CATHEDRAL AM, JULY 2013

David Monteith, Dean of Leicester (centre)

Cathedral AM is an early morning networking event held at Leicester Cathedral, gathering together people from different parts of city and county, with a special mission to share news and experience on aspects of life in the the city centre. The meetings are hosted by Urban Canon Barry Naylor and Julie Ann Heath, Chaplain to the Cathedral. Breakfast is served from 0730 then there's a speaker from 0800.

This morning's speaker is David Monteith, Dean of Leicester. David speaks about his own background, the steps he has taken which have led him to this post. He's only been Dean of Leicester for a couple of months, taking on the role at one of the most challenging and exciting times in the life of Leicester Cathedral, with the imminent development of the Cathedral Gardens and the unfolding story around Richard III and plans being laid for the internal renovation of the Cathedral itself.

There's a buzz around the tables about the article in the Independent on Sunday's New Review, which everyone seems positive about - even a few folk who were interviewed and hoped to be mentioned in the article, but didn't feature in the published version. 

I walk out at the end with John Florance of BBC Radio Leicester. As well as giving me his informed opinion on Pacific Rim (which I intend to see this weekend), he asks if I'd be amenable to recording another Thought for the Day soon. Of course I would!

SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT ON FUNDS FOR CHURCH GARDEN

This letter appears in today's Leicester Mercury:

Setting the record straight on funds for church garden

RJ Bingham ("Why not everything in these gardens is lovely", Mailbox, May 20) is concerned about the Diocese of Leicester's plans for funding Cathedral Gardens.

He wittily suggests that as the wall obstructing views in and out of the Guildhall is currently being reduced, so we also remove the "wall of silence" from the diocese on the whole topic, although the rest of his/her letter seems to contain remarkably few actual questions on which we could be accused of being silent.

What it does contain is a number of inaccurate statements, which I'm glad of the chance to respond to.

Firstly it speaks of the diocese "accepting a £1.9 million grant from the city".

I'm not sure where these figures are supposed to have come from but the fact is that no such "grant" exists.

What is proposed is that the city will undertake work to the adjacent highways that it is responsible for, which is likely to amount to about £1.5 million.

The city's capital programme is there for public works and this is an excellent example of such works that will bring benefit to the whole city and its many and increasing number of visitors – which will, of course, itself bring benefits to the local economy.

The cathedral is looking to raise the balance of the funds needed from grants and benefactors – a significant amount of which has already been pledged.

Then the suggestion is made that by entering into constructive partnership with the city authorities in one area, the Church somehow forgoes the right to be critical of any other aspects of their work.

The truth is that, as a Church, we are always ready both to support those in need – as witness the considerable work already carried out both from St Martin's House and parishes up and down the city and county.

We are also always ready to speak up where there is a proper case to be made. Bishop Tim has been foremost among those challenging the Government cuts which are themselves the background to the changes the city has been forced into in its support for homeless people.

Finally, that old cliché about "the Church's millions" is rolled out.Yes, the diocese has capital assets – though considerably less than many local individuals, for example.

These are held in trust for a wide range of work, mainly for the support of parishes, and are fully put to use for that purpose.

The cathedral, unlike more ancient foundations, has very meagre endowment funds and it's just not true to say it can lay out large sums on a whim.

What it can do – and is doing under the leadership of David Monteith, its new Dean – is offer a generous welcome in God's name to all the people who live in or visit our city and provide a healthy challenge to the dominant story of our age, that money is all and the things of the spirit are of no significance.

We have a story that began in one garden in Eden, passes through another in Gethsemane and ends in a heaven often portrayed as a garden of paradise. It's no surprise we'd like to welcome as many as possible through our own gardens in the years to come – and will gladly partner with whoever shares our vision for the healing of humanity.

Pete Hobson, acting Canon Missioner, Leicester Cathedral

WHY NOT EVERYTHING IN THESE GARDENS IS LOVELY

This letter appears in today's Leicester Mercury:

An artist's impression of Cathedral Gardens

Why not everything in these gardens is lovely

As work starts on the removal of an ancient wall, the first stage of the controversial Cathedral Gardens scheme, a number of questions are raised about its funding in these times of recession.

The Diocese of Leicester seems quite happy to accept a £1.9 million grant from Leicester City Council, at a time when the council is proposing to cut £2.2 million from the single persons' homeless budget and almost £1 million from the homeless families budget.

All this at a time when those on benefits or low income are being further stretched by changes in housing benefits and council tax credit, as well as the so called "spare bedroom tax".

