SIC TRANSIT MAPPA MUNDI
Can deans be trusted to care for their cathedrals?
asks Gavin Stamp
THE SAD case of the proposed sale of the Mappa Mundi, a unique object which has been in Hereford Cathedral for probably 700 years, raises the vexed question of the extraordinary autonomy enjoyed by the deans and chapters of our cathedrals. It is an old-established autonomy that can make an Anglican dean dismissive of the opinions of his bishop, let alone that of expert secular institutions or of the general public. Nor is this autonomy confined to the asset-stripping of ancient endowments, for cathedrals, although subject to plan- ning control, have not been subject to historic building or ancient monument legislation, nor are they even covered by the Church of England's own faculty juris- diction system. Although the Dean of Hereford, say, would find it difficult to demolish part of his cathedral to make way for a visitor interpretation centre, there is little to stop him disposing of ancient or beautiful furnishings, or damaging the ancient fabric.
`We only knock down new buildings.'
This is a state of affairs that has long worried conservation bodies who feel that our cathedrals are national monuments that deserve rigorous protection from the vagaries of local care and control. It is a state of affairs that will probably change now that the General Synod, despite the earlier opposition of deans and provosts, has accepted the necessity of a national system of control for cathedrals. Until now, cathedrals have been subject to the attention only of the Cathedrals Advisory Committee, whose advice, if inconvenient, can still be ignored. In future, alterations to the fabric and furnishing of cathedrals will have to be approved by expert bodies and by a national Fabric Commission, whose advice will be mandatory.
This new system still stops well short of the state control of cathedral buildings such as prevails in France. The Church of England will still be responsible for run- ning its own affairs and it may be well that this should be so. For not only are local authorities and the other agents of statu- tory listed building legislation not fully competent to deal with the subtleties of liturgical arrangements and devotional fur- nishings within sacred buildings, there is also the alarming fact that state control must bring with it the possibility of state support — as the Church of England has now accepted for ordinary churches. En- glish Heritage is well aware that its church restoration budget for a year could easily disappear into the stonework of just one mediaeval cathedral. Cathedrals will con- tinue to have to raise money for mainte- nance and restoration themselves, and the success of this will continue to have to depend on the imagination and compe- tence of deans and chapters.
There is a serious argument to be made against even the amount of national con- trol envisaged by this new Cathedrals Measure, arguments that were well ex- pressed in a recent number of the Church Times by Michael Reardon, who happens to be architect to Hereford as well as Birmingham Cathedral. 'A cathedral is not simply a building to house the liturgy,' Mr Reardon rightly asserts, tut is in itself a showing forth of the pattern of redemption and a witness of the enduring presence of God. . . . In taking the responsibility for these buildings away from those whose concerns are properly spiritual and pastor- al, and placing it in the hands of people whose terms of reference are primarily historical or architectural, we are clearly acting in a manner contrary to the spirit in which they were created and risk betraying their true purpose.' He is also worried, with reason, that subjecting cathedrals 'to the aesthetic censorship of a single commit- tee risks establishing the "sameness" of taste that one sees in the houses of the National Trust or in monuments in the care of the state'.
But Mr Reardon's principal worry, as an architect rather than an archaeologist, is that conservation can stultify and freeze in time, for today 'we come dangerously near to believing that conservation and repair is all, and that to alter or enrich the cathed- rals is both arrogant and irresponsible'. This means that such bold and original gestures as the creation of the Octagon at Ely after the fall of the central tower, or the execution of G. G. Pace's design for Llandaff after wartime destruction, would now be impossible. A rare case of a good new addition is William Whitfield's Chap- ter House at St Alban's — ironically the ancient cathedral most vandalised in the 19th century. But perhaps in the present confused state of architecture, with so few architects able to design in a convincing ecclesiastical idiom, caution is necessary would Mr Reardon have had the south transept at York, just restored so immacu- lately, rebuilt by, say, Norman Foster?
The truth is that the real threat to cathedrals is not inspired innovation, but mediocrity and philistinism. Cathedrals are now full of tat: badly designed, obtrusive new forward altars, tawdry banners, dis- plays and all the facilities and sales areas that reveal our total subjection to the importunate gods of tourism and political propaganda. I cannot but observe that a conspicuous feature of the interior of Birmingham Cathedral looking westward is the fitted kitchen under the tower required, I presume, by the Rite of Coffee. This does nothing to enhance either Tho- mas Archer's architecture or the spiritual purpose of the building.
It is true that in recent years there have been no serious cases of English cathedrals being spoiled (Roman Catholic cathedrals are, of course, quite another story . . .). The most destructive reorderings took place in the 1960s, at Salisbury and at Hereford, where Gilbert Scott's remark- able metal screen was removed. The truth is that Hereford is rather a dull cathedral, atrociously treated by its dean and chapter in the 18th century and Scott's screen was a magnificent, original object in its own right which enhanced the building. It ought to go back. But worrying alterations are still being made elsewhere.
Recently at Norwich the chapter decided to erect a new storage building which required breaking through Norman arcades on the north aisle wall. This proposal was reluctantly approved by the Cathedrals Advisory Committee but opposed by English Heritage and the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings — that implacably enemy of overweening deans since its foundation by William Morris — which proposed a less destructive alternative. In the event, a compromise was reached: the arches have stayed but their internal walling has been removed for access. Then there are the immensely vulgar overpaintings of ancient carved woodwork and stonework perpe- trated at Exeter and Southwark. The sad truth is that legislation and control will never be sufficient as cathed- rals faithfully express the values of our times. Just as we get the architecture we deserve, so we get the deans we deserve. Gone are those scholarly, civilised men, like Deans Norris and Milner-White of York, who so sensitively embellished the Minster earlier this century. Gone too are the convinced aesthetes like the late Dean Hussey, who offended conservative taste by his new furnishings at Chichester but always chose good modern artists with conviction. Our modern deans are would- be marketing men and asset-strippers; the trouble is that they are no good at it.
There is the case of Ely where, a few years back, to pay for the restoration of long neglected monastic buildings, the Dean attempted to build houses on the glebe land to the east of the Cathedral. He was thwarted in this greedy and philistine endeavour, not by Church committees or by secular planners, but by two Americans: Mrs Mary Edwards, of Ely Friends of the Earth, who led the opposition, and Mr J. Paul Getty Junior, who gave Ely money on condition that no houses were built. The Dean of Ely is very lucky that the recent cathedral restoration appeal was a success, for had his earlier plans been realised, it is unlikely that many donations would have been forthcoming. Public opinion, express- ed through the collection box, must con- tinue to be the main check on the activities of deans and chapters.
As for wretched Hereford, it is unlikely that people within the diocese, who have always been the principal source of restora- tion funds, will now feel like giving much to the Cathedral. First there was the Dean's dreadful plan to build a shopping centre in the gardens of Church Street (destroying the tomb of Elgar's dog). When that was scotched, he came up with the idea of flogging the map — a scheme conducted with such shabby secrecy that Hereford is up in arms and the Chapter has forfeited all goodwill. Such behaviour raises the embarrassing question of whether not only national treasures but also national monuments are always safe in the hands of those 'whose concerns are properly spiritual and pastoral'.
`I think I've found a cure for all the things we give people to cure them.'
Previous page
