I posted previously about a very quick visit to this place:
It was getting dark and I did not have a lot of time to get a great look at the church. I feel that my post could have been worded a little differently. The church has been restored and they did an excellent job. I remarked that the job looked too good. That was not meant as a criticism. I recently received an email from someone who told me that the church was built in 1908 without a proper foundation or bracing. Therefore extensive work would have had to have been done to properly restore it. Looking back at my post I can see that I might have inadvertently offended someone.
I have a lot of respect for people that work to restore places like this so people like me can see them. I will definitely have to go back and revisit this place. It deserves more attention.