to be really quite disgusted with the Church?

[CopperHandle]

Visited Norwich Cathedral and the place was plastered in begging signs asking for donations. They were boasting that it costs almost £4000 a DAY to run the building, not including major repairs which regularly run into six figures in a year.

For an institute that preaches charitable giving, putting others before self etc etc is it not massively hypocritical to run in such a way that is so incredibly costly?
£4,000 a day for a single building... so there are more than 80 cathedrals in the UK - just on this alone - how many people could be helped with this amount of money?!

AIBU to think this is massively hypocritical and, well, just plain wrong?

Errol,

An example is in a speech made by ++Rowan Williams around 10 years ago.

I love how some people who have nothing to do with the church should have a point of view about what the church does with its own buildings and how the church spends its money.

Perhaps when there's no more bishops in the HOL, and the CofE stops claiming to be the state church?
Anyway; I'm an atheist but I certainly wouldn't mind a few of my taxes going to preserve beautiful old cathedrals.

You would be surprised how much buildings take to maintain and keep running. For example 10 Downing Street's electricity bill is around £6k per month (you can find this out publicly). That's more than 100 normal houses!

Tell them to ask the National Trust for a few bob, they've squirrelled away millions

I adore churches and cathedrals and have visited many and always try and give a few pounds. I was so disappointed when in London a few weeks ago that they were charging £18 to get into St Paul's. I couldn't afford it so didn't get to go in...I understand that these places are expensive to run but some people just don't have that kind of money.

Instead I listened to a classical recital in St Martin in the Fields for free - and gave the few pounds I could afford.

OP I really don't understand the point in asking?
That's how much the church costs... fact. You don't believe it should be asking for money to keep it running, but you also don't believe it should be left to ruin, so....
what do you propose?

Also, great big grand cathedrals are usually in the city centre. Most people worship in their local churches which are much smaller and less grand therefore require much less maintenance/running costs. These churches also tend to give back to their communities e.g. Children's clubs ran by volunteers, rescue shelters, collection points for food donations etc.

The religion isn't charging you. The building is asking for donations as it's a listed building. It has a lot of history to its city in the same way stone henge does and national trust sites. They don't run on fresh air I'm afraid. If you want them, they need money.

A speech 10 years ago? Right oh. The mills of god grind slow ... maybe disestablishment will happen in about 2250 give or take a century.

The CCT (churches conservation trust) do fantastic work repurposing churches for secular community use.
Churches are incredibly important to the heritage and culture of this country (I say that as an atheist) and those still in use should do what they can in terms of chartible fundraising and enterprise income generation to remain so.

Re the notion that all the church's income should be used to feed the poor.

This is really quite nonsense. It's a blurring of the boundaries between church and state. The church is not social services. Of course, it can be very nimble in bypassing state bureaucracy, for example, in providing food banks. But this is not the main mission of the church as an ongoing thing. And things like foodbanks and other social missions are done at local level, i.e. At parish church level, not diocesan. We really don't just give money (or food) - we provide pastoral care.

On a practical level, churches and cathedrals work towards budgets. We have staff costs, admin, mission, and buildings costs. When we give to the church, we expect the trustees to allocate these resources in a fair, balanced and sustainable way. I would imagine that, in a cathedral, visitor donations will go into a restricted fund concerned with the daily running of the cathedral rather than mission costs.

In my church, our giving is allocated to several areas. Building expenses will really just be allocated to energy costs, insurance, and the quinquennial fund. Major building expenses are fund-raised separately.

I think the church is very responsible and sensitive with regards to land assets. I know that my church sold off glebe land to help fund a reordering. Our Cathedral is at risk of bankruptcy due to essential asbestos works, so is selling off glebelands to become much needed social housing.

It's a lot more complicated than the OP thinks.

Canterbury cathedral is a beautiful building too and is a regular destination for our E S L students.
There is a hefty charge to visit it which the students pay.
However this year the cathedral has been undergoing major repairs and whilst I accept that the repairs are necessary , I do think that charging the full entry price for a building that can hardly be seen due to scaffolding and roped off areas is completely unacceptable!
Very disappointing!

Re the notion that all the church's income should be used to feed the poor.

This is really quite nonsense.

Impossible given the reality of what 'the church' is. I guess it lost its way many centuries ago when it became a massive land and property owner. And employer - a lot of the income from its assets is needed for clergy pensions, isn't it?

Maybe the CofE should give the medieval cathedrals back to the RCs, they've got squillions in their dodgy banks haven't they?

Yep, YANBU.

They're not boasting. They're saying it costs £1,460,000 a year to run the cathedral. They've got staff costs, utilities costs, insurance costs, maintenance costs, mission costs and admin costs.

Where do you think their extravagances might lie and where might they cut back? Do you think priests and church staff are paid well?

If you're hunting for organisations that waste vast sums of money when they should be using it to help people, maybe look at central and local government!

So much stupid in one post... hard to formulate a reply.

So the "church' is poor then. I don't think so for a minute. The amount of money these organisations have is beyond my wildest dreams.

Is it liquid, silver?

I totally agree OP, but at this point it's the historical aspect that makes churches important, not the religious.

Good to see our architectural heritage is in such safe hands

As of last July, Durham wasn't charging anything for entry.

Good post Bizzy

Provided they are not maintained by the public purse then I have no problem with them.

I lost all respect for the church years ago - that it is prepared to spend umpteen millions of pounds a year on it's buildings and palaces speaks volumes about it's priorities.

Are they still holding their investments in that payday loan company btw?

Cathedrals are one thing - both as a place of worship and historical/architectural treasures open to the public they should be maintained (including by entrance fee/donation).

Bishops palaces though... hm, can those be justified? I guess they've already downsized a lot of vicarages at least.

Norwich Cathedral is a beautiful structure that should be preserved at all costs.

I don't give two shits about the religion side. It's historical. It's been a part of the city for centuries. I'd support it much like I'd support the Castle Museum.

Most cathedrals ask for donations. I don't see a problem with it.

What is the alternative to the Church spending £££ on its ancient buildings? Could you get a buyer for Norwich Cathedral? Would the taxpayers be happy to pay the whole maintenance costs? Or should we send in the bulldozers? (this would actually be illegal due to laws concerning listed buildings in this country)

A stately home you could hope to sell to some wealthy Russian, but who on earth is going to want a medieval cathedral?

elphame,

Your post makes no sense.

You don't want the taxpayer to maintain these buildings, yet you don't want the church to do so either!

Make up your mind!