Reordering

The Grade I church stands close to the University of East Anglia. It has what the Chancellor described as a "depressing" interior and a "a tiny congregation that is unlikely to grow". The proposal was for a major reordering with a view to attracting usage of the church by University students. A large donation was available to meet the cost of the proposed works. Historic England had concerns about (inter alia) the proposals for the flooring and the pews. The Victorian Society objected, principally, to the levelling of the floors and the replacement of the pews with chairs. The Chancellor was satisfied that a good case had been made for the proposals and granted a faculty.

The proposal was to create a prayer chapel in the north transept of the church by moving to the centre a stored medieval stone mensa resting on a stone base. The Chancellor granted a faculty, being satisfied that the works did not affect the church as a building of special historical or architectural significance. 

The petitioners wished to replace 75 wooden upholstered chairs with 75 lightweight metal and upholstered Alpha SB2M chairs, which are more easily moveable and stackable. The Church Buildings Council objected to upholstered chairs. The Chancellor granted a faculty. He took the view that, as upholstered chairs had been used in the church for upwards of 12 years, their replacement with the proposed new upholstered chairs would meet a need and result in minimal change in the overall appearance of the church.

The proposals were for a major reordering of the Grade II* church, in order to promote community development and flexibility of worship. The Victorian Society was concerned about the replacement of all the nave pews with new moveable pews. The Chancellor granted a faculty for all the items in the petition, apart from the total replacement of all the nave pews. He was content (as was the Victorian Society) for replacement of pews at the front of the nave near the new proposed altar platform, but he invited the parish to consider whether some of the Victorian pews, particularly those with umbrella stands, could be retained towards the back of the nave, so that visitors to the church could be aware of what was in place before the re-ordering.

A faculty had been granted for some reordering work at the church. Subsequently, the team vicar had received a letter of objection within the period for objections, but it was not sent to the registry before the expiry of time for objections and issue of the faculty. To ensure justice to all concerned, the Chancellor therefore set aside his decision pending consideration of the objection. Having considered the letter of objection, the Chancellor determined that the likely harm to the church was minimal and that any such harm would be outweighed by the benefit to the community. He therefore directed the issue of a faculty.

Faculty granted for the construction of an extension to the north side of the church. This judgment follows on from the judgment in Re St. Mary Kenardington [2013] Morag Ellis Comm. Gen. (Canterbury).

The Faculty Petition sought authority to construct a toilet block in the churchyard and an extension to the north side of the church. When the Commissary General visited the site, building work had already begun without Faculty. Faculty granted for the construction of the toilet block. Work on the extension to be stopped until further order. An archaeological report to be filed.

Several items of repair and reordering were proposed. Letters were received from two people objecting to: replacement of the chancel pews with chairs; removal of two pews from each side of the west end of the church, in order to provide more circulation space; and the introduction of notice boards and leaflet stands at the west end of the church. The Chancellor was satisfied that the petitioners had made a good case for the proposals and he accordingly granted a faculty.

The petitioners sought to remove the font from the west end of the church to the chancel and to remove one pew from the west end of the church. The judgment contains a discussion of liturgical tradition and the provisions of Canon Law regarding the siting of a font. Faculty granted.

The petition proposed a reordering of the chancel, to include extending the chancel floor level a short distance into the nave and to provide new altar rails. The Victorian Society objected to the proposed removal of the pulpit and the removal of the iron railings and alabaster-faced walls which separated the chancel from the nave. The Chancellor concluded that the removal of the features concerned would cause moderate harm to the significance of the building as a place of historical interest, but that the harm would be outweighed by the public benefits of providing a more open, unimpeded and flexible space to meet the worship, mission and community needs of the parish.