LONDON'S CHURCHES

Evening Star, Issue 19410, 19 November 1926, Page 14

LONDON'S CHURCHES

NINETEEN TO BE PULLED DOWN VALUABLE BUILDING SITES That the Bishop of London, who, on account of his clerical rank, occupies a, seat in the House of Lords, should present a Bill in that Chamber with tho object of securing Parliament’s consent to the destruction of nineteen churches in his diocese 3 most of which are historical landmarks of considerable architectural importance, _ seems strange; but the explanation is simple, says a correspondent of the Melbourne ‘Age.’ Some of these churches have been in existence for over 250 years, having been rebuilt when the original structures were destroyed in the great fire of London in 1666. They are all substantial stone structures, and are capable of enduring for many centuries. The Bishop of London and everyone else, who values historical buildings would like to see those _ churches preserved, but from the point of view of religious services they are superfluous, and the Church of England is badly in. need of tho money that could be realised by selling, for business purposes, tho valuable sites these churches occupy. There are forty-seven Anglican churches in the city of London—that is, in the square mile which comprises the old city, and is now the commercial centre of the great metropolis. When those churches were built over 250 years ago tho city of London had a residential population of about 300,000. The greater part of the population had their homes within the city wails, and merchants and shopkeepers lived over their business premises. But to-day the number of people who have their homes in the city is below 14,000, and many of them are merely caretakers living in the attics of big office buildings. On Sundays the commercial centre of London is practically deserted, and therefore the attendances at the city churches are very small. Morning and evening services are held in each of them, but in many the average number of worshippers at a service is fewer than ten. Most churchgoers attend the services in the churches in the suburbs in which they live.

The forty-seven city churches not only occupy valuable sites, but they arc also comparatively wealthy, although their congregations are so small. They derive most of their revenue from funds and endowments bequeathed to them generations ago by pious, wealthy worshippers. The average stipend paid to the vicars of these almost deserted churches is over £BSO a year, whereas there are hundreds of vicars in charge of churches in busy centres whose stipends are less than half this amount. The question of pulling down some of the city churches and selling the sites has been under discussion by the authorities of the Church of England for many years. Six years ago- the Bishop of London appointed a Commission of eminent churchmen to consider and report on the matter, and this Commission recommended that nineteen of the forty-seven churches should bo pulled down and re-erected in the suburbs. The Commission estimated the value of the sites of these nineteen churches at £1,695,000. But the idea of pulling down these old churches offends the religious susceptibilities of many people, and the aesthetic susceptibilities of others, with the result that the proposal has many influential opponents. The Bishop of London has succeeded in getting his Bill through the House of Lords, but he has still to get it through the House of Commons. The Corporation of the City of London is opposed to the destruction of these churches, and sent two _of the city sheriffs, picturesquely clad in their long scarlet robes of office, and accompanied by the city remembrancer in uniform, to attend the Bar of the House of Commons and present a petition against the Bishop of London s Bill. This picturesque form of protest Is in conformity with the corporation s fidelity to the ceremonial past. The corporation still carries out,_ through its officials, various ceremonial duties that date back several centuries. The most notable of these ceremonies is the payment of quit _rent to the Crown for certain land in the parish of St. Clement Danes. At this day no one knows where this land is, or who occupies it; but the ceremony of paying rent for it is carried out with much pomp every year at the Law Courts in the Strand. According to tradition, a piece of land was rented by Henry ffl. to a farrier, who established his smithy on it, near the tilting ground of the Knights Templar, for the purpose of shoeing the horses ridden by the knights and repairing their armor. As the smithy was a great convenience to the knights, the rent demanded from the farrier was merely nominal, consisting of six horse shoes and sixty-one nails—the extra nail above sixty being for good measure. For over 700 years this ouit rent has been paid. When the City of London took over the payment of it no one knows; the situation of the land is unknown, and therefore the person in occupation is unknown. But punctually ouco a year the King’s Remembrancer holds court, and calls on the occupants of this forgotten smithy to do service to the King. And the city solicitor comes forward _ and hands over six horse shoes and sixtyone nails. It might bo supposed that the King’s Remembrancer has accumulated a large stock of horse shoes and nails, as the ceremony has been carried out for centuries. But that is not the case, for the same set of horse shoes and nails has Been doing duty for generations. They are kept under lock and key, and produced each year for the ceremony. It is amazing to think of important officials wasting time in carrying out such an empty ceremony year after year, with the same old, stage properties as quit rent for a piece of land which for all practical purposes does not exist. /

Charlie: “It is far. better to be alone than in had company.” Joe: “ I’ll say so, g’bye.”