reorganisation and destruction of irish catholic churches
- This topic has 7,926 replies, 103 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 4 months ago by
.
- Posts
And, here we have a closer look at the Baptismal Font, placed awkwardly before the main door, calculate to impede ingression and egression of every procession. The floor lighting before the main features is also not very very inspiring of any great confidence.
I think the architect for St Peter’s cathedral was Richard Pierce of Enniskillen. The floor tiles are by Armatile (who also did Armagh). The 2 small chairs on either side of the cathedra are apparently “thrones for the Auxilliary bishops”, somehow, I don’t think they are normally provided.
Ah, so that explains the conversational posture of the three chairs. The idea of thrones for Auxiliary bishops is complettely off the wall.
As always, for the purposes of comparison – here is St Peter’s as it was in the early 1900’s
[ATTACH]3033[/ATTACH]
I think the architect here was Jeremiah MacAuley who built St. Peter’s around 1860. The first noticeable feature of the 1900 picture is the focal point of the building which is the High Altar in general, and probably the tabernacle in particular. The re-reordered result cannot escape a great void in the apse of the church which is not filled by the trinity of chairs.
Striking again is the anachronistic intrusion of a basilical arrangement on a gothic structure. Even more odd is the high elevation of the cathedra – gauchely covered in red (as far as I know, Down and Connor never had a bishop Cardinal) and, as at Armagh, the placing of the altar on the floor without elevation -except taht the problem is more accentuated here because the sanctuary is not as large as Armagh.
While the Altar, is size, is better than Armagh, it looks abandoned there on the floor and is rendered impractical for the ceremonies of benedictuion. Fetching are those floor lights – for what purpose I know not and cannot begin to imagine. Ultimately, they are a distraction.
Again, as with Armagh, it has to be said that it is better than the enormous megalomaniac mess made of St. Peter’s by Cathal Daly’s destructive boot-boy penchant – do not forget, that is is responsible for the mess in Longford. But this kind of comparison is hardly reason for self-congratulation when you realize the difference that a little historical investigation would have made in Armagh.
That ambo is just simply AWFUL!
and the architect responsible for Cahal Daly’s intervention was a Laurence McConville (I guess from Rooney and McConville) under the direction of Ray Carroll.
@Fearg wrote:
and the architect responsible for Cahal Daly’s intervention was a Laurence McConville (I guess from Rooney and McConville) under the direction of Ray Carroll.
Well, well…a really awful concatination of the very very worst offenders as far as Irish churches are concerned. Strange that this should cause one to think of Chateaubriand’s famous description of what came out of an audience of Louis XVIII: … “Tallyrand appuy
“Again, as with Armagh, it has to be said that it is better than the enormous megalomaniac mess made of St. Peter’s by Cathal Daly’s destructive boot-boy penchant.”
Do we have any pictures of this era at St Peter’s?
Sorry for the confusion Luzarches!
Below is a photograph of the state of St. Peter’s in Belfast after the boot-boy’s outing:
Interesting – I think at first the old high altar and tablernacle remained in place, under the baldichino, with the cathedra against a pillar to the left. I will see if I can find a picture of that.
@Praxiteles wrote:
Rhabanus,
This is the effort made at re-reordering St. Peter’s Cathedral, Belfast.
I am not sure who the architect was but I am inclined to suspect Brian Quinnof Rooney and McConville -currently advertising themselves in the clerical directory of the diocese of Down and Connor as “liturgical consultants” – but those glossy tiles tell a tale.
Here is a rather novel ecclesiastical eccentricity: a tabernacle door equippe with spy-hole to facilitate “perpetual adoration” -though, I do know what is done when persons are present who are not intent on adoration, for the bishop of Down and Connor must surely realize that perpetual adoration is the same thing as having the Sacred Species exposed to the scoffing multitude 24/7.
The lack of proportion in the tabernacle and plinth is most striking and reminds one of the pathetic effort of re-assembling lego done by Prof. Cathal O’Neill in the Pro-Cathedral after he wrecked that building. Also, the lack of any connection between this tabernacle and an altar is telling of the theologically unacceptable disjoining of Eucharistic Adoration from the Mass.
No sense of proportion whatsoever! And no understanding of the concept of either a Sacrament House or the purpose of the reservation of the Blessed Sacrament. Perhaps this was perpetrated at the insistence of an indolent cleric too lazy to bother coming out to expose and then repose the Blessed Sacrament.
Peek-a-boo to you, too, Brian!
@Praxiteles wrote:
Sorry for the confusion Luzarches!
Below is a photograph of the state of St. Peter’s in Belfast after the boot-boy’s outing:
A shrine to Episkopos – the most important ornament in the whole church. Even God takes a lower place to the enthroned potentate. Lo how the mighty have fallen!
