Joy as new stained glass window installed in Canvey church

Echo: Delighted - Reverends David Tudor and Marion Walford with artist John Bray Delighted - Reverends David Tudor and Marion Walford with artist John Bray

PARISHIONERS celebrated after a colourful stained glass window was finally installed in their new church.

Families in Canvey have come together to sponsor shards of glass in the new £110,000 window at St Nicholas Church, in Long Road, to serve as a snapshot of the island past and present.

The window comprises of 1,038 shards, 716 of which have been engraved with names and dates to serve as a tribute to loved ones and special events.

The 322 remaining shards have been left blank to represent the rest of the community.

Church goers expressed their delight as the finished product was finally installed earlier this week after a year in the making.

Reverend Marion Walford said: “The window looks absolutely amazing, we are so grateful to everyone who helped sponsor a piece. Everyone who has come in just lights up when they see it, which is wonderful.”

Together the pieces form a form a tree of life, with each section symbolising one of the leaves.

Colours for each piece were chosen especially so that when the sun shines through the window, it gives the illusion the tree is moving.

John Bray, the artist behind the project, said: “I am very pleased with how the window has turned out as it was thoroughly enjoyable working with the community to put it together. The idea behind it was really to bring people together, and provide them with a memento which will hopefully last forever.

“One lovely moment was seeing the girls and boys in the church dancing in all the colours on the floor when the light shone through. Hopefully this is something the people on Canvey will really cherish.”

A special dedication ceremony will be held on Sunday January 20 for everyone who sponsored a shard to come along and view the finished window.

For more information contact the church on 01268 511098.

Comments (8)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

6:50pm Thu 13 Dec 12

Carnabackable says...

So nice to see this window come to fruition
So nice to see this window come to fruition Carnabackable
  • Score: 0

8:51am Fri 14 Dec 12

GlenEckett says...

A nice positive piece of news, well done to all involved
A nice positive piece of news, well done to all involved GlenEckett
  • Score: 0

10:13am Fri 14 Dec 12

Brunning999 says...

Good local project.
Well done.
Good local project. Well done. Brunning999
  • Score: 0

1:53pm Wed 19 Dec 12

Aint it just the truth says...

I have been asked to refrain from engaging in protracted discussions on this story. Why? Not because I have been insulting anyone or telling lies or contravening the Echo rules not to post comments that are false, abusive or malicious, but because there are obviously a few sensitive christians out there who do not like their beliefs questioned but do not have the courage of their convictions to leave their own comments, they would rather lodge anonymous complaints with the Echo. The Echo seems to be happy to go along with these unjustifiable complaints which amounts to the suppression of free speech and the suppression of the truth. Shame on you Echo.
I have been asked to refrain from engaging in protracted discussions on this story. Why? Not because I have been insulting anyone or telling lies or contravening the Echo rules not to post comments that are false, abusive or malicious, but because there are obviously a few sensitive christians out there who do not like their beliefs questioned but do not have the courage of their convictions to leave their own comments, they would rather lodge anonymous complaints with the Echo. The Echo seems to be happy to go along with these unjustifiable complaints which amounts to the suppression of free speech and the suppression of the truth. Shame on you Echo. Aint it just the truth
  • Score: 0

8:20pm Wed 19 Dec 12

Nebs says...

Aint it just the truth wrote:
I have been asked to refrain from engaging in protracted discussions on this story. Why? Not because I have been insulting anyone or telling lies or contravening the Echo rules not to post comments that are false, abusive or malicious, but because there are obviously a few sensitive christians out there who do not like their beliefs questioned but do not have the courage of their convictions to leave their own comments, they would rather lodge anonymous complaints with the Echo. The Echo seems to be happy to go along with these unjustifiable complaints which amounts to the suppression of free speech and the suppression of the truth. Shame on you Echo.
Shame, it was an interesting discussion. For what it's worth, I didn't get a similar email despite my questioning the works of respected scientists.
[quote][p][bold]Aint it just the truth[/bold] wrote: I have been asked to refrain from engaging in protracted discussions on this story. Why? Not because I have been insulting anyone or telling lies or contravening the Echo rules not to post comments that are false, abusive or malicious, but because there are obviously a few sensitive christians out there who do not like their beliefs questioned but do not have the courage of their convictions to leave their own comments, they would rather lodge anonymous complaints with the Echo. The Echo seems to be happy to go along with these unjustifiable complaints which amounts to the suppression of free speech and the suppression of the truth. Shame on you Echo.[/p][/quote]Shame, it was an interesting discussion. For what it's worth, I didn't get a similar email despite my questioning the works of respected scientists. Nebs
  • Score: 0

9:05pm Thu 20 Dec 12

Aint it just the truth says...

