THE combination light and heating chandeliers, which the PCC of the Grade I listed St Bartholomew’s, Orford, had unlawfully installed, were not as attractive as those they had replaced, the Chancellor of the diocese of St Edmundsbury & Ipswich has said.

Because the original chandeliers were not an aspect of the Grade-listing of the building, however, and because the harm caused by their removal was small, the Chancellor, the Worshipful Justin Gau, ruled that a confirmatory faculty should be granted to regularise their unlawful installation.

‘I’d like to welcome Mr Bobsworth, who will be conducting today’s service of the heating system’

The parish had been dissatisfied with the old oil-fired heating system, which they had regarded as expensive, inefficient, and unreliable. In March 2022, the PCC voted to have bespoke heating and lighting chandeliers manufactured to resemble the chandeliers being replaced. The new system was in line with the Church of England’s commitment to net zero emissions (News, 12 February 2020).

The petitioners said that its ease of use and efficiency had increased community use of the church and its outreach to schools and for musical events as well as worship.

Historic England raised no objections to the scheme, and there had been no objections when public notices were displayed. The petitioners therefore assumed that the petition would be a fait accompli, and went ahead with the work without having first obtained a faculty. They apologised, and assured the court that the PCC had acted in good faith.

There was one party opponent to the petition for a confirmatory faculty, Nicholas Bridges, a member of the parish and of the congregation, an architect and expert in heritage. He accused the petitioners of failing to take proper advice from the diocesan heating adviser, of making no assessment of potential condensation issues, and of using an electrical contractor with insufficient understanding of historic buildings, resulting in damage caused by the cabling installation.

Mr Bridges said that the original chandeliers had been part of Gothic revival work within part of the church, and that these had the same character as the church lamps. He argued that there had been a high level of harm caused to the building, and that there had been no benefits from the heated chandeliers — such as increased liturgical freedom, pastoral well-being, or opportunities for mission — which did not already exist with the old boiler had it been repaired.

In his judgment, the Chancellor said that the petitioners had “acted unwisely but did not intend to break the rules”. They had “jumped the gun”, he said, and accepted their apology. He ruled that the new chandeliers would harm the significance of the special architectural or historical interest of the building because they were not as attractive and sympathetic to the interior as the originals.

Creative CommonsThe original chandeliers, pictured in 2004

He disagreed with Mr Bridges, however, in terms of the seriousness of this harm. The church was not listed Grade I because of its lights, which he said “were attractive but not so beautiful or special that they could be considered anything other than noteworthy, and the harm caused by their removal was small”.

The new lighting and heating chandeliers had proved efficient, economic, and flexible to use; they had allowed further outreach, public benefit, and missional work to thrive. The confirmatory faculty was therefore granted, subject to the conditions that the Church Building Council’s mitigating advice was followed as to the wiring and damage caused to the building; that the original chandeliers were photographed and a full description was made of where they were originally hung; and that this was archived.

The original chandeliers are to be sold or auctioned.