Friends of St John’s News
From Wendy Spiegel . . .
Our charity, The Friends of St Johns North Bovey, was set up in 2006, following the quinquennial report, which is required by the Diocese, on the church in 2005. It was created to act as a fund raising body for the essential repairs that were required to keep the church building in a viable state.
This year, the Object of the Charity was changed to more accurately reflect the perceived reasons for its existence. The new Object reads: ”The object of the Society shall be to promote the preservation, repair, maintenance, restoration, improvement and ornamentation of the fabric of the Church of St John’s North Bovey and in so doing to provide a building in which to advance the Christian religion, and to encourage its utilisation for other community related functions, duly assisting and advising the Parochial Church Council in the fulfilment of this object.” From this, it is obvious that any monies raised by The Friends is to be used for the fabric of the building and not for the day-to-day running expenses of the church.
The Friends have so far paid for the repairs which have been taking place this summer – these include repainting of the gutters, oiling of all the wood work, including the lych gate, building of a new chimney for the boiler house, clearing of all ground gutters, and other general maintenance works, amounting to £4,500.00. Whereas this has made a significant improvement already, it is small fry compared to what is to come, such as re-plastering the walls, repairing the windows, renewing the heating system, and maintaining the integrity of the roof.
There may be grants available to help with some of the work but there are very tight controls and parameters for such assistance. One of the main pre-requisites is that the Church must be seen to be being used for other community activities and not just as a place of worship occasionally. As is obvious from the change in the Object of the charity, this is also a requirement from the Charity Commission. After all, in times gone by, churches were always used for meeting houses, market trading, social events, as well as the traditional religious services.
So apart from the massive funds needed to restore the fabric of the building, there are plans to create more space so that more community events may take place. If these plans can also include the provision of a small kitchen and some toilets, that would indeed be a bonus for all participants. The PCC is producing a 5-year plan in order to prioritise the works and to enable them to do this, an architect has to be employed to oversee these works. The PCC and The Friends will be working closely together to ensure progress and we will all be embarking on a huge fund raising drive to ensure the survival of our historic church here in North Bovey.
19 Comments
mandyhart4321
As an atheist, I am disappointed by this change in policy. I could go on; I’m not going to.
Gary Day-Ellison
Wouldn’t it make sense to use the Village Hall’s kitchen & toilets and deploy limited resources to the essential maintenance of the St John’s structure & fabric? It’s only across the green – make the best of a great Village Hall facility. IMHO
mandyhart4321
Greg Hart has asked me to post this comment:
Thank you Wendy for using the village blog to clarify the changes to the object of the friends of St John charity as well as the PCC plans to alter the church to include facilities already adequately provided in our village. It seems evident that the changes to the object of the charity have been made to accommodate the long terms plans of the PCC in full.
As an atheist all my life BUT also a member of this community I was perfectly happy to support the previous object of the charity which I understood ring fenced money raised from the supporters for only essential maintenance and conservation of, in my opinion, the third most important building in the village after the pub and the village hall. As such it also made entire sense to me that it prevented the money raised subsidising the financial demands placed on the PCC by the diocese. This is I believe is to primarily pay for the vicar which in my opinion should be entirely supported by those who use or need him. Under these arrangements I felt I wasn’t supporting the church as such or what goes on in it but a beautiful building. Admittedly it helped if I chose to forget that the church owns the building anyway and that they certainly have the wonga to maintain it themselves if they wanted to.
Regarding the plans it seems to me the argument for “more space so that more community events may take place” is ridiculous as we already have a well equipped village hall and at the same time a limited number of community events. If we didn’t have these facilities or the Ring of Bells I can see the proposal possibly making sense. Although personally I’d be worried that a church facility would come with imposed religious beliefs and prejudices about who can use it or what can take place. So sorry but I can’t see how this can be “a bonus for all participants’” unless by community and participants you are actually referring to the relatively few people who actually regularly attend services. Even if this is the case surely the most Christian solution would be to support the rest of the community and its existing facilities for the good of everyone.
I’m confused and about the motives for such an idea and will be surprised if the plans gain the support of the community in general but as often happens with well meaning volunteer groups this doesn’t mean you won’t go ahead and do it.
So from,what I have said I hope you understand and respect why I’m not prepared to continue with my support of the Friends.
Gary Day-Ellison
I encourage others to add their views on this matter. The Hart’s views are clearly stated and cogently put. I say that not because the concur with my stated opinion on the wasteful duplication of communal facilities and somewhat confused priorities. This exactly the kind of ‘open forum’ I hoped the Village Voices blog could become.
So, have your say!
