A BABY,
A BLUE DOT,
& THE PEOPLE
OF GOD.
A study in the missiological benefits of
refurbished church sanctuaries within
some Church of Scotland congregations.
Rev Scott Burton
June 2013
STUDY LEAVE REPORT
The purpose of this study leave is to investigate the benefits
of refurbishing a traditional place of worship by bringing the
facilities up to a more modern standard.
I have come to my current ministry in Perth (of 6.5 years thus far)
from a previous seven year ministry in a congregation (Kelty
in Fife) that removed all pews, installed a new heating system,
automated glass front door, new kitchen and upgraded AV facilities
in their 19th century ecclesiastical building. I am aware, therefore,
of some of the practical benefits to the congregation in terms of
more comfortable seating, warmer environment in winter months,
flexible space etc. However, rooted in the fact that my current
congregation is moving further and further along the road towards
refurbishing our 800 seat, late 19th century sanctuary, with all the
expensive costs of architects fees, planning consents, design, and
actual refurbishment itself, the prime focus of this research will be
to enquire about the specific impact of church refurbishments on a
congregation’s ministry and mission.
I am indebted to Mr Brian Waller of the Church of Scotland
General Trustees for sending an extensive list of refurbished
churches from around the whole of Scotland. I am also grateful to
my friends and colleagues on Facebook who responded to a
question I posted there: “Assessing some of the real benefits of
refurbishing places of worship, has anyone got suggestions of
refurbished churches worth a visit?”
I received 33 suggestions of refurbished churches to visit, from 24
individual contributors. These suggestions ranged from Carlops in
the Borders to St. Gile’s Church in Elgin, Moray.
(See appendix 1). Some of these suggestions I know well, having
worked in them as youth worker, minister or probationer assistant,
or having visited for other reasons in the past. Others are known
to me simply because they are local to my current location, and
still more I have no knowledge of at all.
In order to maximize the limited time for this study, and to minimise
the expense of travelling around the country, I decided to try and
focus on church buildings that would be easily accessible, match
something similar to what my own congregation are hoping to do
and which are practical to visit in terms of geography, and
schedules (both mine and those being visited). Sadly, I did not
manage to visit as many churches as I had hoped might be
possible. This was due to ministerial holidays, busy diaries and
the practicalities of timing and communication (non-returned phone
calls, emails etc).
Narrowing my visits down this way, I then grouped the visits into
their geographical areas and began developing a schedule of
visitation according to ministerial availability in those parishes, as
well as my own availability throughout the four weeks of study
leave provided.
I also developed a questionnaire that would allow for a sense of
consistency in the research as I asked for answers to the same
questions in each location. (See appendix 2)
WEEK 1
I spent this week adjusting to time out of the busyness of parish life
(something which I must say took me rather by surprise – in terms
of how difficult I found it to slow down!). I also constructed a
questionnaire that would allow for consistency during visits, and
made numerous phone calls, sent numerous emails and visited
many church websites to plan where I would visit and when.
Further, I began to read the book Re-Pitching the Tent – the
definitive guide to re-ordering church buildings for worship and
mission – by Richard Giles which, it transpires, has been an
excellent introduction to many issues of relevance in this issue.1
Finally, I went to the refurbished sanctuary of Kinross Parish
Church, Perth & Kinross for Sunday worship,
WEEK 2
This second week included visits to:
St. Cuthbert’s Church, Edinburgh
(meeting Rev. David Denniston to discuss refurbishments in all
three of the congregations where he has ministered: Kennoway,
Fife, North Church, Perth and St. Cuthbert’s, Edinburgh).
St. Andrew’s Blackadder Church, North Berwick
(meeting Rev Neil Dougall who had inherited a newly refurbished
church after the previous ministry of Rev Eddie McKenna).
1
Canterbury Press, Norwich, 2004,
There was also further administration and organization along with
continued reading.
