• Welcome to this forum . We are a worldwide group with a common interest in Birmingham and its history. While here, please follow a few simple rules. We ask that you respect other members, thank those who have helped you and please keep your contributions on-topic with the thread.

    We do hope you enjoy your visit. BHF Admin Team
  • HI folks the server that hosts the site completely died including the Hdd's and backups.
    Luckily i create an offsite backup once a week! this has now been restored so we have lost a few days posts.
    im still fixing things at the moment so bear with me and im still working on all images 90% are fine the others im working on now
    we are now using a backup solution

Christ Church New Street

Re: Christchurch

Hi Wendy, what great photos but don't they make you feel sad especially the second one.
Love the horse with the bag, I so remember when a tradesman stopped for any length of time in the street, out came the bag and the horse didn't move an inch.
 
zz.jpeg
When Christchurch was demolished in 1899 several bodies were removed from the vault, one of these was that of John Baskerville the printer, to be re-buried in Warstone Lane Cemetary.The statue of Sir Robert Peel, the man who founded the police force was taken from iit's place of prominence in front of the church and placed in Calthorpe Park in 1927 then it was moved once again in 1963 to the position where it is today outside The Tally Ho Police Trainig Centre on Pershore Road.
 
Thanks for that cuppa.... a really interesting article and the rest of the page is great too. Didn't it have a lovely interior? That's the first photo/painting I've seen of it.
 
What a great link, like Charlie it's the first time I have seen the interior, it was such a massive church. I didn't realise there were shops set into the walls below the church either, it reminded me of the shops just up from the Top Rank in Dale End. I think there are still a couple there now.
 
It was the first time I'd seen the interior as well, I came across it by accident....I'm sure there are many more little gems out there waiting to be found.
I have found quite a few images that I think are unseen, and I am happy to post links on here once they are online, if people want me to.
 
cuppateabiscuit said:
It was the first time I'd seen the interior as well, I came across it by accident....I'm sure there are many more little gems out there waiting to be found.
I have found quite a few images that I think are unseen, and I am happy to post links on here once they are online, if people want me to.
Click to expand...

Yes please!
 
As some images are missing from the first post #1 of this thread, here are the beginning and end views of Christ Church. In the 1899 Christ Church view care has been taken to remove the clock face(s) before demolition. Viv.

image.jpg

image.jpeg
 
Don't understand why the Exchange building "necessitated the taking down of Christ Church" when the Exchange was much further down New Street. Viv.
 
IMG_1445.jpg IMG_1446.jpg IMG_1447.jpg

A few anecdotes from Christ Church...

Sep 1892...a fight in the Vestry
Feb 1892..the Blue Ribbon Army
Oct 1890...The Telephonic Experiment
 
Very strange, particularly as the exchange buildings were not demolished till much later.
 
I have a baptism record from 1877 showing that my Great Grandfather, then 25 years old was baptised on March 30th 1877 at Christchurch. By the date are the vicars initials, the only entry on the page like that and above the actual entry is written 'received into the church'. His residence is shown as Hill Street and as the rest of the baptisms lived in Broad Street, Sheepcote Street and Cambridge Street, I assume this church is in the Broad Street area, although in 1871 and 1881 he as shown on the census as living in Grosvenor Street. Can anyone identify the church please?

Bob
 
I believe the expression 'received into the church' relates to instances where a child is born, but not expected to survive, and a Baptism ceremony is urgently performed. Such 'Baptisms' might be carried out, not only by a Minister, but also by a Midwife, or even someone representing a Church. Many would get entered into the Church Register but, many were missed. Typically, 'received into the church' entry might be a couple of months after the initial Birth. The Child having survived and grown in strength that the parent are content to present such before a Minister.

You've really got to think back to the days in question. Officials scurrying about on foot, a 'day book' to hand, responding to verbal 'gossip', recording details in an Ad Hoc manner, and then, when the opportunity arose, transcribing that 'day book' into Registers, or not.

A Baptism at 25 years of age could suggest such a case or might be down to the person moving to another area, or that the original Records for a particular Church, had pershied.

I've previously seen a record of someone being Baptised when in their 70's.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bob Davis said:
I have a baptism record from 1877 showing that my Great Grandfather, then 25 years old was baptised on March 30th 1877 at Christchurch. By the date are the vicars initials, the only entry on the page like that and above the actual entry is written 'received into the church'. His residence is shown as Hill Street and as the rest of the baptisms lived in Broad Street, Sheepcote Street and Cambridge Street, I assume this church is in the Broad Street area, although in 1871 and 1881 he as shown on the census as living in Grosvenor Street. Can anyone identify the church please?

Bob
Click to expand...
Bob I see that you didn't question why your great grand father was baptised when he was 25 years old. It could simply be that he wanted to. Or maybe he was about to be married and that in those days the C of E required someone about to be married to be a member of the C of E.
 
I thought "received into the church" refers to people (usually adults) who choose to follow that religion having not previously been baptised in that denomination. Thinking about it I suppose it refers to those who choose for themselves rather than a baby having the choice made for them by parents.
 
It wasn't unusual for an adult to be baptised and accepted into the faith of a religion of someone that they wanted to marry. In fact at one time if persons of different faiths married it would more times than not have to be a civil marriage if one of them didn't convert.
 
Thank you all for your information and a lot of things now make sense, the first family records appear under an incorrect name in the 1851 census, Great grandfather was born 1852, no record in FreeBMD or Ancestry or any of the similar Genealogy providers of his Father, Mother or siblings apart from IGI and it is impossible to find out how they found birth years etc, likewise non of his siblings appear in the FReeBMD records as marrying or dying. So it could appear that they had no religious affiliation until he got married at St Martins in 1872 (Again his name is misspelt) and from that date on his records are complete. Incidentally he married a lady of Irish descent so perhaps she was religious and was the reason for his baptism.

Bob
 
This painting (artist unknown) portrays the interior of Christ Church as fairly spartan. The pews and decor seem particularly simple. Yet there are numerous lights all around the church. Are there 3 levels to the lectern ? Overall it shows a very different interior to how I would have imagined it- more like a chapel. Viv.

Screenshot_20230608_183031_Chrome.jpg
 
nice painting viv...not sure when it was painted but the church was was there from 1805 so i guess not unusual for the interior to be a bit sparse..
 
Yes that is a three tier pulpit but the stairs look very steep to me. What is puzzling me is its position central in an apse. I would have to ask where is the alter? In a CofE parish church of that time I would have expected the alter to be back against the eastern wall. As you say it does look more like an non-conformist chapel. Also the minister would not be visible anyone sitting in the gallery at the front of the church. Christchurch was built as an overflow for St Philips and was demolished when the local resident population had moved out and made the church redundant so the pews would have been free not rented out to wealthy parishioners.
 
DavidGrain said:
Yes that is a three tier pulpit but the stairs look very steep to me. What is puzzling me is its position central in an apse. I would have to ask where is the alter? In a CofE parish church of that time I would have expected the alter to be back against the eastern wall. As you say it does look more like an non-conformist chapel. Also the minister would not be visible anyone sitting in the gallery at the front of the church. Christchurch was built as an overflow for St Philips and was demolished when the local resident population had moved out and made the church redundant so the pews would have been free not rented out to wealthy parishioners.
Click to expand...
we must also take into account a little artistic licence

lyn
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top