A BABY,A BLUE DOT,

& THE PEOPLE OF GOD.

A study in the missiological benefits of refurbished church sanctuaries within

some Church of Scotland congregations.

Rev Scott BurtonJune 2013

STUDY LEAVE REPORT

The purpose of this study leave is to investigate the benefits of refurbishing a traditional place of worship by bringing thefacilities up to a more modern standard.

I have come to my current ministry in Perth (of 6.5 years thus far) from a previous seven year ministry in a congregation (Kelty in Fife) that removed all pews, installed a new heating system, automated glass front door, new kitchen and upgraded AV facilities in their 19th century ecclesiastical building. I am aware, therefore, of some of the practical benefits to the congregation in terms of more comfortable seating, warmer environment in winter months, flexible space etc. However, rooted in the fact that my current congregation is moving further and further along the road towards refurbishing our 800 seat, late 19th century sanctuary, with all the expensive costs of architects fees, planning consents, design, and actual refurbishment itself, the prime focus of this research will be to enquire about the specific impact of church refurbishments on a congregation’s ministry and mission.

I am indebted to Mr Brian Waller of the Church of Scotland General Trustees for sending an extensive list of refurbished churches from around the whole of Scotland. I am also grateful to my friends and colleagues on Facebook who responded to a question I posted there: “Assessing some of the real benefits of refurbishing places of worship, has anyone got suggestions of refurbished churches worth a visit?”

I received 33 suggestions of refurbished churches to visit, from 24 individual contributors. These suggestions ranged from Carlops in the Borders to St. Gile’s Church in Elgin, Moray. (See appendix 1). Some of these suggestions I know well, having worked in them as youth worker, minister or probationer assistant, or having visited for other reasons in the past. Others are known to me simply because they are local to my current location, and still more I have no knowledge of at all.

In order to maximize the limited time for this study, and to minimise the expense of travelling around the country, I decided to try and focus on church buildings that would be easily accessible, match something similar to what my own congregation are hoping to do and which are practical to visit in terms of geography, and schedules (both mine and those being visited). Sadly, I did not manage to visit as many churches as I had hoped might be

possible. This was due to ministerial holidays, busy diaries and the practicalities of timing and communication (non-returned phone calls, emails etc).

Narrowing my visits down this way, I then grouped the visits into their geographical areas and began developing a schedule of visitation according to ministerial availability in those parishes, as well as my own availability throughout the four weeks of study leave provided.

I also developed a questionnaire that would allow for a sense of consistency in the research as I asked for answers to the same questions in each location. (See appendix 2)

WEEK 1I spent this week adjusting to time out of the busyness of parish life (something which I must say took me rather by surprise – in terms of how difficult I found it to slow down!). I also constructed a questionnaire that would allow for consistency during visits, and made numerous phone calls, sent numerous emails and visited many church websites to plan where I would visit and when. Further, I began to read the book Re-Pitching the Tent – the definitive guide to re-ordering church buildings for worship and mission – by Richard Giles which, it transpires, has been an excellent introduction to many issues of relevance in this issue.1

Finally, I went to the refurbished sanctuary of Kinross Parish Church, Perth & Kinross for Sunday worship,

WEEK 2This second week included visits to:

St. Cuthbert’s Church, Edinburgh (meeting Rev. David Denniston to discuss refurbishments in all three of the congregations where he has ministered: Kennoway, Fife, North Church, Perth and St. Cuthbert’s, Edinburgh).

St. Andrew’s Blackadder Church, North Berwick(meeting Rev Neil Dougall who had inherited a newly refurbished church after the previous ministry of Rev Eddie McKenna).

There was also further administration and organization along with 1 Canterbury Press, Norwich, 2004,

continued reading.

