Kulić compares Clifton to Liverpool:' At Liverpool, the interior is cluttered with indecisive liturgical furnishings but these can easily ignored as the scale and form of the space, the central altar and baldachino, and colors ("sic") of light predominate. At Clifton, the various elements of the interior are coherently placed and legible, while the exterior is unassuming. For example, lighting by daylight or electric light was to be concealed, as were any windows within the line of sight of those seated in the Nave. The interior of Clifton Cathedral has a quality of openness rather like that of Liverpool , but this was intended to allow fluid movement between different areas, and the liturgical elements seem more definitely fixed and appropriate to their allotted places. If finally, there is a sense of certainty in this building, it is one of organiszation ("sic") rather than of image.' Bishop Rudderham pronounced the final design satisfactory: ’Having studied the drawings and the model inside and out I am very much more in tune with the design than I was at the beginning. It has a fine spacious feeling to it. And I think it will be a splendid setting for the liturgy. It brings the people as close as possible to the Altar without crowding them, and there will be plenty of room for our ceremonies.'