The incumbent and churchwardens sought a faculty for the re-ordering of this Grade I listed church, including the relocation of a nineteenth-century chancel screen which was part of a substantial Victorian re-ordering. The Victorian Society, English Heritage and the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings objected to the relocation of the chancel screen. The theological tradition of the parish was evangelical and the PCC and incumbent found the screen ‘intrusive’; they wanted to remove it to create a more visible space for the worship band. The petitioners argued that the screen contravened Anglican understandings of justification by faith and Christ's sacrifice as set out in Articles 7, 11, 15 and 28 of the 39 Articles of Religion through Old Testament theology about sacred space and altars. The chancellor refused to permit the relocation of the chancel screen, on the basis that the necessity for the change was not made out. In dealing with the theological arguments raised by the petitioners, the chancellor observed that, while arguments based on theological and doctrinal grounds are deployable in the consistory court, their use is not to be encouraged. Such arguments are often likely to increase periods of correspondence and consultation, as well as lengthen hearings and judgments. Chancellors should be robust in using their case management powers to rule out the use of such arguments unless persuaded that they would be likely to have an important effect on the outcome of the case. Although the 39 Articles form part of the doctrinal basis of Anglicanism, their application to the issues arising in faculty matters is likely to be controversial and disputable, and reliance on them may generate more heat than light. [Catherine Shelley]