Church conservation
In March 2009, John Smith, a former chairman of Stamford Civic Society and an expert on the conservation of churches, gave a lecture to the Men of the Stones on the reordering of historic churches. This he repeated to the parish of St Botolph, Longthorpe, Peterborough, a few months later.
After outlining the historical evolution of church interiors, and analysing of the needs for current reordering – liturgical and practical – he illustrated the talk with a large number of examples demonstrating recent practice. He concluded the evening with an examination of two churches in the town – St George’s and St John’s – which sum up the challenges presented by reordering.
With the permission of the Men of the Stones we reproduce the concluding section of John’s lecture.
Before 1888 St George’s was a modest building consisting only of nave, chancel and aisles, plus a couple of small Victorian additions at the east end of the aisles. The communion table was small and reticent and dwarfed by a large pulpit and reading desk – a very Protestant post-Reformation statement. The congregation was accommodated in heavy doored pews and there were galleries along both sides of the nave and across the west end. In 1888 the Stamford architect J C Traylen removed the pews and galleries, which had only been there 44 years, and replaced them with chairs – a very significant step. To maintain seating capacity he built transepts on each side of the nave and extended the aisles westwards to clasp the tower.
Up to a few years ago the interior of the church had a typical conservative 20th century layout. The altar, complete with flower vases, was more prominent in front of a 1920 reredos, the earlier pulpit had been replaced by a smaller more transparent one and the heavy reading desk replaced by a brass eagle lectern (acquired from St Michael’s upon it redundancy). The chairs were in a traditional position facing east into the chancel.
All this was swept away in 1995-6 when a much more radical reordering was introduced. It was preceded by serious consideration of a number of schemes; the most imaginative proposed totally reorienting the church to place the communion table at the west end. This suited the church very well, gave good sight lines, but was perhaps too radical for the parish. The present layout consists of a large platform in front of the chancel arch, surrounded on three sides by chairs, with a small westward projection for the reading desk. The reading desk forms the new focal point of the church, with the portable communion table sitting undemonstratively behind. This is reflective of St George’s Evangelical tradition where services of the Word predominate and Holy Communion is held less frequently.
St George’s is a very active church and the recent electronic equipment caters not only for services but for social events, which include concerts for young people. While the loudspeakers, thick cabling and transmitting equipment, seems a little insensitive in an ancient building, such things have a limited life and will be removed or replaced in a few years. The important thing is that they should be installed non-destructively and reversibly, and this has been here. A major drawback of having expensive equipment on view is that the church has to be kept locked, which is unfortunate in an historic town catering for large numbers of visitors and cultural tourists.
While the newer installations have been more carefully controlled, there has been much do-it-yourself at St George’s and successive hole drilling by the chancel arch, though minor, is an eyesore. More importantly, it is permanent. Also, there is no reason for it as there are well know techniques for doing this sort of thing non-destructively. However, St George’s is a most dynamic and active church and the parish uses its building to the full. The illustration (I’m attaching it) of last year’s harvest supper shows almost a return to the medieval concept of the nave belonging to the people. Overall, I should say the reordering at St George’s has been successful, though there is an element of a dead and underused chancel about it.
St John’s is a totally different case. Here, we have a church that is defined by two important events in its history: its building in 1451; and its major restoration in 1856 when the pews were installed and the decorative painting of the roofs took place. Over the last half century St John’s has had a chequered history; it was joined with All Saints in 1962 and formed into the united benefice of All Saints and St John’s in 1980. As the smaller of the two churches, it was the more vulnerable.
In the mid-1990s the benefice proposed a major reordering that would have removed all the pews and introduced a liturgical arrangement typical second half of the 20th century, resembling those we have been seeing earlier in this talk. The church would also have been divided with a roofed lobby inserted at the west end. Because of the importance of the medieval architectural space, and of the 19th century furnishings – mainly the pews designed by Stamford architect, Edward Browning, modelled on medieval Norfolk examples – there was resistance, and in the end it was decided that the church as it stood was too important to allow clearing and major reordering. It was one, though not the only, argument why the church was declared redundant and passed into the hands of the joint government/church funded Churches Conservation Trust in 2003. Generally, though pews can provide headaches for the reorderer, they are not usually an insurmountable problem. There are vast numbers of churches filled with Victorian pews of no great quality and the number of churches where the quality and historic importance demands that nothing should be done is relatively small. St John’s was a special case where one congregation had to maintain two high quality historic churches. Every case involving pews and furnishings needs to be treated with sensitivity and imagination, though I would not include the practice of preserving a few bench hung on a wall in that category.
We can therefore see that in this small town we have two churches that represent the two extremes of reordering or not reordering.
I think you will have seen by now that no two churches are alike and that each needs it own individual treatment. My aim this evening has been to show the scope of what can be done. If your church or parish is contemplating reordering I should like to conclude by making one plea: that is, when you are first considering reordering, do not think about what you can do to your building, but identify the genuine needs of the parish and only then start thinking of how you might fit the building into your plans. The very worst sorts of reordering I have seen are cases where people have seen something somewhere elsewhere and tried to copy it without really thinking about their own needs and circumstances. Or other cases where someone has identified a particular place in the church that would make an ideal – chapel, kitchen, toilet space, etc. – without considering a wider strategy. This is putting the cart before the horse.