WEEK 3Letham St. Mark’s Church, Perth(morning worship – both 9:30 & 11am)

St. Andrew’s Church, Arbroath(Meeting Rev Dr Martin Fair)

St. Vigean’s Church, Arbroath(Meeting Rev Dr Nelu Balaj)

Bellie Church, Moray(Meeting Rev. Alison Mehigan)

Aberlour Church, Moray(Meeting Rev Shuna Dick)

St. Gile’s Church, Elgin – 11am Thursday (Meeting Session Clerk Elspeth Jackson)

WEEK 4Unfortunately my study leave was interrupted by a significant incident in my own congregation that could not be ignored or left until I returned. The only visit conducted, then, was to worship at Dundee Steeple, supplemented by further reading and the initial writing up of this report.

Nevertheless, I did manage a follow-up visit to Kinross, to meet with Rev Alan Reid (minister) and Mrs Sheila Green (property convenor).

I had hoped for a follow-up visit this week with the minister at Letham St. Mark’s Church in Perth, but no communication was returned. This was disappointing given that, having worshipped there I witnessed something of importance that I shall refer to in my conclusion.

Despite my frustration that more visits were not possible, this study leave has, nevertheless, been very worthwhile. Of itself, having the space to read the book, Re-Pitching the Tent, has been an extremely helpful use of time. Richard Giles introduced many excellent ideas and points of consideration from start to finish,

always in the context that refurbishment of church buildings involves significant change (which, in my experience, churches always seem to find difficult).

Missiologically, we long for the non-attending parishioner to change and

begin joining us in worship we long for the non-believer to change by coming to

increasing or sudden faith we long for the attendances at worship to change by our

young people choosing to be part of our ecclesiastical communities.

We long for non-attending church members to begin more regular attendance week by week

We long for income to by non-contributing church members to begin contributing something financially.

However, all too often regular church-going members find it difficult to actualize change in our much-loved, historic, buildings – whether in terms of desire, willingness or fear of financial cost (though I would like to highlight that I do not find this same resistance in my own congregation of St. Matthew’s). Hence Giles’ introductory point is not insignificant:

“Lamentably, comparatively few of our church buildings have been refurbished and re-equipped . . . Local Christian communities are only now beginning to face up to these new building requirements of a missionary church, and the temptation to withdraw into a heritage cocoon is very great.”2

Giles then discusses a variety of fascinating and worthy points of consideration: How buildings tell a story (for good or for bad) The practicalities of space in an ecclesiastical setting, Historic, developmental and changes in the design of places

of worship The visual impact of buildings for Christian education

(pulpits, stained glass, lecterns etc), The ethics of spending significant funds on buildings rather

than other Christian endeavor,2 Giles, Richard, Re-Pitching the Tent. Canterbury Press, Norwich, 2004

Mission Interior design And several other topics such as liturgy, theology and the

sacraments.

After all this deliberation, Giles’ conclusion is as important to hear as had been his introduction:

“The longer we leave it [ruthless reassessment of our buildings’ interiors], the worse the pain and upheaval will be. Unavoidably, the crowbar represents a vital stage in our spiritual growth as missionary congregations.”3

And so I have been privileged to spend a small amount of time visiting congregations who have, independently, realized the considerations of much of what Giles writes about. However, as is my primary focus in this study, have they realized any benefit in terms of mission from all the work that has been carried out?

REASONS FOR REFURBISHMENTRightly, there were various specific and particular underlying reasons for refurbishing the buildings I visited. In one, a lady had collapsed during Sunday worship and physically was jammed within the pews – making attendance to her critical, medical needs much more difficult and demanding. This linked with the lack of room for individuals who use wheelchairs was the final motivator to change. We can refer to this as a pastoral concern.

Others had no main reasons for refurbishment other than what we might call practical concern, with heating systems that were simply past their best, electrical wiring that was installed in the 1950s, and the discovery of asbestos in the ceiling. Presbytery’s fabric report uncovered the major concerns in one location and agreement was made between all three tiers of church governance (local, regional and national) to proceed with significant redevelopment.

Other congregations were conscious that the pews were restrictive for children and prams, with a missionary desire to make access much easier for younger families. Another listed missionary concern for refurbishment from the start. There was no immanent 3 Re-Pitching the Tent, p211.

requirement to spend on fabric, but more of a sense that the development of the building fitted very much with the general ethos of congregational development – seeking to be a church that serves the modern world.

