1986 - 40 years ago - March - Part 2

1986 - 40 years ago - March - Part 2

March 17-23

DISCLOSURES about profits made by local oil companies lead the president of the Jersey Farmers Union to ask Agriculture and Fisheries president Senator Pierre Horsfall to take the matter up in the States and head an inquiry into the issue.

A 19-year-old unemployed Jerseyman, Steve Shane Mesney, pleads guilty in the Police Court to grave and criminal assault. The Court hears that 27-year-old Alan McCormick required 50 stitches after being found lying bleeding in Chapel Lane after an attack by Mesney.

Jersey historian Mrs Joan Stevens dies aged 75.

The States pass the controversial Queen's Valley Reservoir Law after thrashing out the amendments but opponents of the flooding plans say that they have not given up the fig ht.

Mrs Helen Baker, a founder of the Save Our Valleys group, says that the anti-flooders may petition the Queen.

Automaten Gaudin, the Five Oaks catering and refrigeration equipment company, closes with the loss of 11 jobs and is declared en desastre in the Royal Court.

The former offices of the Jersey New Waterworks Company in Mulcaster Street are bought by the Banco de Bilbao for £1 million.

The Police Court hears that doctors have no legal right to special parking places when a practitioner, Dr James Hugh, appears to answer more than 30 parking charges.

The 100-year-old iron railings at the central Market are to be surveyed by a specialist structural engineer after it is discovered they are rusting badly.

March 24-30

THE Island celebrates the 100th anniversary of the birth of its greatest artist of modern times, Edmund Blampied. Tributes are paid to the way in which he so faithfully recorded the essential nature of Jersey and its inhabitants.

The arrest of a further 13 people on suspicion of drunken driving brings the total of arrests for the offence to 104 for the first three months of 1986.

Figures published by the Social Security Committee show that the 'flu epidemic of February and March broke all records. Between 17 February and 14 March, 5,896 medical certificates were issued.

Mr Robin Seymour, chairman of the Island's largest hotel group, warns that Jersey stands to lose its tourism market if hotels up-grade and increase their prices too rapidly.

Finance and economics Committee president Senator Reg Jeune says he is horrified by a suggestion from the Civil Aviation Authority that Jersey could lose its Heathrow connection.

The Jersey Gas Company's annual report for 1985 is published and reveals that there are plans for a move from the existing Bath Street building to Tunnel Street. The report also reveals a profit after tax in 1985 of over £172 million.

Speaking at an Institute of Bankers dinner, the principal of Highlands College, Mr Wally Clarke, attacks the poor training record of the local finance industry.

 

Elizabeth Castle opens its gates to the public for the first time since a £120,000 facelift designed to make the fortification more easily understood by visitors.

ITV reporting on the Trans Debate in Jersey Schools

The recent report by ITV was (I thought) very biased. Teachers are prohibited from (a) telling parents and (b) using biological gender pronouns in cases of children declaring themselves as "Trans". But what if other children tell their parents and it gets back to the child's parents? The concept of secrecy is "porous" at best, and presumably at parent / teacher review meetings the teachers then revert to using biological gender pronouns for the child, which must make the risk of slip-ups considerable. They must also take care in school end of term reports.

Emotional Framing and Operational Contradictions

I think this presented the issue in a way that downplayed the practical and safeguarding tensions within the current Trans Inclusion Schools Guidance. This is because the report focused on emotional framing rather than the operational contradictions teachers face.

The guidance requires teachers not to inform parents if a child declares a different gender identity at school unless the child explicitly consents. At the same time, teachers must use the child’s chosen name and pronouns in school settings, even though biological sex remains relevant for safeguarding, sports, facilities, and internal data systems!

This creates a dual‑track system: one linguistic and administrative reality for safeguarding, and another for social interaction. Teachers must constantly switch between these two registers depending on who they are speaking to, which is inherently error‑prone.

The idea that this can be kept confidential is “porous.” Schools are socially transparent environments. Children talk to each other, and they talk to their parents. Parents talk to other parents. Information flows sideways through the community in ways no policy can control.

