Grieving son forced to smash mother's headstone after Pulborough church rules it is 'too lavish'

11:20am Monday 20th August 2012 in News

DESTROYED: Mark Doe has been ordered by the church to remove the headstone DESTROYED: Mark Doe has been ordered by the church to remove the headstone

A grieving son had to smash his mother’s gravestone to pieces with a sledgehammer after being ordered to remove it by the church.

Mark Doe and his family rushed to install the gravestone – which included three roses in the design – on his mother Shirley Jone’s grave.

But the church decided the design was too lavish and insisted it be removed by 4pm on Friday.

Devastated Mr Doe was forced to take a sledgehammer to his mother’s memorial when the stone could not be removed from the ground at St Mary’s Church in Pulborough.

He said: “It was really upsetting. We had a hearing at the church on Tuesday and the Diocese of Chichester ruled that the headstone had to be removed.

“They said the design was too elaborate. They said the headstone had to be removed completely by Friday.

“The stone had been there since December 21. We rushed to make sure it was there before Christmas, then two weeks later they told us they wanted it removed.

“We’d had talks with the vicar before choosing the headstone. It wasn’t even anything particularly lavish – it came from a catalogue.

“Father Paul originally agreed to it, but then he kept saying he thought it was only going to be one rose and it was three – but that was actually a mistake by the stonemason.

“They wouldn’t even give us enough time to get a replacement before tearing it down. My dad’s devastated and can’t even go up there.

“My family don’t break the law. We had been given until 4 o’clock to remove it but the pins wouldn’t come out so we had to put a sledgehammer to it or break the law.

“I feel they are discriminating against me. I went round the church yard and found other illegal stones.”

Mr Doe said that the original headstone had cost £2,200. The family will now have to have a new stone made – at a similar price.

The Argus contacted the Diocese of Chichester and Father Paul Welch but neither responded to the Argus’ request for a comment.

Comments(35)

john5001 says...
11:32am Mon 20 Aug 12

its easier to pass a camel throw the eye of a needle. then a rich man get into haven.

Report this post »

tooned_in says...
11:45am Mon 20 Aug 12

I find this article really upsetting, how can a headstone be too lavish, fair enough if it was multicoloured and illuminated by neon lights but this seems to be a very unfair judgement in my opinion, to have to vandalised your own mothers grave must be heartbreaking and I feel for the Doe family.
surely it makes the graveyard a nicer place and takes the eyes away from the dossers, drunks & druggies that seem to litter these resting places

Report this post »

rustybn3 says...
11:49am Mon 20 Aug 12

What was the Church thinking off. what a horrible thing for the "Church " to ask a person to do, Shame on the Church, " SHAME "

Report this post »

Euly says...
11:56am Mon 20 Aug 12

Disgusting, and just typical these cowards have made no comment on their appalling treatment of this family.

Report this post »

Goldenwight says...
12:05pm Mon 20 Aug 12

While the story is distressing, and raises some interesting moral questions, the telling of it raises a couple of points.

Firstly, why was it necessary to smash the gravestone with a sledgehammer? If the stone was able to be put there in one piece, it was able to be removed in one piece. Albeit that the cost of doing so may have been somewhat greater.

Secondly, was the possibility of altering the stone in situ explored as a possible compromise- for example, by removing the plinth? Remember that there has been over eight months to take remedial action, so this is not a snap decision.

Thirdly, why was it felt necessary to record the demolition in pictures?

Fourthly, did Mr Doe consider the possible effects of his actions on (completely innocent) bystanders and other church yard users? This action could just as easily have been accomplished at night when there were no visitors.

Apologies if this post seems negative, but I always feel it is best to view a problem impartially and from all angles. I wish the family all the best at this difficult time and hope that a mutually satisfactory conclusion can be reached on this.