Married to the missionary motivation was a desire for more flexibility in worship space and style, and so the congregations recognized that remodeling was required to produce such enhanced space. We can refer to this as liturgical concern.

“A Christian community at the outset of the third millennium will require a different set of tools from those available 100 years ago if it is to do the work of God in the drastically changed context of a pluralist society.”4

TIMESCALESOne congregation (Elgin: St. Giles) refurbished for the first time 30 years ago – removing pews and installing kitchen facilities under the back gallery of the sanctuary, with a glass façade separating the flexible space and the worship space. They have since re-modeled their whole sanctuary by removing pews with seats.

4 Re-pitching the tent p4

Elgin St. Giles

Another congregation (Edinburgh: St. Cuthbert’s) did something very similar, installing a café and gift shop under their back gallery some 20 years ago. Other refurbishment work has taken place since.

St. Cuthberts, Edinburgh.

Another church first discussed refurbishment in 1989 (North Berwick: St. Andrew’s Blackadder) at the time of congregational union. Work (including raising the sanctuary to gallery level) was carried out in the late 1990s.

St. Andrew’s Blackadder, North Berwick

Another congregation (Kinross) was first deliberated in 1990 and was completed in 2006.

Kinross Parish Church

Yet another congregation (Bellie Church, Fochabers) first discussed refurbishment in 1985 but it was not until 2005 that the concept was agreed and then 2009 when the work took place.

Bellie Church, Fochabers

The shortest timescale came from Aberlour, with a new minister

arriving in 2010 and work beginning in 2011 with a 2012 completion date.

Aberlour Church

Arbroath: St. Andrew’s

Arbroath: St. Andrew’s also had a short timescale where refurbishment was first discussed in 2006 and work was carried out in 2009, with a two year period in between times to firm up the vision.

CONGREGATIONAL BENEFITSRichard Giles makes a very interesting comment when he declares, “Refurbished buildings are not unconnected to refurbished lives” 5 This absolutely echoes a phrase of my own that, “facilities are meant to facilitate the life of the church people”.

Sadly, the opposite can be true too: unchanged, inflexible, dull, old-fashioned buildings can easily reflect the mind-set and activity of a congregation.

In this study, however, it was thoroughly refreshing (inspiring, indeed) to note the answers to the question, “What have been the major benefits of the refurbishment for the congregation?”

5 Re-Pitching the Tent p56

The refurbishment, at North Berwick, “utterly transformed the theology and culture of the congregation”. Meetings no longer take place at the manse, people can see each other in worship, and there has been a “tectonic shift” in the understanding of God from transcendent to immanent. North Berwick was also fascinating in the comment that, “the building now clears an hour after worship, not after ten minutes as it was before the refurbishment”. If the church really is about people then this is a critical point to note.

In Bellie it has been equally transformative for the people, not just the building. Wheelchair users can now come into the church. More than that, wheelchair users do not sit on the end of a row of seats, but seats can be rearranged to permit people with disabilities to sit within the body of the kirk, right at the heart of the faith community! Here there is also a live AV feed of worship services into other areas of the church building so that crèche users can be part of worship too.

In St Andrew’s Arbroath I was informed that changing seat formations and settings is a “mood and experience changer”. People now come to worship expecting the unexpected, enjoying experimentation.

Aberlour, similarly, shared how they have “worshipped in the round”, now have flexibility for a variety of uses midweek as well as Sundays, find that people sit more closely together (thus developing fellowship) and have improved singing as a result.

In Elgin refurbishment has enabled “more socialization”, “opened up relationships”, created flexible space for wheelchair users, enables more control of the climate, enables more informal, and frequent communion services, and (importantly) made the whole building easier to clean.

Edinburgh: St Cuthberts also mentioned more open hospitality, fellowship and flexibility. Importantly, the change in the building changed the mind-set of the people. The same minister of this church was also minister at Kennoway, Fife and Perth: North Church, where refurbishments were carried out during his ministry. He says of them that the change in the buildings created more accessibility, more comfort, more flexibility, tremendous opportunity for worship lunches, creativity, use of hi-tech, and

alternative worship.

