Flamstead church: £1m repairs save Grade I-listed building

[Imperial Dave]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-59669712

a tidy sum of dosh....

[Jim Webster]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-59669712

a tidy sum of dosh....

As a churchwarden I'm more taken by the fact that the church itself had to raise £250K and managed it.
Then I googled the location and all was made clear.

Round here the need to spend £60k will lead to church closure unless it's genuinely historic. But talking to a church warden a lot further south, they had major repairs, they would have to raise at least half a million.
They had several thousand in cash in hand. So they spent about £5k on producing a professional colour brochure explaining what they were raising the money for, distributed the brochures and had the money with the month.

We shut a church because even if we could raise £100k, it would be obscene to spend that sort of money on an unnecessary building in a town with a thriving foodbank

[Imperial Dave]

a very good point Jim. A very good point indeed

[Jim Webster]

a very good point Jim. A very good point indeed

I'm lucky, I've never had the nightmare of looking after a grade 1 listed building!

[Imperial Dave]

must be a nightmare. My local church when I was growing up is St. Mary's Portskewett which is a grade 1 and still going but isnt huge although I dont know how much they need to spend on it to keep it going. I remember a thermometer appeal for a new roof 45 years ago raised £20K 

[Erpingham]

I think Jim, as usual, brings the down to earth side of church preservation.  In many places, you have churches of little architectural merit built to hold much larger congregations than today which were probably murder to heat and maintain when new, let alone a hundred or two hundred years later with a tenth of the congregation.  Not to mention that the church actually has a mission within its local community - its not primarily a preservation society.

[Jim Webster]

I think Jim, as usual, brings the down to earth side of church preservation.  In many places, you have churches of little architectural merit built to hold much larger congregations than today which were probably murder to heat and maintain when new, let alone a hundred or two hundred years later with a tenth of the congregation.  Not to mention that the church actually has a mission within its local community - its not primarily a preservation society.

Ours was built in 1841
Actually to build it they knocked down another that was built in 1606 or thereabouts
That was probably not the first one on the site, there was probably one before because there are references to it as a chapel of ease
But we were faced with a nice building, but it's always been to big for anything but weddings and funerals. But it's surprising how you can fill a rural church for these events.

The history is interesting in that it was built in the middle of a parish, where two farms near each other might at the time have had as many people 'living in' as the village did. So the church was equidistant from several small centres of population
But the village grew, the farms no longer house communities of fifteen or twenty, and now the church is on a windswept, gale battered position a mile out of the village.
A village with a perfectly good village hall, new, warm and comfortable, where the congregation now meet for Sunday services. And capital released can be used for the mission of the church, not preserving an admittedly nice early Victorian building.

I'm always wary about people who look back and try to judge church attendance from building size. Some will have been built to that size as much to serve as an indoor market.
Also in the early 18th century you have the hang over from legal obligation due to law (Act of Uniformity 1558. Most of the Act was repealed by the Statute Law Revision Act 1888.)
But also church was a major community  gathering. It was a legitimate excuse for not working (always important in a farming context)
So a lot of people would attend for social reasons
There's a diary of one parson from later in the century where when he took over a parish, there were only a dozen women taking communion and they stopped when he refused to pay them the halfpenny each his predecessor had done 

But there is a growing feeling in the church that we've been lumbered with these buildings, a lot are unnecessary, and frankly, if they're that architecturally important the state can have them and we'll either rent them on a Sunday morning, or if the rent isn't competitive, we can rent the village hall 
Then we can put our time into doing what the church should be doing

[Erpingham]

In a city like Bradford you have the compounding issue of large, grand CofE churches built by wealthy patrons which, given the antipathy of the urban working classes to the CofE, were probably never full.  While wealthy mill owners were there to pay for their upkeep, all was well.  When they were gone, it was a case of gradual decline.

[Jim Webster]

In a city like Bradford you have the compounding issue of large, grand CofE churches built by wealthy patrons which, given the antipathy of the urban working classes to the CofE, were probably never full.  While wealthy mill owners were there to pay for their upkeep, all was well.  When they were gone, it was a case of gradual decline.

It happened earlier with the great medieval wool churches of the Cotswolds and East Anglia.

I do occasionally wonder about Greek and Roman temples where they talk about them never being completed, or alternatively having fallen into ruin.
I know one Trajan, and probably other Emperors worried about local authorities starting ever more grandiose projects

From Pliny's letters to Trajan

To Trajan.

The people of Prusa, Sir, have a public bath which is in a neglected and dilapidated state. They wish, with your kind permission, to restore it; but I think a new one ought to be built, and I reckon that you can safely comply with their wishes. The money for its erection will be forthcoming, for first there are the sums I spoke of *   which I have already begun to claim and demand from private individuals, and secondly there is the money usually collected for a free distribution of oil which they are now prepared to utilise for the construction of a new bath. Besides, the dignity of the city and the glory of your reign demand its erection.


[24] L   Trajan to Pliny.

If the construction of a new bath will not cripple the finances of Prusa, we can indulge their wishes, only it must be understood that no new imposts are to be raised to meet the cost, and that their contributions for necessary expenses shall not show any falling off.

[Swampster]

It happened earlier with the great medieval wool churches of the Cotswolds and East Anglia.

I do occasionally wonder about Greek and Roman temples where they talk about them never being completed, or alternatively having fallen into ruin.
I know one Trajan, and probably other Emperors worried about local authorities starting ever more grandiose projects

When I studied Late Antiquity, the point was raised that in earlier times, the rich could spend their money on these grandiose projects and make a mark on their cities. This increased the prestige of them and their family.
With time, more and more demands were made for funds to maintain the existing structures which did little for prestige of the current generation and increasingly had no familial link either. This served as one of the factors creating less of a bond between land owners and cities.