reorganisation and destruction of irish catholic churches
- This topic has 7,926 replies, 103 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 6 months ago by
.
- Posts
Just reveived a copy of the Friends of St. Colman’s Cathedral 2009 Calendar.
It contains some beautiful external pictures of the Cathedral taken from different locations and at different periods during the year.
The modest price of Euro 5 will be useful, I am sure, in the coming months should it become necessary to mount a second campaign against the Cloyne HACKERS.
Cobh Cathedral, Cobh, Co. Cork
The latest we hear from the Cobh Cathedral saga is the installation of something akin to a kitchen unit behind the High Altar. The unit is approximately 5 feet wide and about six feet high. It is divided into three parts: the lower part has three presses; the central part has a sink and wash-top: and the upper part (in what appears to be an attempt at concretising Richard “Wrecker” Hurley’s doddering about “domisticity”) for all the world resembles a rustic dresser with presses concealing pigeon-holes to be used for some unknown purpose. The unit, of course, has running water: both in and out – which must have required the drilling of a bew more holes in the floor and walls of the sanctuary.
It now appears that this was installed without any planning permission or indeed witout even a declaration of exemption. This is a new category which seems to be coming in wide use in Cork and allows for all sorts of things to happen – up to and including the demolition of protected strustures in whole or part.
When asked about the “domestic” appliances fitted at the back of the High Altar in Cobh Cathedral, as usual, the know-nothing Cobh Urban District Council knew nothing about it. In order to satisty those who wanted to know something about it, our Italian friend, who acts as an architect for the Urban District Council, Signor Cacciotti, was despatched to the Cathedral. Reports have it that he compiled another of his extensive (but well illustrated) reports on Cobh cathedral – if you recall, he did a previous one which, AFTER 847 PAGES, came to the remarkable conclusion that the doors had not been painted for some time. This time. El Gran Segnor discovered what appears to be the vanguard for the installation of a chipper behind the High Altar. Presumably, he looked at it, considered it, pondered it, measured it -perhaps- contemplated it, ruminated about it, meditated on it, and finally came to an even more shocking conclusion in this latest report – the kitchen sink was a thing of beauty of and joy forever and, as such, not only did not impinge in any way on the architectural integrity of Cobh Cathedral, BUT, in fact, it even managed to improve on it – shades there of the great Prof. O’Beill’s efforts to improve on Pugin. While I suppose one could have some sort of comprehension for El Gran Segnor’s enthusiasm for the kitchen sink behind the High Altar in Cobh Cathedral – given the boyish fascination of Italians for automated gadgets (especially when connected with chippers) that has been nurtured at least from the time of Leonardo’s automota – but the concommitant enthuasism of the Cork County Conservation Officer FOR the domestic approach to sacred space leaves us wondering about the inquadration of his aesthetic outlook – indeed, we could ask if there is one.
Then of course, there is the case of the revetment of the credance tables to the side of the High Altar. This is done in red marble – as you would expect. The problem is that the revetment on the south creadnce table has been smashed and a large section of the revetment noW sits on the table it self. Well, Kojack Cachiotti in his investigation of matters tells us that this was broken 20 years ago – and you do not need planning permission or declaration for that either. Remarkably, he had nothing to say about doing anything about it. Obviously, the know-nothing Cobh Urban Distruict Council knew nothing about it and did not know what to do about it and not knowing how to read -even Signor Cacchiotti’s extensive but well illustrated reports- probably had to distract some of the people usually engaged in the adult literacy programmes to explain the puzzling squiggles to them before returning their heads to the tranquility of the sand.
@tomahawk wrote:
The three lay members of FOSCC who accompanied Praxitelles to the conference were neither clerics or councillors!!
Do you ever answer a direct question – I was not talking about the FOSCC. I was wondering what you were doing in Ballincollig.
@tomahawk wrote:
There are a number of sitting councillors who support the changes and will be going forward for re-election next June. They are not “single issue “candidates but their position on the issue is well known.
Now read this carefully Tomahawk, so you can formulate an answer to this particular question.
Which councillors are you referring to and ,more importantly, how do you know they are in favour of the changes?I am afraid ‘their positiion being well-known’ cannot be true as they have all, other than Sean O’Connor, mostly fudged around the issue. So if what you say is true give us the names. You make a lot of unsubstantiated statements and expect them to be taken at face value, so now back up what you say with names and how you know they are in favour of the changes.