High five Nebs. No scientist would complain about someone asking probing questions as that is how science progresses. I must add that whilst I disagree with your views I respect the fact that you are the only one with the courage of his convictions to engage and ask these questions. Btw, I have been reprieved - these sneaky christians can't deny my right to free speech - so I have copied the bulk of my last post below in case you didn't see it...
.
“2500 years ago we thought that water was an element and the earth was flat“.
.
… and soon after that a few ancient Greeks proposed that everything was made of atoms. And then another ancient Greek calculated the circumference of the world with surprising accuracy (we have never believed the earth was flat, that is a myth - all sailors, ancient and modern know it is curved cos we can see it).
.
1500 years before that we were still using stone tools.
Haven’t we done well?
.
You say there are varying conclusions about the end of the universe but that’s not strictly true, it‘s more a case of the evidence improving over time. I also note that you say you “prefer“ one of those options. I don‘t, I prefer assessing all the evidence, which is building up strongly in favour of the big freeze. That doesn’t mean that we know for sure, but if we could bet on it…
.
You keep saying that science will be so much better in future, and I hope it will be, but it won’t necessarily turn everything we’ve learnt so far upside down. Have you noticed that we have hardly made any real major discoveries for decades? I am referring to physics here, not, for example, palaeo-anthropology which has really resolved the mystery of our human origins over the last few decades, whereas most advances in physics have been a case of better technology confirming what the theories, or rather maths, have been telling us for a while. But as I said before, we all know there are bits, probably even whole levels, missing from our theories. But there is also a high probability that whatever we are missing won’t change most of the standard model too much.
.
99.999 recurring will never quite get to 100 will it? The point was that no sane person would believe that fairies built the universe but we cannot prove it so we cannot say ‘100 per cent certainty‘, even though it clearly is. Basic maths v common sense.
.
High five Nebs. No scientist would complain about someone asking probing questions as that is how science progresses. I must add that whilst I disagree with your views I respect the fact that you are the only one with the courage of his convictions to engage and ask these questions. Btw, I have been reprieved - these sneaky christians can't deny my right to free speech - so I have copied the bulk of my last post below in case you didn't see it... . “2500 years ago we thought that water was an element and the earth was flat“. . … and soon after that a few ancient Greeks proposed that everything was made of atoms. And then another ancient Greek calculated the circumference of the world with surprising accuracy (we have never believed the earth was flat, that is a myth - all sailors, ancient and modern know it is curved cos we can see it). . 1500 years before that we were still using stone tools. Haven’t we done well? . You say there are varying conclusions about the end of the universe but that’s not strictly true, it‘s more a case of the evidence improving over time. I also note that you say you “prefer“ one of those options. I don‘t, I prefer assessing all the evidence, which is building up strongly in favour of the big freeze. That doesn’t mean that we know for sure, but if we could bet on it… . You keep saying that science will be so much better in future, and I hope it will be, but it won’t necessarily turn everything we’ve learnt so far upside down. Have you noticed that we have hardly made any real major discoveries for decades? I am referring to physics here, not, for example, palaeo-anthropology which has really resolved the mystery of our human origins over the last few decades, whereas most advances in physics have been a case of better technology confirming what the theories, or rather maths, have been telling us for a while. But as I said before, we all know there are bits, probably even whole levels, missing from our theories. But there is also a high probability that whatever we are missing won’t change most of the standard model too much. . 99.999 recurring will never quite get to 100 will it? The point was that no sane person would believe that fairies built the universe but we cannot prove it so we cannot say ‘100 per cent certainty‘, even though it clearly is. Basic maths v common sense. . Aint it just the truth
  • Score: 0

12:09am Fri 21 Dec 12

Nebs says...

