Victorian restoration

In retrospect the period of Victorian restoration has been viewed in a generally unfavourable light, though it did result in the rediscovery of some long-lost features and some churches that would otherwise have fallen into disrepair were saved.

[4] In addition, ever since the mid-17th century Puritan reforms, which were typified by a minimum of ritual and decoration and by an unambiguous emphasis on preaching, there had been an ongoing removal of any emotion or colour from English religious services as a means of distancing itself from what was seen as the excesses of Catholicism[5] but towards the end of the 18th century the burgeoning Gothic Revival and interest in medievalism encouraged people to seek more interest in their religious services.

[9] Known as Commissioners' churches, most of them cost only £4,000 to £5,000 each to build, and dissatisfaction with their indifferent design and cheap construction provoked a strong reaction.

My first church dates from the same year withthe foundation of the Cambridge CamdenSociety, to whom the honour of our recoveryfrom the odious bathos is mainly due.I only wish I had known its founders at the time.

[15] The CCS's firm insistence on one style being correct proved to be a beacon for those who were no longer able to judge for themselves what was "good" in architecture—the certainties of the Vitruvian rules having lost their power during the Romantic movement that had been in vogue since the middle of the 18th century.

[19] Persuaded by the Cambridge Camden Society that Decorated Gothic was the only correct style, and by the Oxford Movement's theories concerning the nature of worship, a spate of "restoration" was soon under way.

[23] Different architects had different degrees of sympathy with original material, and as the century progressed greater care was generally taken;[24] this was at least partly as a result of the increasingly louder voices that were raised in opposition.

[26][27] At Lichfield Cathedral, the 18th century had been a period of decay: the 15th-century library was pulled down, most of the statues on the west front were removed, and the stonework covered with Roman cement.

After some structural work early in the 19th century by James Wyatt, the ornate west front (pictured above) was restored by Sir George Gilbert Scott.

[21] In 1850 Scott wrote a book A plea for the faithful restoration of our Ancient Churches, in which he stated that "as a general rule it is highly desirable to preserve those vestiges of the growth and history of buildings which are indicated by the various styles and irregularities of its parts".

[24] The principles espoused by SPAB took some time to attract support, but the policy of putting "Protection in place of Restoration" eventually took hold, and are adhered to today.

[18] Morris also wrote in 1877: But of late years a great uprising of ecclesiastical zeal, coinciding with a great increase of study, and consequently of knowledge of medieval architecture has driven people into spending their money on these buildings, not merely with the purpose of repairing them, of keeping them safe, clean, and wind and water-tight, but also of "restoring" them to some ideal state of perfection; sweeping away if possible all signs of what has befallen them at least since the Reformation, and often since dates much earlier.

Further opposition came from evangelical Protestants, who believed that "ornamental carved work, decorative painting, encaustic tiles, and stained glass were foolish vanities which lead the heart astray",[34] and from others who were concerned about the cost: "For the cost of one stone church with a groined roof, or even an open timbered roof, two might be built in brick with plaster ceilings; and who could dare to say that worship in the plainer building would be less devout or sincere than that which was offered in the other?

"[34][35] Not all Catholics were in favour either: late in his life Cardinal Wiseman made it clear that his preference was for Renaissance art, as might be expected of a religious order of Italian origin.

From a 20th-century perspective the process of Victorian restoration has often been viewed unfavourably, with terms such as "ruthless", "insensitive" and "heavy-handed" being commonly used to describe the work done.