Even if teachers follow the guidance perfectly, other children may mention the situation at home, and the information may reach the child’s parents indirectly. This means the policy’s assumption of controlled secrecy is unrealistic in practice.

Parent–teacher meetings introduce another layer of risk. Teachers are expected to revert to biological pronouns when speaking to parents who are not aware of the child’s school identity. Switching pronoun sets depending on the audience is cognitively demanding, especially in a busy meeting where teachers are discussing multiple pupils.

End‑of‑term reports create similar problems. Reports for parents must use the child’s real name and biological pronouns for the child, but internally teachers must refer to the child in their chosen name and  sex. Teachers must therefore maintain two parallel linguistic systems in writing as well as speech, increasing the likelihood of accidental disclosure.

Safeguarding law adds further tension. Biological sex remains the legally relevant category for risk assessment, supervision, and certain activities. Teachers must therefore treat the child as one sex for safeguarding purposes while treating them as another for social purposes. This contradiction is extremely difficult to manage consistently.

School Trips

The ITV report highlighted a complaint from a trans‑identified child who felt distressed at being required to share accommodation with their biological sex on school trips. That emotional experience is real for the child, but ITV presented it as though the only relevant factor was the child’s discomfort, without acknowledging the wider safeguarding framework that schools must operate within.

Safeguarding, however, applies to all children on the trip, not just the one who is unhappy with the arrangement. Schools have legal duties around privacy, dignity, supervision, and risk management that cannot be suspended for a single case. These duties are based on biological sex because safeguarding is built around physical risk categories, not identity categories.

If a child is biologically male, then regardless of their gender identity, they have the anatomy, physical development, and strength profile of a male. This matters for safeguarding because it shapes the risk environment for other children, particularly in intimate settings like shared bedrooms, bathrooms, and changing areas.

Moving a biologically male child into girls’ accommodation introduces safeguarding risks for the girls. These risks do not depend on the child’s intentions or personality. They arise from the structural reality that girls cannot consent to sharing private overnight spaces with a male peer, and their parents would not expect it.

Even if the child is entirely harmless, safeguarding is not about judging individual character. It is about preventing situations that could lead to discomfort, allegations, breaches of privacy, or harm. Schools must therefore consider the rights and safety of every child, not only the one who identifies differently.

ITV’s framing presented the school’s decision as discriminatory or insensitive, but it omitted the legal and safeguarding logic behind sex‑based accommodation. It also did not acknowledge that many jurisdictions require overnight arrangements to be based on biological sex precisely because identity cannot override safeguarding obligations.

This omission makes the issue appear simpler than it is. Overnight trips expose the fundamental contradiction in the current guidance: schools are told to treat the child socially as their chosen gender, but they must apply safeguarding rules based on biological sex. In day‑to‑day classroom life, this tension can be masked. On residential trips, it becomes unavoidable.

The deeper problem is that a policy built on secrecy and identity‑based categories cannot function in settings where biological sex is operationally relevant. Accommodation, supervision, and parental expectations all depend on sex, not pronouns. ITV’s report did not explore this, which is why the coverage felt incomplete.

Conclusions

ITV’s coverage did not foreground these structural contradictions or the scale of public concern. It also did not reflect the growing political pressure to revise or replace the guidance, including petitions, propositions in the States, and concerns raised by safeguarding groups.

The deeper issue is that the policy is built on incompatible assumptions: that secrecy can be maintained in a school environment, that teachers can flawlessly code‑switch between pronoun systems, and that safeguarding can be separated from parental knowledge. These assumptions simply do not hold in real life.

Reviewing Claus Westermann's Creation

Claus Westermann “Creation”

This had a profound effect on my thinking when I read it in the 1980s.

A bit of background story.   Claus Westermann (7 October 1909 – 11 June 2000) was a German Protestant Old Testament scholar. He taught at the University of Heidelberg from 1958 to 1978. Westermann is considered one of the premier Old Testament scholars of the twentieth century. 

Westermann’s observation that God never interrogates the serpent is one of the most important, and easily overlooked, features of Genesis 3. It shapes his entire understanding of how the text treats evil, responsibility, and the limits of human knowledge:

The serpent’s silence before God

In Genesis 3, God questions:
Adam: “Where are you?”
Eve: “What is this you have done?”

