Praxiteles
Forum Replies Created
- Posts
St. James’, Spanish Place, London.
Here we have some views of this remarkable church in London which, mercifully, is totally intact down to the smallest detail and by a great providence has been saved from the hackers and the wreckers.
Praxiteles is pleased to bring to readers’ attention the following link containing a previes of a book by one Kevin Foley et al bing an introduction to the General Instruction to the Roman Missal – that famous legislative text governing the celebration of the Mass. Readers may recall that that the HACK have consistently claimed a form of juridical absolutism for Bishop Magee in matters relating to the liturgy that would have caused despots such as Joseph II or Frederick III of Prussia to blush. We have heard claims from the HACK that the bishop is absolute in his diocese and responsible to no one and to no higher institution. Of course, any sensible person can immediately see the distortions emerging from this over-exaggereated picture – except of course those in Cork COunty Council who, quite possibly, may not be sensible persons.
In order to bolster up the “broad” position, the HACK, last October, organised a Conference on liturgy and heritage. Readers may recall that the then bosom friends, Cllr. Harrington from Bantry and Bishop Magee, co-chaired the event to muh mutual admiration at that time.
The HACK imported an American canonist to tell the stupid County COuncil all about liturgical law – and, presmuably, to back up its ridiculous pèosition. His name was Kevin Seasoltz, OSB, a veteran liturgist on the road since the 1950/1960s. He did his bit but Praxiteles now believes that the HACK and Danny “I AM a liturgist” Murphy would want to read an article by Kevin Seasoltz in a recently published commentary on the General Instruction to the Roman Missal on the question of law and liturgy. Indeed, when it comes to the question of the power a bishop has to do anything about the liturgy other than to enforce liturgical discipline, it is refreshing to see that K. Seasoltz refers to this role as a “limited” role – precisely what the the FOSCC has been saying for years.
Read all about it yourself from the last paragraph of page 34 in the link below:
Praxiteles has a little present for the liturgical gurus in Cloyne, and especially on the Cloyne HACK. This is the Missale Gregorianum, that is, the Roman Missal set to the musical tones PRESCRIBED fro every Sunday and Feastday of the year. Please note, here we are speaking of the Roman Missal of 1970 – the so-called Conciliar or New Missal. This is what Danny “I am a Liturgust” Murphy is supposted to nourish his flock on every Sunday. But I wonder how much of a shock it will be to discover that church music is not about “picking” hymns for Sunday Mass but about executing the contents of this book. Moreover, Praxiteles is looking forward to the delight of ascertaining whether or not the sacristy of Cobh Cathedral has (or ever had) a copy of this ESSENTIAL liturgical book. As we see here, the American Church Music Association has very kindly produced a version of this Missal with lots and lots and lots of translation into English -so it should not beything of a taxation on the brains of the HACK at least to look at and if some (or all) of the HACK still cannot get it, then we can apply to Cobh Urban District Council to send someone from their adult literacy programme to help them out.
@Praxiteles wrote:
An engraving of St. Paul’s Basilica in Rome in the aftermath of the fire of 1829.
Of Dublin interest, some of the marble recovered from the ruins of St Paul’s was subsequently bough and used for the construction of the High Altar in of the Jesuit church of St. Francis Xavier, Gardner’s Street.
@apelles wrote:
Another few pics of Saint Willibrord in Utrecht, I love the use & dispersion of colour in this church, the picking out of the vaulted ribs & the intensity of the stencilwork…they got the balance just right…. an inspiration!
In 1869 Monsignor G.W. van Heukelum, a Utercht Bishop, founded the “Bernulfus Guild”, a Roman Catholic group of artists which wanted to revive medieval craftmanship.
The Dutch architect Alfred Tepe and the German sculptor W.F. Mengelberg were invited to build the Saint Willibrord church, because they had gained experience from the restoration of the Gothic Cathedral of Cologne.
In 1875 the first stone was laid. The church was consecrated in 1877; the interior decoration was completed in 1891.Just checked the Hierarchia Catholica, vol. VIII (1846-1903) and there is no van Heukelum listed as a bishop in the Netherlands for that period. This leads me to think that G.W. Heukelum was a prelate rather than a bishop – but nonetheless an effective one.
