STW Churches ! ?

Ah St Killian’s, also my own church from 0-5yrs – thanks for the memories Peter 🙂

Can’t say I ever liked it much, but then again kids are only impressed by fairytale gothic interiors. Being in it again a couple of years ago was quite revealing – most certainly the cheapest of materials really lets it down as mentioned. Or materials used in the wrong way, for example the exterior breeze blocks walls, which should either have been left exposed or crisply rendered over and then painted white. There’s little worse than a painted concrete block – so hideously cheap and nasty.

The grim entrance portals also lack the finesse they deserve, while the various block projections always merely reinforced the popular image of a large public convenience by echoing urinal or shower divisions in lavatories. Hardly an heartening thought to be greeted with on one’s way to mass.

Essentially it is a good design at its core – just severly hampered by the constraints of parish funds at the time. This striking view is suggestive of what could have been with some fine tuning:

It works very similarly to Carroll’s with the elegant lantern overlooking the low-lying base:

…and the bare aluminum framing very much of the RT

funny that you know it Graham … thanks for the other images, strong similarities alright, particularly the original RTE glazing.

A smooth plaster finish, painted white as you said could really elevate the whole thing.
The tarmac running right up to the base doesn’t help either, it would sit more comfortably set in lawn or planting.

The glazing in itself, slightly tinted, is quite attractive & is probably where most of the money went at the time.

Internally, I like what I assume was the original concept – a minimal white canvas giving way to what once were uninterrupted views of surrounding sky with the stained glass to rear representing a descending holy spirit.

No plaster there either however, not even well pointed, so the white canvas is no more than poorly painted breeze block.

Not too sure about your thoughts on the lighting, fairly simple fittings (for the time) it actually can look quite good after dark … poor quality image below.

Definitely would like to see the thing retained (little chance at this stage) & finished as it should have been, although perhaps the intended level of minimalism is as you say a little austere for a community church.

Great last shot – I remember that view very well 🙂
The bright lighting and all the busy glazing bars made it feel like there was a lot of activity going on, with something special taking place inside. Symbolically it also opened the church up to the community, being visible from all around.

I don’t think the minimalist approach is at all inappropriate for a parish church; rather I just feel the glazing makes you feel too exposed inside – a personal gripe probably. And if you do want seclusion, I suppose you could avail of one of the shady side seats under the ‘eaves’.

It’s a classic example of a Vatican II church for a young emerging community though isn’t it, whether over-zealously interpreted or not as some may see it – the altar given no special position in sharing the same vacuous volume as the congregation, everybody seated in a broad way as to be visible and participating with each other, the altar elevated to a level apparent to all but the clinically blind etc etc…
It’s a Vatican II building executed from scratch, rather than an existing church to which the new thinking was hamfistedly ‘retrofitted’ as we often saw across the country.

It’d be sad to see it disappear rather than refurbished: what’s the thinking behind its demolition Peter – too small? Would it be replaced on site?

too big seems to be the thinking & also on ‘aesthetic’ grounds, haven’t met anyone who talks positively of the existing building. Different site also appears likely 😉

Could it be converted to alternative use – perhaps warehousing or something like that?

@Peter FitzPatrick wrote:

Are there many churches designed by Scott Tallon Walker in Ireland ?
I’m aware of Christ the King in London & my own fairly modest local church in Kingswood Heights.

It never really endeared itself to locals or various priests & will likely be demolished in the next year or two.

Completed in 1979, its a fairly simple design, poorly executed with bargain basement materials.
I quite like the actual design myself & would prefer to see it saved & upgraded, but i’m a lone voice on this one.
The plain block exterior which was once white (as was the interior) has been let go & was last painted in a ‘maintenance saving’ grey. I’ve posted a few images below …

So any thoughts or opinions ?
Any images of other STW churches ?

Are you really surprised?
Whatever the architectural value you may see in this, it is unsuitable for what it was built for and it comes as no surprise that it will not be missed when and if it is demolished.
It looks like a warehouse – inside and out. It is totally unsympathetic to its purpose.
Graham H said “Can’t say I ever liked it much, but then again kids are only impressed by fairytale gothic interiors”. Could it be that children see and understand these things better? I believe they do. They have no baggage; they react to their surroundings spondaneously.
The more I see of it the more I think that modern architecture is driven by a total collapse of artisan skills. The building in question could be put together by anyone. Could they construct a “fairytale gothic” structure, be it church or ortherwise? I think not.
Modernism is regression not progression. We have lost so much- so many skills; so much artistry. Let us not pretend that this is a good thing.