But God never asks the serpent anything. There is no “Why did you do this?” or “What is your purpose?” The serpent receives only a sentence, not a dialogue. 

For Westermann, this is not an accident. It is a literary and theological signal: the serpent’s origin, motive, and inner nature are deliberately withheld. Evil as a mystery, not an explained mechanism.

Westermann argues that Genesis 3 refuses to give an origin story for evil. The serpent simply appears - a creature within creation, cunning, speaking, but unexplained. This is consistent with the Hebrew Bible’s general approach:

· Evil is real.
· Evil is not metaphysically grounded.
· Evil’s origin is not revealed.

This is why Westermann insists that Genesis 3 is not a myth of cosmic rebellion or a metaphysical Fall. It is a story of human disobedience within a world where the possibility of temptation already exists, but whose deeper source remains beyond human grasp.

Westermann stresses that the serpent is introduced as:

“one of the animals the LORD God had made”

So cunning, but still a creature, neither divine nor demonic in the later Christian sense. By refusing to question the serpent, the text avoids turning it into a cosmic antagonist. It remains a creature, not a metaphysical enemy. This keeps Genesis 3 firmly within the worldview of the Hebrew Bible, not later dualistic or mythic systems.

The move to read the devil back into the serpent is a later development in Jewish and Christian interpretation, not something present in Genesis itself. The ancient text gives no hint that the serpent is anything other than a creature “that the LORD God had made.”. I have always thought that narrative re-interpretation comes dangerously close to a dualistic outlook.

Westermann famously argues that "the narrative of Genesis 2–3 does not speak of a fall" in the traditional dogmatic sense. Instead, he views it as a "primeval event" that describes the ongoing reality of being human.

He asserts that the word "fall" is inaccurate and deceptive because the text does not describe a move from a "perfect" state to a "ruined" one, but rather the introduction of disobedience and limits.
Alienation, Not Separation: He interprets the expulsion from Eden as alienation from God, not a definitive separation. He emphasizes that God continues to care for and give meaning to human life outside the garden.

(a) Agreement with Jewish Thought

Westermann’s work often mirrors the Jewish perspective that humans were created with two inclinations: the Yetzer HaTov (good) and Yetzer HaRa (evil/selfish). Like Jewish scholars, Westermann argues that humans remain God’s creatures after the garden. There is no "stain" passed down; instead, there is an ongoing choice between obedience and rebellion.

He agrees with the Rabbinic view that Genesis 3 explains why life is difficult (toil, pain, mortality) rather than why humans are inherently "evil."

Focus on the Narrative: Both prioritize the literal text over later systematic dogmas like the "Fall of Man."

(b) Agreement with Eastern Orthodoxy

Westermann’s "primeval history" approach resonates with the Orthodox concept of Ancestral Sin (as opposed to Original Sin) and Mortality vs. Guilt: Eastern Orthodoxy teaches that we inherit Adam’s mortality, not his guilt. Westermann similarly focuses on the "limits" placed on humanity (death and toil) as the primary consequence of the garden narrative.

The Goal is Still Union: Westermann’s idea that God remains "at work" in the world after the garden mirrors the Orthodox view that the Imago Dei (Image of God) was darkened but not destroyed.
Process over Event: He views the "fall" as a description of human frailty, which aligns with the Orthodox view of humanity as being created in an "infant" or "developing" state rather than a state of static perfection.

Last Orders! The Reform of the Licencing Law and why it may cost the consumer more

Reforming the Jersey alcohol licensing law has taken over 16 years of active discussion and multiple failed attempts. While the previous legislation (Licensing (Jersey) Law 1974) remained largely unchanged for over 50 years, the specific effort to modernize the system and dismantle the Licensing Assembly began in earnest around 2009. It has only just been approved now!

Bailiwick Express reports that

"Jersey’s long-standing licensing assembly will be dismantled, with powers over alcohol licensing handed over to government regulators in one of the most significant upheavals of the island’s licensing system in decades."

"The package of reforms, brought forward by Economic Development Minister Kirsten Morel, aimed at “reducing complexities” and speeding up the process for businesses seeking licences."

