|
The Church of England Report on Spiritualism
... is a matter of Public Record.
It was said at the time, that the Committee appointed by the Archbishops to investigate Spiritualism carefully studied the subject for two years, and then handed in its report.
It was expected by the Committee and by the general public that the guidance from this would be made available to the rank and file of the Church of England who, up to then, had been given no official lead whatsoever regarding communication with the so called dead.
When a decent interval had elapsed and no statement had been made inquiries were instituted by distinguished persons at the time, and it was learned that the House of Bishops had taken the surprising step of pigeonholing the reports.
For nine years the reports were kept secret; then one morning there mysteriously appeared on the office desk of A.W. Austen [ a prominent figure ] what purported to be a typed copy of the Majority Report.
He got in touch with a member of the
Committee he knew was in favour of the report being published, though
s/he was bound by his loyalty to the Church to keep its secrets.
He said that he had a copy of the Majority
Report, and was going to print it. And that there were one or two
phrases that were obscure, because of the careless typing, but he would
rather print a slightly inaccurate version than none at all.
He went on to say that however, if in the
interests of truth this person would read what he had done so far, and
correct it where necessary, then s/he will be rendering a service to
everyone concerned.
The purported copy was re typed, a reporter
was sent with it to the member concerned. What the reporter brought
back was a carefully corrected typescript, with every comma marked in,
missing lines written in the margins, and complete in every detail.
The report was printed in its entirety in "Psychic News" and with the
co-operation of the Press Association extracts from it appeared in
newspapers all over the world. Still the Church preserved a stony
silence. Copies of the paper containing the report were sent to all the
bishops and the two Archbishops.
No comment came except for a protest from the Archbishop of Canterbury.
The printing of the report by Mr Austen gave
to the rank and file of the Church of England the guidance that had
been denied them by the House of Bishops. To Christians all over the
world it broke the news that a Committee of influential Churchmen,
examining Spiritualism on behalf of the Church and at the request of
the Archbishops had found that it was true and could be a valuable
addition to the Christian ministry.
What do Spiritualists believe? Well it
depends where you are living, it seems. It appears that a number of
people have attempted to make statements like "All Spiritualist
believe..." Unfortunately it turns out that these various definitions
are different. For example one spiritualist group in the U.S. suggests
that spiritualists don't believe in reincarnation. In Australia and all
over the world though many spiritualists do believe in reincarnation.
Other spiritualists believe that all
spiritualists should be Christian. Not surprisingly some feel the
opposite! So is there anything all Spiritualists do believe in? It
seems that there aren't a lot of things they believe in worldwide, however, it seems that everyone appears to agree on the following points.
A belief in a higher power (God)
A belief in life after physical death
A belief in communication to/from the spirit world.
This report dated 1937.
The book entitled “Harry Edwards – The Life
Story of the Great Healer" by Ramus Branch discusses this report, and
I have just covered a little of the subject here.
THE REPORT
"In interpreting our evidence it is important to take
into account the theories, prevalent among the more experienced and careful
Spiritualists, as to the nature and the value of the alleged messages
delivered through the agency of mediums. It is pointed out, on the evidence of
the "communicators " themselves, that the communicators and
guides are themselves at very different levels or spiritual
development and of very partial knowledge, and that the "controls"
or which they make use may often be very undeveloped personalities who are
capable of this particular service because they are closely linked with
temporarily disassociate portions of the personalities of the mediums
concerned.
There are thus at
least three factors which would render messages, especially those of a high
order of spiritual or metaphysical value, liable to disturbance, and
which lead to the difficulties, generally recognised
by Spiritualists, which the communicators would in any case find in transmitting
messages which do not already lie within the general conditions of our
knowledge.
There is however, nothing inherently contradictory, or
necessarily improbable in this account of the conditions involved in such
communications. It is, however, no more than a hypothesis, incapable of
scientific proof, nor does it assist us in determining the authenticity of the
communications themselves.
The verification of these, if it is possible at all, must rest
upon ordinary scientific tests. To say this is not, however, to deny that the
communications may sometimes be held to be convincing upon other than
scientific grounds.
In any case it seems necessary to distinguish between the
sense of contact with departed friends or with " guides," and the
assurance that the messages have necessarily any high value because
they come through this unusual channel. It is perhaps of some
importance to notice that there is general agreement in the
communications, that time has not the same rigid character as a "
time series " in the life that lies beyond death. This is in
any case probable on other grounds, but it is of interest as
indicating a possible reason why the communicators are frequently confused
or mistaken as to exact indications of time. This may not be a failure in
their own apprehension of the real significance of events, so much as in
their power of conveying that apprehension in a form, which can be
adapted to the mentality of the medium and to the understanding of
those to whom the message is directed.