Report this post »

dandragon says...
12:07pm Mon 20 Aug 12

just shows how out of touch the church really are with their outdated views and ridiculous rules

Report this post »

Hove Actually says...
12:08pm Mon 20 Aug 12

And they wonder why NINETY FIVE percent of the population do not attend church....
It is about time this minority group came into the main stream way of thinking, and if the want to see an elaborate headstone just visit Brighton cemetery up Bear Road

Report this post »

Crystal Ball says...
12:10pm Mon 20 Aug 12

Not a nice thing for the relatives to have to do but I would ask if they initially consulted the church/local authority with regards to guidelines for headstones/memorials
? Most have them to save situations like this.

Report this post »

Nathan_Adler says...
12:16pm Mon 20 Aug 12

When I read this I had images of Del Boy. But when i saw the picture, it seems quite a tasteful headstone.

In days when the church is decreasing its membership, this story doesn't help their image.

Let's hope the dearly departed Mrs. Jones sees the funny side of the story (if one can be found)

Report this post »

egym64 says...
12:21pm Mon 20 Aug 12

Goldenwight wrote:
While the story is distressing, and raises some interesting moral questions, the telling of it raises a couple of points.

Firstly, why was it necessary to smash the gravestone with a sledgehammer? If the stone was able to be put there in one piece, it was able to be removed in one piece. Albeit that the cost of doing so may have been somewhat greater.

Secondly, was the possibility of altering the stone in situ explored as a possible compromise- for example, by removing the plinth? Remember that there has been over eight months to take remedial action, so this is not a snap decision.

Thirdly, why was it felt necessary to record the demolition in pictures?

Fourthly, did Mr Doe consider the possible effects of his actions on (completely innocent) bystanders and other church yard users? This action could just as easily have been accomplished at night when there were no visitors.

Apologies if this post seems negative, but I always feel it is best to view a problem impartially and from all angles. I wish the family all the best at this difficult time and hope that a mutually satisfactory conclusion can be reached on this.
Are you for real?????

Report this post »

Hoarder12345444 says...
12:27pm Mon 20 Aug 12

It's disgusting. People should be able to have their own headstone for relatives. Cant see why it was too lavish. Typical draconian rules from the church. I feel for the bloke and family for having to have to do this sort of thing, must be very distressing. Shame on the vicar and the church, appalling.

Report this post »

Poccypoc says...
12:40pm Mon 20 Aug 12

I can't these holier-than-thou bible-bashers and their silly rules and regulations. How about they cut down on priests abusing young children, or recognise gay people, instead of going after grieving people like the Doe family. It's shameful.

Report this post »

mr punch says...
12:40pm Mon 20 Aug 12

This story just goes to show what a complete load of nonsense the church really is. They should maybe have left it there and let the vicar smash it up, would have made a better story for a start and even the Sun would've grabbed that one! Also, whilst the bloke had the sledge hammer in his hand he should've taken out a few other 'distasteful' headstones and then as an encore..... knocked down the blimmin' church as that's very distasteful to a lot of people!

Report this post »

mrtricky says...
12:47pm Mon 20 Aug 12

Euly wrote:
Disgusting, and just typical these cowards have made no comment on their appalling treatment of this family.
Yes, shame on the Church as I'd be livid if this happened to my family stone.

Like previous Argus reports on many subjects however, people, groups or organizations often hide behind the curtain of anonymity or quietness to suit their situation when a media response is requested.

Report this post »

gandalfthebiege says...
12:48pm Mon 20 Aug 12

Whats wrong with just getting an angle grinder and cutting it down to just the bit with writing on? kill two birds with one stone.

Report this post »

Metadadaist says...
12:57pm Mon 20 Aug 12

"the church decided the design was too lavish". Jesus. This is the church that has that gigantic marble and stone monolith in the middle of London right? You know, that really really lavish one.

Report this post »

Metadadaist says...
12:59pm Mon 20 Aug 12

Mr Doe should have told Father Paul Welch that Jesus/God/whatever had told him to build the edifice for his mother. Would love to have seen that debate!

