Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

Endinburgh Council
 
 
Saturday, 21st November 2009 Change Date

Minister to face a higher power over manse row

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 14 November 2009
By Ian Swanson
THE battle between the church authorities and an Edinburgh minister who refuses to live in his manse is set to continue despite a two-hour Kirk "trial". The Rev John Munro, minister at Fairmilehead Parish Church, lost the vote when his case went before the Church of Scotland's Commission of Assembly yesterday.
But the row will now move to the Kirk's Edinburgh presbytery, which is expected to issue an ultimatum to Mr Munro that he must stop living in his own house and move into the manse in Braid Crescent, Morningside, or face disciplinary action, including the possibility of the sack.

Mr Munro and his wife lived in the eight-roomed manse for five years, but she never liked the house and two years ago they bought their own property in the Braids.

Mr Munro still uses the manse every day as an office and an American assistant minister is living there as a guest. But the presbytery claims the arrangement breaches Church of Scotland rules.

When the case came before the Commission of Assembly, held at St Cuthbert's Parish Church yesterday, the ministers and elders voted 64 to five for the presbytery and against Mr Munro.

Mr Munro said he was not surprised by the result. "It's very difficult to persuade the church to overturn the status quo," he said.

"A lot of people came up to me afterwards and said I'd won the argument even though I lost the vote."

A key part of the case was a disagreement over the definition of the Kirk regulations which say a minister is required to "occupy" the manse.

Mr Munro argued he did occupy the manse because he has possession of the property and uses it as an office.

He said: "I mentioned the Alice in Wonderland motto that we should say what we mean and mean what we say, particularly in church regulations, and for them to use the word 'occupy' if they meant 'live' was wrong.

"I also produced some case law from the United States where a woman was held to be 'living' in her principal residence because she kept it furnished and occasionally allowed guests to stay there. I will carry on occupying the manse."

He said he had received numerous supportive e-mails after the row was revealed in the Evening News on Thursday.

Presbytery clerk, the Rev George Whyte, said: "We are pleased the commission upheld our stance and we look forward to taking the matter forward in a way that is caring to all parties."

Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 14 November 2009 11:36 AM
  • Source: Edinburgh Evening News
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Church of Scotland
 
1

alfonsa pedrosa,

embra 14/11/2009 12:03:45
Stupidity at its church best,the Rev is happy where he is so why should he have to live in a manse,he still makes his work on time.
2

bill inch,

EDINBURGH 14/11/2009 12:37:21
Top Story
Druids wife rejects sects cave.
3

Fifi la Bonbon,

14/11/2009 12:57:34
What a stupid situation. the Church of Scotland is closing care homes and yet the Holy Willies and Jacks-in-office are wasting time and money because he and his wife choose to stay in a nicer house than the big place they've been told to live in. Is there any group of people more pompous and irrelevant than those set in authority to run religious organisations? There is an opportunity to sell off what is probably a property worth the better part of a million pounds, but the clodhoppers in charge would rather persecute a man and his wife and force them to live somewhere they'd rather not. A two hour trial with sixty nine people turning out on a Friday night to debate this ridiculous proposition! I know they're other worldly but that's not the same as living in another world from the rest of us.

I'm not a churchy kind of person but even I can see a mob of hypocrites and pharisees when they're lumbering down the road. Was Obadiah Slope anywhere to be seen last night?
4

LUVMACITY,

IN THE LOBBY 14/11/2009 13:18:17
God bless the Rev.
5

Fifi la Bonbon,

14/11/2009 13:31:36
I've been thinking more about this thing last night - the two hour trial with sixty nine people turning out on a Friday night to debate forcing a man and his wife to quit their family home and move into a place they moved out of because they couldn't live there happily as a family.

Sixty four Edinburgh worthies voted to do this.

Imagine what it must have felt like to have "won" such a vote.

Visualise the smile of satisfaction on their faces as they savoured their victory.

