While Bishop Victoria and the Anglican church property trust (CPT) continue to sit on their hands perhaps awaiting devine intervention, who knew, it turns out that a group of stalwart people in New Zealand – with an incredible level of international assistance – are busy planning a very special Cathedral project.
From: Mark Belton
Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2017 11:11 PM
To: [Elizabeth Kerr + RCC Mailing List]
Subject: Introducing The People’s Steeple
Dear Cathedral Restoration supporters
Below is a link to a video clip of the People’s Steeple proposal being demonstrated by its creator Marcus Brandt. Marcus has been in CHCH this last week promoting the People’s Steeple Project.
The People’s Steeple is a mind blowing proposal…audacious, visionary, inspiring. Lifting telescoping timber sections of the spire 60 metres into the sky…powered by about 500 trained people working 16 capstan winches placed around Cathedral Square, watched by up to 50,000 people in the Square.
The US based Timber Framers Guild (TFG), a professional organisation of engineers and timber framers has offered to be the lead contractor to build, assemble, and erect the People’s Steeple. The lead NZ engineers would be renowned CHCH timber engineer – Prof Andy Buchanan whose report on the project is attached.
Skilled TFG members from the US and around the world would gift their time, working in the Square preparing and assembling the timbers, and then helping lead the steeple’s erection. Up to 300 TFG members along with locals could be involved working in the Square over a period of about 6 months.
The TFG have successfully undertaken 75 community building projects over the last 25 years in the US and around the world. They are super keen to offer their services to CHCH. The TFG emphasise their projects are about ‘building communities’.
Marcus says would take only 2-3 hrs to lift and secure the telescoping sections. Flooring and bells would be assembled the same day and in the evening the bells would ring out…proclaiming to the world – ‘Christchurch is back’….and a Hangi feast would be opened…for a crowd of 50,000! International media would broadcast the event around the world…the whole enterprise being about engaging our community in the most positive way…and it would ignite fund raising for the restoration of the cathedral. It is envisaged the construction of the People’s Steeple would lead restoration of the cathedral and the Square.
It is noted huge pro bono contributions from the Guild’s members are being offered, and Blakely Pacific NZ Ltd, a US based forestry company has offered to provide the timbers at no cost from giant 125-year-old Port Orford Cedar from its Pioneer Forest in South Canterbury.
The Restore Christchurch Cathedral Group is strongly supportive of the People’s Steeple.
We hope this inspiring project will help engage and enthuse Christchurch people with recovery of the cathedral, and help get the cathedral restoration programme underway.
Warm regards
Mark Belton
Co-Chair, Restore Christchurch Cathedral
Mark Belton
Managing Director
Permanent Forests NZ Limited
PO Box 34, Lyttelton 8841, New Zealand
See attached reports by Marcus Brandt, Andy Buchanan, and the TFG.
● TFG People’s Steeple Project approach notes-10-2-16
● Steeple 16-8-12
● M Belton report on Timber Framers Guild conf and People’s Steeple 23-9-16
● Engineering the People’s Steeple v9
The People’s Steeple | Whare Films Published on Feb 23, 2017
The People’s Steeple
Rebuilding the Bell Tower at Christchurch Cathedral
Marcus Brandt: An Introduction
For the last thirty years or so, I’ve been restoring historic stone and timber buildings, mostly in Southeastern Pennsylvania. I’m a working master carpenter and stone mason. Most of the historic buildings I am called to work on are 150 to 300 years old. Solid and well crafted, these old buildings tend to age well, but neglect and damage can take a toll. Much of my effort is spent in repairing and strengthening the timber frames of barns, bridges, houses, gristmills and churches. I’ve had several commissions to build new structures in the old style. I have organized and led many barn raisings, in which hundreds of volunteers gather to raise a barn’s frame in a day. A good crew will have the sides and roof on too.
Straightening, plumbing and repairing damaged stone walls is often called for. It is not uncommon to straighten a wall 10 meters high that is out of plumb by 400 or 500 mm. Having studied and worked with several Scots masons, I’m a strong believer in lime based mortars and good masonry practice. The interface between stone and timber is of particular interest to me.
Since 1989, I’ve been a professional member of the Timber Framers Guild (TFG) and a member of the Traditional Timberframe Research and Advisory Group (TTRAG). That part of the Guild focuses on understanding the past practice of the craft with a view that the past might help inform future practice. I have advised many historical and preservation societies and sat on many review boards.
As a result of my participation in Guild efforts and projects, I was invited to go to both Scotland and China to investigate “lost” technologies for the Public Broadcast Service series NOVA. We built working siege weapons in Scotland and in China we built a bridge design that hadn’t been built since the Mongol invasion.
I teach Traditional building skills at Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA. I’m particularly interested in ways that the pre-industrial past practice can inform building in the greener, sustainable post-industrial world of the future.
I serve as a sailor, boson and ship’s carpenter aboard the tall ship Gazela (www.Gazela.org). That experience has taught me much about rigging and raising heavy loads in confined spaces. It’s taught me about erecting tall, secure, flexible, stable structures that get tossed about and shaken mercilessly. A sea captain in her own right, my wife serves as First Mate aboard Gazela. She out-ranks me, and helps keep me humble.
Since 22 February, I have been working as much as possible to develop a method to rebuild the Bell tower at Christchurch. With the help of friends and students, and the forbearance of my wife, I developed a plan that is beautiful, solid, strong, flexible, earthquake resistant, buildable, durable, and familiar. But more than anything, I want to use the rebuilding of the steeple as a vehicle for rebuilding and strengthening the community. And, once built, serve as an outward witness to the inward love we have for each other as fellow humans.
I look forward to doing this project with the able help of my best friends in the world…many of whom I haven’t yet met.
█ More information about the People’s Steeple Project and participants at http://thepeoplessteeple.org/
Related Posts and Comments:
23.12.15 Christ Church Cathedral: practical news from govt mediator…
14.7.12 Rival newspaper on historic heritage #cathedral
2.3.12 Christ Church, Cathedral Square
—
Posted by Elizabeth Kerr
This post is offered in the public interest.
*Images: Christchurch Cathedral – (from top) colour render by whatifdunedin [photo source: Country Farm Garden Photos at cfgphoto.com]; black white render by whatifdunedin [photo source: Tony H Photography at tonyhphotography.co.nz]; colour photo of steeple detail [mygola.com]; cathedral with chalice by Sisson Photography [via photoshelter.com]; black white photo by Mudbird Ceramics [mudbirdceramics.blogspot.co.nz]; colour photo by Cindy taken on 5 Aug 2003 [via staticflickr.com]
What if? Dunedin... 
Good historic heritage news at Christchurch today.
At Facebook:
[Photo link issue at Stuff, viewable at their page by clicking on the blank box. -Eds]
****
Fri, 3 Mar 2017
Stuff: $70m for cathedral restoration
By Charlie Gates – The Press
Catholic leaders are confident they can raise the $70 million still needed for the restoration of their earthquake-damaged cathedral in Christchurch, but the project will have to be approved by a new bishop.
Diocese administrator Rick Loughnan said consultants had been appointed to help with the fundraising effort for the Cathedral of the Blessed Sacrament on Barbadoes St along with parish buildings and new churches.
“We are confident that we could raise that money,” he said. The diocese has about $30m for the $100m cathedral restoration project, leaving about $70m left to raise. Loughnan said the money could be raised in the diocese, overseas and in the local community.
Bishop Barry Jones died in February last year. The long and private process to find his replacement is still under way, Loughnan said. Before his death, Jones approved a project to restore the central part of the cathedral, known as the nave, for about $45m. Diocese leaders said in October that engineering work had proved the whole cathedral could be restored for about $100m.