"Under the new law, the Licensing Assembly will be abolished, with oversight passing to the government’s Regulation Directorate."

Good news? Perhaps not for the consumer. The words "government’s Regulation Directorate" suggest bureaucracy and extra costs, despite it being an existing body (albeit unknown to most of the population). And the suggestion would not be wholly wrong!

While the reform aims to be cost-neutral for the taxpayer, it will lead to significant changes in fee structures.

The new regulatory system is intended to be funded by the hospitality and retail industry through licence fees rather than general taxation. In simple terms, while the hospitality industry has always paid for licences, the old system was essentially a subsidised service, whereas the new one is a commercial-style regulatory model. 

For decades, the Licensing Assembly (made up of Jurats and the Bailiff) operated through the Royal Court. Because the Jurats are volunteers and the court's administrative costs are bundled into the general judicial budget, the "true" cost of running the licensing system was unquantified and largely covered by the taxpayer.

Under the new system this will be moved to the "Regulation Directorate". This is a government department with paid staff, digital infrastructure, and operational overheads. To avoid using general tax money, the new law sets fees at a "cost recovery" level. Essentially, the industry is now paying for the full salary and desk of the person processing their application.

Expect an expansion of civil servants within the directorate, unless I am being unduly cynical. Official Ministerial Decisions signed in early 2026 explicitly state there are no financial or staffing implications resulting from the transfer of licensing duties. I'll believe that if it is true in 2027. 

For instance, handling the "centuries-old" volume of applications previously managed by the court system may require additional administrative and technical staff. The Directorate must now publish all applications online and provide formal explanations to Parish Constables if their decisions differ from local Parish Assembly views, adding a new layer of mandatory administrative work.

Within the existing system, fees have been largely "static" since 2006. A large supermarket pays the same flat fee as a small corner shop for an off-licence, which doesn't reflect the regulatory effort or their market share. 

The government is shifting the burden toward off-licences (supermarkets and liquor stores), which now account for roughly two-thirds of the alcohol market. This allows them to keep fees for struggling hospitality venues (pubs and restaurants) more stable while still funding the new Directorate's workload.

While the Regulation Directorate’s goal is to be "cost-neutral" for the government, the retailer's costs are going up, and those are usually passed straight to you. So expect to pay more at the supermarket - although this may reduce binge drinking, so is not entirely bad news for health.

As of early 2026, existing licence fees generate approximately £260,000 annually for the department; the Directorate expects to handle an additional 30–40 new applications per year under the expanded regime. Fees have not seen a standard inflationary increase since 2007. The Regulation Directorate will set fees to achieve "full cost recovery," meaning the industry must pay for the Directorate's staff, digital systems, and enforcement.

But on the positive side, many businesses currently pay multiple fees for different categories (e.g., a "Taverner's" licence plus an "Entertainment" licence). The new system collapses these into just three categories (On-licence, Off-licence, and Events), which may reduce total individual payments for some venues even if per-licence rates rise.

A Short Story: I am here

Again, I have based this short story on a poem I wrote ages ago, loosely based on Isaiah 58:9.

I Am Here

The rain had been falling for hours, soaking the streets of Reading and the spirits of those who walked them. Marla stood beneath the awning of the shelter, arms crossed, watching the line of people stretch down the block. Some clutched blankets, others held plastic bags with all they owned. Most just waited, silent and soaked.

She had volunteered here for years, but tonight felt heavier. Maybe it was the weather. Maybe it was the man who had shouted at her earlier, angry that there weren’t enough beds. Maybe it was the way her own heart felt clenched, like a fist she couldn’t release.

Inside, the soup simmered. Bread was sliced. Volunteers moved with practiced rhythm. But Marla lingered at the door, unsure why she couldn’t step back in.

A voice broke her reverie: “You alright?” It was Thomas, the shelter’s night manager. His coat was damp, his eyes tired but kind. Marla hesitated. “I don’t know. I just… I feel like I’m failing. Like we’re all failing.” Thomas nodded slowly. “It’s easy to feel that way. But this isn’t about fixing everything. It’s about showing up.” She looked at him, unsure what to say.