Ancient churches can be reordered successfully to serve the needs of a modern congregation and conserve an ancient structure. The advice is, employ a good imaginative architect, not necessarily your inspecting architect, and take advice from the many professionals who are there to advise you.
After outlining the historical evolution of church interiors, and analysing of the needs for current reordering – liturgical and practical – he illustrated the talk with a large number of examples demonstrating recent practice. He concluded the evening with an examination of two churches in the town – St George’s and St John’s – which sum up the challenges presented by reordering.
With the permission of the Men of the Stones we reproduce the concluding section of John’s lecture.
Before 1888 St George’s was a modest building consisting only of nave, chancel and aisles, plus a couple of small Victorian additions at the east end of the aisles. The communion table was small and reticent and dwarfed by a large pulpit and reading desk – a very Protestant post-Reformation statement. The congregation was accommodated in heavy doored pews and there were galleries along both sides of the nave and across the west end. In 1888 the Stamford architect J C Traylen removed the pews and galleries, which had only been there 44 years, and replaced them with chairs – a very significant step. To maintain seating capacity he built transepts on each side of the nave and extended the aisles westwards to clasp the tower.
Up to a few years ago the interior of the church had a typical conservative 20th century layout. The altar, complete with flower vases, was more prominent in front of a 1920 reredos, the earlier pulpit had been replaced by a smaller more transparent one and the heavy reading desk replaced by a brass eagle lectern (acquired from St Michael’s upon it redundancy). The chairs were in a traditional position facing east into the chancel.
All this was swept away in 1995-6 when a much more radical reordering was introduced. It was preceded by serious consideration of a number of schemes; the most imaginative proposed totally reorienting the church to place the communion table at the west end. This suited the church very well, gave good sight lines, but was perhaps too radical for the parish. The present layout consists of a large platform in front of the chancel arch, surrounded on three sides by chairs, with a small westward projection for the reading desk. The reading desk forms the new focal point of the church, with the portable communion table sitting undemonstratively behind. This is reflective of St George’s Evangelical tradition where services of the Word predominate and Holy Communion is held less frequently.
St George’s is a very active church and the recent electronic equipment caters not only for services but for social events, which include concerts for young people. While the loudspeakers, thick cabling and transmitting equipment, seems a little insensitive in an ancient building, such things have a limited life and will be removed or replaced in a few years. The important thing is that they should be installed non-destructively and reversibly, and this has been here. A major drawback of having expensive equipment on view is that the church has to be kept locked, which is unfortunate in an historic town catering for large numbers of visitors and cultural tourists.
While the newer installations have been more carefully controlled, there has been much do-it-yourself at St George’s and successive hole drilling by the chancel arch, though minor, is an eyesore. More importantly, it is permanent. Also, there is no reason for it as there are well know techniques for doing this sort of thing non-destructively. However, St George’s is a most dynamic and active church and the parish uses its building to the full. The illustration (I’m attaching it) of last year’s harvest supper shows almost a return to the medieval concept of the nave belonging to the people. Overall, I should say the reordering at St George’s has been successful, though there is an element of a dead and underused chancel about it.
St John’s is a totally different case. Here, we have a church that is defined by two important events in its history: its building in 1451; and its major restoration in 1856 when the pews were installed and the decorative painting of the roofs took place. Over the last half century St John’s has had a chequered history; it was joined with All Saints in 1962 and formed into the united benefice of All Saints and St John’s in 1980. As the smaller of the two churches, it was the more vulnerable.
In the mid-1990s the benefice proposed a major reordering that would have removed all the pews and introduced a liturgical arrangement typical second half of the 20th century, resembling those we have been seeing earlier in this talk. The church would also have been divided with a roofed lobby inserted at the west end. Because of the importance of the medieval architectural space, and of the 19th century furnishings – mainly the pews designed by Stamford architect, Edward Browning, modelled on medieval Norfolk examples – there was resistance, and in the end it was decided that the church as it stood was too important to allow clearing and major reordering. It was one, though not the only, argument why the church was declared redundant and passed into the hands of the joint government/church funded Churches Conservation Trust in 2003. Generally, though pews can provide headaches for the reorderer, they are not usually an insurmountable problem. There are vast numbers of churches filled with Victorian pews of no great quality and the number of churches where the quality and historic importance demands that nothing should be done is relatively small. St John’s was a special case where one congregation had to maintain two high quality historic churches. Every case involving pews and furnishings needs to be treated with sensitivity and imagination, though I would not include the practice of preserving a few bench hung on a wall in that category.
We can therefore see that in this small town we have two churches that represent the two extremes of reordering or not reordering.
I think you will have seen by now that no two churches are alike and that each needs it own individual treatment. My aim this evening has been to show the scope of what can be done. If your church or parish is contemplating reordering I should like to conclude by making one plea: that is, when you are first considering reordering, do not think about what you can do to your building, but identify the genuine needs of the parish and only then start thinking of how you might fit the building into your plans. The very worst sorts of reordering I have seen are cases where people have seen something somewhere elsewhere and tried to copy it without really thinking about their own needs and circumstances. Or other cases where someone has identified a particular place in the church that would make an ideal – chapel, kitchen, toilet space, etc. – without considering a wider strategy. This is putting the cart before the horse.
Ancient churches can be reordered successfully to serve the needs of a modern congregation and conserve an ancient structure. The advice is, employ a good imaginative architect, not necessarily your inspecting architect, and take advice from the many professionals who are there to advise you.
