reorganisation and destruction of irish catholic churches

@ake wrote:

here’s an interesting picture; a colour photograph of Waterford Cathedral, before the removal of the stenciling. Notice the columns are already blue. It would be interesting to know the chronology of the interior decoration. What was the original Georgian decoration scheme?
[ATTACH]7133[/ATTACH]

Thanks for posting this colourised picture of Waterford Cathedral.

Am I correct in distinguishing a gallery (galleries) in the transept?

I do not see Stations of the Cross; perhaps they begin only further down in the nave.

I am intriqued by the tabernacle in the centre of the high altar. Might this have been arranged toward the end of the nineteenth century or the beginning of the twentieth century? It seems odd to me that a cathedral in 1792 would have had the tabernacle in the centre (Seems a bit early to me). Of course, circumstances peculiar to Ireland at that time may have suggested this arrangement. Any ideas?

@Rhabanus wrote:

Thanks for posting this colourised picture of Waterford Cathedral.

Am I correct in distinguishing a gallery (galleries) in the transept?

I do not see Stations of the Cross; perhaps they begin only further down in the nave.

I am intriqued by the tabernacle in the centre of the high altar. Might this have been arranged toward the end of the nineteenth century or the beginning of the twentieth century? It seems odd to me that a cathedral in 1792 would have had the tabernacle in the centre (Seems a bit early to me). Of course, circumstances peculiar to Ireland at that time may have suggested this arrangement. Any ideas?

Yes indeed they are galleries. The long transepts both have beautiful galleries. Are these the original Georgian galleries? I presume they are, in part at least, but I still haven’t come across any detailed literature on the building so can’t say for certain.; (in the below pictures, see what an immense difference would be made to the interior simply by painting the columns the same yellow)

[ATTACH]7146[/ATTACH][ATTACH]7147[/ATTACH][ATTACH]7148[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH]7149[/ATTACH][ATTACH]7150[/ATTACH]

As for the altar arrangement, look at this image, posted before

[ATTACH]7151[/ATTACH]

This is from the National Library, and apparently dates from 1890-1910. Which would suggest that it is rather earlier than the coloured picture. The altar seems unchanged, but look at the altar rails; the central gates are gone. In the colour image they appear to be intact. So…I don’t know.

A peculiar thing in the colour image is the wall decoration just above the gallery in the transept- criss crossing lines (?!)

ake: a wonderful series of pictures of a very historic building; given that both this and the C of I cathedral were both designed by the same architect (John Roberts) at the end of the 18thC – a ramarkable feat in itself – it is perhaps ironic that the Cath cathedral has now developed a more ‘anglican’ feel. The present colour scheme may be chaste, but too much splendid detail (‘pagan’ rather than ‘christian’ in the classical manner) has been lost.
One thing that intrigues me: where did the forest of tie-bars come from? Is the fabric so unstable? There are none in Christchurch, so did the catholics build their’s on the cheap? I thought there would be other technical, less intrusive, means of dealing with this problem. Tie-bars are often a feature of Italian gothic churches, demonstrating a lack of familiarity with Gothic building techniques (e.g. the use of buttresses), and not to their aesthetic advantage either.

Any photographs of Cobh Cathedral yesterday? reports have that over 500 turned out.

@ake wrote:

here’s an interesting picture; a colour photograph of Waterford Cathedral, before the removal of the stenciling. Notice the columns are already blue. It would be interesting to know the chronology of the interior decoration. What was the original Georgian decoration scheme?
[ATTACH]7133[/ATTACH]

I have a watercolour painting of the interior dating from around 1886 when the stenciling was carried out . It shows the columns in a golden colour above the Stations , with a marblized brown granite effect from the top of the stations down to the base.

Cobh Cathedral, 25 March 2008

Delighted to see Brianq back again for some fun and frolicks. We were missing you, as they say.

And so to the nux. We note the following from the above:

“The parish decide whether to proceed or not”.

That is surely the statement of the century and it all depends on how you define “parish”. In most cases, it is a simple matter of “la paroisse, c’est moi” – parish priest speaking. Despite a veneer of lay participation etc. Geneva has not yet reached the decision making processes of the Cthaolic Church – at any level. And of course, it cannot be expected to.

As for the decision making process in which the pariush decided not to proceed with a make over, well all we can say is taht one swallow does not a summer. And are you sure the “parish” had been told by the PP to reject whatever it was thta had been proposed?

@Fearg wrote:

And a similar hypothetical question for Brian Quinn – if the 1904 sanctuary had still been intact in 2002, how would you have proceeded? (Assuming the client gave you complete freedom!).

Thanks,
Fearg.

Brian – I’d be interested in what your thoughts on the above would be (original question was in relation to Armagh Cathedral). thanks.

@brianq wrote:

Hi all

back again for another stint of fun and frolics – to help this forum get back to some sort of fidelity to the mind of the Holy Roman and Apostolic Catholic Church as expressed in Vat2 and subsequent documents etc.

Regarding below:
Just take a look at this guff:

“As liturgical consultants, we help you form your new worship environment into a central element in your ministry and pastoral planning. We do this in two ways – by designing the worship interior and its elements, and by facilitating an interactive process that discerns the worship needs of the community prior to a commitment to construction”.

And this, which makes absolutely clear that any mess created in the process is truly YOURS and no one else’s:

BQ: no – and i’m at a loss to see how you came to that conclusion from my statement. A ‘mess’ can be due to many factors.

“The role of a liturgical consultant is to facilitate a process that ensures your new worship environment not only accommodates your spatial needs, but resonates with your tradition and aspirations. Such a process involves as many from the parish as possible and is adapted to, and inspired by, your community. This guided consultation is an opportunity to reflect on your Christian commitment and how your worship space reflects and nourishes that commitment. Just as each community is unique, so is the guided process and so is the result”.

What happens when the parish just does not want what ever is concocted by the “decision-making” committee?

BQ: that’s an easy one, it’s highly likely it won’t proceed or will be substantially amended. The parish decide whether to proceed or not. I have been involved in a process where it was decided not to proceed – a fact I refer to on the website by the way which somehow you didn’t mention.

BQ[/QUOTE]

Well what about the Dromaroad mess Who is responsible for that and can we identify at least some of the many factors?

@johnglas wrote:

No regrets at the return of the ‘new’ old rite, but ‘fiddle-back’ chasubles and lace-edged albs? I seem to remember that pre-Vat II there had been a liturgical revival which involved (inter alia) a return to fuller (‘Gothic’) chasubles and plainer albs (‘alb’ = (plain) white). My secondary school church history book (c. early 1960s) – not an unconservative tome by any means – referred to gold braid and lace (and, by implication, fiddle-back chasubles) as ’18th century bad taste’. It wasn’t wrong.

The book reflects a certain current in the slightly earlier liturgical movement which apportioned to the sobriquet of bad taste to anything not of its persuasion. Of course, thise side of the liturgical movement was not exactly the source of the wreckaghe that ensued in the aftermath of the Council. For that we have to look to more hardened archaeologists types seton recreating the liturgical practoces of the Gregory the Great within a pedogogical context by now long dated.

True, the vestments worn in Cobh were not best examples of their type but there are other splendid examples of the same type available and just sitting and waiting.