Gianlorenzo
Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Great news from Cobh. The Friends have won they appeal to An Bord Pleanala. Congratulation to them and the Irish Georgian Society and An Taisce Cork.
@THE_Chris wrote:
Im not going to get into this debate as both sides are firmly entrenched. But I will say this.
I am a bit disappointed in how the media and everyone on here are labelling John Magee as some form of mad heretic with a death sentence for us all. He’s been portrayed in a terrible way by the media and it seems there is a massive hate campaign against him by all.
I can say with hand on heart, knowing him personally, that is is the nicest man anyone could ever hope to meet. He is the most caring person I know. Very quiet and a bit shy, but get to know him and he is a great laugh, and the kindest man you could ever know.
Unfortunately, the media never acknowledge this, and everyones opinion of him is swayed by that.
He is now scared to leave his house because of the viscousness of this campaign against him. He used to take walks all over Cobh island. He cant risk it anymore. Would you go out on your own having received DEATH THREATS though the mail?
You read that right.
Please, if you want to have a campaign against the reordering then thats fine by me – its your opinion, but dont resort to personal attacks against John Magee. He doesnt deserve that.
If you will take the time to read back over this thread you will see that the campaign against the reordering is just that. It is in no way a personal attack on Bishop Magee, it never was and never will be. If you would take the time to get to know the people involved in the Friends of St. Colman’s who are running the campaign you will learn that they are some of the most loyal parishioner Bishop John has.
One of the most frustrating things about this whole affaire is the notion that this is in some way a personal attack on the bishop or the Church.
Regarding the death threat to the Bishop, of which I have heard, to the best of my knowledge it has been sent on to the Gardai and they are investigating. They have never approached the Friends about this as they know that it is nothing to do with them.
Please do enter the debate, but also please get your facts right. If Bishop John has been criticised on this thread it is in connection with the present re-ordering plans which are opposed by over 90% of his flock. If he chooses to ignore this fact then you cannot blame the people for getting angry.
If he only knew that the Friends are in fact a safety valve in Cobh as the anger that is there is currently mooted by the fact that the Friends are running the campaign and refuse to countenance any personal attack on the bishop and have never stooped to personal attack.St. Lambertus, Veghel, Cuypers 1858 – 1862
Having been used by the protestant minority for almost two hundred years the Gothic church of St. Lambertus of Veghel was returned to the Catholic Church in 1819. Up to that time Catholics had used a simple church disguised as a barn. The old church was repaired and was ready for use in 1822. But the church was too small and in 1858 P.J.H. Cuypers started his biggest assignment so far; a new church was built on the location of the old barn church. The old church was demolished in 1860.
The St. Lambertus was to that time Cuypers’ biggest church. It was also the first big church where he applied brick vaults, after having practised with these in the basement of the presbytery. The vaulting of the church was relatively cheap, as the architect managed to use a minimum of material to overarch a maximum of space, although this miracle has caused enormous costs for maintenance since. But from this moment on Cuypers’ name was established nationwide.
It’s a three-aisled cruciform basilica type church with a tower at the west-side and a choir with ambulatory and radiating chapels. The design was inspired by French 13th-century Gothic. The tower has an octagonal upper segment surrounded by four small turrets standing at the corners of the segment underneath, an idea borrowed from Chartres cathedral which Cuypers used on several other occasions.St. Petrus’ Loo, Banden
The village of Loo was part of the Bergeijk parish until 1848, although from 1790 it had a ‘hidden’ church, and for the first 13 years as a young parish used that building for Masses. In 1861 a new church was built, designed by C. Weber and is typical of his early career.
It’s a three-aisled neo-Gothic church of the German Stuffenhalle type, a type of church related to the hall-church, only with side-aisles narrower than the central aisle. The side-aisles are closed at the back by polygonal apses. The choir is of the same width as the central aisle, only a bit lower. The modest buttresses indicate the absence of stone vaults. In all, the church is still a far cry from Weber’s much more famous and impressive neo-Romano-Gothic churches. Weber built several similar churches in the province of Limburg.