St Lacteen’s, Donoughmore, Co. Cork
Now we come to the apoge of the McCarthy/Lynch creation in Donoughmore – the Tabernacel.
Firstly, the centrality of the Eucharist in Christian worship is expressed here by dumping the tabernacle into a corner. It is hung from the wall with a shelf some way below it. Its disconnection with any shape or form of altar ensures that no theological connection is made between the celebration of the Mass, the reservation of the Sacrament and Eucharistic adoration (commonly understood as the Mass held in contemplation). Denuded of these basic associations, it is hard to see what sense can be made of the tabernacle in Donoughmore. Moreover, the construction here seems completely detached from the Eucharistic traditions of both East and West with all of the usual eucharistic symbols missing or deliberately excluded. Instead, we have a metal box emblazoned with the commercial logo used by the Central Committee for the Organisation of the Jubilee Year 2000 – an item with no religious significance or connotation.
The form of the box used here, though, is perhaps not without significance. It has been suggested to Praxiteles that the form of the broken pillar here conveys the kind of thing that Paul VI had in mind in his famous allusion to “les fumées de satan entrées dans l’Eglise”. Or, do we ascribe too much to the great John “I’d love to be a liturguist” Lynch and his knowledge of 18th century oddities? It would be interesting to see how Morart’s Magic Flute with our friend John I’d love tp be a liturgist Lynch playing the part of Sarastro would work in this ambit! Or, on second thoughts, our desparately would-be liturgust might be better case as Tamino, geweiteter Priester des Weisheitstempels, flanked by McCarthy as der Vogelfänger, Papageno, send out by the Königin der Nacht to find poor old Pamina. I can just imagine die Königin der Nacht declaim ” Der Hölle Rache kocht in meinem Herzen,
Tod und Verzweiflung flammet um mich her! Fühlt nicht durch dich Sarastro Todesschmerzen, So bist du meine Tochter nimmermehr. Verstossen sei auf ewig, Verlassen sei auf ewig, Zertrümmert sei’n auf ewig Alle Bande der Natur Wenn nicht durch dich Sarastro wird erblassen! Hört, Rachegötter, hört der Mutter Schwur! ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZNEOl4bcfkc )And what else can the would-be-liturgists reaction to picture gallery be except: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-L9U_AfY34g
And this can only be the self-congratulatory leys of Tamino and Papageno on their wonderful achievement at St. Lacteen’s, Donoughmore: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=87UE2GC5db0
In any event, we have here the result of a process of de-sacralization, de-theologization, de-signification, domesticization, and (quite possibly) re-signification or trans-signification! And pity the left over for the 1832 church -the sanctuary lamp: it reminds Praxiteles of E. Waugh’s meditation on the significance of the sanctuary lamp in his Brideshead Revisited (except here, curiously, it seems to harbinger an absence rather than a presence).
St Lacteen’s Church, Donoughmore, Co. Cork.
Sorry for interrupting our godimento of the glories of Norman/Byzantine Palermo with some further analysis of the cow-shed built by McCarhy and Lynch at Donoughmore, Co. Cork.
Here we have some shots of the day chapel located at the entrance of the church, connecting to a shoe-box dimensioned sacristy and a large hall (used for “gathering” purposes). Again, it is difficult to know where to begin here. Is a day chapel really necessary in a small country church? That question did not arise obviously. Instead, we have here an excellent example of a-home-away-from-home approach to domestic liturgy. The positioning of the altar could not be more wrong and certainly conveys nothing of its sanctity. Again, the stripped down approach to its decoration – not even a pair of candle sticks, no crucifix (indeed John “I’d like to be a lIturguist” Lynch gives the impression of not particularly liking the Cross -and, presumably, its theological, anthropological and cosmological implications).
The shape of the chapel is very queer – at best trapezoid – but difficult to categorize in any Western system.
The day chapel is conected to the main chapel by a glass window which has canabalized the roundels from the stained glass windows of the 1832 church as well as the figures from several of the windows from the church. Needless to say, these have been strung together with the signature sub-leonardine genius of the great Liturgikos himself.
The rest of the chapel is drearily lighted by toilet-sized windows and “enhanced” by domestic radiators etc.
Johnglas!