“We are going to propose to the new bishop that we restore the cathedral, possibly with some new lightweight materials in some places,’’ Loughnan said. We are ready to go in a sense, but we can’t do anything that compromises the bishop’s decision. We are waiting for our new bishop. He will make the final decision on whether we proceed with restoration or not. That is his decision.” Cont/
● The diocese has also started work on repairing, strengthening and replacing churches across the diocese.
****
From: Mark Belton
Sent: Friday, 3 March 2017 2:12 p.m.
To: Sebastian Wilberforce
Cc: [Elizabeth Kerr +RCC Mailing List]
Subject: RE: The Press on the [Catholic] cathedral and heritage 3 3 17
This quiet resolve of the Catholic leadership shames the Anglicans….how pathetic and lacking in faith they are, and why the lack of confidence in support from the wider community? They continuously insult good people within New Zealand and around the world who would give generously to assist with the cathedral’s restoration.
The Anglicans timidity about sharing in the risk of raising $30 million is a sham.
The Arts Centre Trust faced raising $140 million to cover costs above their insurance payout, more than four times the amount the Anglicans require.
The Roman Catholics need to raise $70 million, more than twice what the Anglicans are so challenged by.
And as the Press revealed last week the Anglicans have an asset base worth over $300 million, and on that basis are well positioned to share some risk.
Despite these facts the Anglicans have the temerity to play hard ball with our Government, rejecting its generous offers, and then had had the gall to make sanctimonious non announcements on the eve of the 6th Anniversary of the quakes.
Their opposition to the restoration of the cathedral has been obvious from the outset as they have gushed alternative truths about safety, cost and ‘modern ecclesiastical requirements’ that would make Trump proud. The facts speak for themselves, from the outset engineering experts were unanimous full restoration to the highest code requirements was possible. To the shame of the Anglicans the cathedral, beloved by so many quake affected Cantabrians, has been left wounded and exposed to vermin and the weather for 6 long years. But for the Bishop’s intransigence it could be well on the way to recovery by now.
The cathedral issue has caused huge discord and anguish in a community that was hurting enough from the trauma of the quakes. Its recovery is essential to the healing needed in this city. This is the most important issue, how this impass has affected our people. It behoves our community leaders to stand strong for the recovery of beautiful and history rich sacred places which people hold dear in their memory. The cathedral in the square is foremost amongst such places. Instead of seizing the opportunity to lead the spiritual and emotional recovery of Christchurch with restoration of the cathedral the Church leadership has obstructed at every opportunity. So Sad. So tragic.
It is time for the Anglican Canterbury Diocese leadership to move on. The Bishop should resign.
That said…A positive decision on the cathedral must be close. There is no other way forward.
Warm regards
Mark
Mark Belton
Co-Chair, Restore Christchurch Cathedral
Mark Belton
Managing Director
Permanent Forests NZ Limited
PO Box 34, Lyttelton 8841, New Zealand
Mark Belton: “But for the Bishop’s intransigence it could be well on the way to recovery by now…….It is time for the Anglican Canterbury Diocese leadership to move on. The Bishop should resign.”
Nailed!
Why do “ordinary” C of E people put up with this ruthlessly ambitious woman? Do Anglican Bishops have a claim to Papal-style infallibility, making it sinful to challenge their opinions? That ghastly person is so out of touch with what the Cathedral means to Christchurch, to Canterbury, to NZers and to people all over the world who ever spent time in Christchurch. Most of them are not Anglicans, indeed statistically it’s a fair bet that most of them aren’t even Christians. This is far from concluding they are not spiritually alive, open to and welcoming of the special places that take them for even a brief time to considerations of matters beyond coffee and credit card debt and interpersonal grumps and facebook.
Received.
From: Vaughan Maybury
Sent: Friday, 3 March 2017 2:33 p.m.
To: Mark Belton; Sebastian Wilberforce
Cc: [Elizabeth Kerr + RCC Mailing List]
Subject: RE: The Press on the [Catholic] cathedral and heritage 3 3 17
Mark, I agree with your points regarding sham ‘concerns’ about raising additional funding. The trustees should follow their leader and also resign, they clearly have no place in a restoration process they have fought tooth and nail to oppose.
Vaughan Maybury
This morning via The Press:
Last updated 09:14, April 1 2017
Stuff: Opinion: Cathedral talks are a ‘sham’
By Philip Burdon
OPINION The long running negotiations over the restoration of the Christ Church Cathedral remain unresolved as the “good faith negotiations” of the church leadership are increasingly called into question. Structurally the building has been the subject of endless engineering reviews and without exception it is agreed by all expert opinion that the cathedral can be made safe and restored to 100 per cent of code using contemporary building techniques and materials.
Endless attempts informally and formally have been made to to reach an agreement with the Anglican church to restore the cathedral. The most recent was the Crown Working Party led by Geoff Dangerfield, a retired senior public servant, where a recommendation was signed off and agreed by the three participating parties – the Crown, the Church Property Trustees (CPT) and the Great Christchurch Building Trust (GCBT). The public were led to believe that the appropriate announcement would be made before Christmas and when that failed by February 22, being the sixth anniversary of the earthquake.
The Crown and the broader community have bent over backwards to accommodate the Church. I suggest it is doubtful if any recipient of such generous offers of help has ever been so ungrateful or so unhelpful. The reality is that, regardless of the understandings that have been reached, the process has been frustrated by an endless succession of last minute objections by the church leadership. Cont/
● Philip Burdon is the co-chairman of the Great Christchurch Buildings Trust.
****
Last updated 05:00, April 1 2017
Stuff: Campaigner: Cathedral talks are ‘sham’
By Charlie Gates – The Press
Negotiations to restore the ChristChurch Cathedral are a “sham” because Anglican leaders have a “private agenda” to demolish the historic building, a campaigner claims. Great Christchurch Buildings Trust (GCBT) co-chairman Philip Burdon made the claims in an opinion piece submitted to Stuff. The businessman and former Cabinet minister has campaigned to save the cathedral from demolition. Church Property Trustees (CPT), who manage Anglican diocese buildings, are in talks with the Government over a deal to restore the cathedral. A deal was expected before Christmas and again in February, but agreement has proved elusive. Burdon believes Anglican leaders secretly want to demolish the cathedral. “On the face of it, it would appear that we have all been the victims of sham negotiations and that the private ambition of the relevant Church leadership has always been to oppose restoration.” Cont/
Bloody Old Victoria Witch and the CPT
—
Cathedral survey options criticised
• The Press
• 20 Apr 2017
• CHARLIE GATES
An Anglican survey on restoration options for Christ Church Cathedral is ‘‘misleading’’ and a ‘‘delaying tactic’’, says heritage campaigner Mark Belton.
The Church Property Trustees (CPT), who manage Anglican diocese buildings, commissioned the survey earlier this month. CPT general manager Gavin Holley said it was commissioned to ‘‘give us up-to-date information’’.
The survey asks people if they prefer a modern cathedral or a restoration. Then it asks if the fact a modern cathedral would not require Government funds, would take seven years to complete and is unlikely to have an impact on rates changes that opinion. It also asks if the fact restoration means the Anglican church ‘‘will need to raise $56 million’’ and full insurance ‘‘is likely to be $1000 a day’’ changes that opinion.
