giving judgment for the Plaintiff, said that the Act
of 1843 as well as that of 1856 (the words of the latter being clearer than
those of the former) made the district a new parish for all ecclesiastical
purposes, and banns of marriage might be published and marriages
solemnized, and all the laws and customs then relating to them would apply
to the new parish, the effect of which was that the banns must be published
in the Church of the new parish. Though recent legislation had
brought into prominence the civil character of the marriage contract, and
had enabled it to be entered into before a Registrar, still he had no doubt
that the solemnization of matrimony in a Church was within the words
“ecclesiastical purposes.” The inhabitants therefore of a
district parish have no more right to have their banns asked or their
marriage solemnised in the mother Church than they have in any other Church
in England, so long as they reside in that district.
District parishes, it will be observed, are separate parishes for
Ecclesiastical purposes. These words affect the question as to
the right of the ratepaying parishioners of a new district voting for the
Churchwardens of the old parish. This they have a right to do on the
following ground:—The Churchwardens of an old parish have functions
to perform which are rather secular than ecclesiastical. They are in
some cases ex-officio Overseers, and in many cases officially
concerned in the management of endowed charities. The creation
therefore of a district for ecclesiastical purposes does not deprive the
inhabitants of the new district of the right which they had before of
voting for Churchwardens in the old civil parish of which
they continue to be ratepayers. The ratepayers of the whole of
the old parish have consequently a right to vote in vestry at the election
of the Churchwardens in the old parish. The privilege, however, is
not reciprocal, for the ratepayers in the old parish have no similar right
of attending at the vestry and voting for Churchwardens in the new
district, because they are elected “for ecclesiastical
purposes” only.
It would be impossible to speak of the duties of Churchwardens without
touching upon the vexed questions of pews. I suppose that if we could
turn the hands of the clock back for some centuries, and were then
legislating for the future of the Church with our experience of the pew
system by a prophetic anachronism clearly present in our minds, we should
hardly suggest for legislation such laws as would bring about the existing
state of things. With the Epistle of St. James in our thoughts there
are some points in our present legal system which most persons find it
difficult to justify. But it is a thorny subject, and I do not
want to dogmatise. It is, perhaps, just the one very point with
respect to which great caution is needed, much charity, much
forbearance. You cannot ride rough-shod over old prejudices, or if
you do you are sure sooner or later to suffer for it. No doubt in
theory (to use the words of the Bishop of Carlisle) the Churchwardens, as
the officers of the ordinary, have, subject to him, the sole appointment
and arrangement of the seats. They are to act to the best of their
judgment, and without favour, to the best advantage of all. [43]
And for the most part, in new Churches, this arrangement works well.
Either by agreement of the heads of the parish the Church is declared to be
in the popular sense of the term “free and open,” which is
perhaps on the whole the best of all or else by mutual forbearance and
general co-operation an arrangement is arrived at by which the worshippers
in Church have from time to time seats allotted to them.
It is not, however, in the case of new Churches that
difficulties arise, except when these new Churches take the place of old
ones. Then it may be that the old abuses of faculty pews and of
supposed exclusive rights in certain holdings have to be contended
with. Cases have occurred where supposed usurpers have been kept out
of faculty pews when there is plenty of room, or of locking up the pew when
the so-called owner is absent. Faculty pews are an anomaly, and I
wish there were none, but if the title to them can be proved they are legal
and must be dealt with accordingly. I do not imagine that any new
faculties are now issued by the Courts, but in the rebuilding of old
Churches the dealing with existing faculties requires very tender
handling. It were heartily to be wished that all legal holders of
faculty pews would consent to waive their rights for the future, for the
sake of peace and the avoidance of jealousies. Of course in such a
case the Churchwardens would feel it an obligation which it would be their
pleasure to fulfil, to provide those who give up their rights with such
accommodation as their families may require. But if, as is sometimes the
case, they stand exclusively upon their rights, Churchwardens have no power
to abrogate the law, and can only look forward to the future with hope,
either that a short Act of Parliament may be passed enacting that at the
death of the present owner of a faculty pew that particular faculty should
cease, and determine, only excepting (unless with the consent of the owner)
cases in which under the Church Building Acts the faculty was issued in
consequence of money paid down for the building of the Church with the
understanding that the faculty would be granted in consequence: or if this
be not done that in the lapse of time some holder of the faculty may regard
the matter from an unselfish standpoint and voluntarily resign his
rights.