WEEK 3
Letham St. Mark’s Church, Perth
(morning worship – both 9:30 & 11am)
St. Andrew’s Church, Arbroath
(Meeting Rev Dr Martin Fair)
St. Vigean’s Church, Arbroath
(Meeting Rev Dr Nelu Balaj)
Bellie Church, Moray
(Meeting Rev. Alison Mehigan)
Aberlour Church, Moray
(Meeting Rev Shuna Dick)
St. Gile’s Church, Elgin – 11am Thursday
(Meeting Session Clerk Elspeth Jackson)
WEEK 4
Unfortunately my study leave was interrupted by a significant
incident in my own congregation that could not be ignored or left
until I returned. The only visit conducted, then, was to
worship at Dundee Steeple, supplemented by further reading and
the initial writing up of this report.
Nevertheless, I did manage a follow-up visit to Kinross, to meet
with Rev Alan Reid (minister) and Mrs Sheila Green (property
convenor).
I had hoped for a follow-up visit this week with the minister at
Letham St. Mark’s Church in Perth, but no communication was
returned. This was disappointing given that, having worshipped
there I witnessed something of importance that I shall refer to in
my conclusion.
Despite my frustration that more visits were not possible, this study
leave has, nevertheless, been very worthwhile. Of itself, having
the space to read the book, Re-Pitching the Tent, has been an
extremely helpful use of time. Richard Giles introduced many
excellent ideas and points of consideration from start to finish,
always in the context that refurbishment of church buildings
involves significant change (which, in my experience, churches
always seem to find difficult).
Missiologically,
 we long for the non-attending parishioner to change and
begin joining us in worship
 we long for the non-believer to change by coming to
increasing or sudden faith
 we long for the attendances at worship to change by our
young people choosing to be part of our ecclesiastical
communities.
 We long for non-attending church members to begin more
regular attendance week by week
 We long for income to by non-contributing church members
to begin contributing something financially.
However, all too often regular church-going members find it
difficult to actualize change in our much-loved, historic,
buildings – whether in terms of desire, willingness or fear of
financial cost (though I would like to highlight that I do not find
this same resistance in my own congregation of St. Matthew’s).
Hence Giles’ introductory point is not insignificant:
“Lamentably, comparatively few of our church
buildings have been refurbished and re-equipped
. . . Local Christian communities are only now
beginning to face up to these new building
requirements of a missionary church, and the
temptation to withdraw into a heritage cocoon is
very great.”2
Giles then discusses a variety of fascinating and worthy points
of consideration:
 How buildings tell a story (for good or for bad)
 The practicalities of space in an ecclesiastical setting,
 Historic, developmental and changes in the design of places
2
Giles, Richard, Re-Pitching the Tent. Canterbury Press, Norwich, 2004





of worship
The visual impact of buildings for Christian education
(pulpits, stained glass, lecterns etc),
The ethics of spending significant funds on buildings rather
than other Christian endeavor,
Mission
Interior design
And several other topics such as liturgy, theology and the
sacraments.
After all this deliberation, Giles’ conclusion is as important to hear
as had been his introduction:
“The longer we leave it [ruthless reassessment of our
buildings’ interiors], the worse the pain and
upheaval will be. Unavoidably, the crowbar
represents a vital stage in our spiritual growth as
missionary congregations.”3
And so I have been privileged to spend a small amount of time
visiting congregations who have, independently, realized the
considerations of much of what Giles writes about. However, as is
my primary focus in this study, have they realized any benefit in
terms of mission from all the work that has been carried out?
REASONS FOR REFURBISHMENT
Rightly, there were various specific and particular underlying
reasons for refurbishing the buildings I visited. In one, a lady had
collapsed during Sunday worship and physically was jammed
within the pews – making attendance to her critical, medical needs
much more difficult and demanding. This linked with the lack of
room for individuals who use wheelchairs was the final motivator to
change. We can refer to this as a pastoral concern.
Others had no main reasons for refurbishment other than what we
might call practical concern, with heating systems that were
simply past their best, electrical wiring that was installed in the
1950s, and the discovery of asbestos in the ceiling. Presbytery’s
fabric report uncovered the major concerns in one location and
agreement was made between all three tiers of church governance
3
Re-Pitching the Tent, p211.
(local, regional and national) to proceed with significant
redevelopment.
Other congregations were conscious that the pews were restrictive
for children and prams, with a missionary desire to make access
much easier for younger families. Another listed missionary
concern for refurbishment from the start. There was no immanent
requirement to spend on fabric, but more of a sense that the
development of the building fitted very much with the general ethos
of congregational development – seeking to be a church that
serves the modern world.