Anglican leaders are in negotiations with the Government over a restoration deal for the cathedral. The Government deal involves the $104m cost of restoration being funded by the Anglican’s $42m insurance payout, a $10m Government grant, a $15m Government loan and a $15m funding pledge from the Great Christchurch Buildings Trust (GCBT). This leaves a shortfall of $26m. The CPT says the shortfall is $56m because the Government’s $15m loan needs to be repaid and the GCBT’s funding pledge is still to be realised. The CPT also points to an additional $4m needed for fundraising costs, taking the total cost of the project to $108 million.
The survey asks for views on taxpayer and ratepayer contributions to the cathedral restoration and if people would be willing to donate to the project. After those questions, the survey asks people to vote again on which cathedral option they prefer.
Restore Christ Church Cathedral Group co-chairman Mark Belton said some questions in the survey were ‘‘appalling’’. ‘‘I am thoroughly disillusioned and frustrated by it,’’ he said. ‘‘They are leading and misleading questions. It is another delaying tactic when what is needed is resolution.
‘‘It is time to be more honest about this. I and many others have kept quiet in the hope that the church is acting in good faith and the poll is further evidence that they have not been. The survey is so manipulated. It is about trying to generate support for something else, which is not what is on the table for negotiation.’’
A diocese spokesman said there would be no comment until the results of the poll were published. He would not say when that would be, nor how people could participate in the survey.
Christchurch-based research agency Research First is carrying out the work and has a link to the questionnaire on its website, researchfirst.co.nz.
‘‘I am thoroughly disillusioned and frustrated by it [the survey].’’ Heritage campaigner Mark Belton
[ends]
****
One for our Lit Candle Vicky:
Last updated 05:00, May 20 2017
The Press: Christ Church Cathedral: What if it has to be modern?
By John McCrone
Stonewalled. Nope, the Bishop won’t be taking questions. Neither will the Church Property Trustees (CPT). Even those more distantly connected to the vexed Christ Church Cathedral question declined interview requests from The Press after a few days of “taking advice”. Perhaps that is human and reasonable. The Anglican hierarchy has been under sustained attack ever since it decided to pull down the very symbol of Christchurch – its earthquake-stricken Gothic revival cathedral – and replace it with something cheaper, safer and modern. But here we are halfway through 2017, still waiting to hear an official response to a Government-backed plan to reinstate the Cathedral with the help of a $10 million grant from the public purse. Instead of giving its answer, the Church has decided to undertake another survey of people’s feelings. In April, CPT employed Research First to run an online questionnaire. And despite the trustees having formally rescinded their 2013 decision to go “modest contemporary” so they could take part in last year’s mediation talks in open good faith, a modern replacement cathedral is again clearly the direction in which they are leaning. […] Cathedral traditionalists, like Great Christchurch Buildings Trust (GCBT) co-chair Philip Burdon, have reacted angrily, saying it shows the negotiations were always a sham. Burdon accuses Bishop Victoria Matthews – a Canadian – of being “an outsider who neither relates to nor understands her host community.” Cont/
—
Emails received by whatifdunedin……..
Email(s) from Ross Gray:
20 May 2017
Why has Mc Crone written this? It seems calculated to increase complication, obfuscation and procrastination, as sought by the Anglican hierarchy. He shows no awareness of the heritage status of the building and the near insuperable odds of having it demolished in order to effect any of these modern schemes. His critiquing of the online poll is nil. He is unaware of how much importance the bishop put on “beauty” (which she can’t seem to ascribe to the cathedral itself!) in her public pronouncements about a modern replacement following the “cathedral tour” in 2013.
Plain mischief-making in my view.
20 May 2017
Sorry, I meant to also say, what a silly and meaningless title, “What if it has to be MODERN?”: what does “have” mean here? Why would it “have to” and according to whom?
I also meant to say what a terrific letter (faith!) from Haydn yesterday! It echoes what we of the Civic Trust have included in a media release which The Press has refused to use and which the Star said it will use in next Thursday’s paper.
[ends]
Email from Marcus Brandt (USA):
21 May 2017
Ross;
I find it curious that the Press is somewhat selective about what stories it deems fit to print about the Cathedral. The Civic Trust press release seems like a natural. It’s to the point and is the voice of a Chch Heritage organization of long standing. It deserves to be in the public sphere that the Fourth Estate is obliged to provide.
But then again, they never bothered to print a single word about UNESCO’s call that the Cathedral must be saved. Other NZ papers picked up the story and we brought it to the Press’s attention, but nothing was printed.
Curious indeed.
Marcus
PS…yes, Hayden’s letter was a gem.
[ends]
Letter to the editor at The Press:
19 May 2017
Anglicans lacking faith?
Faith, faith and more faith is my answer to Noel Dunlop’s question, ‘‘Does the [Anglican diocese] have solutions to come up with the shortfall in funds to cover the cost of restoration?’’ (May 13).
Since when have so many of our church-going Anglicans been so lacking in faith? How acutely today’s church-going Anglicans seem to differ from our founding fathers. Today’s church-going Anglicans could never have founded a city like ours or a province like ours.
Our modern variety seems even to lack faith enough to imagine how inspired men and women of many faiths and none will rebuild Canterbury’s heritage cathedral for them, while the modern Anglican elite sits around turning every penny a thousand times, playing for time.
But time is not on their side, since the cathedral issue is greater than today’s ‘‘churchgoers: and the anglican ‘‘elite’’, who are here today and gone tomorrow.
Haydn Rawston
Lansdown
[ends]
****
The problem personified:
Photo: Joseph Johnson/Fairfax NZ
****
At Twitter:
Last updated 13:29, May 21 2017
The Press: Christ Church Cathedral decision won’t be made until September, as decision-making power transferred
By Nick Truebridge
Delays in deciding what to do with Christ Church Cathedral are holding up development around Cathedral Square. A decision on the future of the earthquake-damaged Christ Church Cathedral will not be made until at least September and will be made by a committee of diocese parishioners and priests. This is the latest holdup in what has become a highly controversial topic in Christchurch’s central-city rebuild, complete with accusations of “sham” negotiations and “delay tactics”. Meanwhile, developers with property interests around Cathedral Square say they will not make decisions on their developments until a decision on the decaying cathedral is made. A decision on the quake-damaged Christ Church Cathedral will not be made until September, Bishop Victoria Matthews has told the city’s Anglican Diocese. Trustees have been considering a Government offer to help with cathedral restoration. The deal involves the majority of the $104 million construction cost of restoration being funded by the Anglican’s $42m insurance payout, a $10m government grant, a $15m government loan and a $15m funding pledge from the Great Christchurch Buildings Trust (GCBT). Cont/
****
The Press’s claim about “developers with property interests around Cathedral Square say they will not make decisions on their developments until a decision on the decaying cathedral is made” is not 100% correct, excuse me, because Invercargill-based Geoffrey Thomson (the owner of Distinction Hotels) has more progressive ideas! As mentioned at another thread here, Thomson is no slouch – he’s opening a new Distinction Hotel on Cathedral Square at Christchurch in early 2018:
http://www.distinctionhotels.co.nz/x,960,1419,0/distinction-hotel-coming-to-christchurch.html
“The Distinction Hotels NZ group own and manage ten superior 4 to 5 star properties under the Distinction Hotels brand in both the North and South Island’s of New Zealand. These locations include Whangarei, Hamilton, Rotorua, Palmerson North, Wellington, Fox Glacier, Lake Wanaka, 2 hotel properties in Te Anau, a new luxury property in Dunedin and another in Christchurch set to open in early 2018.”
At Twitter:
### radionz.co.nz
Govt urged to act on Christ Church Cathedral decision
From Checkpoint, 5:46 pm today Link
The Greater Christchurch Buildings Trust warns if the government doesn’t step in and force a decision before September, the quake damaged building will remain in a state of decay for years to come.