For an introduction to church arhitecture in the Netherlands Praxiteles can recommend the following webpage:
Apelles!
In the last postoing, follow the link and you will see another link to the consecration booklet containing the main prayers for the consecration of the Altar, walls and door lentals of St. Patrick’s.
Below is a photograph of the anointing of the walls in St Patrick’s, Kansas
And of course, the candle holder under he cross is for the candles that are supposed to be lit under thse crosses on the anniversary of the consecration of the church.
The Ceremonies for the Consecration of a Church accordin to the Roman Pontifical of Clement VIII published in 1596 are the ones mentioned in relation to St Patrick’s in New York. However, here are those same ceremonies carried out last October for the re-consecration of St. Patrick’s Kansas City, Missouri:
St Patrick’s Cathedral, New York
While searching for something else Praxiteles came acorss thi sinteresting report from the New York Times of 14 March 1885 on the consecration of St Patrick’s Cathedral, New York:
http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?_r=1&res=9E02E1DF1030E433A25757C1A9659C94649FD7CF
Actually, this was the bit Praxiteles was interested in (posting 875, p.35):
Originally Posted by Praxiteles
Yes indeed. I absolutely agree with Thomond. The very best congratulations are in order for the FOSCC who have done trojan work in the face all sorts of mean and base-bred tricks to stifle the voice of the ordinary citizen whne they had something important to say.This morning’s newspapers report that Fr. Jim Killeen, the Chris-ologos public relations officer for the diocese of Cloyne, is studying the 90 page Rabbitte Report before deciding what hnext to do. Perhaps he did not notice that the Rabbit Report has been binned in its totality and, hence, there is little or no need for the Cloyne diocesan authorities to stretch their ample brains on it. Just concentrate on on the single page Order made by An Bord Pleannala, if that is not too taxing or tiring, and they should know what they have to do fairly fast. Indeed, most of the luminaries involved in recommending Prof. O’Neill’s mad-hatter scheme should simply resign – starting with the over qualified members of the Historic Church Commission of the diocese of Cloyne who obviously cannot be trusted to safeguard the interests on one of the most important monuments in the country. Even the good Bishop, who staked so much on bulldozing his way over his own flock, should also consider sending in a little letter to BXVI.
@Oswald wrote:
Although Praxiteles insisted during the appeal that we should read the tendentious documents produced by FOSCC, we are now advised to “bin” the objective Inspector’s Report “in its totality” without reading his assessment or considering the implications of the Board’s decision for the conservation of protected structures which are used as places of worship. One important difference between the Inspector and the Board appears to be that the Inspector took account of Chapter 5 of the Guidelines on Architectural Heritage Protection and the Board did not. Even if we concentrate on the Board’s Order, as Praxiteles advises, we find that the Board accepted that reordering is justified to meet liturgical requirements but decided it could not support the particular design solution proposed. The question to be addressed – by anyone pursuing a genuine interest in architecture and conservation, rather than a vendetta against Bishop Magee – is how the design should now be amended to meet the liturgical requirements while retaining more of the existing fabric of the cathedral.
While researching the Dutch Gothic Revival on the thread Praxiteles cane across this little posting and was immediately struck by the unwillingness of failures in Clone to resign. Just what is it about these people?
Johnglas!
A note from an earlier thread on St Franzis Xavier’s in Amsterdam
A. TEPE (1881-1883)
St. Francis Xavier or De Krijtberg in Amsterdam
This Jesuit church was built to replace an earlier one that had been fronted by a private house – much like Adam and Eve’s in Dublin – and was begun in 1881 The site for the new church posed serious spacial difficulties. Tepe however managed to construct a rather large church, especially when compared to the St. Willibrordus in Utrecht, built a few years earlier under similar space limitations.
Because only the front would be directly visible Tepe gave the church a monumental facade with octagonal towers at the sides of it, instead of his usual square tower. Instead of a true transept there’s a pseudo-transept with shallow arms, and the choir is flanked by diagonally positioned chapels. In the interior optimal use of space was made by limiting the width of the side-aisles, thus creating more space for the central aisle. A gallery above the side-aisles provided even more space.
De Krijtberg is one of the highlights in Tepe’s career. The interior was largely furnished by Mengelberg in Utrecht and has survived almost intact..