It is not known whether Weber designed a tower for this church or not. The current tower was added in 1896 and was designed by C. Franssen, an important representative of the second generation of neo-Gothic architects.Lee Wong,
I got it from the Cathedral wet site you posted on #755.
I speak from personal experience of these types of meetings and the manipulative character of them. I am sorry if you are offended or upset by my use of the above quote, but I find the actions of the people involved in this type of manipulative process very offensive indeed.
If you are concerned for your Cathedral, you should do a little research on the subject. Look at http://www.foscc.com
for a contemporary Irish Cathedral re-ordering story.
Another offensive aspect of all this is the money expended on these totally unnecessary re-orderings. Nothing in Vatican II or subsequent Vatican documents calls for the destruction of sanctuaries in old churches. It is an out-dated liturgical and design preference of some members of the clergy which has been imposed on unwitting parishioners all over the English speaking world. While Bishops and priests spend their time working on these projects their churches are emptying.It looks as if the “indoctrination seesions” have already begun in Albany. God help them.
Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception PARISH NEWS
REMINDER: The first of three informational meetings on the renovation of the interior of the Cathedral will be held Monday, March 6 at 7:00 p.m. in the Cathedral. The topic will be The History of the Christian Place of Worship. Please make every effort to participate in these meetings.Brain-washing and manipulation
Vosko’s masquerade attacks the very heart of the Catholic faith.In an effort to bury the Church visible with newfangled liturgical rhetoric, Father Vosko’s modus operandi is predicated on the assumption that he can manipulate parishioners into believing that their own input—ideas of what a parish church building should be—is being taken into consideration in the design of their church.
To this end, diocesan worship committees recommend Fr. Vosko to engineer the whole process that a parish must undergo, to achieve the desired project—which is usually pre-determined before any input is received from parishioners— with little or no resistance from laity.
The fact that bishops and pastors are so ready and willing to “partner” with Fr. Vosko is worrisome to many
If the project calls for the renovation of an historic church or cathedral, Fr. Vosko is hired to have the parishioners come to the conclusion that their traditional arrangement—with pews, central tabernacle, statuary, shrines, elevated sanctuary, Communion rails, baldacchino, high altar, etc.—is unsuitable for “post-Vatican II” worship, and therefore is unsalvageable as a church building.
Ultimate irony
Fr. Vosko’s comment that in the old church the people never had a say in anything is most ironic.His own planning process is engineered down to the most minute details. He, for instance, includes plans on how to arrange the seating during his educational indoctrination presentations, to discourage dissent. Fr. Vosko’s charade is designed to give the impression that everyone has a “say” in the design process, when in fact the whole project has been designed in Vosko’s head before he even arrives at a particular parish.
This is from St. Catherine’s Review. http://www.aquinas-multimedia.com/catherine/dickvosko1.html
“Father Richard Vosko, Ph.D., a priest of the Diocese of Albany, has been making a comfortable living for the past 29 years, travelling the United States and Canada—parish by parish—promoting his liturgical indoctrination program for the renovation of traditional Catholic churches as well as for the design of new Catholic churches.
He bills himself as a “Designer and Consultant for Worship Environments,” and teaches in a Chicago-based training program for the certification of new consultants.
According to a self-promotional “A Short Biography” that he provides to parishes he is “trained in liturgy, the fine arts, and adult education. His research interest has to do with the impact of the built environment on adult behavior patterns.”
Not an architect
Although he often gives the air of being a professional architect, he is not. The materials he prepares for parish renovation teams, according to architect William J. Miller of Cincinnati, Oh., “clearly appear to be the kind of material that constitutes a portion of architectural service called ‘design programming.’”Vosko, emphasizes Miller, is not a registered architect. “In effect such acts would seem to constitute the illegal practice of architecture in general appearance.”
Miller, who met Vosko at an indoctrination session for St. John the Baptist Church in Harrison, Ohio, raises an interesting point: “For a contract to be legal and binding it must, among other requirements, be for something legal.
