# Tée Sfmy of
  BEKESBOURNE
CHURCH

Richard B. Pyper, M.A.

Printed by A. & J. PURCHESE, 25 High Street, Bridge, Canterbury, Kent.

have been cruciform. One transept is gone, the other
is now used for organ and vestry, and has now a modern
arch instead of the Norman one. “ ln the nave,”
Glynne goes on, “ some windows are Norman, but most
are Rectiliniar.”

By the xixth century the building appears to have
fallen into a sad state of disrepair. An old woodcut in
Seymour’s Survey of Kent shows the Tower, which has
been added to the original church, in a ruinous state and
without a roof. lt was not until after 1880 that it was
rescued by the Rev. H. Wardell who was Vicar from
1881 to 1898. He set about restoring the Church with

unbounded energy and loving care. Large sums of

money were raised, the Gipps family being most generous
donors. The Ecclesiastical Commissioners assisted with
some £200 in restoring the Chancel. The altar was
raised to the original level, the chancel arch constructed
and the old whitewashed ceiling replaced by an oak
roof. Choir seats were installed and new seating in the
nave. The tower was raised about two feet to enable
the new bells to be hung, and much other work was done.
Altogether some £4,000 were spent and we owe the
present completeness of the Church to the Rev. Wardell
and his devoted little band.

The oak pulpit was a later addition being presented
by members of the Ramsay family of Howletts.

 

it would be now if it had not been destroyed by dry-
rot, when the Church was, later, allowed _ to fall into such
bad repair. An oak altar took the place of the stone altar
top, which, with its consecration crosses now lies in
front of the Chancel step, an unworthy place to have
put the Lord’s Table, from which for hundreds of years
His children had been fed.

One word more must be said about the patronage
of the Living. At the Reformation this patronage
passed from the Canons of St. Gregory to the Arch-
bishops of Canterbury who have had it ever since. There
are, however, two breaks in this patronage which are
interesting as they throw a sidelight on the history of the
whole country. When Philip of Spain_ and Mary were
on the throne of England they had no liking for
Reformation ways. Among other things they deposed
Archbishop Cranmer and declared the See of Canter-
bury to be vacant. By a coincidence, at the same time,
the living of Bekesbourne was vacant, and Philip and
Mary appointed Marmaduke Smyth to the living——
sede vacante~——-in 1554. The other break in the patron-
age came from the opposite extreme. In the Common-
wealth period the Prayer Book was forbidden, and
Services were of a Presbyterian type. Again there was
a vacancy at Bekesbourne. The Archbishop could not
present ; but Thomas Heron, M.A. was appointed by
“Robert Hales, Esq., Patron, 15th February, 1655.”
Sir Robert was a parishioner and lived at Howletts.

So the swing of the religious pendulum from one
extreme to the other was illustrated in the appointment
of Bekesbourne Vicars.

Turn again and take another look at the Church as
it used to be. Glynne in his “ Notes on the Churches
of Kent,” writes :———“ There is a semi-circular arch in
the north wall, which seems to have opened into
a transept now destroyed. There is a similar arch
opening to the south transept.” So the Church would

It may be well here to try to realize what the wor-
ship in our Church was like in medireval times from such
notes as we have. We have seen the Chantry priest at
his altar. Now we turn to the Parish Church services.

Picture someone coming to Church on a Festival.
He comes in by the old Norman door, stops at the Holy
Water stoup to cross himself, and then goes up the
Church into a blaze of light——lights on the altar——lights
on the screen before the Holy Cross——lights before St.
Mary, St. Peter, and St. Nicholas. The Priest at the
altar wears a costly and beautiful vestment, and the
altar is furnished with treasures which are kept in the
two aumbries, or cupboards, behind the altar, which
are a marked feature of the Church. This is not an
imaginary story. It is based on old wills——eight of
which have been noted. Four of these wills provided
for wax candles for the light of the Holy Cross—two for
St. Mary——one for St. Peter, and two provide for the
image of St. Nicholas. Plenty of such gifts of candles
must also have come from the living, as well as from the
wills of the deceased. As for the costly vestment, in
1532, Sir John Texton——a priest who lies buried in the
Church before the Rood, provided in his will thus :-
“To the Church for buying a Vestment £33’ Three
pounds was then a lordly sum when money was worth so
much more than now, and would probably mean £40-

,€ 50 nowadays.

Then came the Reformation, which changed this
form of worship. The Prayer Book in English took the
place of the Latin Service book. Worship in Parish
Churches became simpler, but the beauty and dignity of
worship were kept up, though in a difi°erent manner.
The pre-reformation Chalice disappeared, but the
beautiful Elizabethan Communion cup and paten-
cover took its place. The gifts which filled the aumbries
were removed, but Archbishop Parker gave equally
generously when he furnished the chancel with fine
wainscotting, and beautiful Choir-seats, priceless oak work

SOME NOTES ON THE STORY OF
BEKESBOURNE CHURCH

In 1080 William the Conqueror had the Domesday
Book compiled, which gives a description of all the
Estates in the Kingdom, and in it is recorded that there
was a Church in Bekesbourne, which clearly proves
that there was a Saxon Church in the parish before the
Normans came. Of that Church we have no details,
nor do we know how long it had stood. It was most
likely a wooden building, provided by the Lord of the
Manor for himself and his people.

It was not many years, however, before the
Normans, who were famous church builders, set to work
to build a worthier House of God. Thus the present
Church was built about the year 1100, and although
there have, of course, been alterations and additions
since, it is the same church still. To picture what the
church was like when it was first built, stand outside and
look at the chancel. The two little round-headed
windows which have been built up were the windows on
each side of the altar, showing how short was the chancel
in Norman days. The Nave also has its bits of Norman
work’ in the beautiful doorway by which worshippers
still enter.

In the xiiith century there was again a desire to add
dignity to the structure. The Chancel was lengthened
to its present size, the little Norman windows built up
and new windows inserted. At the East end two very
fine lancet windows, with some elegant Early English
moulding, were made, beautiful in their proportions, and
far more uncommon than the three lancets seen in so
many other churches.

As regards the rest of the church, the Nave was
almost entirely rebuilt towards the end of the xixth
century. Originally there was no chancel arch, as there
is now. Instead, a beam ran across between the chancel
and nave, on which was the Rood Cross.

One other thing is to be noticed. In front of the
chancel step lies the old stone altar top, which was used
till the Reformation, and then removed to make way for
a new altar of wood. ‘

To turn next to the history of the Church. In the
year 1180, when the Church was still a small Norman
building, the Lord of the Manor was Eustace de Bourne,
and the Church was called St. Peter de Bourne, the
Bourne of course, being the little river. The Church
then belonged to Eustace, but he had a mind to hand it
over to the Canons of St. Gregory in Canterbury (a).
Before doing so, Eustace consulted his Rector. They
were Rectors at that time. The Rector’s name was
Michael. He had no surname, only a few people had
surnames in those days. “ l\Iichael the Parson,” as he
is called, gave his consent, and the Church passed into
the hands of St. Gregory’s, who became the Rectors and
appointed a “Vicar ” to care for the parish. This
transfer was a great event because it put the patronage of
the Church in the hands of St. Gregory’s from that day
to the Reformation, since when it has been in the Arch-
bishop’s gift. This story of Eustace de Bourne and
Michael the Parson and St. Peter de Bourne comes
from Mr. Frampton, a most careful and painstaking
archaeologist, who came across an old Assize Roll, giving
an account of a dispute over the patronage of the Church
at Bekesbourne. The date of «the document is 1313.
It was there proved in court, that Eustace de Bourne
gave the Church to St. Gregory’s, Michael the Parson

(rz) St. Gregory's was a Priory instituted by Archbishop Lanfranc
and situated in Nortligate St., Canterbury. but has long since
vanished.

5‘

consenting. So St. Gregory’s were confirmed in their
right, and we get the name of one Rector many years
before the registered list of Vicars begins. Mr.
Frampton most kindly gave a copy of this paper to the
Church Chest.

A year after the date of the Assize rol1—in 1314-
another piece of local church history is recorded. In
that year James de Bourne founded the “ Bourne’s
Chantry.” The Chantry provided a priest to pray for
the souls of departed friends. This entailed a second
and an independent priest using the Church in addition
to the Vicar. Very likely the Chantry priest would
have his own side altar in the body of the Church, where
he would say his masses. There are records of the

appointments to Bekesbourne of five such Chantry

priests between 1314 and 1361. The stipend of these
priests consisted of a house, 24 acres of land, and a yearly
rent of 6/8d.,’ granted by the Patron ; and in return the
priest had to provide the Patron with a pair of spurs, or
Sixpence for the same :—an odd proviso but, probably,
in the nature of an acknowledgment. The total yearly
value of the stipend, according to “Kent Chantries ”
was not quite £2 13s. 4d,, which was so little that by
1362 no one could be found to take it. Bartholomew de
Bourne, a descendant of the Patron, therefore, arranged
to join the Chantry to that of Eastbridge Hospital,
Canterbury, the priest of that Chapel undertaking to
attend at Bekesbourne on the festivals of St. Michael
and St. Peter, as well as on the six days after Christmas

g and the four days after Pentecost.

Chantry priests were very busy in .\rIedia3val times,
a great deal of money being given, or left by will, for
prayers to be said for the souls of deceased relatives or
friends. The Church must have been in frequent use
when Chantry priests were officially admitted by the
Archbishop, and were attached to it by right in addition
to the incumbent.