It is often urged as of great significance that Spiritualism in
many respects re-affirms the highest convictions of religious people, and
that it has brought many to a new assurance of the truth of teaching,
which had ceased to have any meaning to them.
This is a point of some difficulty, since assurance seems
to come along different and even conflicting lines. We cannot ignore
the fact that at least one considerable Spiritualist organisation is
definitely anti-Christian in character. This divergence of testimony is
explained by Spiritualists as due to the continuance of spirits, at least for a
period, within the system of beliefs, which they have held in this life. It is
held that even though the whole development of the personality is being raised
from level to level, the attitudes to truth and goodness taken up in this life
persist in the next, and that this somewhat divergent testimony to the ‘truth'
of Christianity must be explained in this way.
We should add that whatever be value of this supposed
confirmation of the truth of religion, Spiritualism does not seem to have added
anything except perhaps a practical emphasis to our understanding of those
truths. Many alleged communications seem, indeed, to fall below the highest
Christian standards of understanding and spiritual insight, and indeed below
the level of spiritual insight and mental capacity shown by the communicators
while still in this life.
While there is insistence upon the supremacy of love comparable
with the New Testament assertion that "God is Love" the accounts
sometimes given of the mediatory work of Christ frequently fall very
far below the full teaching of the Christian Gospel, seeming to
depend rather upon some power of working a miracle of materialisation
(in the organisation is definitely anti-Christ Resurrection appearances) than
upon a radical and final acceptance of the burden of guilt of man's sin, and
a victory wrought for us upon
the Cross.
Nevertheless, it is clearly true that the recognition of
the nearness of our friends who have died, and of their progress in
the spiritual life and of their continuing concern for us, cannot do
otherwise, for those who have experienced it than add a new immediacy
and richness to their belief in the Communion of Saints.
There seems to be no reason at all why the Church should
regard this vital and personal enrichment of one of her central
doctrines with disfavour,
so long as it does not distract Christians from their fundamental gladness that
they may come, when they will, into the presence of their Lord and Master,
Jesus Christ Himself, or weaken their sense that their fellowship is
fellowship in Him.
It is claimed by Spiritualists that the character of many events in the
Christian revelation, as recorded in of the Gospels, is precisely that
of psychic phenomena, and that the evidence for the paranormal occurrences
which Spiritualism has adduced strongly confirms the historicity of the Gospel
records, in the sense that they also are records of paranorma1 occurrences,
including instances for example, of clairvoyance (in the
story of Nathaniel) of materialisation (in the feeding of the five
thousand, and above all in the narrative of the
Resurrection appearances).
The miracles of healing are acclaimed as closely parallel to the
healings performed through mediums. It is strongly urged that if we do not
accept the evidence for modern psychical happenings, we should not apart from
long tradition accept the Gospel records either. It is certainly true that
there are quite clear parallels between the miraculous events recorded in the
Gospel and modern phenomena attested by Spiritualists. And if we assert that the latter must be
doubted because they have not yet proved capable of scientific statement and
verification, we must add that the miracles, and the Resurrection itself, are
not capable of such verification either.
We must therefore ask what the proper Christian grounds of
belief in these central truths of Christianity are. The answer to this question
is clearly that we believe upon a basis of faith, and not of demonstrable
scientific knowledge. Our grounds for this faith are to be found either in a
direct mystical assurance that Jesus of Nazareth as we have received Him, is
indeed God's word to us, or more broadly in the apprehension of ethical and
spiritual values.
We do not accept the Gospels because they record wonders, but
because they ring true to the deepest powers of spiritual apprehension, which
we possess. But if this is
so, we must clearly apply similar criteria to the claims of
Spiritualists, and this
means that while we regard some part of these claims as matter proper
to the scientist, we regard some other parts of these claims as not
properly capable of scientific verification or dispute, but, at the
same time, as deserving the consideration of Christians upon grounds of
another kind.
It has been seen, in the account of the evidence submitted to
our Committee, that so far as rigid scientific tests are concerned
very little if anything remains both verifiable and inexplicable out of
the whole mass of paranormal phenomena. Modern psychological
knowledge has reveals a wide range of powers and of possible sources of
misunderstanding in our subconscious or unconscious mind. When these
are combined with the possibility of thought transference, of
telepathy, many communications delivered through mediums seem capable
of explanation.