He continued, “Isaiah says, ‘Share your food with the hungry, and do not turn away from your own flesh and blood.’ That’s not a strategy. It’s an act of love.” Marla blinked, surprised by the scripture. “You quoting prophets now?” Thomas smiled. “Only the good ones.” They stood in silence for a moment, the rain softening to a mist.

Then Marla saw her. A girl, maybe ten, standing at the edge of the line. No coat. No shoes. Just a soaked hoodie and a plastic bag clutched to her chest. Her lips were blue. Marla moved without thinking. She grabbed a blanket from the bin inside, a bowl of soup, and a pair of dry socks. She knelt before the girl, wrapped the blanket around her shoulders, and offered the soup.

The girl looked at her with wide eyes, unsure whether to trust. “It’s okay,” Marla said gently. “You’re safe now.” The girl took the bowl, hands trembling. She didn’t speak, but her eyes said everything.

Marla sat beside her on the wet pavement, not caring about the cold. She didn’t ask questions. She just stayed.

And in that moment, something shifted. The clenched fist inside her heart loosened. The bitterness she hadn’t named began to dissolve. She felt the warmth of the soup, the weight of the blanket, the quiet presence of a child who had been brave enough to show up.

Later, as the girl slept in one of the last beds, Marla stood in the hallway and whispered a prayer—not polished, not perfect, just honest. “I’m tired. I’m angry. But I want to keep showing up. Help me.”

And in the silence that followed, she felt it: not a voice, not a miracle, but a presence. A nearness. As if the answer had already come. As if the words were already spoken: “I am here.”

Short Stories: You Will Become Clean

You Will Become Clean
(A short story based on a poem of mine based on (2 Kings 5:13)

Naaman had always been a man who filled a room. Even before he spoke, people straightened their backs, adjusted their cloaks, and tried to look useful. He was the commander of Aram’s armies, a man whose victories were sung by soldiers around their fires. Yet for all his strength, Naaman carried a private dread beneath his armour: the creeping, mottled patches on his skin that no ointment, no priest, no whispered charm had ever eased. The scourge of leprosy.

He hid it well. A general learns to hide many things. But the disease advanced, slow and relentless, and Naaman felt his world narrowing. He feared the day when his men would recoil, or when the king’s favour would cool into pity.

It was a young servant girl, an Israelite taken in war, who first spoke hope into his despair. She told Naaman’s wife of a prophet in Samaria, a man of God who could heal what no physician could touch. Naaman resisted the idea at first. It seemed absurd that a foreign holy man might succeed where Aram’s finest healers had failed. But desperation has a way of loosening pride, and soon he was on the road with a royal letter, gifts, and a caravan of soldiers.

When he reached the house of Elisha, he expected ceremony. He expected the prophet to come out, wave his hands, call upon heaven, and perform something suitably impressive for a man of his rank. Instead, a servant opened the door and delivered a simple message:

“Go and wash in the Jordan seven times. Your flesh will be restored, and you will become clean.”

Naaman felt heat rise in his chest: anger, humiliation, disbelief. The Jordan? That muddy trickle compared to the broad rivers of Damascus? Was this a joke at his expense? He turned his horse sharply, ready to leave the whole foolish errand behind.

But his servants, who knew him well enough to risk honesty, rode alongside and spoke gently.

“My father,” one said, “if the prophet had asked you to do something difficult, you would have done it. Why not try this simple thing?”

Their words settled on him like cool water. Naaman slowed. Pride is a heavy armour, and he felt its weight now. He realised he could either cling to it or be healed, but not both. So he went down to the Jordan.

The water was cold, unremarkable, almost disappointing. But he stepped in. Once. Twice. Three times. With each immersion he felt something loosening, not on his skin, but in his heart. By the seventh time, when he rose and wiped the water from his eyes, he saw his flesh renewed, smooth as a child’s.

Naaman stood in the river, stunned. The healing was real, but so was the change within him. He had come seeking a cure; he received instead a lesson in humility, trust, and the quiet power of obedience.

And as he rode home, the sunlight warm on his restored skin, he understood something he had never grasped before: sometimes the smallest act, stepping into the water, admitting our need, is the doorway through which grace enters and makes us clean.