Meanwhile it is well to remember with regard to existing faculty pews
that:—
1. The form of appropriation in old faculties varies
considerably. In order to ascertain the wording of a particular
faculty application should be made to the Diocesan Registrar.
2. With regard to pews annexed by prescription to certain
messuages the right to the pew passes with the messuage, the tenant of
which for the time being has also de jure for the time being the
prescriptive right to the pew. [46a]
3. No faculty can be legally granted entitling a non-parishioner
to a seat in the body of the Church. [46b] Any faculty so worded
as to allow this is void as far as that particular point is concerned.
4. No faculty gives power either to the owners and occupiers of
the house in respect of which the faculty has been issued to let such seats
apart from the houses, or to appropriate them to other persons.
No Churchwarden should ever allow a parishioner to repair the pew which
he may temporarily occupy. Such an act, if done with the sanction
of the Churchwardens, may in after years seem to give a claim to
proprietorship in that particular pew. Too great care cannot be taken
to avoid any future misunderstanding.
The matter is too often looked upon as a party question. The great
Duke of Wellington was no party man, and I cannot forbear from quoting in
connection with this subject an extract from a letter written to my father,
the Bishop of Winchester, in 1836, in response to an application to him to
support a Diocesan Church Building Society, which was then in course of
formation. The Duke writes concerning providing accommodation in
country Churches as follows:—
“It has frequently occurred to me that when Church room is
required the first thing to do is to prevail upon individuals to give up
the pews which they cannot use . . . If more space was required I should
propose that all pews should be given up, that the whole space of the
Church should be laid open for the accommodation of all the parishioners
indiscriminately, separate chairs of a cheap description being provided for
their accommodation. This being done, and space being still required
for the accommodation of the parishioners in their attendance upon Divine
Service, I would propose to consider the mode of enlarging the Church, or
if that could not be effected, of building another Church or Chapel.
It must never be forgotten that another Church or Chapel would require the
attendance of another Clergyman, who must live and must be
remunerated. He can be remunerated only by the sale or hire of the
pews and places in the new place of Divine worship; and here again would
commence the evil which has in my opinion been the most efficient cause of
the non-attendance at Divine worship of the lower classes of the people of
this country.” [48]
Surely these words, which (bearing in mind who was the writer of them)
cannot be supposed to have been the offspring of heated ecclesiastical
partisanship, are well worthy of consideration, even after the lapse of
more than half a century. It does, indeed, seem sad that parochial
difficulties should so often arise in respect of Church sittings.
There is no part of the parochial machinery which more requires the free
application of the oil of common sense—Christian charity and a true
spirit of forbearing courtesy in order to avoid friction. Blessed are
the peacemakers.
Difficulties not unfrequently arise in connection with the conveyance of
buildings or of land to be used not only for public worship, but also for
meetings, classes, etc. The subject was under the consideration of
the Committee of the Incorporated Church Building Society in 1889, and with
the co-operation of their legal advisers a statement was issued clearly
pointing out the advantages and the disadvantages of the several modes of
procedure possible. With the permission of the Church Building
Society’s Committee, I add in Appendix X a summary of the
conveniences and inconveniences of the several Acts. The Minister and
Churchwardens are not a corporation with perpetual succession under the
common law, though often supposed so to be because they are
specially so made for the purpose of carrying out the Schools Sites’
Acts. The advisers of the Church Building Society on the whole
recommend that a conveyance should be made to individual Trustees,
“which will be good according to the ordinary law of mortmain as a
charitable conveyance, the only real objection to this being that if the
conveyance be a gift, without price paid, it will fail if the grantor dies
within twelve months.” A form of such conveyance has been
settled for the parish of Staines. This form has been printed by the
Church Building Society, but they recommend that it should be amended by
adding a power, to be used if a consecrated Church is eventually built on
the land, to revoke the trusts and convey the land and building for the
purpose of a Church to any person or body lawfully authorised to accept
such conveyance. If the Staines form is not adopted, it is on the
whole recommended that action should be taken under 43 Geo. III, cap. 108.
