[Bell Historians] Sunderland Minster.
richard.offen at DNDMB3T6Y-zJmnMVp-5Odq8ULs42Y2vpq0ALBuQ9zgOeuEJ413uAmiorQmrW3W7k9g78o-Z8oTvmP_j2nCuVHXw0.yahoo.invalid
Sun Nov 25 13:42:32 GMT 2007
--- In bellhistorians at yahoogroups.com, "David Bryant"
<davidbryant at ...> wrote:
> "My understanding is that the elevation of Sunderland to City
> rise to the elevation of St. Michael & All Angels to Minster status
> could not be a Cathedral as there is only allowed to be one
Cathedral in any
> City status is created by Royal Charter, and a city doesn't have to
> cathedral. Likewise, cathedrals don't have to be in cities.
> There can only be one cathedral in a diocese. Calling the parish
church of a
> cathedral-less city or large town a `minster' is a modern fad such
> pseudo-minsters can be found in a number of places e.g. Doncaster,
> Rotherham, Preston. It isn't liked to city status Doncaster and
> aren't cities.
Hasn't this church been referred to as a 'minster church' for quite
some time? I seem to remember that this was amongst the first in
the new fad of calling a church a minster.
More information about the Bell-historians