Robin Kent

Thirty years ago nonconformist churches with historic church buildings could do almost anything they wanted to their buildings, even in the few cases where the building was listed. Even ten years ago, when our rich heritage of nonconformist churches chapels and meeting houses was beginning to be recognised, elders who removed the original pews from a listed chapel, or took the three-decker pulpit down a peg or two, might merely receive threatening letters from the authorities. Now they would probably be prosecuted and could even end up in prison.

Each year, more church organisations are faced with the responsibility of caring for a listed building. Last year, 28 modern church buildings were added to the thousands of historic church buildings already listed. Recent tightening of planning law affecting alterations to listed church buildings in Scotland may pave the way for still further changes in England and Wales.

It all began when Anglican churches and cathedrals were exempted from the 1913 Ancient Monument Act after an Anglican bishop pointed out, in the House of Lords, that placing churches under secular conservation legislation would ‘subvert the administration of ecclesiastical affairs’. Probably equally important for the legislators was the fact that the Church of England already had an internal system for controlling alterations called ‘faculty jurisdiction’.

This privileged position of ‘ecclesiastical exemption’ from secular historic building controls was informally applied to listed nonconformist church buildings until it was at last given a legal basis after the case of Howard Chapel, Bedford, in 1971. This case also established that consent was still required for demolishing listed churches and churches in conservation areas, since it was judged that use as a place of worship, and with it the special exemption, would have to cease before this happened. Only the Church of England remained exempt for total demolitions, under the Pastoral Measures 1983.

Works at High Cross United Reformed and Jesmond Methodist Church during the '70s and '80s prompted renewed calls for reform from the growing conservation movement. This led first to the ‘Skelmersdale agreement’ in 1986, by which the free churches accepted that partial demolitions also required listed building consent, and finally to the Ecclesiastical Exemption (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Order 1994. As a result exemption was removed for all church buildings in England except those belonging to six denominations which had internal systems for approving alterations to listed churches and churches in conservation areas. In addition to the Church of England and the Church in Wales, these denominations were: the Methodist Church; the Baptist Union of Great Britain and the Baptist Union of Wales; the Roman Catholic Church and the United Reformed Church; all of which continued to enjoy exempt status. Initially, exemption was also temporarily retained by institutional and shared Anglican and Catholic chapels, and by Church of England ‘peculiars’ (churches which, for historical reasons, were exempt from the control of their own diocese). Only in Scotland, and for Scottish denominations in England, were listed church buildings still fully exempt.

In England, the Shimizu judgement in 1997 removed the requirement for conservation area consent for alterations to unlisted churches in conservation areas but, unless belonging to one of the six denominations, listed church buildings now require consent for any works which may affect their ‘character as buildings of special architectural or historic interest’, including internal alterations, alterations to fixtures and alterations to ‘curtilage’ structures, such as boundary walls, gates and railings. Those who carry out such works without listed building consent are liable to a fine or imprisonment.

A government review of the exemption in 1997 concluded that while the Methodist system was efficiently administered, that of the second largest of the nonconformist denominations, the Baptist Union, was in some respects seriously deficient. The Church of England was encouraged to update its administration by removing listed buildings from the faculty jurisdiction; the Church in Wales’ system was not yet fully operational, while the Roman Catholics and the United Reformed Church only had ‘the makings’ of effective systems. The review, by Dr John Newman of the Courtauld Institute, led to an emergency review of the Baptist Union’s system which threatened the loss of its exemption. All the denominations were urged to follow the Methodist example of employing a conservation officer, and to ensure that their central committees included historic building experts without church affiliations to judge proposed works to listed church buildings. However, no suggestions on funding these measures were offered. These and other recommendations have been taken on board and the systems of all six exempt denominations are to be reviewed again before the year 2002.

Meanwhile, on 1st January 1999, following consultation with the Scottish Churches Committee and the local authorities, Historic Scotland announced a three-year pilot scheme, the first step towards removing the special status of Scottish listed churches. Under this scheme, all Scottish churches must now apply for listed building consent for external alterations in the same way as any other listed building owners, but their exemption is retained for internal works. If the local authority is minded to refuse consent the church may appeal to an agreed arbiter or ‘Decision-Making Body’ for a final decision. When the pilot scheme is reviewed in a few years time, legislation will be brought before the Scottish parliament which could significantly influence the situation in England.

Our church buildings are the core of our built heritage and deserve protection. Currently more than 3,500 nonconformist churches and chapels in Britain are listed as of historic importance, in addition to some 40,000 Church of England and Church of Scotland buildings. Many more are within conservation areas. Such historic structures have value and should be cared for. At the same time, their continued use and adaptation for changing religious practices, or for other purposes reflecting the needs of our post-Christian culture, begs many questions. Nonconformists traditionally view their buildings as ‘plant’ rather than ‘temples’ and most have already been extended or adapted: the average Welsh chapel was remodelled or rebuilt five times during the 19th century. Faced with increasing restrictions on using historic church buildings, many of the newer, rapidly growing, evangelical congregations are rejecting them in favour of flexible industrial sheds, where comfortable seating, overhead projectors, lighting and sound systems, disability access provisions, sound-proof creches and catering-standard kitchens can more easily be accommodated.

Moving to new premises avoids major alterations and may satisfy some conservationists, but without continued use by active churches, there is an increasing danger that our Christian heritage in the 21st century may become just that: a museum for the benefit of academics and tourists, subject to progressive deterioration and threatened by other uses which may lead to much greater loss of historic and architectural value in the long term.