[50]
I
pass on to another point. On a vacancy occurring in an incumbency
either through the resignation or death of the Incumbent, certain duties of
considerable importance devolve upon the Churchwardens. During the
vacancy they are in charge of the temporalities of the incumbency, and
therefore it is necessary that a sequestration of the living should be
issued, empowering them to do such things as are necessary in connection
therewith. Application should at once be made with reference to this
to the Bishop’s Registrar. It is then their duty to see that
Church property, whether in connection with the fabric, endowment, or
glebe, suffers no loss during the vacancy. They have also to provide
for the services in Church and any occasional duty which may arise. A
newly-appointed Incumbent does not become legally responsible for this
until he has been instituted, or collated, as the case may be. But it
would
be well always if the Churchwardens, immediately on an appointment being
notified to them, should communicate with the Incumbent-elect and consult
with him as to the best mode of providing for the duty. It is well
that Churchwardens should know that the license of a Curate does not lapse
in consequence of the death of the Incumbent. Six weeks’ notice
within six months after institution is legally necessary if a change is to
be made. [52a] The widow of a deceased Incumbent has a
right to remain in the parsonage house for two calendar months subsequent
to the death of her husband. [52b] All these points
should, if possible, be made a matter of friendly arrangement, but the
actual law of the case is as I have stated it.
There is one question sometimes asked by Churchwardens to which it may
be well to refer. Have they the custody of the keys of the Church,
the appointment of the organist, control over the Church music, and over
the ringing of the Church bells?
With regard to the keys of the Church. It is the undoubted
fact that the church is the freehold of the Incumbent, subject, of course,
to the right of the parishioners to be present in it at all legal Services
of a religious character. It may be often convenient that the
Churchwardens should have a duplicate key of the Church, in order that they
may be able to fulfil their duties in connection with the survey of the
fabric, or for other causes, but this must be clearly understood to be
subject to the will of the Incumbent.
The same with regard to the musical portion of the Service or
appointment of the organist. Lord Stowell’s words
are:—
“The Minister has the right of directing the Service, e.g.,
when the organ shall and shall not play, and when children shall chaunt and
shall not chaunt, though the organist is paid and the children managed by
the Churchwardens.” [53]
Nothing can be clearer or stronger than this.
So
too with regard to the Church bells. The Churchwardens have the
custody of the bells, and the bell ropes are in most cases Church property
placed under their charge, but the law with reference to the ringing of the
bells is undoubted; that for any occasion except that of Divine Service the
permission of the Incumbent is absolutely necessary for the ringing of the
bells. Without that permission they cannot be rung. [54]
There is one further point on which a question sometimes arises in
connection with offertories and collections in church. With reference
to offertories gathered at the time of the celebration of Holy Communion at
an ordinary Service the Churchwardens and Incumbent are expressly directed
by the rubric to dispose of them to such pious and charitable uses as they
shall think fit, wherein if they disagree it shall be disposed of as the
Ordinary shall appoint. The Incumbent has the responsibility of
arranging with reference to collections made not in connection with the
celebration of the Holy Communion. Incumbents are thankful when the
Churchwardens help them with their advice as to what objects shall be
brought before the congregation. In the case of all collections, for
whatsoever purpose they be made, it is most desirable for the avoiding of
any possible difficulty that a written statement should be put upon the
Church door on the Sunday after, stating the amount of the collections made
on the previous Sunday. If the collection be made for any charitable
or missionary society the official receipt for the money collected and sent
should also be affixed to the church door.