Of course, the diocese will argue that the £1.9 million is from a separate budget, but it comes from taxation, including from those who are really struggling at the moment on low incomes and benefits.

It should also be pointed out that accepting the grant puts the diocese in the position of not being able to speak out against the city council's cuts and the waste of money on projects such as Jubilee Square.

Of the remaining £1.1 million needed to complete Cathedral Gardens, through donations and grants, the question needs to be asked, why can't the diocese's Board of Finance find this, or even fund the project outright?

According the most recent accounts obtained from the Charities Commission, the diocese has in the region of £70 million of assets and investments, including £33 million in long-term investments.

The assets of the cathedral are not available, but are likely to be substantial.

With the removal of the ancient wall at the cathedral, perhaps now is the time for the removal of the wall of silence from the diocese,It should explain how public funding of Cathedral Gardens can be morally justified in these austere times and consider whether the project should be postponed.

RJ Bingham, Leicester

MONEY RELEASED TO DRAW UP DETAILED PLANS FOR CATHEDRAL GARDENS SCHEME

This article appears in today's Leicester Mercury:

Money released to draw up detailed plans for Cathedral gardens scheme

Money to draw up detailed plans for a revamp of the area outside Leicester Cathedral has been approved by the mayor.

Church leaders and the city council are working together on a £3 million project to develop Cathedral Gardens.

The council has agreed to provide £150,000 so plans and other documents can be completed by July, when the cathedral is expecting decisions on its funding application for the bulk of the projects costs.

The scheme could be completed by next spring, in time for the opening of the Richard III visitor centre, opposite the cathedral, and the reburial of the monarch's remains.

A further £77,000 has been agreed to bring forward work to pedestrianise and improve St Martins and Peacock Lane, along with £33,000 for related project management costs.

Sir Peter said: "By funding this preliminary work now, the project teams will be in the best possible position to complete in time for the opening of the visitor centre.

"We can't afford to miss this unique opportunity to create something the whole city can enjoy and be proud of.

"These projects will provide a wonderful setting for our cathedral and help to make this historic area an even more attractive destination for visitors."

Leicester Civic Society opposed elements of the scheme, such as the near removal of a grade II-listed wall, but planning permission was granted.

Acting Dean of Leicester Cathedral, Canon Barry Naylor, said: "We are delighted and thankful the city council is helping move the Cathedral Gardens project forward quickly.

"This will transform an area which had become a bit of a backwater into an oasis of peace, that is much more welcoming to visitors."

CATHEDRAL WILL NEVER BE A "DEN OF THIEVES"

This letter appears in today's Leicester Mercury:

Cathedral will never be a "den of thieves"

I read with concern two contrasting letters in the Mercury about Leicester Cathedral (Mailbox, March 1).

The first was from Ann Stones about the "vintage fair" which takes place in the cathedral three or four times a year ("Inappropriate use for our cathedral").

The cathedral is, first and foremost, a house of prayer and sanctuary for all who wish to use it.

If people wish to come to pray when another event is happening, we make it clear to the organisers of the event (if there is a charge for admittance) there should be free admission for those who wish to enter to pray.

I apologise if this was not made clear to Ann Stones.

We also have a chaplain and other cathedral staff available during these events, should people wish to have a spiritual conversation with them.

Guild churches, such as St Martins, and cathedrals have always been used for a variety of events and we hope this helps a wide range of people to see it as "their cathedral", a place where all are welcome.

As well as its primary purpose for worship and prayer, the cathedral hosts lectures, concerts, organ recitals and is part of the Leicester Comedy Festival.

We have run series of silent films, a food fair and events associated with the Castle Park Festival among many other events.

We believe that whatever takes place in the cathedral is legal and honest and far from the type of corrupt and exploitative abuse of religion that led Jesus to drive the money changers and other merchants from the Temple in Jerusalem – those who had turned it into a "den of thieves".

Bill Merry wrote about the possibility of Richard III being reinterred in the proposed Cathedral Gardens instead of within the cathedral ("Memorial should be in the open").

Leicester Cathedral is open to the public every day from 8am to 6pm.

As Richard III was a Christian believer, and following the precedence for the burial of monarchs in this land, it seems most appropriate his final resting place should be in a place of Christian worship. We do not charge for entering the cathedral, nor will we do so, though the costs of keeping the cathedral open are nowhere near met by the voluntary giving of visitors, as generous as this sometimes is.