In effect a contract for something that is not legal is not binding and enforceable. If a parish, after witnessing Vosko’s presentations and upon hearing his recommendations, decided not to pay him, he has no basis in law to collect since he is not licensed to provide the service he renders.”
@Praxiteles wrote:
The Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception, Albany, New York
Originally constructed in 1848-52 to the design of Patrick Keeley, the cathedral was extended to the west in 1891.
A.N. Didron mentions this church in his Annales Arché]http://www.mcwb-arch.com/images/cathedral/Scaffold1.jpg[/IMG]
Mr Wong,
Did anyone tell the authorities in Albany just how important this building is, and that Didron mentions it and tell exactly where the altar was made and who made it. Is it intented to do to the Immaculate Conception what was done to St. Joseph’s in Albany – an even more important church.
Sacred Heart Cathedral Guangzhou City, Guangdong China is described as the largest Gothic Church in China.
The cathedral is also known as “Shi Shi” (Stone-Chamber) because that all its walls and poles are made of granite.
Stone House (Roman Catholic Church), located on Yide Road, was actually the office of the Guangdong and Guangxi provinces during the late Qing Dynasty. Originally named the Sacred Heart of Jesus Church, it was built entirely of granite, hence its name, the Stone House. This, the largest Catholic church in China, is well known in the Far East and is still a religious centre for Guangzhou’s Roman Catholics. It was built between 1863-1888 by the French Architect Guillemin.
Sacred Heart Catholic Church (Shishi Jiaotang) is now a Catholic Patriotic Association (CPA) church, with no contact being allowed outside of China. The church’s construction was begun in the 1860’s and completed in 1888. It somehow survived the Cultural Revolution. It is located on Yide Lu in Central Guangzhou. It is a Gothic-style cathedral with a 190 foot (or so) tower. It’s large copper bell was shipped in from France.@sangallo wrote:
A little question: with all of the emphasis on visibility to ensure greater participation, what is to be said about the blind person? Is he (or she) to be left out, simply because he can’t see what’s going on?
Sangallo, from the limited justification produced in Midleton in support of the proposed re-ordering, one would think that anyone who is blind, or even partially sighted, is completely unable to take ‘active participation’ in the Mass. Taking that idea to its end, it would appear that they are saying that people with sight disability have never actually taken part in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.
Interestingly, I remember it being said, when I was young, that one heard Mass, and that the priest said Mass.Taken along with some of the other bizarre statements made by the Applicants during the recent Oral Hearing,one can only come to the conclusion that they no idea of what their own Church says on these matters and have total contempt for the ordinary parishioners, whose instincts are more inline with true Church teaching then they are.
The reality is that people will naturally go to the same seats day in day out, or week in week out. One can tell who is around immediately upon entering ones local church. Even visitors, if they attend daily Mass, will inevitably go to the same section of the church everytime. Regarding Cobh Cathedral, the back section of the central nave seats are the ones that fill up first, with a few people choosing to take seats nearer the front. Should the proposed re-ordering take place, this situation will not change, and people will move correspondingly back, until they find the place where they are most comfortable.
This, of course, make Prof.O’Neill assumption that everyone is going to “gather around the altar” in his proposed confirugation, total nonesense. One of the characteristics of the team proposing the changes to Cobh Cathedral is their total divorce from reality. If, once, they had taken the time to actually talk to the people they might have learned a great deal of what actually happens in the church. Unfortunatley their attitiude is that they can impose this on the people and that eventually they will come around. No wonder there is such anger and resentment among the parishioners in Cobh.Funny you should say that, Luxarches. Prof. O’Neill considers the seats that are within 15m of the altar the “precious” seat. This was how he described them to the Oral Hearing. So now you know. Get your measuring tape out – check the distance you are from the altar and you will know if you are in the “precious” category or not.
