Reordering

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.

The petition related to various items of reordering. The contentious item was the proposal to replace most of the pews of the Grade II* Victorian church with chairs, in order to provide more comfortable and more flexible seating for church and community use. Historic England objected to the removal of the pews. Although the Chancellor found that removal of the pews would cause ‘moderate’ harm to the building, he granted a faculty, being satisfied that a substantial benefit would be gained from having a flexible worship space and the opportunity for community use of the church.

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.

The petition proposed the following items of reordering in the church: removal of pews from the aisles and replacement of the pew platforms with flagstones; new heating system; renewal of the electrics; installation of new WCs; a new clergy vestry; a space for meetings and workshops; and an area for refreshments (later to become a full kitchen). The Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings and the Victorian Society had reservations about the proposals, the latter being particularly concerned about the removal of Victorian tiles from the aisles. However, the Chancellor granted a faculty, being satisfied that there was a clear justification for the proposals and that any harm to the significance of the church as a building of special architectural or historic interest would not be substantial.

The petition sought permission to replace the pink padded oak chairs in the nave of the Grade I church with Alpha SB2M metal-framed chairs with dark grey upholstery, which would be lighter, provide greater flexibility, be easier to stack and store, and the colour would be more sympathetic to the interior of the church. The Chancellor concluded that the benefits of the new chairs would outweigh any minimal harm to the interior of the church and accordingly granted a faculty.

An extensive programme of reordering was proposed, to include: re-roofing and stonework repairs; new drains and soakaways; repair and realignment of pews; conservation of paintings and monuments; new lighting; removal of some pews; and relocation of the boiler to the churchyard, to create a vestry. The Church Buildings Council had a number of serious reservations about the proposals, which were rebutted by the petitioners. The Chancellor rejected the Council's concerns and granted a faculty.

The petition proposed an extensive program of reordering. The Victorian Society became a party to the proceedings, opposed to the proposals for upholstered chairs and carpet in the nave. The Chancellor granted a Faculty. He was not prusaded by the argument of the Victorian Society that persuaded that carpet in the Grade II building would cause the damaging ‘domestication’ of the interior. With regard to the upholstered chairs, he concluded that 'the choice of chair will inflict some modest harm on the visual aesthetics of the building, but ... this parish has demonstrated a benefit which will outweigh the harm.'

This was a determination of two petitions relating to: a new boiler and changes to the heating system; new lighting and power systems; redecoration; reordering of the chancel; changes to the south door; and disposal of chancel furniture. The Chancellor granted a faculty on the basis that "and the harm to the significance of the building caused by removal of furniture and fittings is outweighed by the liturgical freedom created, and the public benefit to be gained by having a flexible area to utilise for worship and other diverse activities".