Audio | Download: Ogg MP3 (3′ 10″)
From: Mark Belton [Restore Christchurch Cathedral]
Sent: Thursday, 25 May 2017 7:21 p.m.
To: [RCC mailing list]
Subject: Cathedral Announcement….
Winston Peters is speaking about breaking the cathedral impass on Sunday at 1.30 pm in front of the Cathedral.
The politicians have said they are working on a cross party agreement on how to resolve the cathedral issue.
Peters has been the most forthright supporter of the cathedrals restoration. Prior to the last electionhe said he would make restoration part of any coalition agreement he would agree to.
He should be buoyed by our presence and support….we need a strong presence
PLEASE MAKE EVERY EFFORT OT BE THERE TO SHOW YOUR SUPPORT
ENCOURAGE FAMILY AND FRIENDS TO BE THERE TOO.
Mark Belton & Tim Preston
Co-Chairs
Restore Christchurch Cathedral
—
At Facebook:
I noted the threat that permission to demolish would not be granted readily.
My immediate reaction was, aha, another way Madam Bish can achieve demolition – by neglect.
The bloody bishop has so far resisted all free offers to temporarily cover the open face of the Cathedral.
Yes, La Bish is doing her “damnedest” to ensure that it progresses at max speed past the point of no return, meanwhile distributing red herrings and forcing everyone else to loaf around at her lordly ladyship’s pleasure.
The latest emailed via Celia Tripp, Christchurch:
The latest!!!
The working party report has been released.
http://i.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/93011021/christ-church-cathedral-shortfall-could-be-raised-in-five-years-government-report-says
The latest emailed via Celia Hogan, Christchurch:
The latest!!!
The working party report has been released.
Christ Church Cathedral shortfall could be raised in five years, Government report says
http://i.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/93011021/christ-church-cathedral-shortfall-could-be-raised-in-five-years-government-report-says
Story at 1 News this evening:
MP’s try and hasten decision on fate of quake-damaged Christchurch Cathedral
31 min ago
Reporter: Alison Pugh
The meeting comes as the Government releases recommendations that the church be restored.
Source: 1 NEWS
Watch video here:
https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/mps-try-and-hasten-decision-fate-quake-damaged-christchurch-cathedral
This came in to grand applause:
### stuff.co.nz
Time to take to the Christ Church Cathedral with a blunt edge
By Martin Van Beynen
Last updated 12:04, May 26 2017
OPINION: Bluntness is not much valued in New Zealand.
But if any dilemma needs some of this under-appreciated quality it is the Christ Church Cathedral saga.
Skirting around the issue with polite circumlocution hasn’t got us anywhere and it’s high time we started talking brass tacks.
The first thing to say is that the city of Christchurch can’t trust the Anglican Church, currently headed in Christchurch by the reclusive Bishop Victoria Matthews, to make the right decision.
If any evidence of the church’s unsuitability to make the decision is required, we need go no further than this week’s epistle from Bishop Matthews as it appeared in The Press.
If she had said in blunt terms that the church owned the land, would make its own decision and everyone could take a running jump, then I would have said, “go girl” or something similar.
Instead the missive is full of passive-aggressive self justification, avoidance of the issue and sneaky blame pointing.
For instance Bishop Matthews says one of her favourite questions “to ponder is, What do people mean when they say our cathedral in the Square is an icon?”
Well, let me lay this out for the bishop and forgive me, if you will, for mansplaining.
The cathedral is foremost a building which occupies a pivotal place in Christchurch’s most important public space in the city. As a result, it’s the building most frequently associated with the branding of the city and has connections with the past and present.
The cathedral’s original function as a place of worship has dwindled because, let’s face it, nobody goes to church anymore, and its alternative roles have taken up the slack as the city becomes denser and more people friendly. In a city where heritage takes on greater meaning, the cathedral is even more central to the city’s architectural fabric.
The square would actually work much better without a cathedral in its eastern quarter. If the Anglicans want to build a new church, that’s fine but it doesn’t need to be in the square. The church could donate the land and ruins to the city, take the insurance money and carry on business somewhere else.
So it’s the building, the history, the place in the landscape that far out weigh any function as a place of worship. The church might be the registered proprietor of the land but the city owns the building in everything but the documentation.
We already know the bishop prefers demolition and a new cathedral. We are therefore looking at a ludicrous situation where the Anglicans and the Catholics want to erect two new edifices for their minuscule surviving congregations.
Here’s an idea. Why don’t the churches pool their resources, build a nice church they can both use and use the rest of the money to build housing for the homeless and mentally ill. Or why don’t the two churches lease the restored cathedral for their services, which aren’t that different, in a spirit of religious harmony.
Carrying on with our blunt speak, we should also stop pretending there are a number of realistic options on the table.
The only intelligent and sensible way forward is to restore the cathedral to its former state. We need to arrest the fiction the church has any real say in the matter.
As I’ve mentioned, anything other than full restoration forfeits the right of the church to be in the city’s most important public place. It’s like the Parthenon in Athens. No longer of any real use but still deserving of its place as long as it’s the original article.
Too hard? A workforce with all the right skills is just down the road. It will soon finish most of the restoration and strengthening work on the Arts Centre and could simply pack up and move to the square.
Too expensive? Money for these things can always be found. As a ratepayer I don’t mind stumping up some of the money even if an extra special cathedral levy has to be imposed. But we shouldn’t forget the cathedral is a national asset and has a call on national taxpayer funds. It’s not only a Christchurch icon but, like the Church of the Good Shepherd at Lake Tekapo, a national one.
The good bishop talks in her sermon this week of a “hurting city” and “the pain of the people suffering”. She calls for a return to the heroic period of just after the earthquake when “we actually … wanted to help one another”.
Dear oh dear. What planet is this woman on? This hand-wringing and diluting the issue with a whole lot of irrelevancies is just what is not needed to resolve the cathedral saga.
Here’s what should happen. Bishop Matthews should do the heroic thing and resign. Restoration work should commence as soon as contractors are available. The Citizens’ war memorial should be moved from the site to some where it is the focus rather than a sideshow.
I’m not in favour of any land confiscation as this will inevitably lead to years in the courts. In this case the church should bow to the will of intelligent people. If you will.
http://i.stuff.co.nz/the-press/opinion/93005623/time-to-take-to-the-christ-church-cathedral-with-a-blunt-edge
*Bolding by whatifdunedin
Martin Van Beynen has nailed it. SO nailed it.
RNZ Published on May 25, 2017
Chch Cathedral rebuild achievable, new report shows
—
### radionz.co.nz
Chch Cathedral rebuild achievable, new report shows
From Checkpoint, 5:15 pm on 26 May 2017 Link
The Anglican church would only have to contribute the money it received in its insurance payout in order for Christchurch’s cathedral to be restored.
Audio | Download: Ogg MP3 (4′49″)
The Press 27 May 2017
Cash could be raised in five years
By Charlie Gates
A Government-commissioned report by the Cathedral Working Group estimates a funding shortfall for the restoration of Christ Church Cathedral could be filled in five years. A funding shortfall of more than $50 million for restoration of the Christ Church Cathedral could be raised in three to five years, according to a Government’s working group report on the building.
The Working Group report, released under the Official Information Act this week, was delivered to the Government in December. The group was tasked by the Government in July last year to develop a feasible and costed plan for restoration of the cathedral. The report includes advice from fundraising consultancy AskRIGHT about the feasibility of raising $55m for the restoration. Restoration of the cathedral is estimated to cost about $104m. It would be funded by the Anglican’s $42m insurance payout and a $10m government grant. That leaves a $52m funding gap.
