church website design - church123.com.

Monthly Magazine

 

Each month we produce a magazine, "The Over Alderley and Birtles Monthly Messsenger", this being the title used for the first parish magazine produced from 1892 to 1908 by the second Vicar of Birtles, The Revd Henry Waldron Bradley.

Here are some snippets ...

More than 100 years ago ... 

May 1902 was arriving in the parish and most of the news in the Messenger was good ...


Mr Bradley used half the front page to list the School Subscriptions giving both the name and amount paid by individuals. He went on to say that this would be the last year that parishioners would need to give financial support to the school as once the Education Act was passed church schools would receive the same financing as state schools. He went on to say …
Apparently all schools are to be thrown upon the public funds. This seems just and right, whichever way one looks upon it. For looking at it from a national point of view, why should national Education (which renders as great a service to the nation as the Army and Navy) not be paid for out of national charges? Why should the cost of it be borne by private benefactors or to be dependent on any one person going around begging and instituting jumble sales? And then, viewed from a religious point of view, is it right for “Christian England” to tax and penalise religion in such a way that (as is the case now) only those schools can help themselves out of the public purse who profess “nothing”? At the present this is practically the case.


Lieutenant Charles Close Brooks was on his way home from India. A public ovation was deemed likely. Charles was of course a great cricketer and the Birtles captain so he would have been thrilled to learn that the first match of season played against Adlington Park had been a handsome win for Birtles.
The vicar was back in whites and was the second highest scorer and he took a catch. Well held Sir!


May 1902 was arriving in the parish and most of the news in the Messenger was good.

Mr Bradley used half the front page to list the School Subscriptions giving both the name and amount paid by individuals. He went on to say that this would be the last year that parishioners would need to give financial support to the school as once the Education Act was passed church schools would receive the same financing as state schools. He went on to say …

Apparently all schools are to be thrown upon the public funds. This seems just and right, whichever way one looks upon it. For looking at it from a national point of view, why should national Education (which renders as great a service to the nation as the Army and Navy) not be paid for out of national charges? Why should the cost of it be borne by private benefactors or to be dependent on any one person going around begging and instituting jumble sales? And then, viewed from a religious point of view, is it right for "Christian England" to tax and penalise religion in such a way that (as is the case now) only those schools can help themselves out of the public purse who profess "nothing"? At the present this is practically the case.

Lieutenant Charles Close Brooks was on his way home from India. A public ovation was deemed likely. Charles was of course a great cricketer and the Birtles captain so he would have been thrilled to learn that the first match of season played against Adlington Park had been a handsome win for Birtles.

The vicar was back in whites and was the second highest scorer and he took a catch. Well held Sir!

May 1902 was arriving in the parish and most of the news in the Messenger was good.

Mr Bradley used half the front page to list the School Subscriptions giving both the name and amount paid by individuals. He went on to say that this would be the last year that parishioners would need to give financial support to the school as once the Education Act was passed church schools would receive the same financing as state schools. He went on to say …

Apparently all schools are to be thrown upon the public funds. This seems just and right, whichever way one looks upon it. For looking at it from a national point of view, why should national Education (which renders as great a service to the nation as the Army and Navy) not be paid for out of national charges? Why should the cost of it be borne by private benefactors or to be dependent on any one person going around begging and instituting jumble sales? And then, viewed from a religious point of view, is it right for "Christian England" to tax and penalise religion in such a way that (as is the case now) only those schools can help themselves out of the public purse who profess "nothing"? At the present this is practically the case.

Lieutenant Charles Close Brooks was on his way home from India. A public ovation was deemed likely. Charles was of course a great cricketer and the Birtles captain so he would have been thrilled to learn that the first match of season played against Adlington Park had been a handsome win for Birtles.

The vicar was back in whites and was the second highest scorer and he took a catch. Well held Sir!

M

May 1902 was arriving in the parish and most of the news in the Messenger was good.

Mr Bradley used half the front page to list the School Subscriptions giving both the name and amount paid by individuals. He went on to say that this would be the last year that parishioners would need to give financial support to the school as once the Education Act was passed church schools would receive the same financing as state schools. He went on to say …

Apparently all schools are to be thrown upon the public funds. This seems just and right, whichever way one looks upon it. For looking at it from a national point of view, why should national Education (which renders as great a service to the nation as the Army and Navy) not be paid for out of national charges? Why should the cost of it be borne by private benefactors or to be dependent on any one person going around begging and instituting jumble sales? And then, viewed from a religious point of view, is it right for “Christian England” to tax and penalise religion in such a way that (as is the case now) only those schools can help themselves out of the public purse who profess “nothing”? At the present this is practically the case.

Lieutenant Charles Close Brooks was on his way home from India. A public ovation was deemed likely. Charles was of course a great cricketer and the Birtles captain so he would have been thrilled to learn that the first match of season played against Adlington Park had been a handsome win for Birtles.

