the word 'appalled' does not begin to cover it

[winterbadger]

I think it's terrifically important to save, preserve, and protect historic buildings, including church buildings.

But to bankrupt someone wholly unconnected with the church in the name of doing so is atrocious and outwith any Christian principle I was brought up to recognise.

Summary: A couple who live in Wales but inherited farm in Warwickshire are being required to pay nearly £200,000 for upkeep of a church near the farm because one of the fields of the farm was designated at some point in the distant past as property that should support the church.

Even one of the Law Lords who decided the case called the relevant law "anachronistic, even capricious".

Apparently homebuyers can now purchase insurance to protect one against later discovery of such a liability.

Sheesh.

Comments

[zoefruitcake.livejournal.com]

bloody ridiculous :0(

[plutosonium.livejournal.com]

That is terrible! Perhaps they'd like them to start providing the village with fifteen bushels of corn yearly, as well?

It's not the freaking dark ages anymore.

[candlelight1228.livejournal.com]

That's ridiculous. But then again the Church of England seems to be living up to the same standard King Henry VIII set. After all, he had taken all the money from the churches. Not saying it's right just saying they are living by the same standard that was set for them. Any wonder why Eddie Izzard pokes fun at them.

I wish there was something to be done for the couple.

[plutosonium.livejournal.com]

Forfeit the property to the bank, maybe? Sue? Deed the field over and let the church find some way to make money off of it?

[winterbadger]

Infuriatingly, the parish council (and as far as I can tell the culprits seem to be the parish council, *not* the CofE) are *REFUSING* to accept the land as payment for the debt. And they are only going after this family, not other holders of rectorial land (presumably because they know these people have money).

Frnakly, I am a bit surprised, given what little I know about the curren Archbishop of Canterbury, that he has not seen fit to intervene and either discourage or speak out against this action. It can only have a corrosive effect on the relatiosnhip between the Church and its adherents on one side and the rest of the country as a whole. I can only imagine that an action like this is going to increase hostility towards the church and bring nearer the day when the government disestablishes it and legislates out of existence any more holdover laws like this one.

But it would appear from this and the controversy over homosexual adoption that the CoFE remains more rooted in an unmodern and unpleasant past than I realised.

[wolfette]

I saw that on the news the other day. Strikes me it's probably a hold over from the feudal system. Even Scotland, last stronghold of feudal land law, finally did away with that.

[gr-c17.livejournal.com]

I was going to gleefully shout loudly about the 1st amendment. Then remembered the 9 ring wraiths...er justices were just as bad deciding that poor folk can loose their homes for hotels and golf courses last year.

Guess the war against the middle class has taken root across the pond as well. Sorry about that U.K.