reorganisation and destruction of irish catholic churches

Brilliant photographs and a wonderful glimpse at aspects of St. Colman’s Cathedral practically never seen. I especially like the photograph of the Sacred Heart Chapel and the Piet

@ake wrote:

Just a few questions concerning the management of churches, if anyone knows:

Today I was in the recently refurbished and re-opened RC cathedral in Waterford (designed by John Roberts who also designed the COI cathedral in the same city, which they say makes Waterford the only city in Europe whose Protestant and Catholic cathedrals had the same architect) begun 1793 making it a very much Georgian Catholic cathedral. It is so magnificent and has been so well restored I almost don’t want to say anything negative, however I’m going to. The problem is the paint job- it could be argued that the colour of the paint does not affect the appearance of the interior significantly, but while the architecture and ornament are still appreciable, I think an innappropriate colouring does reduce the aesthetic, potentially seriously. In the cathedral the side walls (south and north) are a perfect, soft, unobtrusive light yellow which goes splendidly with the dark woodwork (which is truly the most extensive and beautiful I’ve seen in an Irish RC church), but the east end and the many columns are painted a light baby blue! (Before the recent work it was an even darker blue) the effect is truly awful, and the blue should so obviously be the same yellow as the rest! Another church (also wonderful) in Waterford suffers from the same misfortune- the Franciscan church. This is also a light yellow, perhaps the very same one, but the chancel is painted a gaudy red and the crossing ceiling an absurd orangy yellow- contiguous with the light yellow and clashing with it dreadfully. Many Irish churches in fact are badly coloured. Now I noticed both of the above churches have been re-ordered ( however extremely sympathetically- so much so in fact, it is hardly re-ordering in the usual, destructive sense. That’s not to condone it -it shouldn’t have been done) and I’m wondering

1. Is a new colour scheme ever, or usually a part of the re-ordering carried out by the priests or bishops?

2. Even ignoring re-orderment- is the colour for a church interior usually specified in it’s design, and intentionally retained- or is it under the fancy of the parish priest every 5 years or so, depending on what mood he’s in?

3. Has anyone between the Irish Archbishops and the Pope expressed even an acknowledgement of what has happened to the churches in Ireland, not to even speak of regret?

4. Can anyone with a good knowledge of Catholic bureaucracy please answer me this: Are the Catholic churches in Ireland owned directly by the Holy See- if they are, is there not an official in charge of them, someone qualified and knowledgeable about the vast heritage/property of the Church, whose job is to protect and preserve them?

If anyone in the know could answer any of these for me I’m really grateful.

Colour schemes usually are included in so called “reordering” schemes. One of the worst in the country must surely be the abbey chapel of the Benedictines at Glenstal. The main walls are covered in the most awful psycodyllic wavy bands -enough to induce mal de mer and cause the congregation to take refuge in the side aisles. Usually, the forward architects and the backward liturgists come up with fanciful ideas that somehow or other suddenly become “liturgically” required.

I believe that all colour schemes SHOULD fall under the preservation of protected interiors. I cannot imagine anyone disputing that in the case of a georgian country house.

As far as acknowledging a problem is concerned, most of the Irish hierarchy are not even aware taht one exists. Just look at their statement of “solidarity” with the bishop of Cloyne condemning an Bord Pleannala for its decision in relation to Cobh Cathedral.

Who protects the heritage of the Church: that is indeed a good question. Up to lately, any PP in the country could be relied on to do his bit in a fairly competent fashion. But, at present, well….this thread says it all.

[/I] @Gianlorenzo wrote:

It could be between Holy Thursday and the Easter Vigil. The Sacred Heart Chapel is used at that time for reservation of the Hosts and the covering you see is put in place at that time.
On other occasions when the Sacred Heart Chapel is used that particular structure is not used. So I am guessing that the photos were taken at Easter. THE_Chris can confirm.

If this is used as a tabernacle, even at Easter time, I am afraid that it must be contrary to the present liturgical norms governing tabernacles. A tabernacle must be immoveable ans the case shown in the picture of the Sacred Heart Chapel in Cobh Cathedral cannnot be such – unless they bored a bolt into the mensa of the altar,-on which, by the way, nothing is supposed to be placed. This is truly very edifying coming from the powers that be in Cobh Cathedral with all their guff about liturgical appropriateness. If they are interested, or indeed able, gthey might like to check the provisions of theInstitutio generalis Missalis Romani , article 314 on the fixture and security of the tabernacle; and article 306 in relation to what is to be placed on an altar. Indeed, the original tabernacle on the altar of the Sacred Heart is in perfect conformity with the present legislation on tabernacles in that it is fixed to the reredos, of solid material, and is not placed on the altar but on the gradine of the reredos – and they tell us that Cobh Cathedral is not suitable for the modern liturgy!!

@Gianlorenzo wrote:

What you see is not a tabernacle but a superstructure put in front of the tabernacle. It is made of wood and has a small curtain arrangement, which I think is the point. It sits on the altar but the Hosts are reserved in the actual Sacred Heart Tabernacle behind. Hope that clears things up.