@tomahawk wrote:
Sam,
As I have stated previously I was indifferent to the present row. The reason I entered this debate was because of the hypocritical attitude of some people using this site who have spent a long time being offensive and abusive to those they disagree with, however when they meet those people in a face to face setting they are courteous and charming.Of course if they didnt have the cover of a web name we wouldnt see half of these posts. I do agree with you that people are genuinely concerned with the fabric of the building I also believe that that concern is shared by people on both sides of the argument and I can say this because I have spoken to people from both sides. I wouldnt be a conspiricy theorist and believe that every move the authorities make has to be examined in detail for the hidden agenda. This should not be a them and us situation, if we leave out the re-ordering for a moment and concentrate on maintenance can we not agree everybody is on the same side.If we can manage to overcome that one who knows maybe we may find some bit of common ground on the bigger issue.I am convinced that as long as we have abuse and smart-ass comments we wont have progress on any issue.Really Tomahawk, this is getting to much. How do you know that people using this site are hypocritical. You presume to know who people on this site are and even claim to have met them face to face – how do you know all this? Have contributors to this site being knocking on your door identifying themselves to you and was this prior to or after you entered this debate.
Once again you are making hugh assumptions and believing them as fact.
As for you being indifferent previously – I am afraid I cant accept that, what with you being in contact with all those ‘sitting councillors in favour of the changes’ and you talking to all those ‘silent majority in Cobh and the Dioceses in favour of the changes’ – all that takes some time and effort, so please don’t try and say you were indifferent or you might be accused of being hyprocritical.
Again who have you spoken to on the other side of the debate, ie those, who you would maintain are in a minority, who are against the changes?
As for leaving out the re-ordering for a moment and concentrating on the maintenance, I am afraid that will not wash with the people of Cobh. They were sold this line before and contributed a lot of money for the restoration of their beloved Cathedral, only to have the re-ordering foisted on them at the last moment, when the money was already in. They will not be fooled again. As I said in a previous post, if the Bishop and the Restoration Committee gave solemn promises that the re-ordering was permanently off the agenda then they would get the money they will need for a proper restoration of the Cathedral.
As for finding ‘common ground’ on the big issue – what does that mean? Is it akin to Brian McCutcheon’s idea of ‘consultation’ whereby they held ‘information meetings’ AFTER the planning application had been submitted to Cobh Town Council.I have been told that at the Conference in Ballincollig last week it was said that Richard Hurley was currently working on St. Mary’s Oratory in Maynooth. Can this be right, I was under the impression that Hurley had already wrecked that particular chapel long ago. Whatever is he doing now? Maybe he has been given this benighted building to work on again as no one else wants him next or near their churches.
At this stage, the Ballincollig Conference must be something Cork County wishes it hadn’t become involved with. The first part of the Conference, provided by Bishop Magee, was an embarrassment to many of the council officials and irritated the participants: sermonizing and talking down just don’t work in this kind of forum.
Although the first part was given over to the Cloyne Historic Churches Committee, none of its three speakers had anything to say about cherishing historic churches. The departure point of all three was that everything was up for grabs. Richard Hurley summed up the attitude by comparing the renovation of a 19th century church with clearing out the clutter of a Victorian bathroom!!
The Council people just did not have enough education to engage this argumant at all. Their reaction was similar to their counterparts in post-colonial Africa: sit, say nothing, roll the white of the eye, and eventually go along with anything siad for we don’t know any better and we havn’t the cultural baggage to employ what minimal education we might have.
Press reports about this conference in the Irish Examiner, the Echo, and the Irish Catholic, should already have been sufficient to cause the PA to take notice. Since no specific planning application was involved, it was not obliged to take advice at this level only from the Cloyne Historic Churches Advisory Committee alone and it should, therefore, have been a bit more open to other points of view- I would include among those the Church of Ireland, Methodists etc., who were appallingly treated and basically regarded as hangers-on. A wider discussion of this problem just didn’t happen.
More worrying, however, was the circulation of the list of registered participants at the conference among persons who had no right to have such information. Presumably, in accepting registrations Cork County Council had a duty under the Data Protection Acts (1989, 2003) to use the information only for the purposes for which it was supplied to them. In a quite unprofessional turn of events, registration lists were supplied to persons other than the Council and approaches were made concerning the participation of specific persons who had registered for the conference. Just notice that one contributor on this thread is able to say that a specific number of persons attended the conference to represent a particular organisation – yet, on the day in Ballincollig, there were no lists of participants available to anyone who turned up and no information was available on the participants to anyone there other than to the organisers. How come one contributor to this thread knows all? A complaint should be made to the Govenment Ombudsman asking her to investigate this obvious lack of professionalism and the exposure of persons to the unwelcome attention of cranks simply because they supplied personal data to the Cork County Council.
@Praxiteles wrote:
Cngratulations to Randal Hodginson on what looks like a superb piece of restoration in the Redemptorist church in Limerick.
Praxiteles believes that there will soon be a business expansion in this line of work as soon as we can finally shuffle off the few remaining liturgical dinausaurs left over from the 1970s.