The report sets a fundraising target of $55m. That would be ’’formidable’’, but achievable, it states. ‘‘If the guidance is followed the entity responsible for raising the funds can proceed with a high degree of confidence of success.’’ The report also states that the Great Christchurch Buildings Trust (GCBT) has ‘‘confirmed and identified’’ donations worth $13.7m.
In our view, a change in ownership would spark another series of acrimonious debates.
Read the full news story at the PressReader, go to http://www.pressreader.com/new-zealand/the-press/20170527/281599535448045
*Awaiting Stuff link to the above story. -Eds
****
Last updated 05:00, May 27 2017
The Press: Lost the plot? These 19 questions will get you up to speed on the Christ Church Cathedral saga
By Charlie Gates
Confused by the cathedral saga? Get right up-to-date on with our Q&A.
[the questions]
Why should I care?
How did we get here?
What happened to the cathedral in the quakes?
What did the Anglicans do then?
So, why didn’t they demolish the whole thing?
What did the Anglicans want to build on the cathedral site?
When did the Government get involved?
Why did the Government get involved?
So what did Brownlee do?
Then what did Brownlee do?
What happened?
What was in the second deal?
Have Anglicans accepted the deal?
What is a synod?
Is the end in sight?
What happens if the Anglicans decide to demolish and build a modern replacement?
What does Nicky Wagner want?
What does the mayor want?
What does the bishop want?
Go to this link for the answers:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/92961095/lost-the-plot-these-19-questions-will-get-you-up-to-speed-on-the-christ-church-cathedral-saga
rather good………….
Received via Mark Belton (Co-chair, Restore Christchurch Cathedral)
Sun, 28 May 2017 at 10:51 p.m.
Garry Moore…Former mayor of CHCH has his say on the cathedral.
A Cathedral:
It is interesting how one of the Cathedrals in Christchurch is becoming pretty contentious. In the period since the earthquakes this blot on the landscape has remained uncovered and an ugly reminder that a bureaucracy like a Church can behave as badly as any other institution. Often worse. They hide behind a divine, and very hierarchical cloak. The “don’t meddle with me, God is on my side” sort of behaviour. This causes people to back off in case they are struck down with a bolt of lightning. Even if they don’t believe in religion.
I have said a number of times my theology is based on the Christ who drove the money lenders from the Temple. I’m not sure what his thinking would be on the way the Church has behaved in this City toward the rest of us.
The Anglican Bishop has a simple theology towards buildings. It is that the Body of Christ resides in the people and that buildings are irrelevant. That’s perfectly acceptable if your institution operates far away from any public trough. However Churches do not pay taxes; so they are already have their snouts in the public trough. Also, in Christchurch the CCC has funded the building in the Square to the tune of millions of dollars. I know. I argued at the Council table for these funds to be allocated. If you think we were wrong then drive along Colombo Street in a Northerly direction and have a look at the roof of the Cathedral. You will observe that it is dead straight. The earthquake proofing that you and I paid for worked. What didn’t work was that they had some poor engineering advice and the Cathedral Chapter installed a battering ram at the end of the building between the big earthquakes. When the building moved back and forward on 22 February 2011 this steel structure destroyed the Western end of the building. I stood on Worcester Boulevard bridge and watched it fall down.
The next bit was the real crime. Instead of securing the building and protecting it the Bishop quickly “deconsecrated” it. Here was an excellent opportunity to get rid of a building which cost of fortune to keep open. The Bishop wanted it closed from the start. So for the past 6½ years the pigeons and the weather have had a clear run on this wonderful old building. Peter Beck used to describe it as “the heart and soul of the City”. Well the Anglican faithful have shown us clearly where their heart and soul resides. Somewhere else. Some people have been loud in their condemnation, and good on them. Many people have been disgusted and have voiced their views quietly and sadly. It would appear that many Church faithful have accepted that their Bishop is correct.
In my opinion this issue shows how bureaucracies are often inherently dishonest, without sufficient checks and balances. In the Anglican Church in this Province these checks and balances don’t seem to be working properly. This latest effort by the Bishop to refer the Cathedral to the Synod is a cynical power play. There are three votes at the Synod. The Bishop has one. The Clergy another (just imagine what will happen if they vote against her). The final vote is one for the laity. There is little time for each of the parishes to canvass their attendees to see what their view is on the matter. Guess what will be decided.
Last week the Press printed a badly written, and surprisingly dreadful, argument by the Bishop. I thought she was a better thinker than this. Obviously the Church is feeling rattled. There was a Letter to the Editor by the Archbishop for NZ in the paper defending the Bishop last Thursday. It is attached. This letter was equally awful.
I have known all of the Bishops over the past few decades, Anglican and Catholic. I often reflect back on this City when I first arrived in Christchurch over 4 decades ago, and the role of the Churches. The two Bishops, Anglican and Catholic, Pyatt and Ashby, were towering public figures. Strong on social justice issues. Generously liberal and also great thinkers, they led a lot of public discourse. Even if you didn’t believe in religion they spoke great sense. We are now in a bad spot with both denominations.
So I found it interesting to open Saturday’s Press and read the article by Martin Van Beynen about the Bishop and the Cathedral. Here it is A Cathedral: http://fw.to/Ofe2UuU
It is interesting how one of the Cathedrals in Christchurch is becoming pretty contentious. In the period since the earthquakes this blot on the landscape has remained uncovered and an ugly reminder that a bureaucracy like a Church can behave as badly as any other institution. Often worse. They hide behind a divine, and very hierarchical cloak. The “don’t meddle with me, God is on my side” sort of behaviour. This causes people to back off in case they are struck down with a bolt of lightning. Even if they don’t believe in religion.
I have said a number of times my theology is based on the Christ who drove the money lenders from the Temple. I’m not sure what his thinking would be on the way the Church has behaved in this City toward the rest of us.
The Anglican Bishop has a simple theology towards buildings. It is that the Body of Christ resides in the people and that buildings are irrelevant. That’s perfectly acceptable if your institution operates far away from any public trough. However Churches do not pay taxes; so they are already have their snouts in the public trough. Also, in Christchurch the CCC has funded the building in the Square to the tune of millions of dollars. I know. I argued at the Council table for these funds to be allocated. If you think we were wrong then drive along Colombo Street in a Northerly direction and have a look at the roof of the Cathedral. You will observe that it is dead straight. The earthquake proofing that you and I paid for worked. What didn’t work was that they had some poor engineering advice and the Cathedral Chapter installed a battering ram at the end of the building between the big earthquakes. When the building moved back and forward on 22 February 2011 this steel structure destroyed the Western end of the building. I stood on Worcester Boulevard bridge and watched it fall down.
The next bit was the real crime. Instead of securing the building and protecting it the Bishop quickly “deconsecrated” it. Here was an excellent opportunity to get rid of a building which cost of fortune to keep open. The Bishop wanted it closed from the start. So for the past 6 ½ years the pigeons and the weather have had a clear run on this wonderful old building. Peter Beck used to describe it as “the heart and soul of the City”. Well the Anglican faithful have shown us clearly where their heart and soul resides. Somewhere else. Some people have been loud in their condemnation, and good on them. Many people have been disgusted and have voiced their views quietly and sadly. It would appear that many Church faithful have accepted that their Bishop is correct.
