The proposal was permanently to remove the doors from 27 late-Georgian (1819) and three Victorian (1863) wooden box pews in the Grade II* listed church. The doors had already been temporarily removed under an Archdeacon's licence for temporary reordering. The main objectives were to make access to the pews easier and safer (especially for children) and to improve the visual appearance of the church. Objections were received from Historic England, the Ancient Monuments Society, the Victorian Society, and the Georgian Society. The Chancellor refused to grant a faculty. He was not satisfied that the petitioners had put forward a compelling case for the permanent removal of the pew doors: "I find that the permanent removal of the pew doors would result in harm to the historic significance and the fabric of this Grade II* listed church."

The petitioners wished to remove items of redundant furniture from the Grade II* church, including a number of chairs, a litany desk and the pine pulpit. The pulpit had been relocated during the last interregnum, so that the presiding minister could more easily be seen preaching from a lectern and in order to free up space for major festival and school events. The proposal was to transfer the chairs to the vicarage, and to advertise the desk and pulpit in the diocesan magazine and, if there are no takers, to have them broken up. The Chancellor was satisfied that minimal harm would be caused by the removal of the items and he granted a faculty. He did, however, make it clear that the furniture to be transferred to the vicarage remained in the ownership of the churchwardens and could not be disposed of without further faculty.

The Parochial Church Council wished to sell some items of Georgian silver, some of which were stored in Norwich Museum and some in Norwich Cathedral Treasury. The church had inherited the items ineeh 1970s from two nearby churches, which had been closed. The silver had been valued at £3000 to £4700 (less sale commission). The PCC wished to use the proceeds of sale towards the cost of a new lighting scheme for the church, which would cost over £8000. The Chancellor refused to grant a faculty, as he considered that the petitioners had not established a good reason for the sale. The silver had significance for Thetford and the petitioners had not shown any pressing financial emergency: "I am concerned that it is a case of wanting to use the financial worth of this silver for ‘something’, rather than any compelling financial need that demands the sacrifice of a church treasure."

The proposal was to sell to the British Museum a valuable fifteenth century silver cup which had been used as a chalice, but which in recent years had been on loan to the Museum. There was one party opponent. The Chancellor granted a faculty permitting the sale of the cup on condition that it would be sold only to the British Museum. He directed that a photographic record of the cup be made, along with a short history and that it should be displayed in the church. He also directed as a condition of the faculty that a copy of the cup be made for liturgical use.

The petitioners wished to replace most of the wooden benches in the nave of the Grade II church with upholstered wooden chairs from a local Baptist church. The Victorian Society objected to the proposal. The Diocesan Advisory Committee disagreed with the Victorian Society's reasons for objecting. One of the reasons for the proposal to replace the benches was that their legs were a trip hazard. The Chancellor granted a faculty, being satisfied that the benches were of no great quality, their replacement would remove a trip hazard, the chairs would provide the greater flexibility that the church needed, and the upholstery of the chairs was of such a colour as would not distract the viewer from taking in the splendours of the church building.

The Petitioner's grandparents were buried in a grave which has a double width headstone and a double kerb surround. Over time, the remains of the petitioner's late husband, her sister and her parents had been interred in the double grave. The petitioner now wished to carry out some renovation of the grave and place three grey granite tablets within the kerbs, with inscriptions recording the names of those interred since the petitioner's grandparents were interred. The Chancellor granted a faculty subject to a condition that there should be consistency in the format of the dates of death.

The reordering proposals included the construction of a WC and servery, the removal of a pipe organ installed in 1958 and its replacement with a digital organ. Two parishioners objected to the proposals. The Chancellor was satisfied that the proposed scheme would not cause harm to the significance of the church as a building of special architectural or historic interest and accordingly granted a faculty.

The petitioner wished to re-locate the headstone at the grave of her son by a small distance sideways, so that it would be aligned with what she believed to be the centre of the head of her son’s grave. The vicar and churchwardens objected on the grounds that (1) realigning the stone would make it stand out amongst other stones in the churchyard with which it would not be in line; (2) headstones were aligned with those in rows behind them “for dignity, and creating an orderly environment”; (3) the petitioner had agreed in writing to the headstone being aligned with the stones behind; and (4) allowing the petition would be seen as creating a precedent. The Chancellor did not consider the first and fourth objections as carrying much weight, but that the second and third objections did. The vicar was entitled to require such uniformity of alignment of monuments as he thought fit, within the parameters of the churchyard regulations, and the petitioner had agreed in writing to the monument being placed where it was, even if there had been a mistake in understanding on her part. The Chancellor accordingly refused to grant a faculty.

The faculty petition proposed an extensive reordering to provide: more space in the nave, aisles and chancel with moveable seating; a team administration office; an enclosed meeting space; a new kitchen, refreshment point and toilets; a welcoming entrance, and improved audiovisual systems, Wi-Fi, heating and lighting. All the consultees agreed a specification which all parties could live with. The Chancellor granted a faculty.

The Vicar and Churchwardens applied for a faculty to authorise the construction of a church hall, to replace on old shed-like building, on an unconsecrated extension to the churchyard to the east of the church. The new building would, however, encroach very slightly on to the consecrated part of the churchyard extension. The Chancellor granted a faculty, notwithstanding the slight encroachment of the proposed building on the consecrated part of the churchyard.