“The incongruous and inappropriate design and colour of these chairs will cause harm to the character of the church.”Â
The church argued that many churches and cathedrals had introduced similar chairs, and said the blue colouring would “add some colour and brightness” to the area and match carpets and kneelers.Â
Mr Gallagher ruled that the “need and desirability” of comfortable chairs outweighed any argument against having them.
He also criticised the Society for failing to visit the church or contact its management before lodging its objection.
“Had the Victorian Society been able to visit the church and see for themselves, first hand, the layout and what had been done elsewhere in the church, and been able to engage with the petitioners on what was proposed and needed, much time and expense might have been avoided,” he said.Â
He added that this failure to contact the church’s management meant the charity had been unaware that the chairs would be removed and stacked when not in use, reducing their impact on how the interior looked.
Mrs Garnons-Williams said the plans, which will remove pews in three areas of the church, would also allow it to hold social events such as coffee mornings and concerts more easily.
“When our church was built it was the centre of the community and we’re really keen that it should be that again,” she said.
A spokesman for the society said they were “disappointed” with the decision and added “We only have the resources to visit a fraction of the churches we’re involved with, and this wasn’t a particularly important case for us.”Â
Having comfy chairs in church is more important than preserving pews, church court rules have 270 words, post on www.telegraph.co.uk at 2017-03-31 12:22:29. This is cached page on WBNews. If you want remove this page, please contact us.