We have to notice that no good evidence for telepathy itself is
yet forthcoming, but probably a majority of scientists would accept
it as a fact without pretending to offer an explanation of it. If
telepathy is denied, the evidence that these communications do come from
discarnate spirits is greatly strengthened on the scientific side. But the
tests applied by scientists in as such, are in their very nature
experimental, objective and impersonal.
It is necessary to ask whether such tests do not in themselves
invalidate an inquiry into values, which are in essence personal and spiritual.
The experiences, which many people have found most convincing, are of a kind,
which could hardly occur in the atmosphere of scientific investigation. They
are sporadic, occasional and highly individual. They could not possibly be
repeated or submitted to statistical analysis. It is worthwhile to notice in
this connection that in the ordinary affairs and beliefs of human life
we do not ask for scientific verification of this kind. We accept many
things as certain in the realm of personal relationships upon the basis of
direct insight.
When we say that we know our friends, we mean something very
different from saying that we can give a scientific and verifiable account of
them. But we are none the less many communications delivered sure of our
knowledge. Similar certainties are to be found in the sphere of mystical
experience. It may well be that in this matter of the evidence of the survival
of the human personality after death, we are dependent exactly upon this same
kind of insight, and that a scientific verification, though valuable where it
can be obtained, is of secondary importance, and only partially relevant. And
this is precisely the situation in which we find ourselves in our assurance of
Christianity itself. "We walk by faith, and not by sight�?.
It is thus a weakness, rather than strength, in the
Spiritualist position that it has been represented as resting upon
scientific verification.
If rigid scientific methods are applied it is probable that
verification will never be attained.
We may sum up the position from the point of view of science as
follows:
There is no satisfactory scientific evidence in favour of
any paranormal physical phenomena (materialisations, apports, telekinesis,
etc) all the available scientific evidence is against the occurrence
of such phenomena. Further, the hypothesis of unconscious mental activity
in the mind of the medium or sensitive is a strong alternative
hypothesis to that of the action of a discarnate entity in cases of
mental mediumship. Thus the strictly scientific verdict on the
matter of personal survival can only be one of non-proven. Again, the
whole question of extra sensory perception is still a matter of scientific
subjudice.
On the other hand certain out-standing psychic experiences of
individuals, including certain experiences with mediums, make a
strong prima facie case for survival and for the possibility of spirit communications while
philosophical, ethical and religious considerations may be held to
weigh heavily on the same side.
When every possible explanation of these communications has
been given, and all doubtful evidence set aside, it is very generally
agreed that there remains some element as yet unexplained. We think that it is
probable that the hypothesis that they proceed in some cases from discarnate
spirits is [...tenable?]
We may sum up the position from the true one. That so much can be said
even in so cautious a form, involves very important consequences, and makes
necessary certain warnings. It is abundantly clear, as Spiritualists themselves
admit, that an easy credulity in these matters opens the door to self-deception
and to a very great amount of fraud. We are greatly impressed by the evidence of this which we
received, and desire to place on record a most emphatic warning to those who
might become interested in Spiritualism from motives of mere curiosity or as a way of escaping from the
responsibility of making their own decisions as Christians under the guidance
of the Holy Spirit.
It is legitimate for Christians who are scientifically qualified
to make these matters a subject of scientific enquiry, though, as we have already said, such
enquiry has its necessary limitations. But it is not legitimate, and it is
unquestionably dangerous, to allow an interest in Spiritualism, at a low level
of spiritual value, to replace that deeper religion which rests fundamentally
upon the right relation of the soul to God Himself.
It is necessary to keep clearly in mind that none of the
fundamental Christian obligations or values are in any way changed by our
acceptance of the possibility of communication with discarnate
spirits. Where these essential principles are borne in mind, those
who have the assurance that they have been in touch with their departed friends
may rightly accept the sense of enlargement and of unbroken fellow- ship, which
it brings.
It is important to distinguish between assurance of this
personal contact and assurance of the accuracy and authority or the
messages received. As we have seen, and as many Spiritualists admit, there
is every probability that even authentic messages would be liable to
distortion.
There is a very great danger of misdirection if such
messages are accepted as giving authoritative guidance unless they
are checked by our own human reason under the guidance of the Holy
Spirit received through prayer. But there is no reason why
we should not accept gladly the assurance that we are still in closest
contact with those who have been dear to us in this life, who are going forward,
as we seek to do ourselves in the understanding and fulfilment of the
purpose of God. We cannot avoid the impression that a great deal of
Spiritualism as organised has its centre in man rather than in God, and
is, indeed, materialistic in character.