Christians are, with a few exceptions, pretty tolerant. I must admit that I'd be wary of entering into a similar discussion with you if the thread topic related to some other religions.

You can bet on how the universe will end. The problem is that there won't be anyone around to pay you out. Unless, of course, my thoughts about the existence of God are correct, in which case you will just have to search around heaven until you find your bookie.

Maths does seem to be the frontrunner in a lot of physics. I was taught that 99.99 recurring equals 100. I never really got to grips with this, even though it is proved mathematically.
x = 99.99rec
10x = 999.99rec
10x - x = 999.99rec - 99.99rec
9x = 900
x = 100
That is the proof that I was taught.
But I never agreed with the jump from the first line to the 10x = 999.99rec, as I argued that all you had done was move the decimal point one place to the right, and so however long the recurring numbers extended, they must extend one further in the top line than in the second line. Therefore when you perform the subtraction you do not get 900 but rather 900.00recurring9. So, mathematically, I agree with you. But most mathematicians don't, unless the thinking has changed since I was at school.

On that note I will bid you good night. Busy Friday, back Saturday, unless the Mayans were right in which case I will see you in heaven, or not, as the case may be.
Christians are, with a few exceptions, pretty tolerant. I must admit that I'd be wary of entering into a similar discussion with you if the thread topic related to some other religions. You can bet on how the universe will end. The problem is that there won't be anyone around to pay you out. Unless, of course, my thoughts about the existence of God are correct, in which case you will just have to search around heaven until you find your bookie. Maths does seem to be the frontrunner in a lot of physics. I was taught that 99.99 recurring equals 100. I never really got to grips with this, even though it is proved mathematically. x = 99.99rec 10x = 999.99rec 10x - x = 999.99rec - 99.99rec 9x = 900 x = 100 That is the proof that I was taught. But I never agreed with the jump from the first line to the 10x = 999.99rec, as I argued that all you had done was move the decimal point one place to the right, and so however long the recurring numbers extended, they must extend one further in the top line than in the second line. Therefore when you perform the subtraction you do not get 900 but rather 900.00recurring9. So, mathematically, I agree with you. But most mathematicians don't, unless the thinking has changed since I was at school. On that note I will bid you good night. Busy Friday, back Saturday, unless the Mayans were right in which case I will see you in heaven, or not, as the case may be. Nebs
  • Score: 0

5:27pm Fri 21 Dec 12

Aint it just the truth says...

All religions are broadly the same, makes no difference. There used to be a lot more variety until they got the idea of promising some sort of afterlife, which turned out to be very popular with the great unwashed.
.
The maths is not really important Nebs, my point was philosophical, that it is often not possible to prove a negative, even in some of the most extreme circumstances (fairies made the universe etc) so we can’t say we’re 100% certain of these things even though we can be pretty d a m n sure (a curse on the auto sensor).
.
The end of the Universe is a moot point too as we’ll be long, long, long gone by then. In a few billion years time our galaxy is going to collide with the Andromeda galaxy which could be messy, but don’t worry, around the same time our sun is going to blow up into an enormous red giant and engulf the earth, but even this is the near future compared to the timescales for the end of the universe, whichever scenario proves true. What is a lot more interesting, and more relevant is what is here now, why is it here and how does it work. The only problem with that is that we are pre-programmed to see patterns that aren’t always there, such as non existent gods and god-creators..
All religions are broadly the same, makes no difference. There used to be a lot more variety until they got the idea of promising some sort of afterlife, which turned out to be very popular with the great unwashed. . The maths is not really important Nebs, my point was philosophical, that it is often not possible to prove a negative, even in some of the most extreme circumstances (fairies made the universe etc) so we can’t say we’re 100% certain of these things even though we can be pretty d a m n sure (a curse on the auto sensor). . The end of the Universe is a moot point too as we’ll be long, long, long gone by then. In a few billion years time our galaxy is going to collide with the Andromeda galaxy which could be messy, but don’t worry, around the same time our sun is going to blow up into an enormous red giant and engulf the earth, but even this is the near future compared to the timescales for the end of the universe, whichever scenario proves true. What is a lot more interesting, and more relevant is what is here now, why is it here and how does it work. The only problem with that is that we are pre-programmed to see patterns that aren’t always there, such as non existent gods and god-creators.. Aint it just the truth
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

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