BS: Church V State

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: GUEST,Pete from seven stars link
Date: 17 Jul 15 - 04:03 AM

Also for the benefit of obnoxious guest......st Mary's is at the end of a long unmade road going.......uphill !.    And btw, at the church they have some sea shells found at the site during renovation. Might give you a clue as to when my God " made " that hill !.

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 17 Jul 15 - 03:58 AM

PS I stand by the second remark you objected to.

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 17 Jul 15 - 03:55 AM

Dear XX my post of 15 July 02.49 PM is not factually incorrect at all. It was made initially to a post which stated:

" Some have indeed fallen out of religious use, and no-one would pay to visit those"

I replied "You mean like Fountains Abbey, Tintern abbey?"

Perhaps you could tell me which bit is FACTUALLY incorrect. However I do appreciate that the occupants may have been kicked out so I'll suggest you might want to look at
http://www.visitchurches.org.uk/

Which fits your model a little better

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: Will Fly
Date: 17 Jul 15 - 03:40 AM

GUEST: There are no hills in Norfolk.

GUEST obviously doesn't know north Norfolk - try finding the lovely old, ruined church in Corpusty, or dip inland from the north Norfolk coast near Blakeney and Cley.

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: GUEST,Musket sans comfort blanket
Date: 17 Jul 15 - 03:28 AM

"Churches are built to the glory of God"

But churches actually exist! I can see them, touch them and many years ago, my girlfriend and I got in through a back door of one late at night and had a right good shag.

I think you'll find many churches, especially in the various empires western countries ran were built to the glory of suppressing the natives. Here in Blighty, many were built to the glory of having something bigger and better than "the other lot" have, or indeed what the town over there have.

Built to the glory of vanity and hypocrisy. Still, they are useful to normal people as somewhere to visit and marvel at the architecture, style and get an insight into the past, when almost everyone was controlled and their lives moulded by simpleton superstition.

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 16 Jul 15 - 05:12 PM

Than there is Lud's church in the white peak. Very atmospheric and not built to the glory of anyone. Must say, when we got there, I did say a little word of thanks to the naiads of the Dane for letting me keep my feet on the thick ice in the valley above the river en route! :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: GUEST
Date: 16 Jul 15 - 04:27 PM

There are no hills in Norfolk. Get your God to make some, I'd hate to see you disappointed.

A lot of posts missing on this thread. Ironic seeing the moderators call heritage anything outside of living memory.

This is the real not new world we are discussing, prats.

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 16 Jul 15 - 04:27 PM

Never been. Interesting story. Looks nice...

St Mary, Houghton-on-the-Hill

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: GUEST,Blandiver (Astray)
Date: 16 Jul 15 - 02:21 PM

St Faith, Little Witchingham

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 16 Jul 15 - 01:09 PM

Going back to something Steve said earlier, I wonder why you can get away with not paying to see Salisbury cathedral but it costs about £15 to see that other local (presumed) religious edifice, Stonehenge? I cannot believe the the cost of upkeep is comparable! Maybe it is. Maybe in years to come the religions of both will be all but extinct!

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: GUEST,Pete from seven stars link
Date: 16 Jul 15 - 12:44 PM

Have you been to st Mary's,houghton on on the hill, Norfolk .   It was discovered overgrown and ruined and used by witches.   Bob who "restored" it organised a couple of soldiers to scare them off apparently !. Lovely out of the way location, and some remnants of wall painting.   It has a web site.    I shall look up st faiths as we plan to go to Norfolk some time soon.

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: GUEST,XX
Date: 16 Jul 15 - 09:28 AM

When did God say he wanted all the fancy stuff? Many non-conformists manage to do without it, spending what dosh they had building little chapels in out of the way parts.

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 16 Jul 15 - 05:42 AM

I came across a lovely wee church in deepest, darkest Norfolk a few weeks back - fallen from religious use it's now open to anyone who wants to inspect it's medieval wall paintings and / or have a wee pump on it's old harmonium.

Naturally, I did both & made a wee recording - though heaven knows I'm no keyboard player, I just wanted to capture the feel of the place in sound. I also left a donation & WOULD have paid if asked.

Saint Faith's. 19.5.15.

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: GUEST,XX
Date: 16 Jul 15 - 04:44 AM

You mean like Fountains Abbey, Tintern abbey?