Married to the missionary motivation was a desire for more
flexibility in worship space and style, and so the congregations
recognized that remodeling was required to produce such
enhanced space. We can refer to this as liturgical concern.
“A Christian community at the outset of the third
millennium will require a different set of tools from
those available 100 years ago if it is to do the work
of God in the drastically changed context of a
pluralist society.”4
TIMESCALES
One congregation (Elgin: St. Giles) refurbished for the first time 30
years ago – removing pews and installing kitchen facilities under
the back gallery of the sanctuary, with a glass façade separating
the flexible space and the worship space. They have since remodeled their whole sanctuary by removing pews with seats.
4
Re-pitching the tent p4
Elgin St. Giles
Another congregation (Edinburgh: St. Cuthbert’s) did something
very similar, installing a café and gift shop under their back gallery
some 20 years ago. Other refurbishment work has taken place
since.
St. Cuthberts, Edinburgh.
Another church first discussed refurbishment in 1989 (North
Berwick: St. Andrew’s Blackadder) at the time of congregational
union. Work (including raising the sanctuary to gallery level) was
carried out in the late 1990s.
St. Andrew’s Blackadder, North Berwick
Another congregation (Kinross) was first deliberated in 1990 and
was completed in 2006.
Kinross Parish Church
Yet another congregation (Bellie Church, Fochabers) first
discussed refurbishment in 1985 but it was not until 2005 that the
concept was agreed and then 2009 when the work took place.
Bellie Church, Fochabers
The shortest timescale came from Aberlour, with a new minister
arriving in 2010 and work beginning in 2011 with a 2012
completion date.
Aberlour Church
Arbroath: St. Andrew’s
Arbroath: St. Andrew’s also had a short timescale where
refurbishment was first discussed in 2006 and work was carried
out in 2009, with a two year period in between times to firm up the
vision.
CONGREGATIONAL BENEFITS
Richard Giles makes a very interesting comment when he
declares, “Refurbished buildings are not
unconnected to refurbished lives” 5 This absolutely
echoes a phrase of my own that, “facilities are meant to facilitate
the life of the church people”.
Sadly, the opposite can be true too: unchanged, inflexible, dull,
old-fashioned buildings can easily reflect the mind-set and activity
of a congregation.
In this study, however, it was thoroughly refreshing (inspiring,
indeed) to note the answers to the question, “What have been the
major benefits of the refurbishment for the congregation?”
5
Re-Pitching the Tent p56
The refurbishment, at North Berwick, “utterly transformed the
theology and culture of the congregation”. Meetings no longer
take place at the manse, people can see each other in worship,
and there has been a “tectonic shift” in the understanding of God
from transcendent to immanent. North Berwick was also
fascinating in the comment that, “the building now clears an hour
after worship, not after ten minutes as it was before the
refurbishment”. If the church really is about people then this is a
critical point to note.
In Bellie it has been equally transformative for the people, not just
the building. Wheelchair users can now come into the church.
More than that, wheelchair users do not sit on the end of a row of
seats, but seats can be rearranged to permit people with
disabilities to sit within the body of the kirk, right at the heart of the
faith community! Here there is also a live AV feed of worship
services into other areas of the church building so that crèche
users can be part of worship too.
In St Andrew’s Arbroath I was informed that changing seat
formations and settings is a “mood and experience changer”.
People now come to worship expecting the unexpected, enjoying
experimentation.
Aberlour, similarly, shared how they have “worshipped in the
round”, now have flexibility for a variety of uses midweek as well
as Sundays, find that people sit more closely together (thus
developing fellowship) and have improved singing as a result.
In Elgin refurbishment has enabled “more socialization”, “opened
up relationships”, created flexible space for wheelchair users,
enables more control of the climate, enables more informal, and
frequent communion services, and (importantly) made the whole
building easier to clean.
Edinburgh: St Cuthberts also mentioned more open hospitality,
fellowship and flexibility. Importantly, the change in the building
changed the mind-set of the people. The same minister of this
church was also minister at Kennoway, Fife and Perth: North
Church, where refurbishments were carried out during his ministry.