In Kinross I found tremendous energy and enthusiasm about their refurbishment because, simply put, it has absolutely transformed the congregation’s life. The building is now used for concerts, exhibitions, summer clubs, singing groups etc. People are warmer physically and in character, and there is a flexibility as never before.

Generally, each refurbishment has enhanced congregational life by creating flexible space for worship and meetings, more genuine fellowship, space for musicians, creating the sense of expectancy, expanding experience and permitting creativity.

COMMUNITY BENEFITSMissiologially, I think, a comment made in Kinross says it all: “There is now an enhanced view of the church by non-members. It has become a place that people now want to be”. People comment positively about the building as a venue for concerts, exhibitions and school assemblies, conferences, author visits and allsorts. (Please not the opposite to this: un-refurbished buildings can remain a place that people do not want to be”. What does this do for us in terms of ministry and mission!?)

North Berwick has “a massive footfall”. The refurbishment has “given the church credibility”, and with the doors now open the community clearly see the building as being for them and that it gives value to their lives.

Such comments were echoed in Bellie Church, Fochabers. “The people felt they were allowed back in”. The church is used as a concert venue, a place for band practice, for school assemblies and for musicals concerts. “It’s not scary anymore”. (Once again, please think on the opposite. Many of our church buildings are scary and give off the impression that people are not allowed in!)

St Andrew’s Arbroath said that people now see the church as part of the 21st century; not out of date and out of touch. People comment on “How welcoming” it is. It is used more for weddings and funerals and in the case of two recent funerals for young people who tragically committed suicide, the building could meet the family’s needs and desires in a way it could not before – mainly through the use of AV.

DRAWBACKSApart from a few issues with their heating system, Kinross could find no drawbacks in refurbishing their building.

St. Andrew’s Arbroath were similar. There were no real drawbacks in refurbishing, except for a year of teething problems in the use of different systems (AV, lighting, heating etc). There was a sense of “preciousness” in looking after the building when the congregation moved back in. That needs to be overcome.

Aberlour point out that there can sometimes be a conflict of use in their building if the holiday club has set things up for a week and a funeral arises.

Elgin’s office bearers said they, “Can’t think of any drawbacks” when asked this question. They highlighted that people were negative to the refurbishment in principle then positive once it was complete.

In Kennoway there was a danger of “arriving”, thinking the refurbishment was the conclusion, when, in reality it needs to be the start of a new era of life and work in a congregation. It was also surprising how quickly new fittings wear and tear. There needs to be an ongoing budget for persistent upgrade.

In Perth: North it was noted that certain groups can invest in certain areas of the building and ‘turf wars’ can develop over who has priority use.

North Berwick stated there was “no drawback to refurbishment”.

FINANCIAL COSTSOverall costs ranged from £60,000 - £750,000, with obvious variation in the amount of work being carried out.

Kinross budgeted £600,000 and cost £600,000 (2009)

St. Andrew’s Blackadder budgeted cost £750,000 (late 1990s)

Bellie Church budgeted cost £250,000 and cost £251,000 (2009)

St. Andrew’s Arbroath budgeted £600,000 & cost £600,000(2009)

Aberlour budgeted £180,000 and cost £180,000

Elgin: St. Giles most recent phase budgeted £60,000 and cost £60,000

Some congregation’s had zero fundraising requirements due to legacies left to the church and / or sale of buildings that were surplus to requirements. Others took out loans with the General Trustees and others did major fundraising through trust funds, congregational giving and typical fundraising efforts of concerts, coffee mornings and sales of work etc.

INCREASE IN ATTENDANCE?In St. Cuthbert’s the whole reason for the refurbishment was to manage decline but there was no increase in attendance at worship.

Kennoway did see a modest upward trajectory but nothing significant. There was no obvious sense of cause and effect either.

Perth North church did see a rise in evening worship attendance, put down to the opportunity for a completely changed style and layout to worship.

In Elgin: St. Gile’s there is an awareness that more people in the community now use the church but there has not been an increased attendance at worship.

Aberlour make the interesting observation that there has been a leveling of attendance at traditional Sunday worship and an increased attendance at Messy Church services. These Messy Church services could not have been so easily offered prior to refurbishment.

In St. Andrew’s Arbroath the attendances were good prior to refurbishment anyway. There’s a disappointment that the refurbished sanctuary has not assisted further numerical growth. There is a sense that it has slowed the decline and there’s a feeling that the congregation are on the cusp of more growth. The age range of those attending does seem to be younger than before and their Messy Church services are, like Aberlour’s, growing in

number. Rev Dr Martin Fair also wanted to make the point that the refurbishment was not only about numerical growth, but about long-term sustainability of the building into the future.

In North Berwick the message was that there has not been growth in attendance but the refurbishment does seem to have stemmed the decline.

In Bellie Church there was a similar message to that of St. Andrew’s Arbroath. The refurbishment was not primarily about numerical growth but more about making the church more open and accessible to the community and being able to accommodate other groups and activities. This it has achieved well.

Kinross, in my opinion, offered the most interesting insight to the benefits of refurbishment. Their property convenor said their church attendance had increased and it was down to a mixture of the refurbishment and a new minister. Attendances are “well up”. The minister agreed that the refurbishment had made a significant, positive difference. It makes ministry easier. It is a help and not a hindrance. It facilitates ministry rather than frustrates it. Rev Alan Reid said, “I couldn’t conceive of Kinross Parish Church being what it is without the refurbishment having taken place”.

INCREASE IN MEMBERSHIP?Not one of the churches could speak of an increase in church membership! Nevertheless, a few did talk of the refurbishment stemming the decline.

MISCELLANEOUS COMMENTSMy questionnaire asked for any comments on matters I had not, perhaps, asked about. This was a very interesting section to the research.

St. Andrew’s Blackadder, North Berwick commented that refurbished churches will stay with us into the future; non-refurbished buildings will not. The reason for this view was that people of our modern communities simply will no longer tolerate cold, damp, dark, draughty buildings. I agree.

The Kinross Church people mentioned that visitors to their building now thought of it in positive (rather than previously negative) terms. This is because, it is now warm, light, welcoming,

comfortable and practical.

Bellie Church talked about the fact that the whole journey through refurbishment, and the journey since, has increased the confidence of the congregation and increased their trust in God’s provision. “Will God really provide?” He did!

The minister of St. Cuthberts added comment that the refurbishments were worth their weight in gold. There previously was a duality of message from the words spoken and the unspoken message the church buildings presented. We speak of welcome and yet locked doors speak of the opposite. We speak of God’s light and yet dark, dingy sanctuaries contradict that. We speak of new life in Christ and yet old, tired buildings speak of decay and decline and death.

CONCLUSIONIn conclusion, refurbishment is a no-brainer. It is expensive. It is challenging. It is hard work. However, if we do not refurbish tired old buildings, then these same old buildings will be unsuccessful in retaining the people who gather and even less successful in reaching out to others beyond the walls.

I was sorry that the minister of Letham St. Mark’s Church in Perth never got back to me about my request for a talk about how the church there had changed since its complete demolition and restructure. As I worshipped there, you see, I had the experience of a eureka moment: the “baby” element to my choice of title for this report.

A Eureka moment at Perth: Letham, St. Mark’s (parental permission granted to take and use this photograph)

As I sat next to this baby during Sunday worship I realized that if this mother and child wished to come to worship in any number of un-refurbished churches, they simply would be unwelcome in several practical terms. This would (and does) have a massive negative impact on our mission to a new and generally missing generation!

In an old, tired building there is no place for the mum to leave the buggy if there are wall to wall pews.

If heating pipes are under the pews the baby would scold it’s head and be unable to lie comfortably like this.

Similarly, in many traditional buildings there is no carpet, so the dirty, bare, floorboards would be a hindrance to comfortable and hygienic attendance.

The large (flexible) distance between the chairs is conducive to welcoming in a way that tighter pews simply are not.

