Controversy within C of I over palace plans

A major controversy is brewing within the Church of Ireland over a plan to dispose of one of the church's best-known historic buildings, the Palace in Kilkenny.

The Palace, which has been the residence of the Bishop of Ossory for more than 600 years, has been identified by the Heritage Council as a suitable new headquarters.

Talks on a possible hand-over of the site to the council are at an exploratory stage, the church says. But some are angry that such a move is even being considered.

In a letter to the Church of Ire- land Gazette recently, the Deanelect of St Patrick's Cathedral in Dublin, the Very Rev Robert MacCarthy, said the Palace had undergone almost continuous adaptation to meet changing circumstances, but had always been "a house and a home" to successive bishops of Ossory.

"I hope that we will not celebrate the start of the third millennium by turning it into an office block," he said.

The Heritage Council, however, which has been seeking a headquarters in Kilkenny for the past four years, says there is no question of turning the building into an office block should the church agree to dispose of it.

The proposal under consideration includes the construction of a new bishop's house in the Palace grounds and the retention by the church of certain rights to use the facilities at the Palace for formal occasions.

Dr MacCarthy, in his letter, questions what exactly these "certain rights" are. "I can see a situation not many years down the road when requests to use the reception rooms will be met with apologetic cries of `unforeseen pressure of staff numbers', `changed circumstances', `unrealistic expectations' etc."

However, the chief executive of the council, Mr Michael Starrett, says that continued church use of the Palace would be guaranteed and its rights copperfastened in any agreement to take over the site.

He pointed out that the Heritage Council, a State-sponsored body established four years ago, had just 13 staff and the maximum envisaged in the long term was 20, which the Palace was more than capable of accommodating.

The real fear was that the integrity of the site would be threatened, but this, including its "ecclesiastical integrity", would be protected by the council, he added. Ultimately it was a move which would benefit both the community at large and the church itself.

The high cost of maintaining the Palace is an important consideration for the church in the current discussions. Dr MacCarthy, however, says he believes that maintenance costs for the site over the past 20 years have averaged out at considerably less than the modern See Houses.

"Whatever needs realistically to be spent on the Palace should be available from the accumulated capital resulting from the sale of the Waterford See House in 1977, since the standard rules provide for the surviving house to be a first charge on such monies," he argues.

Ultimately, the decision on what to do with the Palace will be a matter for the church's governing body, the Representative Church Body (RCB), and the two diocesan councils concerned, one of Ferns and the other of Cashel and Ossory. Dr MacCarthy is also unhappy about this.

"A proposal to dispose of this uniquely historic house, sited as it is in close proximity to by far the finest medieval cathedral (St Canice's) in Ireland, is surely a matter in which the whole church is entitled to form a view, not just the dioceses concerned," he wrote.

Ms Denise Hughes, the information officer for the two dioceses, said the two councils would meet later this month to consider the issue.

The RCB's chief officer, Mr Robert Sherwood, said discussions were taking place with the Heritage Council, but it was too early to make any pronouncements. "We are exploring the future of the Palace and how it might best be conserved for the future," he said.

The Bishop of Cashel and Ossory, the Right Rev John Neill, was away and unavailable for comment.