The vicar was back in whites and was the second highest scorer and he took a catch. Well held Sir!

ay 1902 was arriving in the parish and most of the news in the Messenger was good.


Mr Bradley used half the front page to list the School Subscriptions giving both the name and amount paid by individuals. He went on to say that this would be the last year that parishioners would need to give financial support to the school as once the Education Act was passed church schools would receive the same financing as state schools. He went on to say …


Apparently all schools are to be thrown upon the public funds. This seems just and right, whichever way one looks upon it. For looking at it from a national point of view, why should national Education (which renders as great a service to the nation as the Army and Navy) not be paid for out of national charges? Why should the cost of it be borne by private benefactors or to be dependent on any one person going around begging and instituting jumble sales? And then, viewed from a religious point of view, is it right for “Christian England” to tax and penalise religion in such a way that (as is the case now) only those schools can help themselves out of the public purse who profess “nothing”? At the present this is practically the case.


Lieutenant Charles Close Brooks was on his way home from India. A public ovation was deemed likely. Charles was of course a great cricketer and the Birtles captain so he would have been thrilled to learn that the first match of season played against Adlington Park had been a handsome win for Birtles.


The vicar was back in whites and was the second highest scorer and he took a catch. Well held Sir!





MORE THAN ONE HUNDRED YEARS AGO …


May 1902 was arriving in the parish and most of the news in the Messenger was good.


Mr Bradley used half the front page to list the School Subscriptions giving both the name and amount paid by individuals. He went on to say that this would be the last year that parishioners would need to give financial support to the school as once the Education Act was passed church schools would receive the same financing as state schools. He went on to say …


Apparently all schools are to be thrown upon the public funds. This seems just and right, whichever way one looks upon it. For looking at it from a national point of view, why should national Education (which renders as great a service to the nation as the Army and Navy) not be paid for out of national charges? Why should the cost of it be borne by private benefactors or to be dependent on any one person going around begging and instituting jumble sales? And then, viewed from a religious point of view, is it right for “Christian England” to tax and penalise religion in such a way that (as is the case now) only those schools can help themselves out of the public purse who profess “nothing”? At the present this is practically the case.


Lieutenant Charles Close Brooks was on his way home from India. A public ovation was deemed likely. Charles was of course a great cricketer and the Birtles captain so he would have been thrilled to learn that the first match of season played against Adlington Park had been a handsome win for Birtles.


The vicar was back in whites and was the second highest scorer and he took a catch. Well held Sir!



MORE THAN ONE HUNDRED YEARS AGO …


May 1902 was arriving in the parish and most of the news in the Messenger was good.


Mr Bradley used half the front page to list the School Subscriptions giving both the name and amount paid by individuals. He went on to say that this would be the last year that parishioners would need to give financial support to the school as once the Education Act was passed church schools would receive the same financing as state schools. He went on to say …


Apparently all schools are to be thrown upon the public funds. This seems just and right, whichever way one looks upon it. For looking at it from a national point of view, why should national Education (which renders as great a service to the nation as the Army and Navy) not be paid for out of national charges? Why should the cost of it be borne by private benefactors or to be dependent on any one person going around begging and instituting jumble sales? And then, viewed from a religious point of view, is it right for “Christian England” to tax and penalise religion in such a way that (as is the case now) only those schools can help themselves out of the public purse who profess “nothing”? At the present this is practically the case.


Lieutenant Charles Close Brooks was on his way home from India. A public ovation was deemed likely. Charles was of course a great cricketer and the Birtles captain so he would have been thrilled to learn that the first match of season played against Adlington Park had been a handsome win for Birtles.


The vicar was back in whites and was the second highest scorer and he took a catch. Well held Sir!

RE T

HAN ONE HUNDRED YEARS AGO …



May 1902 was arriving in the parish and most of the news in the Messenger was good.

Mr Bradley used half the front page to list the School Subscriptions giving both the name and amount paid by individuals. He went on to say that this would be the last year that parishioners would need to give financial support to the school as once the Education Act was passed church schools would receive the same financing as state schools. He went on to say …

Apparently all schools are to be thrown upon the public funds. This seems just and right, whichever way one looks upon it. For looking at it from a national point of view, why should national Education (which renders as great a service to the nation as the Army and Navy) not be paid for out of national charges? Why should the cost of it be borne by private benefactors or to be dependent on any one person going around begging and instituting jumble sales? And then, viewed from a religious point of view, is it right for “Christian England” to tax and penalise religion in such a way that (as is the case now) only those schools can help themselves out of the public purse who profess “nothing”? At the present this is practically the case.

Lieutenant Charles Close Brooks was on his way home from India. A public ovation was deemed likely. Charles was of course a great cricketer and the Birtles captain so he would have been thrilled to learn that the first match of season played against Adlington Park had been a handsome win for Birtles.

The vicar was back in whites and was the second highest scorer and he took a catch. Well held Sir!






Contact

Birtles Lane 

Macclesfield 

Cheshire 

SK10 4RX