Report this post »

Number Six says...
1:12pm Mon 20 Aug 12

And an Argus reporter just happens to passing by just as Mr Doe is wielding the slegehammer. What are the chances of that happening, I wonder

Report this post »

Metro Reader says...
2:09pm Mon 20 Aug 12

egym64 wrote:
Goldenwight wrote: While the story is distressing, and raises some interesting moral questions, the telling of it raises a couple of points. Firstly, why was it necessary to smash the gravestone with a sledgehammer? If the stone was able to be put there in one piece, it was able to be removed in one piece. Albeit that the cost of doing so may have been somewhat greater. Secondly, was the possibility of altering the stone in situ explored as a possible compromise- for example, by removing the plinth? Remember that there has been over eight months to take remedial action, so this is not a snap decision. Thirdly, why was it felt necessary to record the demolition in pictures? Fourthly, did Mr Doe consider the possible effects of his actions on (completely innocent) bystanders and other church yard users? This action could just as easily have been accomplished at night when there were no visitors. Apologies if this post seems negative, but I always feel it is best to view a problem impartially and from all angles. I wish the family all the best at this difficult time and hope that a mutually satisfactory conclusion can be reached on this.
Are you for real?????
I empathise with Mr Doe, but the Argus has not reported the whole history of the incident if it had then the above comments would not be required.

It is standard that headstones are not allowed until a new grave has had time to settle, which would explain the year wait but what happened in the previous nine months since it was put in place and why smash it?

What would the legal implications be if they had refused? Church law one assumes is in play here.

The article is typical under reporting by the Argus and at best sensationalising a rather traumatic incident.

Report this post »

Metro Reader says...
2:17pm Mon 20 Aug 12

When I said 'Church Law' I should ofcouse said 'Canon law'

In the Church of England, the ecclesiastical courts that formerly decided many matters such as disputes relating to marriage, divorce, wills, and defamation, still have jurisdiction of certain church-related matters (e.g., discipline of clergy, alteration of church property, and issues related to churchyards). Their separate status dates back to the 12th century when the Normans split them off from the mixed secular/religious county and local courts used by the Saxons. In contrast to the other courts of England the law used in ecclesiastical matters is at least partially a civil law system, not common law, although heavily governed by parliamentary statutes. Since the Reformation, ecclesiastical courts in England have been royal courts. The teaching of canon law at the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge was abrogated by Henry VIII; thereafter practitioners in the ecclesiastical courts were trained in civil law, receiving a Doctor of Civil Law (D.C.L.) degree from Oxford, or an LL.D. from Cambridge. Such lawyers (called "doctors" and "civilians") were centred at "Doctors Commons", a few streets south of St Paul's Cathedral in London, where they monopolized probate, matrimonial, and admiralty cases until their jurisdiction was removed to the common law courts in the mid-19th century. (Admiralty law was also based on civil law instead of common law, thus was handled by the civilians too.) Charles I repealed canon law in 1638 after uprisings of Covenanters confronting the Bishops of Aberdeen following the convention at Muchalls Castle and other revolts across Scotland earlier that year.[citation

Report this post »

MuammarQaddafi says...
2:18pm Mon 20 Aug 12

If the only problem was too many roses, the stonemasons who supplied the offending memorial could have removed them easily--gravestone-f
ixing is not uncommon. There are other issues here, not only with Mr Doe but with the vicar.

Report this post »

JoeBlow says...
2:31pm Mon 20 Aug 12

Typical over-reaction on here by bigots who don't know half the story. Cemeteries have rules so that EVERYONE who has a loved one buried there is considered, not just one grieving family. The son admits that there was a mistake by the stonemason and that the stone did not match the design that had been approved. So why was it installed in the first place instead of being corrected by the stonemason?

Report this post »

cookie_brighton says...
2:53pm Mon 20 Aug 12

what confuses me is when a loved one leaves us.......we PURCHASE a plot of land to lay them to rest in......so if the plot of land ( grave) belongs to a member of the deceased ...why can they not place any headstone of their choice on the grave...you have not got to go back too far, to look at massive headstones that were placed on graves.

