Re: St Mary, Hayton (Carlisle Consistory Court; Stinson Ch. June 1990)

A monumental mason submitted to the priest-in-charge an application on behalf of a widow for the erection of a headstone to commemorate her recently deceased husband.

The proposed wording was

LOVE YOU ALWAYS
WALLY
DEARLY BELOVED HUSBAND OF
MILLY BAKER
AND BELOVED DAD OF
STEPHEN, SUSAN, BARRIE,
TRACY AND MARK
AND A DEAR GRANDAD
WHO DIED 18th JUNE 1989

The priest-in-charge gave approval by telephone to the mason. On erection the headstone did not accord with the design submitted and the priest-in-charge referred the matter to the Chancellor. On a Petition for a Confirmatory Faculty, it appeared that the headstone was additionally inscribed with a Jaguar car, a red rose and a X after Wally, representing a kiss. At the hearing it emerged that SUSAN and TRACY were not daughters but daughters-in-law. The deceased was a restorer of motor vehicles, including at the time of his death a Jaguar. The Petition was opposed by the Diocesan Advisory Committee and by the Parochial Church Council. The monumental mason was cited to appear.

Held The object of a headstone was to mark the grave of the deceased; a focus for grief and a memorial for the family and descendants; and to reflect history. The wording would be sufficient if it showed the name and dates of the life of the deceased. Pet names were inappropriate. The words of the headstone in question focused not on the deceased but on his widow and family; were historically inaccurate; and were as ephemeral as a notice in the press. The 'X' was offensive in a place of Christian burial where the only relevant cross was the Cross of Christ. It was inappropriate in a spiritual setting to attempt a physical link between the living and the dead. To erect a stone other than in accordance with the approved design was a trespass. There was no objection to the occupation of the deceased being represented by design rather than by description, or to the rose, as decoration. A faculty for the headstone as erected was refused. The monumental mason was ordered to remove the headstone and substitute one with approved wording for which a Faculty would be granted.

---

(1991) 2 Ecc LJ 228