This article distinguishes contested heritage on consecrated land from the wider secular contested heritage debate. The evolving property law position on contested heritage and consecrated land is analysed in the context of recent consistory court judgments including the controversial decision concerning the memorial to Tobias Rustat at Jesus College, Cambridge. The current application of the ecclesiastical exemption, the statutory guidance on contested heritage from the Church Buildings Council and the Cathedrals Fabric Commission and the Duffield framework are considered together with strong criticisms made by the Archbishops’ Commission for Racial Justice. The article suggests that because issues of contested heritage and the legacies of enslavement have not been properly considered in a timely way by the Church of England, individual consistory court cases have become focal points for wider debates beyond their remit. The article argues that the current resolution process for disputes over contested heritage is untenable in the longer term. Statutory guidance needs to be revised and the faculty process, in particular the Duffield framework, needs to be adapted to address racial justice and mission and worship. Practical advice is offered to individual religious communities seeking to consider contested heritage in their own buildings in the meantime.

中文翻译：

---

有争议的遗产和长老会法院

本文将圣化土地上的争议遗产与更广泛的世俗争议遗产辩论区分开来。在最近的法院判决的背景下分析了关于有争议的遗产和神圣土地的不断演变的财产法立场，包括关于剑桥耶稣学院托比亚斯鲁斯塔特纪念碑的有争议的决定。教会豁免的当前应用、教堂建筑委员会和大教堂结构委员会对有争议遗产的法定指导以及达菲尔德框架与大主教种族正义委员会提出的强烈批评一起被考虑。这篇文章表明，由于英格兰教会没有及时适当地考虑有争议的遗产问题和奴隶制的遗留问题，个别长老会法庭案件已成为超出其职权范围的更广泛辩论的焦点。文章认为，从长远来看，目前解决有争议遗产纠纷的程序是站不住脚的。需要修改法定指导和教师流程，特别是达菲尔德框架，需要进行调整以解决种族正义以及使命和崇拜问题。同时，向寻求在自己的建筑中考虑有争议的遗产的个别宗教团体提供实用建议。