He says of them that the change in the buildings created more
accessibility, more comfort, more flexibility, tremendous
opportunity for worship lunches, creativity, use of hi-tech, and
alternative worship.
In Kinross I found tremendous energy and enthusiasm about their
refurbishment because, simply put, it has absolutely transformed
the congregation’s life. The building is now used for concerts,
exhibitions, summer clubs, singing groups etc. People are warmer
physically and in character, and there is a flexibility as never
before.
Generally, each refurbishment has enhanced congregational life
by creating flexible space for worship and meetings, more genuine
fellowship, space for musicians, creating the sense of expectancy,
expanding experience and permitting creativity.
COMMUNITY BENEFITS
Missiologially, I think, a comment made in Kinross says it all:
“There is now an enhanced view of the church by non-members. It
has become a place that people now want to be”. People
comment positively about the building as a venue for concerts,
exhibitions and school assemblies, conferences, author visits and
allsorts. (Please not the opposite to this: un-refurbished buildings
can remain a place that people do not want to be”. What does this
do for us in terms of ministry and mission!?)
North Berwick has “a massive footfall”. The refurbishment has
“given the church credibility”, and with the doors now open the
community clearly see the building as being for them and that it
gives value to their lives.
Such comments were echoed in Bellie Church, Fochabers. “The
people felt they were allowed back in”. The church is used as a
concert venue, a place for band practice, for school assemblies
and for musicals concerts. “It’s not scary anymore”. (Once again,
please think on the opposite. Many of our church buildings are
scary and give off the impression that people are not allowed in!)
St Andrew’s Arbroath said that people now see the church as part
of the 21st century; not out of date and out of touch. People
comment on “How welcoming” it is. It is used more for weddings
and funerals and in the case of two recent funerals for young
people who tragically committed suicide, the building could meet
the family’s needs and desires in a way it could not before – mainly
through the use of AV.
DRAWBACKS
Apart from a few issues with their heating system, Kinross could
find no drawbacks in refurbishing their building.
St. Andrew’s Arbroath were similar. There were no real drawbacks
in refurbishing, except for a year of teething problems in the use of
different systems (AV, lighting, heating etc). There was a sense of
“preciousness” in looking after the building when the congregation
moved back in. That needs to be overcome.
Aberlour point out that there can sometimes be a conflict of use in
their building if the holiday club has set things up for a week and a
funeral arises.
Elgin’s office bearers said they, “Can’t think of any drawbacks”
when asked this question. They highlighted that people were
negative to the refurbishment in principle then positive once it was
complete.
In Kennoway there was a danger of “arriving”, thinking the
refurbishment was the conclusion, when, in reality it needs to be
the start of a new era of life and work in a congregation. It was
also surprising how quickly new fittings wear and tear. There
needs to be an ongoing budget for persistent upgrade.
In Perth: North it was noted that certain groups can invest in
certain areas of the building and ‘turf wars’ can develop over who
has priority use.
North Berwick stated there was “no drawback to refurbishment”.
FINANCIAL COSTS
Overall costs ranged from £60,000 - £750,000, with obvious
variation in the amount of work being carried out.
Kinross budgeted £600,000 and cost £600,000 (2009)
St. Andrew’s Blackadder budgeted cost £750,000 (late 1990s)
Bellie Church budgeted cost £250,000 and cost £251,000 (2009)
St. Andrew’s Arbroath budgeted £600,000 & cost £600,000(2009)
Aberlour budgeted £180,000 and cost £180,000
Elgin: St. Giles most recent phase budgeted £60,000 and cost
£60,000
Some congregation’s had zero fundraising requirements due to
legacies left to the church and / or sale of buildings that were
surplus to requirements. Others took out loans with the General
Trustees and others did major fundraising through trust funds,
congregational giving and typical fundraising efforts of concerts,
coffee mornings and sales of work etc.
INCREASE IN ATTENDANCE?
In St. Cuthbert’s the whole reason for the refurbishment was to
manage decline but there was no increase in attendance at
worship.
Kennoway did see a modest upward trajectory but nothing
significant. There was no obvious sense of cause and effect
either.
Perth North church did see a rise in evening worship attendance,
put down to the opportunity for a completely changed style and
layout to worship.
In Elgin: St. Gile’s there is an awareness that more people in the
community now use the church but there has not been an
increased attendance at worship.
