Private Baptism and Fees? Options

[Barry Williams]

"Our parish has a policy of requiring baptismal families to attend Baptism Preparation Classes before their children are admitted to baptism."

Your PCC is exceeding its authority. Spiritual matters are the province of the minister. The PCC looks after the bricks and mortar. The PCC can no more have a policy about baptism than it can about music, though it is required to co-operate with the minister in promoting religion in the parish.

If the parents insisted on baptism without attending the classes the minister would still be obliged to perform the service, whatever 'policy' the PCC might think it has.

Canon C24 provides, at paragraph 7: 'He and the parochial church council shall consult together on matters of general concern and importance to the parish.' That is a long way from the PCC having a policy on baptism

"Surely the arrangement is between the parents and the organist - the church doesn't come into it."

The minister always comes into it in music - via Canon B 20, which gives the minister the final word. Please note that it is the minister, not the PCC in this matter. The PCC has no standing in the music, though it can be joined as a party if there is a dispute about an organist's employment rights in an Employment Tribunal. (This has happened several times recently.)



Barry Williams

[mwl1]

The benefice where I live features (usually the same) hymns in all Baptisms that do not fall within the regular Sunday morning do. On the occasions I have played for these, I have always been given a fee. Would it be reasonable to suspect that this money came simply from the church account, as opposed to the families contributing towards my stipend?

[jod]

"Our parish has a policy of requiring baptismal families to attend Baptism Preparation Classes before their children are admitted to baptism."

Your PCC is exceeding its authority. Spiritual matters are the province of the minister. The PCC looks after the bricks and mortar. The PCC can no more have a policy about baptism than it can about music, though it is required to co-operate with the minister in promoting religion in the parish.

If the parents insisted on baptism without attending the classes the minister would still be obliged to perform the service, whatever 'policy' the PCC might think it has.

Canon C24 provides, at paragraph 7: 'He and the parochial church council shall consult together on matters of general concern and importance to the parish.' That is a long way from the PCC having a policy on baptism

"Surely the arrangement is between the parents and the organist - the church doesn't come into it."

The minister always comes into it in music - via Canon B 20, which gives the minister the final word. Please note that it is the minister, not the PCC in this matter. The PCC has no standing in the music, though it can be joined as a party if there is a dispute about an organist's employment rights in an Employment Tribunal. (This has happened several times recently.)



Barry Williams

To clarify B20 the term 'Minister' is the person taking the service and not the Vicar, or any jumped-up Curate or irate member of the PCC - they have no say in the matter. However it would be extremely irregular for a Baptism where another Priest has the Living of the Parish or is simply Priest in Charge not to be consulted about the music.

I know of many Priests who are extremely uncomfortable about the idea of baptism services that are separate from the main services of the Church given what Baptism stands for. I felt uncomfortable that the main service selected for our younger son was a Family Service, I was much happier for the Family Eucharist that formed the basis for Matthew's Baptism. I did choose the music for that, and had a major say for his younger brother...

I didn't give the Vicar much choice, or using Canon Law, large parish and practical considerations aside I would have pushed for the Parish Eucharist. (Then he would have little choice but to crumble on the music as it would fit the service on liturgical and practical grounds... after all he was dealing with somebody who knew more than he did about that subject and furthermore he knew that too). Wiser the first Priest who just let the two qualified musicians select music in consultation with the Organist, and then rubber stamp it knowing we would not do anything daft.

[Barry Williams]

"To clarify B20 the term 'Minister' is the person taking the service and not the Vicar, or any jumped-up Curate or irate member of the PCC - they have no say in the matter."

This is an interesting definition. However, it does not, if my memory servies me correctly, accord with the version given in Halbury's Laws of England.

Barry Williams

[Keyhorn]

A practical example:

We have, here, two ways in which infants can be baptised,

i. During the normal morning service (which may or may not be Eucharistic, though it normally is, or,
ii. At a monthly afternoon Baptism service prior to Evensong, at which there may be one or more families presenting one or more infants each for Baptism. (These services usually fill the nave.)