This leads me to mention another point of considerable importance.
In these days of monetary difficulties and agricultural depression the
frequency of offertories is often a question difficult of solution.
It is perhaps still more difficult wisely to decide the objects for which
the offertory shall be made. With regard to local objects there can
of course be no question. We recognise in these days the power of the
pence, and no one grumbles at the collection of money for purely parochial
purposes. But it is when our people are asked for money for objects
outside the parish that the difficulty really arises. But it ought to
be remembered that we do not lead individual isolated lives apart from our
fellows. The parish is not the centre of the universe. The
tendency of the uneducated mind is to isolate itself from the interests of
others, and to look at all matters from a purely selfish point of
view. The parish is an accidental collection of individual souls in a
particular diocese. The diocese is an aggregation of separate
parishes scattered through an assigned area. The members of the
Church in a particular parish and diocese are members of the Holy Catholic
Church, which by its very nomenclature abrogates individual
isolation. It follows, therefore, that parochial interests must not
absorb attention to the exclusion of larger and less personal
objects. The Body is one, and the members of the Body should work
together for the good of the whole. Corporate as well as individual
life is a reality, and this fact must not be lost sight of in connection
with our offertories. I venture to say that a parish which confines
its offertories to local and parochial purposes will lose by the very
contraction of its sympathies. The duty that lies upon us as trustees
of God’s gifts to utilize them for His honour and glory, should be
pointed out. The privilege of being allowed to help with our
substance, those who stand in need of our assistance, should be duly urged;
and the warmth which is thus kindled in the heart towards others will react
in infusing fresh life into the support of parochial institutions.
The habit of giving grows by use. The blood must not stagnate round
the heart, or the extremities will soon suffer. Your fingers die
because the action of the heart is weak. The promise is that
“He that watereth others shall be watered also himself.”
I have no intention of entering into many details in this matter, but I
cannot be wrong in enforcing this principle. Church work at home and
abroad, as distinct from parochial organizations, should be systematically
brought before all congregations however small: Church work at home,
including home missions; and Church work abroad, including foreign
missionary societies.
Let me give very emphatically this caution. If aggrieved
parishioners come to a Churchwarden and endeavour to persuade him to join a
cave of Adullam, he should be careful not to be rash or hasty in his
answer. He must not take all for granted which heated partisans may
allege, but remember there are always two sides to every question. We
are none of us infallible in our judgment, and many matters after
consultation with others assume a very different aspect to that which at
first sight they seemed to present. If difficulties arise he must not
threaten. It does more harm than good. Let him try what
conciliation will do. Let him see whether common ground of action
cannot be found. Certainly it is unwise to rush into print; it only
tends to inflame the smouldering embers of a quarrel which, but for the
unfortunate publicity given to it, might soon have come to a happy
termination.
Churchwardens must work with the Clergy and the Clergy with the
Churchwardens if they are to be a blessing in the parish in which they are
elected to serve. They have not been brought by chance into
connection with the Incumbent of their parish, for chance is not a word to
be found in the Christian’s dictionary.
With regard to all these cases, if difficulties arise in connection with
any of them it is seldom, if ever, wise to stand out for strict law.
If the matter cannot be settled amicably the interposition of the Rural
Dean or Archdeacon, or, as a final resort, the Bishop, will often smooth a
wrinkled brow and restore to a parish the inestimable blessing of
peace.
It is because I feel the great importance and usefulness of the office
of a Churchwarden, that I have ventured, in accordance with the wish so
kindly expressed by those to whom the foregoing words were in substance
addressed, to publish them in this more permanent form; and I have
only to express the hope that they may be found useful in pointing out to
Churchwardens that their office, far from being a sinecure, may, if
faithfully used, tend very directly to the furtherance of our common
Master’s cause, and that work done by them in a spirit of faith and
love will not lose its reward in the great Hereafter.
GEORGE HENRY GUILDFORD.
The Close, Winchester,
August, 1897.