In my opinion this issue shows how bureaucracies are often inherently dishonest, without sufficient checks and balances. In the Anglican Church in this Province these checks and balances don’t seem to be working properly. This latest effort by the Bishop to refer the Cathedral to the Synod is a cynical power play. There are three votes at the Synod. The Bishop has one. The Clergy another (just imagine what will happen if they vote against her). The final vote is one for the laity. There is little time for each of the parishes to canvass their attendees to see what their view is on the matter. Guess what will be decided.
Last week the Press printed a badly written, and surprisingly dreadful, argument by the Bishop. I thought she was a better thinker than this. Obviously the Church is feeling rattled. There was a Letter to the Editor by the Archbishop for NZ in the paper defending the Bishop last Thursday. It is attached. This letter was equally awful.
I have known all of the Bishops over the past few decades, Anglican and Catholic. I often reflect back on this City when I first arrived in Christchurch over 4 decades ago, and the role of the Churches. The two Bishops, Anglican and Catholic, Pyatt and Ashby, were towering public figures. Strong on social justice issues. Generously liberal and also great thinkers they led a lot of public discourse. Even if you didn’t believe in religion they spoke great sense. We are now in a bad spot with both denominations.
So I found it interesting to open Saturday’s Press and read the article by Martyn van Beynon about the Bishop and the Cathedral. Here it is http://fw.to/Ofe2UuU.
It’s time for leadership on this issue. I agree with Martin. It’s time to take the Anglican Cathedral, and its land, from the Church. Let’s see what the City population, and the country, thinks about what might be a sensible solution. There are a heap of good ideas around. We had a fantastic presentation at the Tuesday Club on how a wooden spire could be constructed some months ago. There will be others of equal merit.
Remember how the Church of England (and all the other denominations) stole land off the Tangata Whenua from North Cape to Bluff? Now it’s time for them to lose something. If they had earned any respect with their overwhelmingly powerful work in the community post-earthquakes then maybe I would consider them worth of a bit of room with this issue. However they haven’t, so let them retreat from the Square and leave it to us sinners to atone for our sinfulness and to rebuild this heart and soul of the City.
[ends]
Received.
From: Mark Belton
Sent: Monday, 5 June 2017 6:17 p.m.
To: [ Restore Christchurch Cathedral mailing list]
Subject: Former Mayor Garry Moore’s writing about the Cathedral
Dear All
Former Mayor of CHCH Garry Moore is a staunch supporter of recovering the Cathedral.
His recent reflections on the cathedral issue are copied below.
And attached is a writing from Haydn Rawstron…for the Cathedral Deans FB page. Haydn is writing from OS, probably the UK. Another tireless supporter of our cathedral.
Mark Belton
Co-chair, Restore Christchurch Cathedral
—
Garry Moore
A Cathedral:
This issue has sure heated up this week. I am attaching an email which Haydn Rawstron wrote during the week. It is a very interesting perspective.
I listened with great interest to John Campbell’s interview with the Bishop. I am a huge fan of John’s but the Bishop had him on toast for breakfast. I react to pious voices. Holier than thou. Maybe one too many masses as a kid. The Bishop defended her institution very well. I was left with the impression that she had a hot line which gave her a position us mere sinners could not understand. She totally distracted John Campbell by referring to the mental health issues in this City. Now nobody is denying the fact that this is true and that the Government is short-changing this City with the mental health budget, but this fact is COMPLETELY irrelevant to this debate. When the Bishop distracted John by pointing the finger at society she should remember that a pointed finger has two ends. The one pointing in her direction is that housing is one of our most critical challenges in our society. I note that the Anglican Church has been selling properties around the City, one just down from us in Cranford Street. Did the fact that they could play a role in affordable housing enter their heads? When the Church leaders stands up and piously points out where the state should be spending money she should also think about what role the institutional church is playing. Maybe how they could be doing a bit better in the sharing of their resources?
I couldn’t put the argument better about the Campbell interview than Celia Hogan who wrote on a blog:
The Bishop was on the radio with John Campbell.
Her personal opinion is that she doesn’t want the cathedral restored (which we all know).
She continues to talk about how the mental health crisis is really bad in Christchurch and that the funds would be better spent there.
The mental health crisis is really bad here in Christchurch, and that amount of money would be well used in that sector BUT if they decide to demolish the cathedral all that money (the governments $25m and GCBT $15) won’t be going towards mental health. And I am 100% confident that none of the church’s $42m would end up in mental health either – why? Well you can barely get a warehouse for that price and then there is the cost of deconstruction, possibly around the $7-$9m mark.
The other question is where has all the insurance money from the other earthquake demolished church’s in Canterbury gone? I don’t imagine it’s gone to mental health!!!!
We are dealing with a Heritage Building which has the highest rating this country awards a building. Not that Heritage grading stopped Gerry Brownlee knocking over dozens of heritage buildings calling them “old dungers”. As well it has an emotional rating way beyond what the Heritage rating covers. This building is not a normal church. It is the place where the City went to celebrate and to grieve. A place of quiet contemplation and rejoicing. Where the voices of children with great voices and mature men sang ecclesiastical music and hymns daily. It is a traditional place. Dammit. Do we have to discard everything in this world because it’s over 5 minutes old? We aren’t talking about a 3D version of life here. This place was special. I remember as Mayor when 9/11 occurred the Cathedral filled that evening as we paused and reflected with our brothers and sisters in New York. Believers and non-believers. Side by side. Or when Rod Donald died and we filled the Cathedral and celebrated his life. Rod wasn’t a believer. However the Cathedral was an entirely appropriate place to celebrate his life. His last act around that part of the city had been to sleep in a cardboard box outside the Cathedral to highlight the plight of the homeless.
I return to a theme I write about frequently. An institution will end up completely dishonest unless it has proper checks and balances. In my opinion the Anglican Church in Canterbury has lost that perspective. On the Campbell interview we had a very intelligent woman determined to impose her own analysis on her Church and this City. That is her role as a leader of an institution. It’s called leadership. However Bishop Matthews arrears to place little value on history or tradition. She appears to ignore how we, ordinary Christchurch residents, feel about her institution or its rules. It seems to me that the Bishop is completely absorbed by the Institution and can’t see beyond it. I also found it interesting how other Church leaders wrote a Letter to the Editor in the Press on Wednesday. The points they make are quite valid. However the main issue which they completely missed is that this Cathedral is no ordinary Church building. This City was effectively built around it. It was a fundamental building which reflected the faith and belief of those European settlers who planned and built this City. You cannot write off the history of a community because it doesn’t fit in with how we might behave today.
If we applied the same test as the Anglican Church has, supported by other Church leaders, towards the Cathedral you could say “why rebuild the Provincial Chambers?”. We don’t have provincial government any longer. So why not pull down the building? What about the Arts Centre. The University has moved to Ilam so the buildings are no longer needed so why not pull those buildings down as well. They aren’t needed for the educational purpose for which they were constructed so, using the Anglican Church logic, pull them down and build a lovely glass monstrosity to house rich people who can afford to live there.
Another aspect of this very public unseemly debate might be that it releases the forces within the Church who are just looking for an excuse to pull out of this Institution and start their own. There is huge debate about the right to marry same sex couples. There is loose talk of affiliating with an Australian break-away group. This could completely distract the Synod from even worrying at all about the Cathedral building. They would become enmeshed in expensive legal battles to defend their ownership of land and buildings. This will also be a legacy issue. This particular Bishop has been very encouraging of fundamental Anglicanism. My observation is that people attracted to this sort of theology move easily from place to place. They seem attracted to American evangelists who are bright and shiny. Full of worthy hymns and accompanied by body guards and great sound systems. These evangelists live lavishly and prey on the vulnerable, who fund their lifestyles. Is this where the local Anglican church is heading? Maybe that explains why they have no commitment to traditional places.