Aberlour make the interesting observation that there has been a
leveling of attendance at traditional Sunday worship and an
increased attendance at Messy Church services. These Messy
Church services could not have been so easily offered prior to
refurbishment.
In St. Andrew’s Arbroath the attendances were good prior to
refurbishment anyway. There’s a disappointment that the
refurbished sanctuary has not assisted further numerical growth.
There is a sense that it has slowed the decline and there’s a
feeling that the congregation are on the cusp of more growth. The
age range of those attending does seem to be younger than before
and their Messy Church services are, like Aberlour’s, growing in
number. Rev Dr Martin Fair also wanted to make the point that the
refurbishment was not only about numerical growth, but about
long-term sustainability of the building into the future.
In North Berwick the message was that there has not been growth
in attendance but the refurbishment does seem to have stemmed
the decline.
In Bellie Church there was a similar message to that of St.
Andrew’s Arbroath. The refurbishment was not primarily about
numerical growth but more about making the church more open
and accessible to the community and being able to accommodate
other groups and activities. This it has achieved well.
Kinross, in my opinion, offered the most interesting insight to the
benefits of refurbishment. Their property convenor said their
church attendance had increased and it was down to a mixture of
the refurbishment and a new minister. Attendances are “well up”.
The minister agreed that the refurbishment had made a significant,
positive difference. It makes ministry easier. It is a help and not a
hindrance. It facilitates ministry rather than frustrates it. Rev Alan
Reid said, “I couldn’t conceive of Kinross Parish Church being
what it is without the refurbishment having taken place”.
INCREASE IN MEMBERSHIP?
Not one of the churches could speak of an increase in church
membership! Nevertheless, a few did talk of the refurbishment
stemming the decline.
MISCELLANEOUS COMMENTS
My questionnaire asked for any comments on matters I had not,
perhaps, asked about. This was a very interesting section to the
research.
St. Andrew’s Blackadder, North Berwick commented that
refurbished churches will stay with us into the future; nonrefurbished buildings will not. The reason for this view was that
people of our modern communities simply will no longer tolerate
cold, damp, dark, draughty buildings. I agree.
The Kinross Church people mentioned that visitors to their building
now thought of it in positive (rather than previously negative)
terms. This is because, it is now warm, light, welcoming,
comfortable and practical.
Bellie Church talked about the fact that the whole journey through
refurbishment, and the journey since, has increased the
confidence of the congregation and increased their trust in God’s
provision. “Will God really provide?” He did!
The minister of St. Cuthberts added comment that the
refurbishments were worth their weight in gold. There previously
was a duality of message from the words spoken and the
unspoken message the church buildings presented.
We speak of welcome and yet locked doors speak of the opposite.
We speak of God’s light and yet dark, dingy sanctuaries contradict
that.
We speak of new life in Christ and yet old, tired buildings speak of
decay and decline and death.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, refurbishment is a no-brainer. It is expensive. It is
challenging. It is hard work. However, if we do not refurbish tired
old buildings, then these same old buildings will be unsuccessful in
retaining the people who gather and even less successful in
reaching out to others beyond the walls.
I was sorry that the minister of Letham St. Mark’s Church in Perth
never got back to me about my request for a talk about how the
church there had changed since its complete demolition and
restructure. As I worshipped there, you see, I had the experience
of a eureka moment: the “baby” element to my choice of title for
this report.
A Eureka moment at Perth: Letham, St. Mark’s (parental permission granted to take
and use this photograph)
As I sat next to this baby during Sunday worship I realized that if
this mother and child wished to come to worship in any number of
un-refurbished churches, they simply would be unwelcome in
several practical terms. This would (and does) have a massive
negative impact on our mission to a new and generally missing
generation!
 In an old, tired building there is no place for the mum to leave
the buggy if there are wall to wall pews.
 If heating pipes are under the pews the baby would scold it’s
head and be unable to lie comfortably like this.
 Similarly, in many traditional buildings there is no carpet, so
the dirty, bare, floorboards would be a hindrance to
comfortable and hygienic attendance.
 The large (flexible) distance between the chairs is conducive
to welcoming in a way that tighter pews simply are not.