Barry Naylor, Acting Dean of Leicester

I STILL SAY PROJECT IS WASTE OF £3 MILLION

This letter appears in today's Leicester Mercury:

I still say project is waste of £3 million

As the dissident who put forward his views on the Cathedral Gardens 'Focus on the social issues, not gardens' (Mercury, September 22), I wish to respond to Peter Hobson, director of the Cathedral Gardens project (Mercury, September 25), as my letter, clearly, has hit a raw nerve within the Diocese of Leicester.

To begin with, Peter Hobson was disappointed that I wrote under "name and address supplied", particularly as I am apparently so well-informed. All too often, whistle-blowers seek anonymity, but he may need to ask himself how it is I am so well-informed.

I am all too aware of the good work that goes on within the diocese, on a number of levels, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't strive to do more.

While Peter Hobson claims the Diocese Mission for Social Responsibility has been restructured, it is difficult to know in what way.

What I do know is for the past year, the diocese has, sadly, been without a director of social responsibility.

With reference to whether to invest in capital projects, I understand the need to maintain existing Church properties, but there is a budget of about £8 million per annum set aside for this, through the Diocese of Leicester Board of Finance.

I fail to see how the Cathedral Gardens is a capital investment, as I am unsure in what way this £3 million project would achieve a financial return.

I would not have a problem with public funding being used towards the much-needed repair of the spire of St Mary De Castro Church, as this is part of Leicester's proud heritage.

I take objection to Peter Hobson's repeated references to "the poor", which in my mind demonstrates, as a minister of religion, his "poor" awareness of social issues to simply pigeonhole people in difficult circumstances as "poor".

I simply pointed out that financial resources from public funds would be better directed to projects working with those affected by homelessness, substance abuse, poverty and suffering.

Surely, most people would rather see some money directed to worthy causes rather than the Cathedral Gardens – by way of, for example, organisations such as Macmillan Nurses, which does great work with those in suffering and often placed in abject poverty – rather than see another fountain built in the Cathedral Gardens, at great expense, only for it to end up like the existing fountain in the gardens, which, as I passed it last Sunday, shortly before evensong, contained a green sludge and is little more than a receptacle for discarded drinks cans, beer bottles and used prophylactics.

I think it is time for the diocese to review its plan for the Cathedral Gardens, which is clearly an extravagant gesture in the present economic situation, and for the debate to continue in the community.

As for my anonymity, should Peter Hobson wish to contact me via the editor, he may do so.

Who knows, I might even challenge him to a live debate on local radio.

Name and address supplied

CHURCH PLAN NOT AT EXPENSE OF OTHERS

This letter appears in today's Leicester Mercury:

Church plan not at expense of others

As the person responsible for delivering the exciting new Cathedral Gardens project, I can't let the letter headed 'Focus on the social issues, not gardens' (Leicester Mercury, Saturday, September 22) pass without response.

So I'm particularly disappointed that the writer didn't feel able to put their name to their views – not least because they clearly know quite a bit about the operations of the Diocese of Leicester, and their point of view deserves a more thorough response than simply another letter. But in the circumstances, that's all I can do.If I had the person in front of me, I'd want to ask them – "why do you think we have to choose?"

Surely this person will be aware of the wide range of work already going on which focuses on social issues, in parishes up and down the city and county, and through centrally-resourced projects.

That includes work with asylum seekers, separated families, young people and those on very low incomes.

It's true that one particular way of working, with a whole lot of associated administration and infrastructure, has been wound up.

That doesn't mean the work stops – it may even free up more resources to do it, not least through the outreach work going on in St Martin's House – which contains far more than the "opulent conferencing and banqueting facilities" your correspondent mentions, though it's kind of him/her to remind people we do also have that resource to offer, and to earn money for our other work in addressing social issues!

But to address the issue head on – is it never right to invest money in capital projects?

If so, then all our churches and community buildings – not to mention our homes and gardens – will eventually fall down, never to be replaced.

And is it never right for the Church to partner with people of goodwill and secular authorities for the greater good, as in this case? In which case we'd better not only abandon all our cathedrals, but also very many of our social projects, which rely on just those sorts of partnerships.

That's why I think criticism of Cathedral Gardens based on the argument "the money could be spent better on the poor" is fundamentally mistaken.

This is in part because the money is not being given for that purpose, but more importantly because sometimes it's important to do something more than spend all our money on the poor.

Jesus himself rebuked Judas when he complained that money was apparently "wasted" on an extravagant gesture.

The principle is the same: the poor will always be with us, and we will always be active in meeting their needs.

Sometimes other things are equally worth doing as well. Cathedral Gardens is definitely one of them.

Pete Hobson, director, St Martin's House, Leicester