My point was that those to were vacated in the Dissolution. So bad examples of paying to get into redundant churches.

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Jul 15 - 03:58 AM

Churches do allow other uses between services, for which they may charge, but the church exists for the services, and was constructed "to the glory of God."
That is not "hoodoo" Jim, it was how they spoke of it.
That is also why they hung the bells in them Musket, and why they let you ring them.

Churches no longer required for services are sold off.
People use them, but no one visits just to see them when they are just another enclosed space.

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: GUEST,Musket smiling
Date: 16 Jul 15 - 02:25 AM

Guildford Cathedral came in handy too when they wanted a location for a scene in The Omen.

To be fair, that was "allowed" although impaling Dr Who with a bloody great crucifix was sacrilege! They should show more respect and deference to a Time Lord. Allowing their cathedral to be used to kill a Galefrian.....

Bleeding well blasphemous

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: GUEST, ^*^
Date: 15 Jul 15 - 09:54 PM

And yet another use for a church.

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Jul 15 - 09:11 PM

Ten minutes' walk through the fields from my house is one of the tiniest churches I've ever seen, the CofE church of Our Lady and St Anne on Leverlake Road, a short step from the beach at Widemouth Bay, about three miles from Bude. Somewhat devoid of architectural merit, admittedly, but a charming spot nonetheless.

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Jul 15 - 08:00 PM

"Did those 'fall out religious use', or where their occupants kicked out ?"
They ran out of customers - it was either that or a Tesco.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: GUEST,Musket shaking his head
Date: 15 Jul 15 - 06:33 PM

Ah well. I should have known those Keith hadn't thought of were in a different category. He just meant those people don't pay to visit.

Silly old Musket.

Those that people pay to visit are just er

What was it again Keith?
😂😂😂

Oh and allowing other uses? Allowing? It's just that I wouldn't want you to call the good people who apply for grants to be hoodwinking The Charities Commission.

Yes. Some do rent out because they allow it to be so. Many rent out because they are required to, and not by your imaginary friend.

If churches merely existed for their members, we'd have more bingo halls.

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Jul 15 - 05:19 PM

There are other uses changes of use

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Jul 15 - 04:09 PM

People pay to use a holiday let I own in Fife that used to be a chapel..

Like Dave's two examples, they might pay to use them, but not just to see them.
Historic ruins are in a different category.

Most old ruins that used to be churches are run by English Heritage, NT etc,

That is not true of churches that have just fallen out of use, which was what I said, and which stands.

"The churches were built to the glory of God, and still only exist as churches for the holding of services.

Some have indeed fallen out of religious use, and no-one would pay to visit those.

Churches may allow other events between services but, as I said, the services are the reason churches exist."

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 15 Jul 15 - 03:38 PM

Treachers, pedant??

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: GUEST,Mudcat pedant
Date: 15 Jul 15 - 03:29 PM

were...

Some here feel poor use of the language you were taught lessens your impact.

To be fair, it is the piss poor quality of some treachers.

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 15 Jul 15 - 03:01 PM

Whalley's pretty neat too. And who can resist the gnomic abbey ruins at Bury St. Edmonds??

Bury St. Edmonds June 1st 2014

I think it's free to get in - but people DO want to see them.

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: GUEST,XX
Date: 15 Jul 15 - 02:55 PM

Did those 'fall out religious use', or where their occupants kicked out ?

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Jul 15 - 02:55 PM

"You really are a complete and utter wanker"
You-can-not-be-serious!!
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 15 Jul 15 - 02:49 PM

" Some have indeed fallen out of religious use, and no-one would pay to visit those"

You mean like Fountains Abbey, Tintern abbey?

You really are a complete and utter wanker

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 15 Jul 15 - 12:31 PM

For the third time...

Change hands.

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Jul 15 - 12:27 PM

"The churches were built to the glory of God, and still only exist as churches for the holding of services."
Leaving aside the hoodoo, if they no longer fulfill their purpose for a significant enough number of people, they should be closed or given to communities for something else.
Many Church of Ireland Protestant Churches are used as music venues, and some for heritage centres
Tuamgraney
Why continue to keep buildings that are empty, especially if they become dangerous if they are not maintained or unused (perhaps god is looking for new tenants up there!!!)
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: Musket
Date: 15 Jul 15 - 12:24 PM

People pay to use a holiday let I own in Fife that used to be a chapel.. Still got the altar, although I moved it to the back where we built a kitchen annex. It makes an excellent island, and we had a double butler sink cut into it.