In the former case, I am on duty anyway and do not receive an extra fee. In the latter case I receive a fee as defined in Schedule B of my contract which deals with extra services.

It seems workable, and equitable. In the case of the extra service, I suspect the families are not charged (the church remains open, and the service is of course public) and the church absorbs this as the cost of having a DoM/Organist and as a gift to the families. I say 'suspect' because I do not really know - how they finance it is none of my business.

[rovikered]

There is no such thing as a private baptism in the Church of England. It is always a public service, save only when it is done as an emergency.
Barry Williams

When it is done in an emergency there IS a prescribed order which makes Private Baptism authorised in the Church of England. I an unfamiliar with the present day prayer book 'Common Worship' so do not know what it includes but The Book of Common Prayer (1662) which is still an authorised and legal book in the Church of England contains an order for 'The Ministration of Private Baptism in Houses'. Of course, this has no bearing on organists' fees for playing at Baptism Services, but I merely wished to set the record straight in case Barry Williams' comment concerning Private Baptism should be misconstrued.

[Barry Williams]

There is no such thing as a private baptism in the Church of England. It is always a public service, save only when it is done as an emergency.
Barry Williams

When it is done in an emergency there IS a prescribed order which makes Private Baptism authorised in the Church of England. I an unfamiliar with the present day prayer book 'Common Worship' so do not know what it includes but The Book of Common Prayer (1662) which is still an authorised and legal book in the Church of England contains an order for 'The Ministration of Private Baptism in Houses'. Of course, this has no bearing on organists' fees for playing at Baptism Services, but I merely wished to set the record straight in case Barry Williams' comment concerning Private Baptism should be misconstrued.

Rovikered is quite correct. I apologise. There is indeed such a service, but its rubrick makes it clear that it was designed to secure early baptism at a time when infant mortality was rife. The service is actually very short indeed, the main part of the text being taken up with the reception of the baptised child into the congregation at a later date. ("If the child.....do afterward live, it is expedient that it be brought into the Church...the Congregation may be certified of the true Form of Baptism, by him privately before used:"

Thus when private baptism is administered, the BCP envisages a service in church, using the words: 'We receive this child into the congrgation of Christ's flock, and we do sign him with the sign of the Cross....'

In this context the term 'private baptism' is akin to an emergency baptism, as still occasionally conducted in a hospital neo-nate ward.

To me, baptism seems so important a service that it should not be tucked into a service of Holy Communion, but deserves to stand on its own. The loathsome 'Full Rite', designed by the late Mervyn Stockwood, of Southwark Diocese, put Baptism, Holy Communion and Confirmation into one service. It often took no more than one hour and failed to do justice to any of the three separate parts. Each service is very important and the first two are, after all, Sacraments.

There is some logic in having the Baptism service when the greatest number of people are present. That is what the BCP prescribes. Yet is does not have to be in the middle of a quite different service, which itself is invariably truncated to accomodate the baptism.

In many places worship has been taken over by 'The Parish Communion' movement with generations of clergy following the outdated and now discredited book of that title, edited by A. Gabriel Hebert of Kelham and promoted muchly by Austin Farrer. (Even Gregory Dix wrote an essay in that book - not a very good one either.)

Barry Williams

[Banjogirl]

I've never known there to be a baptism in our church service, apart from one immediately before a confirmation. All others are separate services, usually straight after the normal Sunday serice. I always thought it was a bit odd and it seems that it is!

[mel2]

In our case we were newbies when son1 was brought for Baptism. The ceremony included several families, as normally happens here either after the main service is finished or, in the afternoon. No music.

By the time son2 was ready, we were regular members and I was teaching in the Sunday School. As 'part of the body of the kirk', so to speak, his Baptism was incorporated as part of the Morning service (can't remember if it was Parish Communion or not).

I was recently asked to play the organ at a Baptism service elsewhere; 2 hymns and music before and after, for the normal fee (whatever that was). I was unable to oblige because it clashed with my regular duties so never did find out what kind of fee I missed.