Report this post »

getThisCoalitionOut says...
3:16pm Mon 20 Aug 12

Typical church of england - bunch of nasty, evil gits who don't know their own religion - best to have nothing to do with it - they relie on donations, they have £billions - so don't give them anymore and don't go to church - I stopped a very long time ago as I disliked it all so much.

Report this post »

sbiscorrupt says...
3:25pm Mon 20 Aug 12

Why is anyone surprised that an organisation (akin to the mafia) that promotes belief in an imaginary friend decides itself on the 'rules' that mortals should live and die by...

Report this post »

Dirk Von Roden says...
3:38pm Mon 20 Aug 12

Bishop Eric would never have allowed this to happen No wonder myself and many others have sought different Venues for prayer ! Father Paul Welch hang your head in shame ! does the church not need a congregation? Does the Anglican church not have more serious issues to sort out before they pick petty faults the guy had already asked "Welch"(Sorry I have NO respect for this so called man of the cloth!) about the headstone and had been given permissions to quibble about an extra two roses is pathetic (just like the Anglican church nowadays) was the stone bigger than proposed?? obviously not! I would send any bill to the "Chichester Diocese for any replacement stone! and folk wonder why the Anglican church is dying ! I can tell you why !! "They are bigots and should lose all chariable status until they conform with British Law !

Report this post »

Dirk Von Roden says...
3:43pm Mon 20 Aug 12

As for the above comments I give the Argus full permission to give my name and address to the Bishop of Chichester if he has the nerve to respond !! which I doubt he will !! these Bishops and the like have lost touch they are on par with MPs as far as I am concerned (only interested in themselfs not the people they are here to serve!!)

Report this post »

nicole/bob says...
2:22am Tue 21 Aug 12

Totally outrageous! We have e-mailed the acting Bishop of Chichester about this and will post his reply in the Argus as and when received

We feel father Paul Welch should reflect upon his ill-considered actions...just what effect does he for one moment think his ill-informed and un-Godly actions/comments have had on Mark Doe and his family?

Shame on him and so many kind thoughts towards the Doe family.

Our Beloved daughter is buried in Hove Cemetetry and we had to have the commemorative statue removed elsewhere because of vandalism.

Bob, Hove

Report this post »

Aspect8 says...
3:30am Tue 21 Aug 12

No wonder so few people go to church now, with nasty people like this there it's enough to turn anyone away from religion.

Report this post »

Morpheus says...
8:41am Tue 21 Aug 12

How ridiculous. The vicar needs to go to Highgate to see what lavish really means.

Report this post »

Old Ladys Gin says...
12:52pm Tue 21 Aug 12

Mmmm! I've got my doubts as to whether we know all the facts on this one.
However I do agree with the respondent who mentions some of the more lavish buildings (in fact generally the most lavish buildings in any town) that the religions have inflicted on us over the years.

Report this post »

Dirk Von Roden says...
5:35am Wed 22 Aug 12

Not forgetting a very "Lavish " London building where the Public are expected to pay to enter!! and what about the Archbishops residence? its not exactly a hovel is it ?? the Church forgets that even "Jesus " kicked the bean counters out of "His Fathers Home"! The sanctity and the sanctuary of the Church is NO MORE!!!

Report this post »

Old Ladys Gin says...
7:30am Wed 22 Aug 12

The monumental masons who made the stone should surely have advised the customer as to what was acceptable?

Report this post »

Dirk Von Roden says...
1:00pm Thu 23 Aug 12

Old lady gin he had permission to start with from the vicar ! the size of the stone was not the problem ! it was the fact it had two extra roses engraved on the stone! Typical of the Church to now turn the blame on the Son ! its about time that the Church held their hands up and admitted they screwed up! they may even get some respect back!

Report this post »

ShorehamBeachcomber says...
8:46am Sun 26 Aug 12

Are they going to get that ugly brick built one behind it removed now then as that is far worse?

Report this post »

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree