Reordering

The proposals were the introduction of a nave altar; the removal of the rood screen; and removal/adaptation of the choir stalls. The Chancellor declined to grant a faculty for the proposed works without consideration being given to whether the chancel arch would need to be removed and also what replacement seating would be appropriate for the choir. He therefore adjourned the petition in order for these matters to be addressed.

The main items of a programme of reordering were the extension of the meeting area at the west end of the church, which would involve removing two rows of pews, and the extension of the gallery over it. Ten parishioners gave notice of objection, but none became parties opponent. The Chancellor was satisfied that a good case had been made for these items and other improvements to the existing facilities and he granted a faculty.

Following a reordering of the church in 1991-1994, it was proposed to place carvings of the heads of the current Bishop of Peterborough (the Rt. Rev. William Westwood) and the current Vicar of Oundle (the Rev. Dr. Lloyd Caddick) as label stops in the nave. (Label stops are put where arches meet in a 'V' at the top of pillars.) The new carvings would be put at the top of the only two pillars in the nave which did not have label stops above them. There were four parties opponent, whose main objections were on the ground of appropriateness, including a suggestion that it was not appropriate to place the likenesses of living persons in the church. The Chancellor found against the objectors and granted a faculty. He was able to accept that the proposals for carved heads were acceptable legally, architecturally and aesthetically, and they were appropriate items to be introduced into the church.

The petitioners sought a faculty for the construction of a parish room (by way of extension) to the south of the church. Two neighbours and another parishioner objected, though there were no objections from the local planning authority (who in fact granted planning consent) or the amenity societies. The Chancellor granted a faculty.

An extensive reordering was proposed for a Grade II listed Victorian church. The Victorian Society and Heritage England, though not parties opponent, objected to the replacement of most of the pews with chairs, replacement of the dado panelling and replacement of the stone and wood floor with new wooden flooring. The Chancellor determined that the resulting public benefit (including liturgical freedom, pastoral well-being, opportunities for mission, and putting the church to viable uses that were consistent with its role as a place of worship and mission) would outweigh any harm that would be caused by the changes.

There was a proposal to build an extension to the north-east corner of the church, which would involve the demolition of a 19th century vestry. There were 16 parties opponent and many other objectors by letter. The need for the extension was as a result of the sale of a building opposite the church, which had been used by many church groups, but had fallen into great disrepair. The Chancellor was satisfied that the proposed extension would not result in harm to the significance of the church as a
building of special architectural or historic interest, and he accordingly granted a faculty.

Petition for installation of replacement sound system and installation of a projector screen in a Grade I church. Objections from Church Buildings Council and Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings in respect of the screen. Re St Alkmund Duffield considered. Faculty granted for both items.

The Rector and Churchwardens petitioned for a faculty to authorise the removal of a large Victorian font and its platform from a position near to the main church door of a small medieval church and the placing of a new, much smaller font of Purbeck stone at the east end of the nave. The Chancellor granted a Faculty. As to a proposal to bury the old font, the Chancellor did not consider that appropriate and made the faculty subject to the following conditions: "(a) every reasonable attempt should be made to transfer the font to another church or chapel, (b) failing such transfer, museums should be contacted, (c) failing a museum, sale on the open market should be considered, (d) whatever disposal is contemplated, my prior consent will be required."

This was an appeal by the Victorian Society against the judgment of the Chancellor of Winchester Diocese of 12 March 2015, granting a faculty to replace the existing, Victorian font in the church with a new font made of Purbeck stone. The new font would be smaller than the Victorian font and would be installed on the south eastern, as opposed to south western, side of the nave. The Court decided that the Chancellor had erred and acted unfairly in his purported application of the written representations procedure, and that his judgment on the merits was flawed by several errors of law. Accordingly, the Court ordered that both his judgment and the resulting faculty be set aside.

The proposed works were the installation of four stained glass panels in the three south chancel window openings of the Grade I listed church and the shortening of all but four of seventeen pews, which had been stored behind the organ, in order to make the pews more easily moveable and to allow more flexible use of the nave. The Chancellor, having considered a detailed analysis of situation prepared by the petitioners, granted a faculty for all the proposed works.