If we wish to engage with people in our 21st century Scottish
culture, on a week by week basis, we absolutely must try to
engage with 21st century facilities. To do otherwise is to stifle,
obstruct and hinder our ministry and mission!
This point was also highlighted for me as I travelled the country
from North Berwick in the south to Elgin in the north. I refer to the
“blue dot” element of my chosen title for this report. As I travelled
to parts of our beautiful country I had not been to for decades, I
realized that my whole mode of transport (an electric / petrol hybrid
car) and my method of navigation (iPhone GPS) would have been
inconceivable the last time I visited certain places.
Our (post)modern world is unrecognizably different from the era in
which most of our old, traditional buildings were constructed. If
this rapid cultural and technological change is the norm now, then
just how archaic are the facilities within which many of us are
expected to successfully and faithfully minister?
Refurbishment is critical! Doing nothing is, in fact, to make a
conscious choice to do something; and it is a negative choice in
terms of mission. If we do not refurbish we will contribute to the
further decline of our congregations, not to mention force
continued discomfort and despondency in our current
congregations.
This leads me to my final point: the “people of God” element of my
chosen title. Refurbishment is absolutely not about buildings. The
refurbishment of buildings inevitably must consider heating,
lighting and Audio Visual systems – all fabric matters.
Refurbishment of buildings absolutely requires discussion and
planning over seating, decoration, and electrical wiring etc.
However, refurbishment is still not about buildings. It is about
people; the people of God who are housed within the buildings that
are (or are not) refurbished.
What I witnessed and experienced on my travels for this study
leave was a whole range of people who were inspired, excited,
enthused, energized, motivated, encouraged and upbeat as a
result of their new facilities. In churches (like mine) where the
heating is past it, there are leaks in the roof, children scolded on
heating pipes, no room for wheelchairs or prams, pensioner’s
chilled to the bone by draughts, closed doors to the public etc, the
exact opposite is often true. Despondency and demoralization has
steadily crept in. This demotivates, discourages, drains energy
negatively and disables the congregation for mission.
I wholeheartedly endorse the concept of refurbishing church
buildings for mission and ministry purposes. To do otherwise is to
hamper the mission the Church of Scotland has been encouraging
for many years now. To repeat Richard Giles in his book,
Repitchig the tent: “Unavoidably, the crowbar represents
a vital stage in our spiritual growth as missionary
congregations.”6
APPENDIX 1
List of suggested refurbished Churches to visit, via Facebook
contacts.
Aberfeldy, Perthshire
Aberlour, Moray
Arbroath St. Andrews,
Barrhead Bourock,
Belle in Fochabers, Moray
Carlops
Clincarthill Parish Church, Glasgow
Cowdenbeath North, Fife
Ellon, Aberdeenshire
Kilbarchan West, Renfrewshire
Inverkeithing, Fife
Inverurie West, Aberdeenshire
Kelty, Fife
Kennoway, Fife
6
Re-Pitching the Tent, p211.
Kinross Parish,
Maryhill church, Glasgow
Newhaven, Edinburgh
North Berwick, East Lothian
North Church, Perth
Partick Trinity Glasgow,
Penicuik, Midlothian
Queen's Park Parish Church, Glasgow?
QP Baptist Church, Glasgow
Sandyford Henderson Glasgow,
St Bryce Kirk, Kirkcaldy
St. Cuthbert’s, Edinburgh
St Giles in Elgin, Moray
St. John’s Gourock, Inverclyde
St. John’s Perth
St Marys, Monkseaton, England
St Ninians and Forglen in Turriff, Aberdeenshire
Trinity church, Cathcart, Glasgow
Tron, Glasgow
APPENDIX 2
QUESTIIONAIRRE
NAME OF CHURCH ______________________________
When was the idea of refurbishing this church first discussed?
Who raised the issue?
When was the refurbishment completed?
What was the budgeted cost?
What was the overall financial cost?
What were the main reasons for carrying out the refurbishment?
What have been the major benefits of the refurbishment for the
congregation?
What have been the major benefits of the refurbishment for the
wider community?
What have been the drawbacks after refurbishing?
What would you do differently?
Have you had an increase in church attendance as a result of the
refurbishment? What evidence can you supply to back this up?
Have you had an increase in church membership as a result of the
refurbishment?