Mr. Richard Hurley, whose work has featured prominently on this thread wrote a report for An Bord Pleanala on behalf of The Arts Council. The Bord had requested this report. What is interesting is what Mr. Hurley says in the context of liturgical requirement: “While it is not essential to change, it is desirable” (see Attached)
This, of course, is what FOSCC has been saying from the beginning, that the proposed changes are a ‘preference’ or a ‘desire’ on the part of BIshop Magee and a small number of his clergy and that they cannot be described as ‘liturgically required‘ as they have tried to make out. And, therefore, as St. Colman’s is such an important building in the Irish context, the irreversible and radical destruction of the fabric that is proposed, should not be allowed merely because it is ‘desired’.
In Midleton during the oral hearing, when Mr. Hurley’s contribution was mentioned the spokesman for the applicants said ” Do you realise that Mr. Hurley was in competition [with Prof. O’Neill and others] for the job of re-ordering the Cathedral”, ergo his contribution can be discounted as ‘pique ‘.
It is truly amazing how the Trustees of St. Colman’s and their agents can discount every and all opposition as either personal attacks on themselves, or motivated by the baser emotions, and never ever actually address the arguments put up against the proposals.
@ctesiphon wrote:
Praxiteles-
Thanks again for taking the time to post all of these documents. They really do give great insight into the goings-on of the last few years, not least the indefatigability of the FOSCC members (and perhaps too the intransigence of the proponents).As can be seen from the previous postings the Trustees of St. Colman’s attitude toward the FOSCC is one of contempt, a contempt which was clearly evident in Midleton at the Oral Hearing. The last paragraph of Canon Terry’s submission says it all, – The HCAC of the Cloyne Diocese when considering the Appeal to An Bord Pleanala considered ONLY the DoEHLG and don’t even mention An Taisce; the Irish Georgian Society; or the FOSCC. Despite the fact that the FOSCC Appeal dealt with every aspect of the case; Liturgical Requirement and lack thereof; improper planning procedures; good conservation practice and the cultural and social aspects of the case. The Trustees chose to ignore all these aspects and dealt exclusively with the question of the lifting and storage of mosaics.
If they get away with this farce then the Planning Act, in so far as it is for the protection of listed and important buildings, may as well be thrown out and as Noel O’Driscoll says in his summing up – get an office and a clerk and a rubber stamp, tell the church authorities that they are outside the law and can do what ever they wish with any of their structure and save everyone a lot of time and effort. All the church authorities have to do is set up their own committee (HCAC), get one of its members to write a document entitled ‘Liturgical Requirement’ , which the same committee will then approve, and away you go. no one in civil authority will question it. And perish the thought that they might seek verification of said document with the proper authority in these matters, i.e. the Holy See.
And to complete the circle, it was the Bishop of Cloyne and his buddy Fr. Paddy Jones who had a hand in writing the Guidelines in the first place – how convenient is that?Another little gem from the hearing. At one stage Prof. O’Neill shows a slide of Da Vinci’s last supper saying that this had given him inspiration for the new confirugation of the sanctuary with the people gather around the altar, until it was pointed out to him that in this painting/fresco the figures are in fact all on one side facing in the same direction.
The more that emerges from this hearing the smellier it gets. For instance Mr. Brian McCutcheon, who was given the task of arranging “consultation” with the people of the parish, thought that holding the ‘information meeting’ on the evening of the day on which the application was submitted to Cobh Town Council would be best. He appears to think that the word “consultation” means “DICTATION”.
Sangallo , you are right, there is damage to some of the mosaics. Today I saw a crack along one of the panels in the predella in front of the Sacred Heart and Pieta chapels and one or two tesserae missing. This is on a par with the neglect in many other parts of the building. Today I also learned that when they took up the oak woodblock floor to install the underfloor heating, which surprisingly never worked, they also took up the mosaic tesserae which run along the border of the wooden floor.
They then replace the oak floor with a new floor – not sure of the wood – and instead of replacing the original tesserae they inserted new ones as the cleaning of the mortar from the old ones would take too much time and effort – these were then binned.
These new tesserae are now lifting in every part of the nave as it seems that the new floor is ‘shifting’. These people are not capable of maintaining a dog kennel nevermind a priceless heritage Church like St. Colman’s.