Most old ruins that used to be churches are run by English Heritage, NT etc, and people pay good money to walk round them.

They may have been built to the glory of some god or other, but they remain to the glory of man and heritage.

By the way, many churches do not "allow" other things but are required to open up the use of the building in return for certain charitable funding. It isn't in the gift of the church to dictate terms when agreeing to conditions, same as any other applicant for grants.

Do you think people only visit churches because of the weekly rituals? No wonder it's called the god delusion....

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 15 Jul 15 - 11:51 AM

Some have indeed fallen out of religious use, and no-one would pay to visit those.

I don't think that is strictly true. People pay for various things at, for instance, All Souls, Bolton or Circomedia at St Paul's, Bristol. As churches fall out of use they will, thankfully, be better utilised and provide a service rather than just, er, a service... :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 15 Jul 15 - 11:40 AM

Churches may allow other events between services but, as I said, the services are the reason churches exist.

Howsabout....

The Fall - Manchester Cathedral 29/05/2015

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Jul 15 - 11:33 AM

The churches were built to the glory of God, and still only exist as churches for the holding of services.

Some have indeed fallen out of religious use, and no-one would pay to visit those.

Churches may allow other events between services but, as I said, the services are the reason churches exist.

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Jul 15 - 10:55 AM

"£Do you get much unskilled labour on a building site?"
Compared to what?
Hod carriers, mixers, general labourers, tea lads, all need certain skills, but how would compare them with sparks, carpenters, plumbers.. all of whom come with training and certification (nowadays)
"Then as now - unskilled meant unemployed."
Fair enough, but you mentioned highly skilled labour, masters and guilds, which is what I was responding to.
"There is much more to see in a church or cathedral than just the building"
o there isn,t, basically you go in to look at the architecture (unless they have the odd Caravaggio hanging on the wall)
"and the services are the reason they exist."
Nine people out of ten have rejected general use of the ordinary church, and those people who use Cathedrals and Abbeys for worship are miniscule, and quite often confined to the elite.
As Musket says, you don't need an elaborate, cold draughty damp and often neglected building to worship, anywhere will do.
When one local church was renovated years ago, the faithful went to mass in the pub (Gleesoms, for anybody who knows this area).      
As god is supposed to be everywhere, you don't need a building at all.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: GUEST,Musket laughing
Date: 15 Jul 15 - 09:50 AM

"services are the reason they exist."

More God botherers nonsense.

There are thousands of old buildings that used to be churches but like Jesus, society has less use for them than they used to when the majority of people were superstitious.

Even those that are used for rituals, many have lottery grants that include making the building available for non Jesus use. I sang at a concert in a church only a few weeks ago. Booked for a concert of acoustic roots. The church has to demonstrate being active in attracting bookings for community use that has nothing to do with their hobby.

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Jul 15 - 08:50 AM

There is much more to see in a church or cathedral than just the building, and the services are the reason they exist.

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 15 Jul 15 - 08:48 AM

no diffrent from any other job requiring a mixture of skilled, semi-skilled and unskilled labour.

Do you get much unskilled labour on a building site? Not in my young day! You got a lot of pride in a job well done & well earned pay packet whatever the time-served skill. Sorry if this getting all a bit Auf Wiedersehen, Pet! (and I know I'm talking to a skilled spark) but you have an even more exacting cause for precision at all stages of the job in medieval Romanesque & Gothic architecture. Then as now - unskilled meant unemployed.

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Jul 15 - 08:44 AM

"You can not get in to the Tower of London without payment."
No church, or cathedral is in any way comparable to The Tower of London with all its displays.
You don't have to pay to enter art galleries and museums in Britain - far more culturally important and informative than anything any church, and essential to our and our children's education.
Only a tenth of the population visit church. and well over half the voting population are opposed to paying for and in many cases allowing religious schools.
Perhaps the churches should be considering changing for services as it is very much a minority habit.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 15 Jul 15 - 08:32 AM

Times I've been to Westminster Cathedral I was in the company of practising Catholics who attended for Mass. I don't think Westminster Abbey has the same intensity of devotion somehow - maybe that's true of Anglicanism as a whole?? I never sense much religion in York Minster - just the occasional call to prayer or a wee service going on in as side chapel - it's mostly happy tourists. Do you get tourists in Westminster Cathedral in the same way I wonder? Even in the Mersey Funnel the place seems weirdly votive somehow. Norwich Catholic Cathedral likewise (well worth a look by the way). I used to attend Evensong in Durham Cathedral because of the music - nice to sit up there and be immersed in so vivid a choral tradition unbroken but a brief hiatus during the republican era. I don't think you have to pay though...