I repeat what I said last week. The Cathedral land and buildings should be taken from the Church.
Garry Moore
Everything is alright in the end. If it isn’t, then we’re not at the end. –Winston Churchill.
Democracy dies in darkness – the by-line of the Washington Post
****
From: Haydn Rawstron
Sent: 30 May 2017 4:04 a.m.
To: CHCHNZ Charlie Gates
Subject: Cathedral, synod,etc….!
Dear Charlie,
I have just posted the following on Dean Lawrence Kimberley’s FB page in answer to a comment there, which showed total ignorance on several crucial matters of understanding regarding the cathedral, its special status and, above, its funding!!
Given your interest in the matter, I though you might [like] to read my posting, which follows.
All best wishes,
Haydn
—
Anne Cecilia Wells Tilling should not be so quick to form such an opinion, and particularly not here on Lawrence ‘s timeline. Perhaps then, we should widen this debate to include Lianne, Robert, Mark, John, Paul and others. Just prior to the earthquakes, cathedral-loving philanthropists raised $4 million to endow the cathedral choir. One former chorister donated $500,000. I personally gave a mere $30,000 but personally raised $270,000 ($240,000 of which in the UK) more. The diocese paid nothing. And such is the history of cathedral funding. The cathedral up until the earthquakes cost the diocese nothing: Instead, the cathedral contributed annually a sizable sum to the diocese, I think some $35,000 if my memory serves me correctly. The cathedral is made up totally ‘of Cantabrian philanthropy’, donations given specifically to the cathedral, for the cathedral. Already as early as the 1930s, diocesan (synod) envy of cathedral finances led to the creation of a cathedral foundation to help pay for the running/salary costs of the cathedral. Philanthropists again made that foundation possible. The cathedral has no land income (as does the diocese) and it is funded by its own foundation, by bequests and philanthropy. [In] recent years, the City Council made an annual grant of $240,000 towards running costs and the CCC was most generous in funding either the restoration of the cathedral roof or the earthquake-strengthening, or both (I can’t exactly remember which). Cathedral philanthopy is very special because it comes not only from anglicans but from catholics, non-conformists, jews and agnostics. (The money I raise annually to send out the singers from Christ Church, Oxford, to Christchurch Cathedral, called THE OXFORDS, comes overwhelmingly from catholic philanthropists!) Synod is not only riven with its eternal division between liberals and evangelicals – the reason we ended up with the unknown compromise candidate, Victoria Matthews, anyway – but, historically, synod is no friend of the cathedral. And, that is not my opinion, but the opinion of two former bishops of Christchurch: AND, PARTLY TO THIS END, all NZ- born bishops of the Christchurch have previously served as Deans of Christchurch Cathedral (as, too, did Dean/Bishop/Archbishop Julius). As bishops, they were then able to smooth out the different expectations of ‘cathedral interests’ and ‘diocese/synod interests’. As bishops, they respected the ‘autonomy’ that the Dean of the cathedral traditionally had, and they were careful to give their deans the space to act as important spokesmen in the city (the likes of Sullivan, Pyatt, Bluck and Beck). Matthews comes from a totally different tradition: in Canada all deans are rectors of a parish and none has any personal particular profile in their cities (I have this information direct from a horse’s mouth, from the Dean of Edmonton, Canada, where Matthews previously served as bishop: ‘the ONLY person of profile is the bishop’). Most Christchurch citizens knew who the giants, Dean Sullivan or Dean Pyatt, were, and who Bluck and Beck were. That is hardly the case with the deans and ‘acting dean’ appointed since Matthews. MOREOVER, returning to the question of synod: very, very few members of synod are regular cathedral worshippers: the majority probably worshipping in the cathedral when synod met once a year and on hardly any other occasion. Most members of synod are spectacularly ignorant about the special needs of the cathedral and its special identity. That was also lamentably made clear when Synod elected Matthews. It paid no attention, whatsoever, as to whether the new bishop could fit into the special relationship with the cathedral and respect the traditional ‘autonomy’ of a Christchurch Cathedral dean. Synod had one thing in mind, divided as it was (and is) along evangelical and liberal lines. Synod members were hell-bent on trying to secure ‘their’ man as bishop (for the two preferred candidates were NZers and men), and when time was running out and no way forward was reached, they switched their tired attention to a remote Canadian retired bishop, whom NO SINGLE member of synod had ever personally met, as a compromise candidate, but – crucially – as a candidate who had no link whatsoever, personally, to either feuding faction. Synod made no request for Matthews to come personally to NZ for an interview, even though she was to be put in charge of a very large diocese and one of the largest land portfolios in Canterbury. If Synod was that irresponsible, it is no small wonder that it was totally incapable of considering ‘the cathedral’ in its deliberations. Synod hardly acted professionally and responsibly. Like Synod, like Matthews.’ To ask synod to decide the cathedral issue is simply the most cynical of her chess moves, yet.
[ends]
Received.
From: Vaughan Maybury [RCC member]
Sent: Fri, 9 Jun 2017 13:05:34 +1200
To: [Restore Christchurch Cathedral mailing list]
Subject: The bishop’s latest twist.
Does anyone know how Matthew’s was able to bend the rules to transfer authority for the cathedral decision from the cathedral trustees to the synod? Based on information circulated here, the Bishop and clergy hold 2/3 of the vote which will hand Matthews the ‘demolish’ home run she’s hell bent on scoring. Was this latest move required because some trustees had a change of heart and were caving? Why wasn’t the decision handed to the synod 5 years ago?
A recent George Clarke (Restoration Man) program featured the restoration of Finchcock’s Oast House located on the Scotney Castle estate in Kent, England. Scotney is the former ancestral home of Edward Hussey III whose moto is carved in the stone above the entrance and reads ‘Vix ea nostra voco’, the English translation is ‘I scarcely call these things our own’ or more simply ‘we just look after this house for future generations’. Enough said.
Vaughan Maybury
Received from David Lynch
Momentus Public Relations Ltd
Christchurch at 4:55 p.m.
FYI: Press coverage (online) of Alasdair Cassels, Cathedral Working Group member, report on the cathedral that he presented at last night’s Christchurch Civic Trust annual general meeting.
Alasdair Cassels: ‘We’d be barbarians’ to tear down the Christ Church Cathedral
Press Online – Jamie Small 08:31, June 21 2017
WATCH VIDEO
http://i.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/93902600/alasdair-cassels-wed-be-barbarians-to-tear-down-the-christ-church-cathedral
****
Additional background:
Ian Lochhead Published on Jan 29, 2015
Restore Christchurch Cathedral Presentation
This 5 minute slide show explains why Christchurch Cathedral, in Christchurch, New Zealand, should be restored following damage in the 2011 earthquakes.
HeliCam PRO Published on Aug 24, 2014
Remembering Christchurch Cathedral
Filmed by Christchurch based aerial specialists HeliCam PRO
Christchurch Cathedral is an Anglican cathedral in the city of Christchurch, New Zealand. It was built between 1864 and 1904, in the centre of the city surrounded by Cathedral Square. On the 22 February 2011 Christchurch was hit with a 6.3 magnitude earthquake that destroyed the spire and part of the tower and severely damaged the structure of the remaining building.
From: Mark Belton
Sent: Thursday, 29 June 2017 10:40 p.m.
