Mr Stannard, Independent Congregational Chapel, Huddersfield 1881

Ramsden Street Chapel, Huddersfield, was independent and associated with the Congregational Union. It  had been in existence from at least 1825 and was governed according to a trust deed (created in 1849) which gave responsibility for buildings and church life to 21 trustees. The deed specified that the chapel was for the

purpose of worship according to the teaching of Pædo-Baptists (those who baptised infants).  

Appended to the trust deed was a 10-point statement of beliefs which “were all in harmony with Calvinism, and some of them were distinctly Calvinistic.” But chapel leaders had not seen this as a means to exclude anyone and had been open and welcoming, accepting of a wide range of views. When a number of Weslyans seceded from the Huddersfield circuit many joined the Ramsden Street Chapel. They were welcomed because they were Christian with no further test. Their theology was Arminian (wiki), not Calvinist (wiki) but it did not seem to have been a source of friction. The trust deed seems to have been treated as more of an historic inheritance than as binding or definitive. 

By the early 1870s the pastor, Rev Richard Skinner, had served for over 30 years. He was then in poor health. In 1873 a co-pastor was appointed for one year with the prospect of succeeding Rev Skinner as minister: Mr James Turner Stannard. 

Stannard’s application for the post of co-pastor was carefully phrased but not dissembling. He baulked at some of terms of the Church's doctrinal statement, in particular

3.  The Universal and Total Depravity of Man and his exposure to the anger of God on account of his sins. 

He accepted “of course” … “the universal sinfulness of man” but quibbled with the word ‘depraved’ as applying only to the very worst of spiritual sins. 

7.  The predestination according to God's gracious purpose, of a multitude which no man can number, unto eternal salvation by Jesus Christ. 

He felt it was not scriptural to “speak of pre-destination in any sense which supposes favouritism or arbitrary choice on God's part”. 

10. The eternal happiness of the righteous, and the everlasting punishment of the wicked. 

He believed “the whole substance and spirit of Christ's message to be strongly opposed to the physical and material terms in which the doctrine of everlasting punishment is often popularly expressed, …” (Huddersfield Chronicle, p6 Col 2.) 

There seems to have been nothing particularly unusual in this approach; other ministers acknowledged as part of the court case that they too treated some of the clauses with a degree of liberality. Stannard signed the statement of doctrine as a condition of becoming co-pastor in the church for one year.  

In December 1874 the church deacons recommended Stannard’s appointment as assistant minister for a further 12 months. After these two years Stannard  was made co-pastor with the implication that he would become Pastor on Rev Skinner's retirement. The vote in his favour was 121:27.

Rev Skinner retired on 10 April 1877 and Stannard renewed his campaign to become the next minister despite significant opposition and the church trustees asking him to withdraw.

On May 9 a vote of members failed by two votes to pass the threshold of a two-thirds majority (233 for Stannard, 121 against). In the long nefarious tradition of getting the ‘right’ result from a vote some 67 people were removed from the voter list between May 1878 and October 1879, although 24 of them were at the meeting. On 14 January Stannard 1890 was elected minister by 184:69 votes. 

An attempt at arbitration between those who supported and those who opposed Stannard came to nothing.  (Sykes, A. W. (1925). Ramsden Street Independent Chapel, Huddersfield: Notes and records of a hundred years, 1825-1925. Huddersfield: Advertiser Press. p56)

29 May 1878, Church leaders met and gave Stannard a month’s notice to quit on a vote of 8 to 4. The following day a meeting of some of the church members resolved “that the church learnt with extreme surprise and indignation that the deacons and trustees have given Mr Stannard six months’ notice, and ask that the trustees should revoke such notice.” (Yorkshire Post and Leeds Intelligencer - Saturday 29 January 1881 p4 col6)

In the court of Chancery

The trustees didn’t budge. Stannard and his supporters turned to the courts. A writ was issued in February 1880. Stannard was belligerent: “... he considered he was fighting the battle of emancipation for many young clergymen after him.” a particularly self-serving form of heroism. 

The case came to trial at the end of January 1881 in the court of Chancery (wiki) before Vice-Chancellor Sir Charles Hall (ODNB). The role of the Court was to determine whether the terms of the trust deed had been implemented rightly. It had no interest in theology. The judge evaded the term ‘heresy’ without excluding it; the word was used more in newspaper headlines than in the pleadings.