Whatever the architectural value you may see in this, it is unsuitable for what it was built for and it comes as no surprise that it will not be missed when and if it is demolished.
It looks like a warehouse – inside and out. It is totally unsympathetic to its purpose.

Don’t necessarily agree that it is unsuitable for its purpose Gianlorenzo, its served fairly well for 28 years. Ok, it doesn’t look good, particularly the exterior, but as mentioned it was constructed with the cheapest of materials. It could have been substantially better.

I don’t think it should be held up as an example of modernism, its just a church on a budget.
I decided to post it because of some basic similarities with other STW stock from the time. I always found it strange that the church (given their budget) approached a big firm in the first place & that they actually took it on.

Often thought it might do as a community centre Prax. Not really suitable for warehousing, its at the centre of the area, adjacent to shops, pub etc.

I was kind of hoping that you might suggest an alternative use as a community centre for, ultimately, I am inclined to think that that is what it is. As a modern building, apart from its basic design, it bares little by way of continuity with the antecendent tradition of church architecture – and where it does make an attempt (the front doors) it would have been better had it not made the attempt at all for somehow it just does not seem to work.

I must confess that I do know this church and have never been in it. But, it has to be said that in some respects in its liturgically accurate in its fittings – as for example McCormack’s church in Burt Co. Donegal is. If you notice, the altar is properly raised on a predella of one step (which one migt quibble with) and then on the traditional three altar steps. The Tabernacle is placed behind the Altar in such a way that when seen from the front of the Altar it could have been produced for a church built by Schwarz in the 1930s (and from where I suspect some influences have been operative). In this sense, and although it lacks rails etc., this church, by Paddy Jones’ standards, is actually quite “antiquated”, indeed even “retroguardista”.

The form of a church in a square surrounded by an archade is one derived from a “back to basics” approach and is inspired by the impluvium of the first Roman house-churches from which the 4th.century basilicas developed. SWT might have improved their design had they, for instance, lowered, by a step of two, the central part outside of the archade. In all of this I have in mind Josefz Plecnik’s Zupnijska cerkev sv. Franciska (The Church of St Francis 1924-1930) in Lubjliana or his church of the Sacred Heart in Prague or his Church of the Holy Ghost in Wien. All of the information about these is to be found on a thread about Plecnik on the world form section of Archiseek. It sems to me that SWT, while having some idea of this architectural sottofondo, have not taken it to its inellectual conclusion, as Plecnik clearly did. Of course, I accept that the task was helped by poor material -such as those awful roof girders- but poor materials cannot disguise the inadequacies that I have point out.

Then, of course, the all important question of iconography arises. In this building, I can see nothing in a modern idiom that symbolically and imaginatively connects automatically to the tradition of Western or even Eastern Christian art and iconography. The rear window on which so much seems to have been spent, while a nice decorative feature, is fundamentally non-representational and, as such, difficult to connect with a theological tradition whose major primary emphasis is the Incarnation, which, a priori, presumes representational form. In other words, once I have to be told that the window represents the Holy Ghost, and that that fact is not immediate to my unlettered intellect, then, in so far as the window has a function, that function has failed.

I think that many contemporary churches do not work and such buildings really reflect a strong secular aspect instead. The church in the photo looks more like a community centre or a warehouse of sorts and is so typical of the shiitty church buildings that sprang up from the 1970’s onwards. Ye’s should see the pebbled dashed windowless block that passes as a church in Corduff, Dublin. In Ballyfermot, like Cabra and other suburbs, we have a fine example of a 1950’s church, with the Church of the Assumption. Also we have the meagre litlte St. Matthews from the 1970’s with it’s unfinished exposed rafters and leaky roof. The parishioners had a collection to erect a bell tower in the 1990’s to make it more reflective of a religious building.
The era of magestic church building is long gone, just like religion too!

@GregF wrote:

I The era of magestic church building is long gone, just like religion too!

In Ireland, at present, the whole area of church building and liturgical ordering is in utter chaos and mired in an insularity that would make the 1950s blush.

Things are not helped by the glaring lack of any great theological tradition among Catholic “intellectuals” in Ireland. Indeed, some seem to think that the Catholic Church can operate without any theological basis or reference to the Western cultural tradition built up by the Church. This widely diffused attitude could be characterized as a sort of ecclesiastical version of the Know-Nothing Movement of the late 19th.century in the US. The rubbishy stuff to which you refer is just a reflection of the theological and cultural famine currently taxing the Irish Church.

