Time again for those who pray to pay?
OUR parish churches have been a feature of island life for hundreds of years. But as their significance declines in this more secular age, questions will undoubtedly be raised again about how they should be maintained, and who should benefit from this.
This issue was highlighted, somewhat out of the blue, in these pages this week. It typically comes round time and time again in the news cycle, at one point as part of a campaign that ran ‘those who pray should pay’. The Church countered by saying that was akin to those without school-age children refusing to pay tax towards education.
The matter has been aired less frequently since the States addressed it in 2015, on the back of a report from the Parochial Ecclesiastical Rates Review Committee, although it ultimately decided to change very little.
Islanders are proud of their parishes, but also rapidly losing contact with them. The parish church is an expense to the ratepayers and while it remains available to parishioners, many now would see no function for the church in their lives. The rectories, where they still exist, are a drain on ratepayers and in some cases not occupied by a resident rector.
Some islanders may be particularly proud to live in their parish, but that does not necessarily translate to parish pride in terms of amenities, engagement with parish officialdom and elections. After a post-general election resurgence in 2020, this year’s parish elections have had minimal engagement from parishioners interested in serving the parish, summed up with another uncontested election last night in St Peter Port. And this is despite some parishes and campaign groups working hard to raise the profile of the elections.
For many, the closest they will come to truly being part of a parish will be if their children attend the parish primary school.
It seems inevitable that the funding of parish churches will become an issue for church – which is struggling to meet funding targets already from its congregations – and/or state again at some point. Will this States have the appetite to pursue what may be considered a ‘vanity project’?
For an Assembly which has shown an appetite to kick over quite a few statues, it also fights strangely shy at times of picking off other targets.