Originally Posted by
taffy
It was just a general comment not aimed at you Cadfael but I do feel it's pointless trying to preserve an old building that no few then attend, cf for example St Margaret's, Toxteth which had £500,000 spent on it.
The view that I take is that Fairfield was once a thriving village and would have been well supported by the church. These days, fairfield is literally a long forgotten name and that is one of the reasons for the church being made redundant.
div>
My problem is that with the regeneration of the church in the last 30 years, the interior (and exterior as I see it) is in a fine condition and the reason for the publicity is to see whether a group or school could take on the building for its needs. Too many times we hear of 'I wish they hadn't knocked down that building as we could have used it'. Unless Fairfield was in the Echo, I'd never of heard of it's plight either. But a redundant church, in my view, doesn't have to be demolished until every other option is looked at, and publicity given on the new state of the interior.
Bookmarks