To this extent it is a substitute for religion, and it is not in
itself religious at all. We were impressed by the unsatisfactory answers
received from practising Spiritualists to such questions as, "Has your
prayer life, your sense of God, been strengthened by your Spiritualistic
experiences?" This explains in great part the hesitancy of many Christians
to have anything to do with it.
But if Spiritualism does, in fact, make so strong an appeal to
some, it is at least in part because the Church has not proclaimed and
practised its faith with sufficient conviction. There is frequently little real fellowship even
between the living, and the full and intimate reality of the Communion of
Saints is often a dead letter.
Spiritualism claims, in fact, to be making accessible a
reality, which the Church has proclaimed but of which it has seemed
only to offer a shadow. This is, of course, is only a part of the truth. For
many the appeal of Spiritualism rests upon much lower motives. It may stimulate
curiosity in the bizarre. It may offer consolation upon terms, which are too
easy. It may afford men the opportunity of escaping the challenge of faith
which, when truly proclaimed, makes so absolute a claim upon men's lives that
they will not face it but turn aside to some easier way.
It is often held that the practice of Spiritualism is
dangerous to the mental balance as well as to the spiritual
condition, of those who take part in it, and it is clearly true that there
are some cases where it has become obsessional in character. But it
is very difficult to judge in these cases whether the uncritical and
unwise type of temperament which does undoubtedly show itself in
certain Spiritualists is a result or a cause of their addiction to
these practices.
Psychologically it is probable that good persons in the
condition of mental disturbance, or lack of balance, would very naturally
use the obvious opportunities afforded by Spiritualism as a means of
expressing the repressed emotions, which have caused their disorder. This indeed is true of Christianity itself,
which frequently becomes the outlet, not only for cranks, but also for or persons who are
definitely of unstable mentality. It should be noticed that Spiritualists
themselves are very much alive to the danger to those who are already
unstable, and even to those who are stable, where the motives are wrong and the
precautions as to sincerity inadequate.
Whatever else is clear in a matter where the evidence is
difficult to interpret, it is certain that Spiritualism has every need of the
high standards of Christianity and its witness to a life which rests by
faith upon God, and which is thereby freed from the conflicts of desire and of
purpose to which all lives not so grounded are liable.
The view has been held with some degree of Church authority that
psychic phenomena are real but that proceed from evil spirits. The possibility that spirits of a low
order may seek to influence us in this way cannot be excluded as inherently
illogical or absurd, but it would be extremely unlikely if there were not also
the possibility of contact with good spirits.
The belief in Angelic guardians or guides has been very general
in Christianity. But in any case the Christian life is grounded upon God, and
its fundamental activities are prayer and worship, which issue in loving
worship of mankind. A life so grounded has nothing to fear from evil influences
or powers of any kind.
The Church of England, for reasons of past controversy, has been
altogether too cautious in its references to the departed. Anglican prayers for the departed do
not satisfy people's needs, because the prayers are so careful in their
language that it is not always evident that the departed are being prayed for,
as contrasted with the living. In general we need much more freedom in our
recognition of the living unity of the whole Church in this world and in that
which lies beyond death. But detailed suggestions on this point should be
matters of dispute, and lie beyond the main purpose of this
Report.
If Spiritualism, with all
aberrations set aside and with every care taken to present it humbly and
accurately, contains a truth, it is important to see that truth not as a new
religion, but only as filling up certain gaps in our knowledge, so
that where we already walked by faith, we may now have some measure
of sight as well. It is, in our opinion, important that
representatives of the Church should keep in touch with groups of
intelligent persons who believe in Spiritualism. We must leave practical
guidance in this matter to the Church itself. "
THE SIGNATORIES
Dr. Francis Underhill
Bishop of Bath and Wells.
Dr. W. R. Matthews
Dean of St. Paul's.
Canon Harold Anson
Master of the Temple.
Canon L. W. Grensted
Nolloth Professor of the
Christian Religion at Oxford.
Dr William Brown
Celebrated Harley Street
Psychologist.
Mr. P. E. Sandlands, Q.C.
Barrister-at-Law.
Lady (Gwendolen) Stephenson
End.
"The
Psychic News" is a site you might like to visit, use the google search
for that as the links are not up and running on this new format - Stella
1063 hits on this page to Aug '07
2010 hits May 2009 - that's 1047 in 21 months.