Paul and Catherine Smith
I write in support of Greg and Mandy Hart. As a trustee of the Parish HalI since 1997, I must declare an interest. Ten years ago a total of 37 parishioners donated over £10,000 towards the cost of refurbishing the Hall, which together with various grants enabled the work to be carried out at that time. More refurbishment is now planned and a grant towards the cost has been agreed by the Rural Aid Committee of Teignbridge DC.
If the Church is to become involved with community activities then the small income the Hall derives from lettings will be eroded. This shows little respect for those who gave so generously towards the Hall in the past and those who worked so hard to restore it, and makes it unlikely that the Rural Aid committee will be able to make any further grants.
I too am proud to be an atheist but I do not believe this is a matter of faith but one of common sense. The Church is failing because it has too small a congregation; if it were a business it would have been bankrupt years ago. Indeed the number of regular worshippers at all the churches in the Benefice could probably be happily accommodated in just one church. Why not accept the inevitable? There are a number of charities and organisations which can take over redundant churches with a view to maintaining them; closure does not mean that the building will be lost.
Paul Smith
Gary Day-Ellison
Thank you Paul, I believe I expressed the same opinion.
caroline webster
Once again it appears that a small group of people in the village have decided to undertake activities which the rest of us are then expected to finance.
Pretty much all the has been said above I agree with; we have an excellent village hall and it makes no sense (either common or financial) to try to turn the church into another one?
If the Village Hall was used to full capacity and turning away business then there may be a point to this, but they are not. There is no justification for creating a competitive product that will effectively undermine a facility that has already received considerable investment.
If the “Church” as an organisation cannot maintain it’s property nor can it recruit a congregation large enough to sustain it, then it should accept that maybe the time has come to close it and hand the building over to another charity; such as English Heritage or similar that specialises’ in protecting and maintaining historic buildings.
I’m sure anyone with a genuine desire to worship would not object to travelling a couple of miles to Moretonhampstead where the congregation would welcome additional contributors to their services.
I can see no validity for the statement that this development would be for the “good of all” – quite the opposite, and as such will not be supporting any fundraising and will actively object to any planning applications.
Alan Coy
Clearly, when we have existing facilities within the village hall, one must ask the question, “what is the rationale behind FoStJ thinking”.
Caroline has articulated what any sensible thinking person would conclude in terms of duplicating the village hall facilities which are at present underused.
FoStJ comments would be appreciated.
Gary Day-Ellison
I certainly agree it would be good to hear some response from FoStJ in the face of such strong opposition.
ShelaghJ
Most of my views have been expressed eloquently by those who object to the proposed changes.
We already have a thriving pub and a not-so-thriving village hall – to duplicate their facilities is sheer folly.
Furthermore, the idea of installing toilets and a kitchen beggars belief. The Insurance issues plus Health and Safety implications would be – despite any potential grant – hugely complicated, expensive and a waste of money.
David and I feel we can no longer support the Friends and that decisions such as those being proposed call for a public meeting – in the church by all means, but not as part of a service.
David Jacobs
My preference would be to have our lovely medieval church restored to its former glory.
All pews in place – no books; no milk churns; no tea urns; no trestle tables; no creche; no junk.
Use the village hall for all other activities, including kitchen and toilets.
Raising money for the fabric of the church would then have much wider support.
Hazel Jones
I agree with many of the above comments. Make more use of the Parish Hall. With the support of the Parish Hall Trust, Rob Irving and I have put forward a project to be incorporated into the ‘More than Meets the Eye’ lottery fund application. If successful this will help us to establish a facility within our Parish Hall which will enable its wider use. This would include an audiovisual system to be used for lectures on topics of interest and for entertainment.
The church is ideal for music concerts, which I have greatly enjoyed and hope to support in the future. At other times I have appreciated the atmosphere of tranquility and contemplation in complete silence.
Sonial
“What a fantastic opportunity this debate offers for a positive meeting to be held with the Chairmen of all the disparate village bodies and the villagers.
There is an enormous amount of well intended energy here and by working together with a common plan North Bovey could be even better.! ”
ps The Village Hall is available…………………..
Rob Irving
Mandy Hart
Good – I agree, Hazel, and everyone else.
Do we need a common plan for North Bovey? Can’t we quietly just go about our own business, keeping an eye out for our friends and neighbours where necessary? Are we considering invading Moretonhampstead? Discuss!
Gary Day-Ellison
Please not another committee! Keep and use our fine Village Hall as a well-equipped common meeting place (aside from the pub which is a business). Keep the Church as a church (personally I would put the pews back) and not waste money and effort despoiling it as a scrappy version of the Village Hall.
Jennifer Jones
An interesting discussion and I agree with many comments too. I agree with Greg that the church is one of the three major buildings in the village with the pub and the Village Hall (in no particular order). And even though the church may be owned by the Church Commissioners (or whoever it is owned by), it belongs to all of us. It is a spectacular building, and, in my opinion, the Village Hall and the pub – lovely though they are – cannot compete in some contexts. They most certainly are wonderful buildings too, and may be utilised for all sorts of events, but to dismiss the church as a building only to be used once or twice a month for church services would be sad in my opinion.