Keep up the good work.
fantastic
@tomahawk wrote:
The silent majority do not view it as destruction!
what suggests this exactly? Whenever I talk to everyday churchgoers, all around the country, and ask them what they think of re-orderings like that proposed for Cobh they respond overwhelmingly negativley occasionally indifferently, and never positively that I can recall. I imagine it’s the same in this parish and diocese. There’s also the issue of the experts on victorian architecture opposing the the changes on heritage conservation grounds and the adverse effect on hugely signigifcant all but unique piece of architecture in ireland.
how can you back up the view that this a valiant struggle on behalf of the majority of the common people against a troublesome minority?
An aspect of Irish church fittings and furnishings thta we have hardly touched upon on this thred over the past three years is that of the liturgical contents of church sacrsities. Often they contained some of the most magnificent textiles and metal work in Ireland. Carefully assembled from the early to middle 18th century right up to recent times, parochial collections typically featured Spanish, Italian, Flemish and, above all, French work of the highest squality. Much of the earliest stuff was Spanish, French and Italian. Typically, from the mid 19th century on, such material was drawn from England, Ireland as well as France, Flanders and Spain – and occasionally from Grmany and Austria (e.g. the magificent set of vestments given to Maynooth College by the Empress Elizabeth of Austria in 1879). By the 20th century, material mostly came from Ireland, England and France.
It was the custom to store and care for these items. However, what can only be described as a saccage has gone on in Ireland in very recent time with some of the most valuable works being either dumpde or destroyed without any consideration for their artistic quality and importance.
The most recent round of “clearances” has gone on under the guise of sacristy extensions or renovations which are used as excuses to consign much of this materila to the skip -which Cork Couty Council will insist should be covered. As an example, Praxiteles can point to the sacristy of Cobh Cathedral where it is no longer possible to see anything other than cheap (grimy and sweat saoked) subbish bought off the rack in some hiucksters shop. It appears that while the HACKERS were doing repairs tot he sacristy in Cobh, they took the opportunity to rid the place of 150 years of pontifical clutter – the kind of thing that Richard “Hacker” Hurley would consider should get door with the Victorian jacks fittings. So where has everything gone?
It is all too sad. Just where did things go wrong for the person responsible for the last time the Roman Pontiff was vested in the fanone at the monastery of Santa Cecilia in Rome!
As an example of whct Praxiteles is talking about, here is a set of vestments made by the silk workers of Lyons in France. It was presentd to Pope Pius IX who used these vestments for the opening of the First Vatican Council in December 1869.
The craftsmen and women who made these vestments probably also made vestments that were to be found in many of the sacristies of Ireland – but, where are they?
These examples are kept in the sacristy of St Peter’s Basilica.
off topic, I called in to the Loreto convent in rathfarham and was told the place was empty, the only person inside being a security guard at night, so no access to the chapel (someone at the gate lodge building told me that). I presume I was given the right info. Anyone know anything about the inside of the chapel what state it’s in?
Here are the Austrian Vestments given to Maynooth College in 1879 by the Empress Elizabeth who was stayng at SUmmerhill House nearby on a hunting expeditioin. They were in the College Chapel for all major feats until c. 1950 when a copy set was made and the originals put in the museum.
However, this is only a part of the suite for it also contains a dalmatic, tunicle, cope and humeral veil. The set was made in Vienna on clothe of gold decorated with green shamorck. At the front edge of the chasuble are the Imperial arms of Austria and Lothringen marshelled with WIttelsbach of Bavaria from which house the Empress Elizabeth was born. She was assassinated in Geneva in September 1898.
The vestments of the Honan Chapel in Cork produced, mainly, by the Dun Emar Guild can be seen here together with much inferior quality junk that have been added to them in recent years:
From the sacristy of Mullingar Cathedral – or it least it was there up to recently – this chasuble which dates fromt he mid- 17th century and is said to have belonged to Oliver Plunkett.
And another example dating from 1712 in the sacristy of the Poor Clare Convent in Galway, a fine chasuble, French silk with Irish embroidery depicting the annunciation on the front and the exaltation of the Holy Eucharist (influenced by Raphael’s Disputa in the Stanze Vaticane) with King David on the back.
And another example, this time a early 18th century chasuble from the Dominican Convent in Galway. French damask silk with Irish handwork depicting the descent from the Cross on the back and the instruments of the Passion on the front.
From the sacristy of the Poor Clare Convent in Galway, an altar frntal dating from the early 18th century, in French satin with irish handwork embroidery influenced in its iconography of the Immaculate Conception by the school of Saville, and ultimately by Juam Pacheo’s tract on painting whihc exercised an enormous influence on Sevillian painting of the 17 th century.
An altar frontal from the scaristy of the Dominican Convent in Galway -founded by the Nuncio Rinucini in 1642 – in white French satin with Irish handwork depicting the exhaltation of the Holy Cross. It dates from the early 18th. century. The lions and unicorns in the bottom section refer to the Messianic kingdom foretold by the Prophet Isaiah.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