The case rested on the facts of two issues: whether Stannard conformed to the ten articles of belief appended to the trust deed and, second, whether the process of his election as minister had conformed to the constitution of the church.  (Huddersfield Chronicle, 29 January 1881, p.6 col.1) 

Mr Hastings, for the prosecution, cited several of Stannard’s sermons to show his rejection of Calvinism, and in particular of Calvin’s doctrines of atonement and of hell. He quoted Stannard as saying

“Calvinism has probably done more than any other type of Christianity to degrade man and dishonour God. Its unqualified doctrine of human corruption with its cold heartless talk of human corruption is so horrible as to shock John Calvin, aand has driven men into blank despair and atheism. It has made men selfish and morose, inhuman and fanatical. It has driven the elect into recklessness and open sin.” (Ibid. col. 2) 

This, Mr Hastings said, clearly proved that Stannard did not believe at least two of the doctrinal articles he had subscribed.

The judge was understandably reluctant to read any more sermons than were absolutely necessary but said he would do so, out of court. 

Hastings moved on to the allegation that the voter list had been manipulated to ensure Stannard’s election. “There was,” he said, “no just cause for the expulsion of 45 members, except that they were opposed to the defendant’s teaching.” (Ibid. col. 2) Furthermore, they had been expelled without first being visited in contravention of the church rule and practice. 

The following day the minister, Rev Richard Skinner, was questioned. He affirmed the church’s connection with the Congregational Union and the diversity of theological views within the congregation and denied that this was remarkable. He insisted no-one was ever excluded from the church without first being communicated with. Under questioning it became clear that this had not in fact been true in every case.

Skinner’s examination continued on the following day. He said he had always taught doctrines in accordance with those of the Congregational Union and the trust deed. He insisted the “church was in a state of harmony and peaceableness.” (Ibid. col. 3) even while there were differences of opinion. He himself had reservations concerning “total depravity”. 

A further witness, Dr. Bruce, thought Stannard was sincere, but regarded his “flabby, goody, worthless theology” as an abomination. (Yorkshire Post and Leeds Intelligencer, Saturday 29 January 1881 p4 col6.)

When court resumed Stannard’s affidavit was read by his lawyer, Mr. W. Pearson, Q.C.:

“The phrases attributed to him in the evidence adduced for the plaintiff he characterised as garbled statements, inasmuch as they had been unfairly stripped of their contexts, and he declared that he had never acted, and had never had any intention of acting, otherwise than in harmony with the points of doctrine specified in the trust deed. 

“He had never denied the inspiration of the Scriptures, nor questioned the doctrine of the atonement; he had never denied the proper Deity of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, but had simply guarded himself against the heresy of Tritheism. “ (Huddersfield Chronicle - Monday 31 January 1881, p3 col 3)

Stannard asserted his expectation that he would be elected to the co-pastorate if his time as assistant minister was satisfactory. 

In fact, Pearson said, the allegations were far too general: they didn’t specify just what Stannard had said or done nor what exactly the opinions were that caused offence. He called for the case to be dismissed. It wasn’t. He then went, one by one, through the church’s statement of faith and found each of its brief articles too brief, ambiguous and uncertain to be justiciable. (Huddersfield Chronicle, Monday 31 January 1881, p3 col 4) All Stannard had done was to give his interpretation of the articles.

Judgement

Judgement was given on Tuesday 2 February 1881. The sole issue was whether Mr Stannard’s preaching and theology conformed to the doctrines set out in the chapel’s trust deed. The judge decided it did not. 

He was of opinion that a person who, having regard to these provisions of the deed, was a fit and proper person to fill the pulpit of that particular chapel, would be able to sign a letter of adhesion to the whole of the doctrines without any qualification whatever. (London Evening Standard - Wednesday 2 February 1881, Col 2 p 5)

This clearly did not include Stannard who had stated in writing that “he could not honestly, fairly, and truthfully give his assent to those [three] articles.” 

There was more than a suspicion in Vice-Chancellor Hall's judgement that Mr Stannard’s moral character was not what might be expected in a minister. Stannard’s letter had been  “written with great astuteness and adroitness.” His claim for liberty of interpretation as was usually allowed in similar churches “was so vague, and would leave the position so open to dispute and question, that he must hold that it was not a fair, honest, or sufficient compliance with the requirements of the trust deed.” 

He did not award costs to either side but stayed the injunction for a month in case of an appeal.

Afterwards

Stannard preached his last sermon in Ramsden Street Chapel on 8 February 1881. He moved to be pastor of Milton Congregational Church, Huddersfield where he remained until he died "in tragic circumstances in Blackpool on September 11th 1869." A.W. Sykes, Ramsden Street Independent Chapel Huddersfield: Notes and Record of a Hundred Years. pp54-58 (full text)