Talk:St Enodoc's Church, Trebetherick

Untitled
Can anyone justify the rename from St Enodoc to St Enodoc's?

Although I'm not really a local myself, I have family down there who are (in fact my grandfathers are buried there) and I visit the area regularly. I've only ever heard it called St Enodoc. Google also shows 6500 results for the former versus a mere 344 for the latter. Nearly all the top results (except this page) use the former, including what look like quite a lot of 'reputable' tourist information sites. Stevekeiretsu (talk) 22:01, 25 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I am the guilty one who changed the name in the title. I had written a number of articles on churches, particularly in Cheshire, when I came across a mention of this church in a book given as a Christmas present.  As I had visited and been fascinated by the church and its history, I decided to expand the article.  The usual convention for naming church articles is either St X's Church, Placename or Church of St X, Placename (Placename being included to prevent confusion between churches with similar dedications).  I changed to title to fit this convention (and the book also used St Enodoc's in its title).  I was not aware of the local custom to call the church just St Enodoc Church.  I must say that I have no strong feelings about the title.  If it is usually called St Enodoc Church, that could be the title (with an explanation in the article).  If the dedication is unique, I suppose there is no need for Trebetherick, although I might prefer it to be included (its clearly Cornish name adds to the interest IMO) with a reference to its unique dedication.  Sorry if I have (innocently) caused any local unhappiness. Peter I. Vardy (talk) 10:22, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Images 2014
I think the recent change of the image in the box is an improvement. I would like to see a cropped version of c used in the article rather than in a deprecated gallery. The gallery should be removed. The image of the interior is well worth using as well, although a wider angle one might supercede it when available.SovalValtos (talk) 19:37, 11 December 2014 (UTC)


 * I've had a go at breaking the gallery apart and distributing the images about the article. I've not cropped the photo of the gravestone yet, but is the change more like what you had in mind? Nev1 (talk) 17:14, 12 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Yes, a good improvement. I have found more images on Commons which could be useful. There is no category for St Enodoc's or St Enodoc. A link from this page to a suitable page on Commons would help. IMHO what is most needed is an image that places the church in the broader landscape. Perhaps only a minor article, but one where suitable images can give a better feel than words, unless the writer is a Betjeman. SovalValtos (talk) 18:57, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

Holding yearly services to preserve the tithes
This makes for a colourful story, but to suggest that it was necessary for a service to be held each year to preserve the obligation for tithes to be paid to the incumbent seems inherently implausible to me, for two reasons: (1) it was well established in ecclesiastical law that tithes might be payable to a landowner who was a lay person (a "lay impropriator": see Appropriation (law), so the eligibility to require the payment of tithes has never been dependent upon the holding of services; and (2) tithes are payable in respect of a parish, and it would appear that St Enodoc has always been a chapel-of-ease in the Parish of St Minver. To simplify a little: the Vicar or Rector would have received the tithes, in his capacity of incumbent of St Minver. It is of course possible that the local clergy or churchwardens thought that they had to hold at least one service a year in the church, in order to ensure that they could collect the tithes: but that it is a different matter! Ntmr (talk) 12:51, 3 December 2020 (UTC)