BCD SPECIAL REPORT ON HISTORIC CHURCHES 31st ANNUAL EDITION 11 THE RISKS OF OPEN DOORS Despite these benefits, churches often remain locked because of fears around crime. Churches may believe that an open door policy encourages acts of opportunistic theft or vandalism and they quite rightly believe that the safety of church staff and volunteers has to be a priority. We don’t leave our houses unlocked throughout the day, so why would we risk it with our churches? These fears are not unreasonable. A report published in March by Historic England and the National Police Chiefs’ Council found a rise in theft and vandalism at the nation’s most cherished historic sites, with churches a prime target (see http://bc-url.com/hc24-crime). The report identifies the “theft of valuable heritage materials and cultural objects by opportunist offenders and organised crime groups”, adding that “arson, vandalism, graffiti and other forms of antisocial behaviour continue to pose a significant threat.” But it’s by no means clear that keeping churches open makes these problems worse. In fact, some commentators say open churches encourage the eyes of the community to act as a deterrent to crime and antisocial behaviour. In a letter to the Guardian, Claire Walker, Chief Executive of the National Churches Trust, wrote: “By far the biggest asset in keeping a church safe is the many eyes and ears of local people. If a church is open and welcoming, local people will be alert to what is happening when they go past, or even pop inside to keep an eye on things.” To some extent, the responses to the survey backed this view. They suggest that it is not at all obvious that unlocked churches experience more crime. It is true that, when asked whether their churches had experienced crimes in the last five years, nearly 14 per cent of respondents from unlocked and attended (staffed) churches said they had experienced theft from inside the church, while a little more than half that number (7.4%) from locked churches said the same. But we could put that another way and say that over 86 per cent of unlocked and attended churches hadn’t experienced a theft from inside the church in five years. And the research also found that, while there were fewer thefts from inside locked churches, there were more thefts from their grounds. Similarly, locked churches experienced less antisocial behaviour inside buildings, but significantly more outside. It’s also likely that when theft or antisocial behaviour happens inside a locked church, it causes more damage and costs more to fix, because it implies a break-in. While nearly eight per cent of locked churches reported a break-in in the last five years, only 1.6 per cent of unlocked and attended churches said the same. PSYCHOLOGICAL BARRIERS So the research paints a mixed picture and it is by no means clear that locked and unwelcoming buildings will attract less crime than open and welcoming ones. Overall, the opposite may even be true. Nevertheless, fears over crime and antisocial behaviour are clearly barriers to keeping church doors open. In the survey, over a third (36%) of respondents cited concerns over an increased risk of theft as the reason for keeping doors locked, a far higher number than had actually experienced a recent theft. A further third (33%) were worried about vandalism and 32 per cent about potential damage to buildings. Over a third (36%) were concerned about insurance costs and restrictions. By far the most common reason for keeping churches shut is a lack of staff or volunteers. The three quarters (73%) of respondents who chose this answer may have been concerned about the risks of crime and antisocial behaviour in buildings that were both unlocked and unattended. Almost a third of respondents (30%) were worried about staff and volunteer safety. A welcome message from a parish church in Shropshire which is open in daylight hours and provides an informative guide to the treasures it holds. (Photos: Jonathan Taylor)
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MzI0Mzk=