However, outside of Ireland there is quite a ferment of debate on the subject of church architectire going on – as I have tried to indicate in previous references to writers such as Mosebach in Germany; Alquin Reid in England; the Kephas movement in France; and to a whole host of writers in the United States. The results of this ferment in terms of church architecture is just beginning to be seen in these places. I suspect, however, that it will take a good deal longer for all of this to reach these backward shores.

Originally by Praxiteles

The rear window on which so much seems to have been spent, while a nice decorative feature, is fundamentally non-representational and, as such, difficult to connect with a theological tradition whose major primary emphasis is the Incarnation, which, a priori, presumes representational form. In other words, once I have to be told that the window represents the Holy Ghost, and that that fact is not immediate to my unlettered intellect, then, in so far as the window has a function, that function has failed.

I don’t know Prax, does all church imagery have to be overt ? I have to say, given the scale & context of the rear window it was pretty obvious to me, even from a young age, what it represented. It is diminished somewhat however by the clutter of girders etc.

@Peter FitzPatrick wrote:

I don’t know Prax, does all church imagery have to be overt ? I.

I would re-phrase the question:

Is ecclesiastical art and imagerry conceptual and abstract or is it representational and immediately “sensible”? Is it a process addressed to the intellect or to the senses?
We could typify that question be juxtaposing a piece of sculpture by Henry Moore with picture by Esteban Murillo?
Is ecclesiastical art and imagery an end in itself or a means to an end, i.e. an excercise subsidiary to a greater end?
Then we have to consider its origins and development; the significance of efforts to reproduce the Mandyllion of Edessa (the image of Christ’s face); its instructive or paedegogical purpose, to teach the truths of the faith in an immdeiately accessible form to the unlettered and unscooled, the so-called “Biblia Pauporum” or Bible of the Poor, end; the significance of the theology of the Incarnation in this entire operation, Christ took on concrete flesh was seen in an immediate and accessible “form”; the canon or symbols, colours, forms and images that has evolved oer the past two milennia etc.

When it becomes necessary to put a little brass plaque under the window explaining what it is and what it signifies or symbolizes, how do we understand that?

In relation to the window we have been discussing, I would never have associated the colour blue with the Holy Ghost, nor indeed yellow.

Have not been in the church, but first thing that came to my mind from photo was a Led Zepplin song “Stairway to Heaven”….

As to overt imagery, just my opinion, but would I say yes. Are there not 1001 other venues available
for abstract art. There may have been a field of thought that abstract imagery appeals to a younger congregation, strangely enough i find with my teenagers the reverse is true.

But by end if the structure served its purpose to some level to its parishioners and funds were limited at the time
then it a step up from the Mass Rock days…

@GrahamH wrote:

Whilst I fully support the various liturgical arguments, and the core tenet of the design of a church building according to its use, to suggest that taking a more streamlined approach is somewhat inferior to what had to an extent become little more than a tradition of clutter by the late 19th century is ridiculous. How can cheap plaster mouldings, mass produced stained glass, machine churned timber carvings and resin statues that became so commonplace be described as being the fruits of artisans’ considered labour? And yet this is all part of the ‘traditional’ tradition – not a modernist ideology.

I think we have to make a few distinctions here. It is true that in many churches throughout Ireland and elsewhere recourse was amde tot he purchase f mass produced fittings simply because they were cheap and funds were lacking, at the same time, this is not universally the case – and I think that point is clearly made in instances such as the Cathedrals at Cobh, Monaghan, Armagh, Killarney, and in other churches such as Maynooth College Chapel and the Honan Chapel where practically every single fitting was custom made to the architcets design.

I fully concur Praxiteles – only the above comment about modernisim equating to regression was based precisely on this assumption: that the loss of artisan skills has caused this ‘rot’ to take hold.

You can have a cheap, shoddily built modernist church – likewise regarding conventional ecclesiastical architecture.

Hi Peter,
I’m from the area too and was wondering if you have any more information on the proposed demolition of the church. I am in fifth year and starting my thesis and setting it in Kingswood.
If you could get back to me suzanneheavey@yahoo.co.uk that would be great,
suzanne
ps. think the cheap materials in an area where people feel they get the worst of everything anyway is why it never endeared itself to the locals. Personally I like it at night and when it’s bright out, is miserable on a grey day.