2237 Sept 2009 Brilliant!
Reminder: Tell your friends...
PETITION:
To assist the
freedom of thinking, which is the spiritualist way, please go to this website below, and also tell your
friends about this, the permanent web address is:
http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/spiritteaching/
"We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to
include spiritualist religion as one of the religions taught in our schools as
part of the curriculum."
Submitted
by Sandra McFadden of British Spiritualist Assoc. Deadline to sign
up by: 08 October 2009.
We all need eachother! Come on, Sign up now!
>
More details
More info on
this site see Articles -
Miscellaneous - "The Spiritual Workers
Assoc"
NOW CLOSED
Read the Government’s response >>> http://www.number10.gov.uk/Page21275
The 1988 Education Reform Act states that RE should
be broadly Christian in nature and include study of the principal
religions represented in the UK. Local Standing Advisory Councils for
RE (SACREs) have the responsibility to ensure that local syllabuses
develop pupils’ knowledge, understanding and awareness of Christianity
and the major religions represented in the country and reflect the
values and traditions of the community. RE encourages respect for
those holding different beliefs and helps promote pupils’ moral,
cultural and spiritual development.
Locally agreed syllabuses can include the religions
which reflect the religious make up of the local area in addition to
Christianity.
Local authorities are close to and accountable to
their communities – they are best placed to design an RE syllabus that
reflects the needs and traditions of their community. The national role
is to provide guidance and support on quality standards for effective
provision.
Religious education syllabuses are designed by
locally agreed syllabus conferences (ASCs), taking advice from Standing
Advisory Councils on Religious Education (SACREs). These councils are
statutorily created by local authorities (LAs) and are made up of
people from a variety of faith groups, teachers and LA representatives.
This helps ensure each religious education syllabus reflects the
religious make up of an area. In maintained schools with a religious
character, the syllabus is decided by the governing body in accordance
with the trust deeds of the school.
Sandra McFadden, the Petition Creator, joined by:
- Jim Kennedy
- Bob Gleeson
- James Lochhead
- Sue Willison
- Coral Ryder
- Theresa
- Jameela Boardman
- Lee Glendinning
- Margaret Challenger
- susan carpenter
- Colleen Govil
- m bell
- lorraine moran
- Graham Solly
- William Parkins
- Robert Barber
- Kathlyn Honey
- Joseph Arthur Wright
- Dale Glendinning
- Pauline Richardson
- Janet & John Copestake
- Rt Rev Dr Barry Rathbone
- Jenny Beswick
- Lee Richardson
- Christine Martin
- Nick Drain
- Abdullah Rhodes-Taylor
- Jennie Gibbon
- peter & carol blake
- Brenda Billam
- Myrrha Hibbert
- Abla Ehab El-azhary
- Ann Fordham
- Mike Goodall
- Stuart Harrison
- Sue Wright
- Wendie Perry
- Keith Sangster CSNU
- Leonard Watson
- Roger Brabrook
- a.plummer
- Brian Baylis
- Kyle Glendinning
- Philip Terence Spillane
- pat spillane
- lynne thomas
- Rosie Keen
- Charles McFaulds
- rosie Mitchell
- Joan Severn
- Jean Morgan
- Genevieve Bailey
- stephen g cull
- sue hippard
- patricia dickin
- Minister Ann Robson
- nancy hutchison
- Sam Driscoll
- minister donna morgans
- michelle lieberman
- Glenys Betts
- Amanda Revell
- Minister Kathryn Grundy
- Allan Borland
- Minister Judith Seaman
- Paul Hammond
- Raymond Edwards
- Raymond Grimes
- Pauline Grimes
- Frances Powles
- donna nail
- Julie Gillott
- Justin Lee Farr
- gareth payne
- Steven Bennett
- Nicola Beckitt-Robson
- S Rodgers
- C. Martin
- Barbara Evison CSNU
- Les Gillen
- june lorraine harrison
- Gregory Pettit
- June Herron
- kirsty alexander
- Gillian
- colin hall
- Iris Alsop
- Anji Wylde
- Alan Seymour
- Colette Orton
- Michelle Izzard
- Marion Dampier- Jeans
- Catherine Mccafferty
- Mollie Mcmanus
- Pat Davis
- Patricia Seymour
- nessie richardson
- Jo Allen
- Sharon Summers
- cindy heath
- Maureen M.