A superstructure sitting on the altar in front of the tabernacle makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. It is completey eccentric!!

@samuel j wrote:

Ballymore Church, Cobh, Co. Cork.
What an utter shame… that original carved wood altar must have been a stunning bit of workmanship

Prax you’re gonna have a heart attack … Hello , Prax…are you there …

It is a spectacular piece of bad taste more than anything else. In fact, I know the exact identity of the person responsible for the wrecking of the sanctuary in Ballymore – he also was responsible for Rushbrooke. Indeed, he exerted an undue influence on many of the first wave of “re-orderings” that took place in the diocese of Cloyne during the 1970s. The most serious piece of destruction that can be directly attributable to this person was the destruction of the sanctuary in Fermoy church – and especially of its pulpit which was an early work of the Cork sculptor Seamus Murphy. That work was important in that it showed Murphy’s ability in a medium (marble) other than limestone. He has a description of it in his book Stone Mad. The person responsible for utter destruction once told Praxiteles, who had questioned him rather awkwardly about it, that although the pulpit in Fermoy was by Murphy it was of little significance for it was in marble!!!! I understand that the fragments of the pulpit are still in the possession of the family who donated it – when they discovered what had happened, they came and took away the pieces to store them themselves -it all sounds like a mirror reflection of something out of Eamonn Duffy’s book on the brutalism of the reformation in England The Stripping of the Altars. For the moment, de mortuis nihil nisi bonum

I would not despair of Ballymore. The stincil work is quite likely to be underneath the horrible paint which can be taken off and what ever is there can fairly easily be restored. In those places where the patterns have not survived, new stincils can easily made. I will bet that the niches have been covered over with bit of board that can easily be thrown out.

Let us be claer about things: Vatican II did not say that statues were not to be in sannctuaries. Post conciliar legislation insisted that they there in reasonable numbers -which is quite a different thing. It insisted that if there were four statues of the BVM in the sanctuary they were to be reduced to one – in most cases, that would be reasonable.

However, the iconoclasts used this to begin their work of destruction. After Xmas, I will search out the exact piece of legislation and post it.

The choir of angels on the attic of the East wall in Ballymore was a common feature. A lovely example in mosaic is to be found on the attic of sanctuary wall in Charleville church – and in Midleton, as far as I can recall.

@Praxiteles wrote:

Yes, I am still here…what do want?

Can’t say what Sam wants, but upon viewing the last several photos of that chapel ‘before’ and ‘after’ the brutalism perpetrated upon it, Rhabanus wants more than a good stiff drink. Rhabanus wants the formation of a “liturgical-revolution crimes” council not unlike a war crimes council, with public trials for these iconoclasts.

They ought to be denounced (no use discreetly covering up for the vandal, there, Prax!) and made to do penance and make restitution for their crime of sacrilege and iconoclasm. Problem is the old pendards are probably neither clever nor strong enough to scrape their handiwork off the walls and restore the sanctuaries to their former glory, but at least they could be made to scrape off the undersides of pews and, upon gazing into the filled pails, consider their own many and grievous sins of iconoclasm.

Of course the impact of restoration would go much farther if the drive were to be guided and accompanied by a campaign of evangelisation and catechesis. When Our Lord from the Crucifix bade St Francis of Assisi “Restore my Church!” the saint initially took the words literally and commenced the restoration of San Damiano church. He leventually came to understand the command to have meant much, much more: the restoration of the Church as the Mystical Body of Christ through a campaign of evangelisation through preaching and the ascetic life.

This could trigger a revival of faith, hope, and love throughout Ireland, if only a leader even remotely touched by the spirit of evangelical zeal would exercise some much-needed leadership. Instead of hirelings, the Church is in serious need of real pastors.

The original (and restored) beauty of these Irish churches could win many people of good will back to the practice of the Faith of Our Fathers. “How long, O Lord, how long?”

WE certainly know when to pick our moments! It seems that the bishop of Cloyne is intent on wrecking the usual seasonal truce from controversy by issuing a senseless statement to the Evening Echo in Cork. Presumably, its publication on 22 December 2006 is to preclude a response from the FOSCC. However, in this he is quite silly for the FOSCC will deal with this after Christmas with some other matters. As a note of interest, does the bishop of Cloyne think or intend working with An Bord Pleannala to arrive at his new set of plans before he leaves office in four years time? There could be some legal issues there that An Bord Pleannala might like to look at. From what we can gather this isthe third version of the bold bishop’s conversation with the Pope. If he describes as “absolute nonsense” claims that plans are afoot to reorder the Cathedral, thenn why might we not ask was he himself talking this same “absolute nonsense” to his priests and to the Cathedral chapter as we gather from reports in the papers? Here is the article published in the Evening Echo:

Evening Echo 22nd Dec. 2006.
THE Bishop of Cloyne has vowed to complete the re-ordering of St Colman’s Cathedral in Cobh before he leaves office.
Speaking to the Evening Echo, Bishop John Magee said: “I started the work of the restoration of the cathedral in Cobh in 1992 and I would wish, before leaving this diocese at the end of my term of office that I would have completed the work that I set out to do.”
This includes the liturgical re-ordering of the Sacristy, which has caused 1 considerable controversy in Cobh.
The 70-year-old bishop met with strong opposition from the Friends of St Colman’s Cathedral group, which claimed that the changes originally proposed were not in keeping with the design of the cathedral.
An Bord Pleanala was in agreement re with the objectors,
Bishop Magee said that there are currently no new plans in place for the re-ordering of the Sacristy.
Describing as “absolute nonsense” reports that there are plans in place approved by the Pope, Bishop Magee said that he had publicly acknowledged An Bord Pleanala’s rejection of the original plans for re-ordering of the cathedral.
“We shall be working together with the planning authority to see how we can move forward, so as to make sure that the liturgical requirements are respected,” he added.
The bishop also intends to consult widely in relation to any new plans and it is hoped that a proposal can be reached which is acceptable to all.
On his recent .visit to Rome, Bishop – Magee spoke with Pope Benedict XVI in relation to the cathedral, and His Holiness said: “It is a beautiful cathedral. I have not seen its interior but I imagine that it is beautiful.
“I encourage you to do what you can to preserve the beauty of that cathedral for the generations to come said the Pope.

It also seems strange that the bishop of Cloyne is unaware of the protocol that one does not repeat the contents of a conversation with the Pope. If the Pope wishes to say something in public, does he not usually do so through his press spokesperson – and bishop Magee certainly is not that!!

Well, well, I think the the bold bishop has scored an own goal here. Sending presss releases around just before Christmas is a tricky business and he dpes not seem to have the hang of it. Here we have a clear example of the bold bishop serving up and own goal. He tell us that the Pope wishes him to preserve the interior of the Cobh Cathedral and at the same time he is ttrying to tell us that the present interior does not meet “liturgical requirements”. But, the forgetful bishop has forgotten the letter published in the Carow Nationalist from the Joseph Ratzinger from which we can see quite clearly that the nonsense push forward by the bold bishop is nowhere required by the Second Vatican Council nor by the current liturgical legislation of the Church. Just what do you need that get that point into a thick head? I agree with Sam! He seems to have been given a fairly sharp instruction to leave St. Colman’s as it is: This is what to-day’s Irish Independent has to say and the FOSCC are bound to have a glory day on this one:

Papal call to preserve cathedral

‘Beautiful’ building should be protected, Benedict tells local bishop

THE Pope has urged the preservation of an Irish cathedral that has been at the centre of a bitter planning wrangle for almost a decade.

The Bishop of Cloyne, Dr John Magee, revealed Pope Benedict’s plea that St Colman’s Cathedral in Cobh, Co Cork would be preserved as he dismissed suggestions that there would be any attempt to force through controversial changes to the church’s interior.

Last summer, An Bord Pleanala rejected plans for a ‘re-ordering’ of the interior of the cathedral, which is one of Ireland’s most famous neo-Gothic structures.

The board warned that the changes could jeopardise the entire ethos of the 19th century building.

Dr Magee has now said that the current situation “needs to be resolved” – and that the Pope told him, in a private audience earlier this year, that he too wants to see the beauty of St Colman’s preserved. “(The Pope said) it is a beautiful cathedral and I have not seen its interior but I can only imagine that it is beautiful.

“I encourage you to do what you can to preserve the beauty of that cathedral for the generations to come,” Dr Magee said.

The bishop insisted that while he would like to see the refurbishment of St Colman’s completed with the interior re-ordering, any works will be conducted in consultation with the planning board.

Earlier this year, the diocese ruled out a judicial challenge to the planning board’s decision which was taken by a six-to-two majority – and came after An Bord Plealala rejected the recommendation of their own inspector.

Following a two-day oral hearing in Midleton last March, he ruled that the board did not have the right to reject the changes to the cathedral on the basis it would be an interference with liturgical matters.

However, the board rejected that recommendation – insisting that they did have the right to rule on the interior changes to St Colman’s.

The changes were rejected as unduly interfering with the character and historical significance of the cathedral.

St Colman’s – which boasts breathtaking views over Cork harbour -is regarded by many as a masterpiece by the Victorian architect, AW Pugin.

The interior redesign proposed removing a number of the cathedral’s front aisles, lifting floor mosaics and extending the altar. The existing rails would be removed and the Bishop’s Chair would be located forward, towards the congregation.

Dr Magee, and the Diocese of Cloyne insisted the changes would not alter the ethos of the cathedral but, rather, would bring it into line with Vatican II guidelines.

Critics, however, claim that the proposed changes threatened the very fabric of the cathedral – and local opponents warned that, if the changes went ahead despite opposition, the diocese could face a boycott.

Ralph Riegel

Quite so Gianlorenzo!!!