Normally a baptism is pretty much free (except for a certificate) when done as part of a normal Sunday morning.

But what happens about the church charging for things when its a private one?

Sorry, but I don't quite understand the question. I have never done a baptism as part of a normal Sunday morning. All the ones I have done are usually on either a Saturday or Sunday afternoon, as a private Service, and I charge my normal fee of 55 pounds.

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.

There is no fee for baptism services, beyond the certificate. The Fees Order only prescribes fees for Baptism Certificates. It is a canonical offence for a cleric to charge for a baptism.

I am unaware of the practice in other denominations.

Barry Williams

That is more or less what I thought, but doesn't that just apply to there not being a fee for the priest to do his bit?
Essentially I'm talking about the 'extras' that you might get with a wedding or funeral as its an analagous situation with people potentially needing to take time off work for a mid-week service.

If the question is (reading between the lines) "Am I justified in requesting a fee to play the organ for a baptism outside of a normal scheduled service?" then I would say "Absolutely!" The workload will definitely be less though, so the fee should perhaps reflect that.

In which case look at the Occasional Organist fees for your Diocese and charge the funeral rate. I believe in Ely these are ?45.00 per service. However do check with your Diocesean branch of the Royal Schools Of Church Music.

For me I've suggested the same fee as for a funeral - music before and after and a couple of hymns.
But the question was a bit broader: Is the church justified in charging for any other expenses?

As far as I know, Baptism is always free in the Church of England as a right, regardless of when or where the baptism takes place. However, there is a statutory charge of ?12.00 if a Certificate of Baptism is required.

Our parish has a policy of requiring baptismal families to attend Baptism Preparation Classes before their children are admitted to baptism. Our PCC has discussed charging a small fee (say ?10) to cover the costs of running these but this idea has always been strongly rejected.

However, the subject of 'private baptisms' is an interesting one. At one time these were commonplace, but the current policy is that baptisms must always be carried out at the main act of public worship on a Sunday, as follows:

Canon B21 states that:

It is desirable that every minister having a cure of souls shall normally administer the sacrament of Holy Baptism on Sundays at public worship when the most number of people come together, that the congregation there present may witness the receiving of them that be newly baptized into Christ?s Church, and be put in remembrance of their own profession made to God in their baptism.

Canon B22-9 states that:

The minister of every parish shall warn the people that without grave cause and necessity they should not have their children baptized privately in their houses.

This clearly refers to baptism outside of the church. In this case, Canon B22-8 states that : If any infant which is privately baptized do afterwards live, it shall be brought to the church and there, by the minister, received into the congregation of Christ?s flock according to the form and manner prescribed in and by the office for Private Baptism authorized by Canon B1.

This all seems to suggest that there can be no such thing as a Private Baptism.

SB

Sorry, I missed your post whilst I was looking something up.

In answer to your question, I don't think the church can make any charge for baptism, whether directly or indirectly (i.e. for heating, lighting or organist's fees).

However, the church can suggest a 'donation' towards its running costs. Our Rector usually suggests a donation of ?50, and by and large, we have been pleased by the generosity of baptismal families, some of whom have given several times this amount.

When considering such measures I think most PCC's now accept that baptism has largely replaced marriage as the major celebration in most families. Furthermore, in my experience it is not unusual for several children of all ages from one family, and sometimes a parent to be baptised at the same time. Consequently many families now spend hundreds or even thousands of pounds on catering for a baptism, so asking for a donation to the church is not unreasonable.

SB

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

I don't think the church can 'get out of it'. Baptism is free, and that is that.

However, private baptisms were always very simple affairs from what I rememeber, and there was rarely any music except that provided by a gramaphone record.

On that basis I suppose the church could offer an organist (and bellringers, for example) as an option, in much the same way that we do for weddings?

SB

Given that an organist will not (typically) be required to attend out-of-service Baptisms as part of their contract with the incumbent, it follows simply that if the baptismal party want music, they then have to negotiate with and pay a musician. That musician could be a vocal soloist, organist or ukeleleist. "The church" (whoever that is - I am still unclear what you mean when you use that term) forms no part of said negotiations, so they remain "in the clear" with regard to offering baptism "free". Perhaps I am too mercenary in my thinking, but if you want the skills and services of a third-party, you pay for it.

The 'Church' in this context is the Rector and the Parochial Church Council (the PCC). As a PCC member myself my understanding is that the Rector and PCC is at all times 'jointly and severally' responsible for the church buildings in their care, and for what goes on in those buildings. Churches cannot simply be 'hired out' for private purposes, and the Rector and PCC expected to turn a blind eye to what is going on inside them, especially where any kind of religious service is being held.

I fully agree any musician should receive an appropriate 'occasional fee' for their services, but it is up to the Incumbent to decide whether or not music should be provided, and by whom. (Canon B20). If the minister taking the service decides that he/she doesn't want hymns, it would be rather difficult to make a private arrangement for hymns to be sung! The Incumbent may well decide that he/she is happy for the family to agree terms with a musician directly, but it remains his/her prerogative whether or not to allow this.

SB

On the question of vocal soloist... actually the only baptisms I've done have been our kids. Weddings that's a different matter. Funerals have all been choir jobs, and ordinations - they were hubby's.

My approach would be what does the organist want and either match it or look at the job in question. The chance is it will be around ?30-?45. This is to allow suitable practise time, and to rehearse with the organist. No more. The chances are it would be something I knew already or would be able to learn relatively quickly. Oh yes they would be told if they happened upon some technical nightmare where I had to do loads of work, however one takes the rough with the smooth... lots of jobs are familiar territory then there is that one which is new repertoire that takes more work... just like the Organ.

Main thing is I like to think I'm the sort of singer who, as I spend some time in the organ-loft isn't a complete nightmare to work with. If there is room singing from the loft can create a wonderful effect.

Well, actually there is because I played the organ at one a few weeks ago on a Saturday afternoon. It certainly was not an emergency.

"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

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?

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.

"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

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.

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

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!

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.