It is a crime against art and science that there weren't photographers to record and preserve the expressions on those sixty four faces.
6

Pen Fold,

Here 14/11/2009 13:55:23
yet another example of showing compassion & understanding.

thankfully we have a church in the modern day that practice what they preach.

to hell with you all!
7

Fifi la Bonbon,

14/11/2009 14:06:32
Well, as a result of the votes of those sixty four Christian worthies we face the prospect of a reverend gentleman being dismissed from office at Christmas for the crime of sticking up for his family and home.

No point is asking how they can live with themselves. They obviously can. They will have clapped each other on the back in savouring their victory, cast up a quick prayer to God and the baby Jesus, looked scornfully at the five back-sliders who dared to defy our Holy Father's laws and vote for the reverend gentlemen to keep his job and home, and headed off back to their sixty four homes.

One or two may have made a phone call to Obadiah, waiting patiently for word as to whether his prospects have been advanced. But that's another story.
8

JT,

14/11/2009 14:57:31
What is so wrong with a family living in a their own home? I have been in a couple of manse's and they tend to be drafty and damp. Time for the church to get a reality check and be more concerned about getting bums on pews rather than where the minister lives. Its not as if he is living outside the area! Get a grip CoS!
9

tumshie heid,

14/11/2009 15:52:24
Church bampots strike again. The rev will be better off out of the churches evil twisted grasp.
He will no doubt be an educated man who can earn much more in the real world .
10

Bucket Heid,

Edinburgh 14/11/2009 17:51:24
Jesus told us to spread the gospel, feed His sheep, heal the sick and a few other easily understood things. How could a church sink so low as to waste resources on such stupidity? What do you think you look like?

I apologise as a Christian for examples like this of men's idiocity.

I am also sorry for being judgemental.
11

The Penicuik Doctor,

penicuik 14/11/2009 19:34:36
As support for the Rev.regarding the occupying of a manse and I have faced up to the '121' mandarins. The rules of engagement are clear - the ministers voted some 100 years ago that a manse should be the residence of a parish minister and have 7 rooms - for the visiting minister. When asked to quantify these 'visiting ministers' the silence was deafening. CoS, come on, let ministers buy their own residence, pay the tax to Customs and Excise (or at least allow congregations to choose) and sell the manses - and do something with the capital - feed the hungry and clothe the poor. Where would Jesus stand in this debate?? Go to the world and preach and heal the sick - do NOT spent time fighting over MAN made rules.
12

keit011,

14/11/2009 21:10:53
this must keep the bishops awake at night there's no way he will be able to sleep with this on his mind.other poor homeless people battered women and children who could use this as a refuge remember when you hand over money for collections exactly where they are going 8 bedroom houses in the braids not bad
13

watever,

somewhere 15/11/2009 16:17:46
here here to the above, you took the words out of my mouth, Anyway why do 2 people need and 8 bedroom house,
even if they do have vistors,you go Rev and good luck
14

Alex MacDonald,

Inverness 18/11/2009 17:58:02
I'll take a divergent view. Ministers allegedly have a vocation. They're on duty 24/7 in a specified location. He's minister of a specific defined area and living in the specified accommodation is part of his contract. If he doesn't like the contract, he shouldn't have accepted the contract. It's not as if the terms were new -- they've been there for centuries.

A minister is not an employee in the normal sense of the term -- he's an office-holder.

It's open to him to campaign to change the terms under which he holds his "office" -- but it's not legitimate for him to disregard those terms while they're in force.

Surely we should expect a minister, of all people, to honour the terms of the contract that he undertook when he was inducted to his charge?

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
RSS Feed of this article's comments
Delivery formats: RSS, Atom, Javascript & Email
 
  

 
 

More Edinburgh, East & Fife

More Edinburgh, East & Fife >>

More Church of Scotland

More Church of Scotland >>

Features

Scottish Business Briefing Stay informed
Paperboy Paperboy Customised news

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.