I’m happy to say that, as a singer, I have performed in all these buildings, and there is just no competition for ambiance and acoustics. Many people from the village were at one or more of these events, and I was blessed to receive some great feedback. The Village Hall isn’t in the same league for performance. I remember, Mandy, that you commented once about how ironic it was that there was a jazz performance in the church, and a church service in the pub! How lovely to have that flexibility.
My sense is that we are in danger of seeing the church just as a building in which to hold services for the Christian community. That may well be why it was built, although I suspect that there have been gatherings on that land from the time that people first lived in this place, and they may not just have been about spiritual and/or religious matters. And given that it really belongs to all of us, let’s have an open meeting to discuss and discover what it is that we, as the residents of the village, actually want this building to be as well, or not.
Gary Day-Ellison
I take the point about acoustics. Music is enhanced by the setting. But concerts are fine without toilets & a kitchen in the church.
Alex Austin
In her statement Wendy has made it clear that the purpose of the Friends remains to raise funds that will ONLY be used to preserve and maintain the fabric of the building. No funds will be spent on the daily running of the church, I.e paying for a vicar or for installing toilets or kitchens or anything else.
The PCC may have plans of their own with regards the development of the church and any worries about this should be directed to that body. With that in mind, it would be the PCC that would have to find funds to do so, and not the parishioners of North Bovey. It would be the church itself spending its own money on redevelopment surely. The Friends have no authority to be involved in any such matters and I don’t believe the friends are actually suggesting that they are financially involved in this, only that they are working with the PCC within the 5 year plan adding their support I assume to the renovation and maintenance works as highlighted by the 2005 report.
If the Friends see fit to continue to plan fund raising events that may well be suited to being organised in the Church itself, then why not? It has worked very well so far, especially over the last couple of years. I do not believe that this has been detrimental to the Hall.
Whilst I agree that there should be no conflict of interest or competition between the Hall and the Church in terms of events or community gatherings, surely it is up to the Friends and the Hall to agree this between themselves to ensure no cross over and form a clear and mutually beneficial way ahead. We have had some excellent concerts and plays in the church, all of which have been brilliantly attended and well enjoyed by our community. None of these events would have worked as well in the hall, purely based on the difference in acoustics. Don’t also forget that the Friends contribute to the Hall by utilising it for events also, most recently the Craft Fair, Murder Mysterys, etc. it has been two way traffic.
And as Jennifer has pointed out, how amazing is it that we can have concerts in the Church, Church in the Pub and part of the pub in the Hall (their contributions in the past to the Harvest Supper). We have successfully, due to the hard work and dedication of those volunteering to protect our assets in the Hall, Church, Meadow and Conservation and the economic contribution of local businesses such as the Pub, Bovey Castle and small business managed very well to help each other. Please, let’s continue to do so. I believe it is unhelpful to make comments accusing small groups of people of making decisions and expecting the parishioners to fund it. All these people both int the ‘Parish Eye’ and behind it work very hard as volunteers to preserve, protect and promote our various assets
In threatening to remove your financial support from the Friends, be sure that you are doing so based on clear fact. Perhaps we need a little more clarity from the Friends? Perhaps the Friends will answer some of our questions and concerns and we will have a clearer picture of the differences and the boundaries between the work of the friends and that of the PCC in our current day?
The Parish may also be interested to know that on 24th September between 1600-2000 there will be a drop in event in the Hall for Parishioners to give their experiences and ideas about Parish life here in North Bovey
And to decide whether the Parish would like a community plan for the future. Make your voices heard and drop in. Details will follow very shortly. Why not use this opportunity to develop some of these trains of thoughts and opinions.
Christine Johnson
I think it’s great that there are so many people working hard in various ways to support the village and it’s facilities. It’s very useful to have this blog to discuss ideas and perhaps it could be used more in future to help each group/committee etc to coordinate and communicate. Also a parish meeting sounds like a good idea so everyone else can have their say – many interested residents may not be online.
The church is much more to me than merely a lovely old listed building, although it’s obviously important to people for different reasons. I very much hope it will still be in use as a place of worship for many years (and personally prefer services in church to other locations). I am also supportive of other uses like concerts – making use of those fantastic acoustics. I for one would be very pleased to have toilets available in church, although there are probably higher priorities for any budget (like walls, windows, heating, roof etc which Wendy mentioned). For events requiring a kitchen, or more space with tables etc, it seems to make more sense to use the village hall – or use both. They are very different buildings and I would hope any improvements can be complimentary, rather than competitive. Obviously the pub is also great, and important for the village, but as a business is in a different category.