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 15 Jul 15 - 08:30 AM

"These buildings were erected by highly skilled labourers and master of various guilds"
No they weren't - the intricate work may be carried out by artisans and craftsmen (who were very much a part of the labouring classes - certainly not princes, Dukes, Bishops, merchants...) but the heavy lifting was done by unskilled labour - no diffrent from any other job requiring a mixture of skilled, semi-skilled and unskilled labour.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 15 Jul 15 - 08:12 AM

You can get into Salisbury Cathedral without paying if you really want to dig in, but you have to run the gauntlet of the extremely vigilant staff at the "voluntary donations" booth! :-). I think it's a suggested £7.50 these days. The same applies at Bath Abbey (wonderful) but the suggested donation is two quid. Pay up!

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 15 Jul 15 - 07:49 AM

Minor point but attending a service is not nothing. It is time that could be far better spent appreciating the art and architecture of the building. I do not know for certain but I strongly suspect that if you started wandering round the abbey during a service you would be asked to sit down or leave.

As to the difference between Westminster abbey and cathedral, yes,the age is significant but is not the cost in maintaining both very high? If so, why does one charge and the other not? Anything to do with one giving something back to the people while the other, being part of the state, is still taxing them? Just asking.

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Jul 15 - 07:38 AM

You can not get in to the Tower of London without payment.
You can attend a service at any church or cathedral for nothing.
Most churches are left open and free all day too.
Perhaps you expect them to pay you something Rag?

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: GUEST,XX
Date: 15 Jul 15 - 07:26 AM

As XX has clearly stated these buildings were erected by the labour of "the people"

No I didn't. I said "The buildings were paid for by the fruits of the labour of working people in the area." The masons etc were paid by money collected as taxation, tithes and so on.

However, even if a building was put up by public subscription maintenance has to be paid for. Whether it is from general taxation or a fee on the door is a debate that goes beyond old churches.

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 15 Jul 15 - 07:23 AM

Jack, As I've previously stated I do not mind contributing to the upkeep of the building but to have someone forbid me to enter unless I pay does not sit right with me.

The Anglican Church is an extremely wealthy organisation, even I was surprised at the vast amount of investments they had two years ago.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-23467750

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: Jack Blandiver
Date: 15 Jul 15 - 07:12 AM

Jack, As XX has clearly stated these buildings were erected by the labour of "the people" the masons, the carpenters etc etc.

Nothing so very clear about it, Raggytash - it's just rhetoric, and quite inaccurate at that. These buildings were erected by highly skilled labourers and master of various guilds in direct employ of the Church and it does us good to remember their artistry & cough up a miserly fee in the hope it's directed to the upkeep so that future generations may enjoy it too. Am I remembering that it costs somewhere in the region of £20,000 a week just to keep York Minster warm & dry?

This is hardly Folk Art we're talking about here, despite some cunning flourishes on the vernacular of the time, theological & otherwise. For £10 quid you're getting access to the enduring legacy of human ingenuity however ill-founded or mis-directed, but the same might be said of the Pyramids or Stonehenge or my humble old Victorian terraced house or the M6. So I happily pay my tenner for a few hour's time-travelling whilst seeking out the devil that endures in the details of the centuries.

I'm an atheist so God really has nothing to do with it.

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Jul 15 - 06:48 AM

Rag, re. your post 15 Jul 15 - 06:45 AM,

No.

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Jul 15 - 06:47 AM

Now I, and you, have to pay to visit a so-called house of god.

Why should you expect something for nothing?
Attendance at services is free, but a voluntary collection will be made.

Subject: RE: BS: Church V State
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 15 Jul 15 - 06:45 AM

Not wishing to put too fine a point on it KAOH


FUCK OFF!!!