|
|
|
Ecclesiastical Case Reports
Re Holy Cross, Pershore
(Worcester Consistory Court: Mynors Ch, September 2000)
Pews - objectors - Bishopsgate questions
A faculty was granted for a limited reordering of a Grade I listed church (known as Pershore Abbey) involving inter alia the permanent removal of pews in the side aisles and the modification and stabilising of the pews that were to remain in the central part of the nave. In considering the case the chancellor had before him three other options: first the retention of pews throughout, second the removal of pews and provision of chairs throughout and third a further compromise similar to the faculty granted. The number of objectors to the petition demanded that a hearing be held. In considering the evidence of the objectors the chancellor referred to the judgment of the Court of Arches in Re St Luke the Evangelist, Maidstone [1995] Fam 1 wherein the Dean of the Arches stated that 'the persons most concerned with worship in a church are those who worship there regularly, although other members of the Church who are not such regular worshippers may also be concerned'. In the present case objectors came forward from within the congregation and without. Objection was widespread in the local community and the chancellor considered that any scheme would have profound pastoral implications for both the worshipping congregation and the wider community, neither of which should be overlooked. In considering the 'Bishopsgate' questions the chancellor stated that 'there is a fourth question that should always be asked, alongside the three posed in Bishopsgate - namely, what are likely to be the pastoral consequences, both short-term and looking further ahead, of making a proposed change?'. The chancellor also considered the matter of aesthetics, architectural and historical matters, the flexibility of the building for worship and other uses and issues regarding access for the disabled. In the latter point he was particularly mindful of the terms of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 which generally comes into force in 2004 and therefore should be taken notice of when considering any building schemes from now on. The chancellor found that the necessity of the removal of the pews in the side aisles outweighed the possible pastoral damage but that there was no necessity for the removal of the pews in the nave.
Note: In the course of his judgment, the chancellor commented that minutes of DAC meetings should be made public. 'It is of the essence of such a committee that its work should command widespread public support, both within the church and more widely; and this is much more likely when its operations are seen to be open to public scrutiny'.
[LY]
|
Search the Case Reports & Journals (issues 1 to 39) |
|
|