But Naaman’s story lingers long after. The water that restored him still speaks to us, still moves through the life of the Church. The water washes still today, when we follow on this way, in prayer and water, making us clean. In every baptism, even in the gentle lifting of a child at the font, and the pouring of water over the head, the same quiet mercy flows, the same invitation of grace and renewal.

The Sunday Archive: The Pilot, August 1997 - Part 12

The Sunday Archive: The Pilot, August 1997 - Part 12

SHORTLY after his arrival in a new parish, the vicar was asked to conduct a funeral service.

In the service he announced: "I'm sorry that I cannot pay tribute to the deceased as I did not know him. But if any of you would like to say a few words, please feel free to do so."

There was complete silence. "Now don't be shy," continued the vicar, "I'm sure some of you would like to say a kindly word about your friend." Finally a voice from the back muttered: "His brother was worse!"

—Rev John Dodd, Grouville

St Luke and St James
From
DAVID JONES Priest-in-Charge

The Winds of Change and the Challenge to Share

THE twentieth century crept closer to the Established Church in the Bailiwick of Jersey last month, yet the Deanery Synod again ran away from facing the need to look at the present conditions of the Church of England and what the future held and the challenge to change. Ours is the last Deanery in our Diocese to face the challenge! The "Other Island" has already done its job. Why is Jersey last? What a reputation, when we could be leading the way with imagination and flare! A lot was said about history and the need to preserve, and not in "my parish," and why not next door?

For those of you unaware of the issue, it was the need to release two clergy posts in the Island, so that places with greater need may benefit on the mainland. This is something new for us here but very common for the last twenty years in the UK. Back in the 70's it was realised that most of the Church of England's clergy were in the rural areas, when most of the population lived in urban areas. 

So a process of better use of the manpower of the Church was undertaken and the number of clergy, serving relatively small populations, was reduced by the uniting of parishes under one priest. Added to this there were, and are, less men (and now women) offering themselves for the Ordained Ministry and less money to pay for them. Thus there was a growing need, with less resources. Since those days country and town parishes have had to cut their cloth according to the means available.

I came to Jersey from three rural parishes of the size of St Mary's and St John's, scattered over 30 square miles. We had three church schools to run and to be chairman of the governors and trustee of. Three church councils to run. Three parish councils to attend and the raising of funds to maintain all three church buildings, and pay the Quota, and give to mission. Yes, with the visiting and the growing of congregations. That group of three is now, like many others, to increase to five parishes soon. Still with only one Rector. My situation was far from unique, as there were Rectors nearby with five, six and seven parishes.

Yes, I know that Rectors on Jersey are different and play a part in the civil parish administration, but they, unlike their UK fellows, get their church and rectories maintained by the civil authorities and don't have the burden of work, raising funds to do the repair and restoration, themselves (like, I might say, the district churches here do!).

The challenge all of the Anglican churches in Jersey have, is to take our part in the wider Church of which we belong (a wider Church that supports those parishes here who do not pay their full Quota, by subsidising them.) We have more than our fair share of clergy. We need to share our priests, and at the moment release two for service elsewhere. To somewhere with a great need (and population). We may need to release more, only time will tell. But this surely is part of being Christians together, helping where there is the greater need.

We face a challenge, country parishes and the parishes and churches around the town of St Helier; are we making the best use of our limited manpower resources? Let us make the creative choices, rather than have them imposed on us, because we have run away from the challenge. This time, is not a time of doom and gloom, though, but a time of opportunity. Sharing a priest can release the ministries of other people, as is evident in many a parish church in the UK where one man has charge of a group of two, three or four. It is a time to seek a new vision from God as to what is His task for His people in this generation.

The talking will go on, let us pray that we Anglicans in this Island may not duck the issues, but meet them with courage, imagination and the Spirit of Christian generosity. That come November we may have a plan for our future development, worthy of those who follow the God who makes all things new and is ever moving onward.

Much more can and will be said, but we cannot get away from the fact that we have more than our fair share of clergy. Let us meet that truth together. And together rise to the challenge.

