Ruth Gledhill reviews Roy Strong's A Little History of the English Country Church

ABOUT 30 YEARS AGO, after he was appointed director of the V&A, Sir Roy Strong put on an exhibition, The Destruction of the English Country House 1875-1975, that was a turning point in saving these buildings.

Now in his 70s, Sir Roy Strong has turned his attention to saving the English parish church, which he believes is facing crisis. But preserving the buildings in a heritage aspic ”“ like that around so many of his beloved country houses today ”“ is not his answer. Preservation is admirable, he writes in his new book, but the word has begun to take on negative connotations. A replacement is needed that shows a desire to move on. To save the parish church, he says, “perhaps we need bodies whose names feature the word ”˜adaptation’ rather than ”˜conservation’ or ”˜preservation’ ”.

Sir Roy is infused with the love he feels for the Church, its inhabitants and its Creator. What he suggests must be taken seriously if the Church, as well as the parish church, is to survive.

The writing is concise, uncluttered, clear. Even when you know the history, you still turn the pages, wanting to find out what small but telling detail he has uncovered next.

Read it all.

print

Posted in * Anglican - Episcopal, * Christian Life / Church Life, Anglican Provinces, Church History, Church of England (CoE)

3 comments on “Ruth Gledhill reviews Roy Strong's A Little History of the English Country Church

  1. Terry Tee says:

    I believe from reading reviews that he supports turning churches into community centres – you know the kind of thing, the nave turned into a weekly space for mothers and toddlers, a sub-post office and so on, and then used for worship on Sundays. If so, my heart sinks. Is there no sense of sacred space? Nothing to be set apart for God? A depressing commentary on the accidie of England today. BTW I write from London.

  2. evan miller says:

    Terry Tee,
    I think all of the activities you mention are wonderful IF they take place in the parish hall and NOT in the actual church building. I couldn’t agree more with you re. the importance of sacred space. Al least in the old rood screen divided churches the sense of sacred space could be maintained in the chancel and sanctuary even if more secular activities were taking place in the nave.

  3. Harvey says:

    It proves what I heard years ago. The Church is not a building. The Church is people. If the people are not there then all that remains is a building. You can tear it down or let it be of use to someone. The early church existed in the Catacombs mainly occupied by remains of dead people.