We all love Tintern Abbey. Its forlorn skeleton in a tranquil setting reminds us of better past days, a time when the priority was not the balance-sheet or the ballooning international company but man made in the image of God. Things have moved on. The golden rule of not going back in life prohibits us from endeavouring to retrieve a Romantic interpretation of life that might have obtained the approval of Walter Scott or Wordsworth. Parishioners of Chapel Hill, which contains the Abbey, may be over-awed by the skeletal presence on their door-step, but nostalgia is not enough. Our Anglo-Saxon ancestors who saw impressive Roman ruins daily certainly had that feeling when they looked upon the eald enta geweorc (the old work of giants).
We must have our wits about us. It is quite likely that we shall see many Tintern Abbeys in days to come. We have an abundance of noble buildings that are unsuited to the needs of the day. We cannot sustain them. We have to consider the possibility that the Beeching cuts being considered for the Church of England will require the abandonment of over-sized parish churches in order to sustain the living Church, the body of believing Christians. The discussion paper ‘Perspectives on money, people, buildings’ makes clear the scale of the problem.
Of course, no bishop would choose to go down in history as one who abandoned medieval masterpieces to the weather. However, if many Tinterns proved to be centres of pilgrimage in their abandonment, they would be just as likely to engender a defeatist frame of mind. Border churches like Jedburgh and Melrose have their magic but they are stark reminders of the way things used to be, of bygone days beyond retrieval. It is a severe test of true faith to ask it to cope with insistent reminders of past greatness.
Who should decide whether we need more Tinterns? An Established Church that exists on a principle of conformity must consider not only the views of the present generation of habitual worshippers but also the vast number of default members who have little or nothing to do with the Church. The admirable sense of responsibility for the nation as a whole that has marked the Established Church in all its ups and downs has prevented it from falling into the hands of a select group that has little notion of the implications of conformity. But the tension between conformity and enthusiasm remains when it comes to buildings.
A confrontation with budget cuts may lead to a preoccupation with the balance-sheet as the whole truth of the matter. The Church is a messenger (amongst other things). It carries a message. It lives by mission. If that mission requires some detachment from magnificent buildings, it may find itself having to pass that responsibility on to others. It may of course prove to be the case that a gaunt, roofless ruin will prove to be a galvanizing spectacle. It is just possible that it will drive its viewers to consider what our society is missing in its rejection of its Christian inheritance. We must listen for the Tintern overtones.
If you have a comment on this post please send an email to Revd John King at johnc.king@talktalk.net Edited extracts may be published. To forward this to a friend click on the chain icon below.
Comments