DIARY DATES FOR AUGUST

1st-4th: Choir Tour singing in Sherbourne Abbey. 4th: Prayer School, 7.30 pm.
7th: MU Overseas Coffee Morning at church, 11 am-12 noon.
10th: Fun Day and Barbeque at the Vicarage from 2 pm.
17th: Songs of Praise in support of the Children's Society.
31st: Church Picnic and Scavenger Hunt at Gorey.

REGISTERS

HOLY BAPTISM. 1st June, Alexander Lopes; 15th June, Kerry McFarlane; 22nd June, Katherine Veitch, Samuel Allen; 6th July, Jamie Larbaliester, Sean Herbert, Luke Piziura; 13th July, Oliver Bybarezuk.

HOLY MATRIMONY. 28th June, Timothy Marsh and Jocelyne Le Guerne; 12th July, Michael Arnold and Tracey Huggett.

St Brelade, St Aubin on the Hill and Communicare

HOLY BAPTISM. 1st June, Robyn Wellman; 15th June, Fraser Barlow, Jemima Hill; 29th June, Stacy Benstead.

HOLY MATRIMONY. 7th June, Matthew Ahier and Silke Viola; Jonathan Williams and Sarah Mallet; 14th June, Robin Ovenden and Lucy Hackett; Andrew Chamberlain and Victoria Duckett; 21st June, Alun Evans and Sarah Pinel; 28th, Stephen de Gruchy and Fiona Macintosh.

 

The Font

I wanted to write a poem about the font in St Brelade's Church to show how the Eastern Church Fathers speak about infant baptism. The Fathers consistently describe baptism as grace given, new birth, entry into the family of God, and a participation in the Church’s living continuity across generations. This is something lost in the sacramental minimalism and iconoclasm of the Reformation.

The Font

Carved from granite, with loving prayer:
It stands in the church, and brings near,
The past, the ages gone, of babies brought
To be baptised, because they ought;
Forbid not little children, said our Lord,
And so the priest, the water poured,
Upon the child, and made the sign
Of the cross, of the love so divine;
Generations came on such a day,
To bless the child, to love and pray;
What do you see? To see mere stone,
Or the place where faith once shone,
And does now, not just times past,
But a sign in stone of faith to last,
Of baptism into the family holy;
Water and faith, to one so lowly,
Pregnant with the Spirit above,
Descending with grace and love,
As water is poured over the head,
A tapestry gains one more thread;

Heaven descends upon the earth:

A sign of grace, of second birth.


Appendix: The Font as Stone and Sign

The poem’s meditation on the font as both “mere stone” and “a sign in stone of faith to last” matches the Eastern sacramental imagination. The Fathers often speak of material things (water, oil, stone, bread) as transfigured bearers of divine grace. The granite font in the poem becomes a witness across centuries, just as they describe the Church’s sacraments as living memory embodied in matter.

Baptism as new birth: The poem speaks of “second birth” and heaven descending to earth. Eastern Fathers, from Irenaeus to Cyril of Jerusalem, speak of baptism as regeneration, a true birth from above, not merely symbolic.

Grace given to the lowly: The line “Water and faith, to one so lowly” resonates with their insistence that baptism is God’s action, not human achievement. Origen explicitly says infants are baptised  because they too need the healing grace of Christ. 

The child welcomed into the family: The poem’s sense of being woven into a “tapestry” mirrors the Fathers’ understanding of baptism as incorporation into the Body of Christ, the household of faith. [Here I have also drawn on Oscar Cullman's "Baptism in the New Testament".]

Generational continuity: Eastern tradition emphasises the Church as a living organism across time. The poem’s movement through “ages gone” and “generations came on such a day” reflects that same sacramental memory.

The font as a place where heaven touches earth: This is deeply patristic. Chrysostom, for example, describes the baptismal waters as “pregnant with the Spirit,” a place where divine life is poured out.

The Font as Stone and Sign: I wanted to place the font as both “mere stone” and “a sign in stone of faith to last” to match the Eastern sacramental imagination. The Fathers often speak of material things (water, oil, stone, bread) as transfigured bearers of divine grace. The granite font becomes a witness across centuries, just as they describe the Church’s sacraments as living memory embodied in matter.