Anciently, a porch was added to one or more of the principal doors of a church, to form a protection during parts of the offices of baptism and matrimony, which were performed ante ostium ecclesia. As the whole of these services is now performed inside the church, this use of the porch is obsolete. It may, however, be retained as a protection of the entrance from the wind. If this be allowed, and all doors are used in the same way both for ingress and egress, each door ought logically to have a porch before it. Modern architects, as a rule, only provide side entrances with porches; and although I believe this to be a mere following of mediæval precedent, it may be justified in the following

manner :

A congregation does not enter a church in a crowd, but assembles by degrees; its dispersion, on the contrary, is general and simultaneous. Consequently, although ample means of egress are necessary, a single door will serve the purpose of entrance. Now, in an artificially warmed and ventilated building, every unnecessary admission of cold air from without is to be avoided. I think, therefore, that all the principal doors of a church except one should be kept closed and curtained over until required at the breaking-up of a congregation. The door used for entrance should be protected by a porch on the outside; and if it be large, it should be provided with a wicket, so that it may not always be necessary to open the whole. By this means

accommodation, as compared with the size of a building, make this now out of the question.

the comfort of the church will be much increased. If this suggestion is acted upon, the door used for entrance, and provided with a porch, ought of course to be on the side on which approach to the church is easiest.

Sometimes in a town church, on a crowded site, there may be doors opening into different streets, entrances from each of which may be required; but even in such a case I would leave only one door open, except when a congregation is assembling for service. Indeed, I have known cases where this has been done of necessity to prevent the church being used as a thoroughfare.

Besides the public entrance to a church, it is sometimes convenient to have side doors for special purposes. For instance, when school children are seated apart from the rest of the congregation, there ought, if possible, to be a door near them, by which they may be quietly brought in and out without disturbing the rest of the worshippers. A door is also useful opening either into the choir vestry or near it. Sometimes one door may be made to serve both these purposes. When the clergy-house is close to the church, there should be a communication between them. This may be through the choir vestry, but should never be through the sacristy. All these doors should be small and unobtrusive.

It may be thought that as long as sufficient light is admitted, the disposition of the windows is a matter of but slight importance. This is a mistake. The whole effect of an interior may easily be spoiled by a badly

placed window. The light in the nave and aisles ought to be evenly diffused and in sufficient quantity; subdued, indeed, but not so reduced from a sentimental love of the "dim religious," as to require artificial aid at midday, if the sun does not happen to be bright. The higher the windows are from the ground the better, both for architectural effect and exclusion of draughts. In town churches the lighting should be mainly from the clerestory, for by the reduction, or, if possible, the omission of the aisle windows, the noise from passing traffic is best excluded.

Nothing is more common than to see the whole interior of a church ruined by an east window which permits nothing in the chancel to be seen but itself. Some architects, to avoid this defect, prefer to omit it altogether. But I think this is a mistake, for the fault lies not so much in the presence of the east window as in the absence of side light in the chancel. If this be well managed, no harm will result from the size of the east window. At the same time, the development of the altar and its ornaments require that the cill should be well raised, so that ordinarily the east window will not be very large. Sometimes local circumstances necessitate its omission, but whether it exists or not, it is of the greatest importance that the sanctuary should be well lighted from the sides. Indeed, it is almost impossible to have too much light here.

Collecting our results, we find that there ought to be a nave and chancel of about the same width, and communicating directly through the chancel arch. The

nave may have aisles, whose width will vary according to circumstances, and transepts for congregational use should never be allowed. All the principal entrances must be in the western part, and one at least should have a porch. The chancel must be accessible from the north or south, or both, as well as from the west, and must have on one side a convenient place for the organ. There should be a sacristy and a choir vestry, which should communicate with one another, and the former also with the sanctuary. The tower, which should not be added unless funds allow of a good one, will ordinarily be either western or central; if the latter, over the chancel, not west of it, but for special reasons it may be allowed to stand almost anywhere.

ON arranging the furniture of the body of the church, the same object must be kept in view as in choosing its plan-namely, the convenience of the congregation as worshippers and as an audience. A church. ought not to be crowded with pews. On festivals and special occasions the concourse of people is often great, but at ordinary times it is not so. The building should be large enough to receive the greater number; but if it be filled with pews for this purpose, the usual congregation will appear thin and scattered in them. Besides which, it is reasonable that the smaller number should be concentrated in the best part of the church, which can easily be brought about by confining the permanent seats to that part.

Neverthe

1 I am quite aware that this word is dreadfully "incorrect." less, I mean to stick to it. It has been the name for the fixed seats provided for the congregation ever since they had a name in English. And although in late times they have been fashioned after the manner of tanks, I cannot see that they require renaming on the older form being reverted to, any more than the pulpit does on being reduced again to a single deck. The word itself in no way implies the presence of doors, locks, and nameplates, and there is no convenient substitute. The "correct" word is stalls, but unfortunately nave seats never are stalls.