reorganisation and destruction of irish catholic churches

The Martyrdom of St. Peter, Michelangelo’s fresco of 1546 in the Cappella Paolina of the Apostolic Palace:

According to tradition, Peter was crucified upside down, either on the Janiculum hill or in a circus arena between two metae, the pair of turning-posts or conical columns set in the ground at each end of the course. Artists have used both settings, depicting Peter on the cross at the moment of being lifted by soldiers, often surrounded by onlookers, or already raised in position, with a small group of women standing by in allusion to the similar group at Christ’s crucifixion.

In Michelangelo’s composition everything is centred in the fearful event; in triumph over pain and suffering. As in the fresco of St Paul, the main protagonist fits into an ellipse placed in the centre of the cross, extended on four sides by the disposition of the figures. This device lends to the design a clarity and strength which is absent from the restless Damascus scene, because there the fallen Saul appears suspended in mid-air at the lower edge of the picture, and the accompanying figures occupy different levels of space. In the Crucifixion, on the other hand, most of the figures are vertical; only those near the centre give the impression of rotating round the martyr. Their features betray the utmost horror, especially those of the women on the lower right who tremble with terror, and several onnlookers seem on the verge of madness

The Conversion of St. Paul on the opposite wall of the Cappella Paolina:

The conversion of Saul (St Paul) is the best-known and most widely represented of the Pauline themes (Acts 9:1-9). On the road to Damascus, where he was going to obtain authorization from the synagogue to arrest Christians, Paul was struck to the ground, blinded by a sudden light from heaven. The voice of God, heard also by Paul’s attendants, as artists make clear, said, ‘Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?’ They led him to the city where, the voice had said, he would told what he had to do. According to a tradition, connected with the medieval Custom of representing pride as a falling horseman, Paul made the journey on horseback. He lies on the ground as if just thrown from his horse, prostrate with awe, or unconcious. He may be wearing Roman armour. Christ appeares in the heavens, perhaps with three angels. Paul’s attendants run to help him or try to control the rearing horses.

In Michelangelo’s fresco the composition shows great depth of feeling obtained by the use of light and darkness that foreshadows Rembrandt and testifies to the heroic virtuosity of the aged master. A focal line traverses the the painting, its progression at once reveals the meaning of the composition. Starting at the top left it flows diagonally, along the figure of Christ descending and a beam of light. It follows a figure with raised fingers and another, bent over the fallen Saul, and circumscribes the ellipse of this body. From his right leg it curves back and upward in the direction of a horse galloping in the background, and loses itself in the undulating contours of the mountains with a vision of the heavenly Jerusalem faintly outlined in their folds – unless we accept a more literal explanation and call it Damascus. The high-light on the head of Saul and on the horse’s head confirms the symbolic meaning; the dim awarness of fallen man is touched by the lightning flash of grace, and as universal conciousness awakens in him, he loses his animal torpor and gains true knowledge.

And this is Caravaggio’s rendition of the same subject (1600):

http://www.artchive.com/artchive/C/caravaggio/st_peter.jpg.html

And this is Caravaggio’s rendering of the conversion of St. Paul on the opposite wall of the chapel (1600):

http://www.artchive.com/artchive/C/caravaggio/caravaggio_conversion_of_st_paul.jpg.html

@Sirius wrote:

Having sifted through your postings on the Cobh appeal I am struck by the recurring images of waste disposal. Earlier we were encouraged to “bin” the Inspector’s report and now we are asked to “dump” the Guidelines. Your attitude to waste management seems to be as Victorian as your liturgical views. Why don’t you try recycling these documents?

Sirius, do you object to everything Victorian or it is just architecture and liturgy?
Re. 963. you still haven’t defined your terms.
What precisely is ‘Victorian liturgy’ and what are the ‘liturgical requirement’ that you presume for Cobh Cathedral?

Thqn you very much kennie for the kind remarks.

I doubt that Sirius is in a position to make a professionql comment on the liturgy as practised in the 19th. century. So far, he has produced no indication of knowing anything about the subject

@Kennie wrote:

As I was passing delighted through Drogheda station and musing on the many merits of Prof. O’Neill’s many architectural triumphs, I was interrupted by my recalling the amazing news that the Bishops’ Conference is taking a concerned interest in the misdoings of Bishop Magee and his HACKs. I would have thought that by now, rather than getting themselves publicly associated with all the extraordinary mess in Cobh – the dire lobbying of public officers, the procedural omissions, the guff about liturgical requirements, the very proposal to destroy such a wonderful piece of Church architecture – they would do better to ponder the tsunami yet to come. For one thing, can you dig up the mosaic floor of a protected building with pneumatic drills and while a planning hearing is actually in course without the forces of law and order coming to call? It seems inevitable that the Bishops will have discussed that question, though behind closed doors. It by a remote chance they didn’t, perhaps they might feel the need to put it on the agenda for the next moot. We don’t need to reflect on liturgical requirements there. I mean, I feel confident that it is not required by any ecclesiastical rule.

And what I say is, DON’T KNOCK PRAXITELES. Without her efforts, our lives in the last while would have been shorn of much beauty. The sort of beauty that even episcopal emissaries can’t get at with a pneumatic drill. I say this with immense serenity in the face of some ungenerous carping of late.

Oh, Oh, I think we have a streaker on the pitch!

@Bruges wrote:

Is there no right of reply in the land FOSCC?

It is disappointing that Praxiteles, whose postings are usually laced with razor sharp invective, should gratefully accept protection from a blunt instrument like Kennie.

Hardly protection. Amusement maybe. Prax is quite capable of taking care of herself.
In the land of FOSCC there is always right of reply along as it is to the point and not needless invective.

@Armandd wrote:

Bonjour

I was reading the informations about the cathedral of St Colman in Cobh. Is he permitted to the bishops in Irelande to make some directions to the agents of the generalities for the urbanization? En France we have the legalities of separations. The bishops are never asked for informations.

Salut Armand!
Malheureusement, de nos jours en Irlande le primary role of the Irish bishops is to preserve English architectural heritage. Once they have achieved that, the bishops are permitted to look after the liturgical needs of their congregations, in consultation with the Pugin Society and their Irish franchisees. Quel dommage that Amiral Hoche, Wolfe Tone (and the brave troupes de marines from Brest and La Rochelle) came so close but did not succeed in 1796!

Bonjour Chuck

Explique moi cette drole de situqtion. Je n’en comprends plus rien

@Armandd wrote:

Bonjour Chuck

Explique moi cette drole de situqtion. Je n’en comprends plus rien

My suspicions are confirmed! Would a genuine resident of La Rochelle say “bonjour” at 9.23pm (see post #1012) Obviously you are an agent provocateur!

I am placed on La Rochelle. I do not understand the provocative agent. The addesse is normal to chat (causer) on forums in the French internet.