- david wheeler
- James Pugh
- Ann Marshall
- Tricia Daniels Pugh OSNU
- Minister Doris Smith
- Beverley Forman
- Ruth Jenkins
- e.e.mason
- Sheila Scott
- Minister Nora Moray Stringer
- Minister Bill fiddes
- Carol Ann Fiddes
- Minister Marian Bishop
- Kirstaline Taylor
- julie millard
- Tony Penketh OSNU
- kriss bailey
- Minister Thomas Haver
- Minister Trevor Rushforth
- Philip Jenkins
- gladys brown
- Kathryn Crossley
- Helen DaVita
- Keith B. Hinton
- jayne bradsworth
- Nicolas Chaplin
- Emma Jukes
- Mrs. Beryl Illstone
- Beverley Cooper
- Alfred Winchester
- ANNETTE TOLLIS
- Jim Howat
- Sheelagh Wellman
- Kay Vincent
- Janet Gay
- Paula Eouzan
- Lynda Hopkins
- Robin Evans
- Ouida Ann Harrison
- June O'Brien
- Margaret Brunton
- Derek Donaghy
- Sylvia Hobro
- P.A.Timms
- Keelie Martin
- karen Braysher
- Stella Davidson
- g.b. shirley
- Naomi \\Jones
- barbara pettinger
- BRIGITTE RIX (York)
- Beverly Hamilton
- Martin Colclough
- Lisa Meehan
- Jane Rich
- lynne murray
- H. J. Fyfe
- Myrrha Hibbert
- Miss Ryan
- Manuela Williams
- Louise Dobson
- mark deeming
- John Wynne-Williams
- Mary Ions OSNU
- Diane Joy Rayfield
- Irene Bowden-Meal
- sandra ryton
- Annette Blann
- Frederick Giddings
- Helen Lawless
- Wendy Bowden
- elizabeth noel-smith
- Jean Gray
- Mary Clifford
- Minister Mary Clifford
- Natalie McNeice
- pauline harding
- Steven Glendinning
- Wm.B.Nedderman
- Stephen Dawson
- Phyllis Dominy
- karl williams
- David J Golden
- CHRISTINE HARBURN
- Geraldine Kass
- Janice Walkden
- Wendy Moss
- E. Gillen
- Caroline Bennett
- hayley page
- Ray Milverton
- Moveta McLeary
- Roger Colman
- Darren German
- Joanne Hopwood
- Paul Masters
- Dorothy Davies
- Peggy Bloom
- Chris Sherrington
- Adam Craven
- Debs Winchester
- Julie K. Childs
- S.Adamson
- Dee Newby
- Cheryll McKay
- Gwen Burton
- ellena brown
- annette chubb
- Helen Moxey
- Tina Fredericks
- Piper Cockey
- Janet Driscoll
- Deb Hawken
- ann Luck
- Alison Eastwood
- Jim Kennedy
- Sheryl Richards
- john alexander
- Stuart Sutherland
- joyce latrham
- john latrham
- Lew Sutton
- Carol Noonan IIHHT
- Anne Mackriell
- Susan Smith
- sue chambers
- jannina tokarska
- janette Brundrett
- Alan Smith
- sylvia whelan
- Steven Walkden
- Barbara Eaton
- karen healy
- Beryl Collins
- kate johnson
- Glynne Powell
- Pat Parry
- Marina Shaw
- K . Owens
- Gillian A
- Sandra Killen
- Sue Brown
- Mr & Mrs Brame
- Sharon Berry
- michael osullivan
- Zandra Read
- Hilda Stephens
- Lorraine Quigley
- Leslie Wade
- Penelope M Gater
- Judith Lott
- Bradley Harris
- harry odell
- Lillian Odell
- liz willis
- Clifford Seaden
- roy andrew bennett
- Catherine Currie
- Mandy Robinson
- Lynne Mulrooney
- D Burgess
- F.Hobbs
- Anthony P Bisson
- Wendy Pedder
- N. McIntyre
- Meryl Cunliffe
- Rebecca Keely
- Adrian Miller
- Sharlene Smith
- Jennie Sorensen
- a.greenwood
- Elizabeth Mscandlon
- sarah priddey
- Paul Halford
- Lynne Halford
- Graham Horton
- annette chadwick
- Emma Finch
- val baker
- Stephanie Gordon
- Linda Walker
- John Wison
- Marc Cook
- Carole Laynes
- Martin J West
- Mrs E Thackeray
- Claire Perry
- Lucy Dunlop
- A Campbell
- Christopher Sausman
- Adele Potten-Price
- Louise Cullen
- ann young
- Adam Casey
- candice darrington
|