If we wish to engage with people in our 21st century Scottish

culture, on a week by week basis, we absolutely must try to engage with 21st century facilities. To do otherwise is to stifle, obstruct and hinder our ministry and mission!

This point was also highlighted for me as I travelled the country from North Berwick in the south to Elgin in the north. I refer to the “blue dot” element of my chosen title for this report. As I travelled to parts of our beautiful country I had not been to for decades, I realized that my whole mode of transport (an electric / petrol hybrid car) and my method of navigation (iPhone GPS) would have been inconceivable the last time I visited certain places.

Our (post)modern world is unrecognizably different from the era in which most of our old, traditional buildings were constructed. If this rapid cultural and technological change is the norm now, then just how archaic are the facilities within which many of us are expected to successfully and faithfully minister?

Refurbishment is critical! Doing nothing is, in fact, to make a conscious choice to do something; and it is a negative choice in terms of mission. If we do not refurbish we will contribute to the further decline of our congregations, not to mention force continued discomfort and despondency in our current congregations.

This leads me to my final point: the “people of God” element of my chosen title. Refurbishment is absolutely not about buildings. The refurbishment of buildings inevitably must consider heating, lighting and Audio Visual systems – all fabric matters. Refurbishment of buildings absolutely requires discussion and planning over seating, decoration, and electrical wiring etc. However, refurbishment is still not about buildings. It is about people; the people of God who are housed within the buildings that

are (or are not) refurbished.

What I witnessed and experienced on my travels for this study leave was a whole range of people who were inspired, excited, enthused, energized, motivated, encouraged and upbeat as a result of their new facilities. In churches (like mine) where the heating is past it, there are leaks in the roof, children scolded on heating pipes, no room for wheelchairs or prams, pensioner’s chilled to the bone by draughts, closed doors to the public etc, the exact opposite is often true. Despondency and demoralization has steadily crept in. This demotivates, discourages, drains energy negatively and disables the congregation for mission.

I wholeheartedly endorse the concept of refurbishing church buildings for mission and ministry purposes. To do otherwise is to hamper the mission the Church of Scotland has been encouraging for many years now. To repeat Richard Giles in his book, Repitchig the tent: “Unavoidably, the crowbar represents a vital stage in our spiritual growth as missionary congregations.”6

APPENDIX 1List of suggested refurbished Churches to visit, via Facebook contacts.

Aberfeldy, Perthshire Aberlour, MorayArbroath St. Andrews,Barrhead Bourock,Belle in Fochabers, Moray CarlopsClincarthill Parish Church, GlasgowCowdenbeath North, Fife Ellon, AberdeenshireKilbarchan West, RenfrewshireInverkeithing, FifeInverurie West, AberdeenshireKelty, FifeKennoway, Fife Kinross Parish, Maryhill church, Glasgow6 Re-Pitching the Tent, p211.

Newhaven, Edinburgh North Berwick, East LothianNorth Church, Perth Partick Trinity Glasgow, Penicuik, MidlothianQueen's Park Parish Church, Glasgow?QP Baptist Church, GlasgowSandyford Henderson Glasgow,St Bryce Kirk, KirkcaldySt. Cuthbert’s, EdinburghSt Giles in Elgin, MoraySt. John’s Gourock, InverclydeSt. John’s PerthSt Marys, Monkseaton, EnglandSt Ninians and Forglen in Turriff, AberdeenshireTrinity church, Cathcart, GlasgowTron, Glasgow

APPENDIX 2

QUESTIIONAIRRE

NAME OF CHURCH ______________________________

When was the idea of refurbishing this church first discussed?

Who raised the issue?

When was the refurbishment completed?

What was the budgeted cost?

What was the overall financial cost?

What were the main reasons for carrying out the refurbishment?

What have been the major benefits of the refurbishment for the congregation?

What have been the major benefits of the refurbishment for the wider community?

What have been the drawbacks after refurbishing?

What would you do differently?

Have you had an increase in church attendance as a result of the refurbishment? What evidence can you supply to back this up?

Have you had an increase in church membership as a result of the refurbishment?