To: [Restore Christchurch Cathedral mailing list]
Subject: STUFF NEWS: Christchurch City Council to consider funding Christ Church Cathedral restoration behind closed doors
Dear All….there is much work going on behind the scenes… see stuff news below…The Mayor Lianne Dalziel and her deputy Andrew Turner, and most councillors are supportive of restoration. Before the quakes the council has been a generous supporter of maintenance and improvements work on the cathedral. For the last decade it had granted about $250,000 per annum towards ongoing running costs.
Tim Preston and I urged Council at its public forum meeting a week ago to consider the Governments Group Report supporting restoration, and to show ‘its hand’….the Council are voting on the matter tomorrow in a private session. Fingers crossed for a strong showing of support and a commitment to contribute to rebuild and maintenance costs.
Mark Belton
Co-chair, Restore Christchurch Cathedral
****
Last updated 17:31, June 29 2017
Stuff: Council to consider funding Christ Church Cathedral restoration behind closed doors
By Charlie Gates – The Press
Christchurch city councillors will meet behind closed doors to consider funding for the restoration of the Christ Church Cathedral. Christchurch Mayor Lianne Dalziel on Thursday said councillors would meet in private on Friday to consider council funding options for cathedral restoration. Any funding decision from the meeting would be subject to consultation, she said. […] Dalziel said she felt council should contribute to the $104 million restoration cost of the cathedral. […] Dalziel said restoration of the cathedral would provide certainty for the city. Cont/
At Facebook:
Oh dear! The ramifications of the rebuild, or not to. God certainly dealt a mean hand the day he unleashed those earthquakes in and around Christchurch. Interesting to see and hear how the motley homo sapiens handle it all. Buildings, sheesh! they consume more time and debate than they do materials, and for what? It is the endless toing and froing of the ‘hoy poloy’ that is interesting, Now, the business in Australia where the police have decided to charge the RC Cardinal on time related sex charges. A much more interesting situation than mere buildings, I think. Imagine if we could see a case of sex abberations in the Cathedral which could then be seen as a God driven result in the building being razed. Now that would be worth talking about, wouldn’t it?
A far leap, Calvin. The Anglicans at Christchurch are not the “RC’s”. Neither are all RC’s the Australian Cardinal or series of priests and church hierarchy (worldwide) being forced by the police and courts to confront their heinous transgressions.
For that, Christ Church Cathedral (the building) – for rebuild – may practically stand apart. And endure. With conservation, restoration, redevelopment and new engineering technology. Thank god.
Er, the earthquakes were a natural disaster, in which people died. It was not caused by a supernatural entity. Any God above CH would be Anglo High Church, anyway.
Calvin, I think there’s addendum or amendment: “God certainly dealt a mean hand the day he unleashed” on the city to the north of here a manipulative self-willed Bishop driven to extraordinary efforts by personal “I want” …….
Consideration is now being given to the restoration of the Christchurch RC Cathedral. Estimated cost $100,000,000. With all this money floating around Christchurch to restore broken religious monuments. It would appear that Christchurch, unlike the rest of NZ, doesn’t have any poverty issues that should take precedence over bricks and mortar.
I have just returned from Berlin. it is a jaw dropping sight. The old imperial centre between the Brandenburg gate and the old palace has been rebuilt pretty much in its entirety, as has quite a bit of the City on either side of the Unter den Linden. You can imagine the scale and the nature of the buildings involved.
The palace itself which has been rebuilt from scratch, and which makes Buckingham Palace look both small and restrained, is due to be finished in the next 18 months. It will be a modern multi-use public building inside, as they have no current use for an imperial palace (Hang on Angela!).
The Dom, the heavily bombed Old Cathedral, is now entirely ‘as was’. Beyond this rebuilt ‘Mitte’ area it’s a modern but liveable city that retains a lot of its old character and a surprising amount of its older buidlings, many of which have been repaired. It contains no giant shoeboxes whatsoever, and is the better for it – unlike London – Yuk!! All this while surrounded by quite considerable artificial hills which are where they put the old one.
Obviously, like the citizens of Ypres and Rheims, they thought it was worthwhile, and I agree with them.
Yes Rob, but they have population, that also works and they don’t have folk like our Mayor, sea rise to contend with or blocked mudtanks do they? Germans as a race of people know how to make trains and buses run on time, but they have made a fatal mistake by importing labour from Turkey and other eastern areas to use during their boom times. Problem is those folk don’t go back but water down the population. They now have groups of ‘different’ people, different cultures and religions. The problems are working through into the system and chaos is the next thing after a generation or more. Europe is generally dealing with racism and grumpy folk of all types. New Zealand is fortunate in being small, isolated with water as its boundary, but we still have the likliehood of racial problems coming up the road if our politicians aren’t careful.
From: Mark Belton
Sent: Tuesday, 4 July 2017 2:54 p.m.
To: Sebastian Wilberforce
Cc: [RCC mailing list]
Subject: RE: the Press on the Cathedral and heritage 4 7 17
Dear Cathedral Restoration Supporters…
Big news today is in addition to the City Council pledging $10m over 5 years toward restoration, the Government Minister Nicky Wagner announced Cabinet have agreed to improve their offer to $25 million. In addition there is the $42 million insurance payout, and the GCBT pledge of about $15 million.
This leaves just $10 million to be raised to cover the funding gap…
Hopefully this overwhelming support, and the depth and logic of the CWG report win over the Bishop and the Synod.
The pre-Synod consultation meetings start tonight. We will be presenting the case for restoration in accordance with the CWG recommendations at these meetings. Today’s announcements will greatly assist our cause. We hope Synod will vote to support restoration.
In today’s announcement the Minister made specific reference to the Peoples Steeple project. Mack McGee and Marcus Brandt please note!
Warm regards
Mark Belton
Co Chair RCC.
****
Last updated 21:00 03/07/2017
Stuff: Christchurch City Council votes to give $10m to save Christ Church Cathedral
By Michael Wright – The Press
The city council has pledged $10 million to restore Christ Church Cathedral, further strengthening the public commitment to save the earthquake-damaged building. Stuff understands Christchurch city councillors voted unanimously to help pay for the rebuild of the church at an extraordinary meeting on Friday. The decision is in principle only, contingent on restoration going ahead. Public consultation is needed, as no such funding for the cathedral was allocated in the council’s Long Term Plan. […] The council money would come from its heritage budget over several years. The council frequently provides funding to preserve heritage buildings, but not on this scale. Recent contributions include $1.9m each for McLeans Mansion and the Public Trust office. Mayor Lianne Dalziel last week spoke in favour of council financial support for restoration. Cont/
****
Tue, 4 Jul 2017
ODT: $35m restoration offer for cathedral
Source: NZ Herald
An offer of $35 million, along with legislation to fast-track the restoration of earthquake-crippled ChristChurch Cathedral, has been made by the Government and the Christchurch City Council today. The deal was presented this morning by the Minister Supporting Greater Christchurch Regeneration, Nicky Wagner, to Anglican Bishop Victoria Matthews. The deal consists of a new Crown offer of $10 million plus an interest-free loan of $15 million. The council will contribute an extra $10 million, subject to public consultation, and comes on top of a pledge through the Restore Christchurch Cathedral Campaign for a further $13 million. Taken together with the church’s insurance proceeds of $42 million, it brings the money available to about $90 million. It leaves a shortfall of about $14 million, after the Cathedral Working Group Recommendation Report, released last month, recommended rebuilding the cathedral, at an estimated cost of $104 million. The cost of the restoration, however, has also risen and is now at $127 million, leaving a shortfall of $37 million. Cont/
I’m curious to see what new excuse Bish pulls out of her ear in support of her iron resolve to have a new cathedral, a lasting monument to, ah, could the word be ego?