The later arrangement with the auxiliaries cosily flanking Lord High-and-Mighty seems inspired by American talk shows, though rather overdone with the ornate gothic thronettes. Recall that on the cross Christ was flanked by two thieves.
@Fearg wrote:
As always, for the purposes of comparison – here is St Peter’s as it was in the early 1900’s
[ATTACH]3033[/ATTACH]
Thank you, Fearg! What a beauty St Peter’s, Belfast, was in the early twentieth century. Note the fulfilment of the aesthetic canons of integritas, consonantia, and claritas. Everything fits together so harmoniously and proportionately. The effect is immediately pleasing without any need to analyse or explore the details. Upon closer, scrutiny, however, each detail brings one back to the glory of the whole. The entire ensemble works perfectly.
The later jiggery-pokery merely exposes the charlatanism of the architectural fakirs and the gullibility, idleness, and fecklessness of the sponsoring prelates.
The destruction of the pulpit is telling: out goes the Word of God proclaimed in Scripture]Dum vivimus, speramus[/I].
@Praxiteles wrote:
Rhabanus!
As we are on the subject of St. Peter’s in Belfast, perhaps you might like to comment liturgically on this arrangement of things there?
Whatever happened to the Francis Bigg tapestries, the central one of which portrayed a broken Host with a kindof triple-lightning-bolt pointing towards the episcopal chair? Fire? Jumble sale? Surely, no self-respecting thief would have made off with those ‘tapestries.’
I suppose the arrangement portrayed in this photo celebrates liturgical knavery at its cheekiest: three potentates for the price of one. Liturgically inept parish priests frequently have themselves flanked by altar boys (a cheap substitute for deacon and subdeacon). Liturgically inept ordinaries may like to have themselves flanked by their auxiliaries. But look who is always front-and-center: ME! ME! ME! ME! ME! Look Ma, no taste!! 😀
I suppose after consulting with his episcopal underlings, His Lordship may CONDESCEND to the altar for whatever it is the hoi polloi are expecting of his graciousness today.
By the way, has anyone figured out why the website fo Armagh cathedral still offers a tour of the cathdral in its whale-tooth stage of aggiornamento? And how come the tour comes with a rendition of Luther’s anti-papal “A Might Fortress”? I should have though that a robust recording of John McCormack or Frank Petterson singing Faith of Our Fathers would have been far more appropriate for the primatial see of All Ireland. Perhaps the episcopoi get a bit nervous when they hear those stirring words of Fr Faber: “How truly blest would be our fate/ If we, like them, should die for Thee!”
Perhaps the renovations committee at Belfast could install a television on the reverse side of the altar so that the episcopal trio can follow the soaps during the liturgy of the Word proclaimed from the ambo of the Roman Eagle. “Our response to today’s psalm will be: Giovanezza!“
@Praxiteles wrote:
And here is another snap of the ambo – it looks somewhat American bald eagle:
Dig those crazy talons!! This is definitely the Roman Eagle which surmounted Musso in WWII. I think Cecil B. DeMille mimicked it in Ben Hur or The Sign of the Cross.
@Praxiteles wrote:
And, here we have a closer look at the Baptismal Font, placed awkwardly before the main door, calculate to impede ingression and egression of every procession. The floor lighting before the main features is also not very very inspiring of any great confidence.
Help me to understand this better, Praxiteles. Either the water is too cold or too forceful for Our Lord, or else the iconography is really portraying Al Jolson performing “Mammy!” to a hostile audience.
In any case, the structure certainly impedes liturgical processions. But then such ordered movements of clergy in hierarchical array are not preferred (or rather are openly opposed) by the anti-hierarchical factions in militant circles.
Keep it all horizontal, flat, and straight. No imagination, no exuberance, no effort to rise above this sublunary world to a higher, nobler life in the New Jerusalem above, our Mother. Ignore that Gothic architecture at all costs. It’s pulling us upward and we must resist its siren-song to rise above ourselve in God-ward flight. Keep focused on that BIG chair up front. You’ll take your marching orders from there, you will – and you’ll thank His Lordship for it! Or else he’ll send that fascist eagle after you, all the way home.
@Praxiteles wrote:
Rhabanus!
As we are on the subject of St. Peter’s in Belfast, perhaps you might like to comment liturgically on this arrangement of things there?
The retro-fitted vents in the sanctuary on either side of the throne-like chair do nothing to enhance the ensemble. Che tackezza!
Where is the tabernacle located, anyway? I know that it’s perched parlously on that ridiculous plinth, but where? In some side chapel? The north transept? The south transept? Where is it hiding?
As the Magdalene once famously complained, “They have taken my Lord away, and I do not know where they have put Him!”
Peek-a-boo! I am sure that He sees us, but where are we to see Him?
Peek-a-boo!
“L’oeil etait dans le tombe – et Il regardait Cain!”
Peek-a-boo!
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