In the 1970 the church was threathened with demolition, but thankfully it was restored instead. This restoration started in 1979 and was completed in 2001.
On the original posting concerning the St Wilibord’s church in Utrecht, Praxiteles had the following to say:
Another important architect of the Dutch neo Gothic revival is Wilhelm Victor Alfred Tepe.
He was born in Amsterdam in November 1840 and studied architecture at the Bauakadamie in Berlin 1861-l 1864 but was dissatisfied with its Classicism. Tepe devoted much of his time tot he study of of Viollet-le-Duc. and the French neo-Gothic movement which included Lassus and Didron. From 1865 to 1867 Tepe worked under Vincenz Statz, one of Germany’s leading neo-Gothic architects. Tepe was involved with Statz in Cologne on the completion of the cathedral.In 1867 Tepe returned to Amsterdam, where he worked for an architect Ouderterp moving to Utrecht in 1872 where he became one of the leading members of the St. Bernulphusgilde (‘Guild of St. Bernulphus’), a group of Catholic clergy and artists striving to restore national traditions and craftmanship in religious art and architecture. The guild was a dominant influence in the archdiocese of Utrecht. Influences from medieval indigenous styles were especially encouraged, as was the use of indigenous materials, especially brick. Most of Tepe’s oeuvre is to be found in the archdiocese of Utrecht. From 1871 to 1905 Tepe built around 70 churches, executed in brick with very little natural stone, and taking the late-Gothic 15th- and 16th-centuries’ styles of the Lower Rhine and Westphalia as his majopr influence. The St. Bernulphus Guild saw to the sumptous decoration of the interiorrs.
In 1905 Tepe moved to Germany, where he designed several more churches. He died in Düsseldorf in 1920,Church St. Willibrordus, Utrecht 1876-1877
The church has undergone an important restoration which was brought to completion in 2005. It would useful for public bodies in Ireland such as the Heritage COuncil and the architectural “experts” in the Department of the Environment to take a close look at this restoration. They might learn something from it.
The photograph below shows the apse and its setting in the middle of the town houses.
The Gothic Revival in Holland
Architect no. 3
A. Tepe (1840-1920)
Wilhelm Victor Alfred Tepe is the second most important architect of neo-Gothicism in the Netherlands, after P.J.H. Cuypers. Tepe, the son of a German textiles-merchant who had moved to the Netherlands, was born in Amsterdam on the 24th of November 1840. He studied architecture at the Bauakadamie in Berlin from 1861 until 1864 but was not content with its Classical orientation. In his free time he studied the work of Viollet-le-Duc, the French expert on Gothic architecture, as well as actual churches. From 1865 until 1867 Tepe worked for Vincenz Statz, one of the leading neo-Gothic architects of Germany, in Cologne. Here he was involved with the restoration and completion of the cathedral, an experience that would become of a major influence on his work in the Netherlands.
In 1867 Tepe returned to Amsterdam, where he worked for an architect Ouderterp for a while, and moved to Utrecht in 1872 where he became one of the leading members of the St. Bernulphusgilde (‘Guild of St. Bernulphus’), a group of Catholic clergy and artists who strived to bring back national traditions and craftmanship in religious art and architecture, and which became a dominant factor in this field in the archdiocese of Utrecht. Influences from medieval indigenous styles were especially encouraged, as was the use of indigenous materials, especially brick. In this diocese Tepe built most of his work. Between 1871 and 1905 Tepe built ca. 70 churches, executed in brick with very little natural stone, and taking the late-Gothic 15th- and 16th-centuries’ styles of the Lower Rhine and Westphalia as examples. The interior of the churches was provided by other members of the St. Bernulphus Guild, of which F.W. Mengelberg was the most important. Until 1882 Tepe had an almost total monopoly in the field of church architecture in the archdiocese. Only after the death of archbishop Schaepman did other architects get more of a chance.
Besides churches Tepe designed various monasteries, schools, orphanages etc., all related to the Catholic Church, as well as a few houses. Throughout his entire career his work shows little evolution in style. There are however four periods in his career. Between 1871 and 1876 Tepe tries to develop his style an experiments with several types of churches. His designs are sparsely decorated in this period. The second phase, from 1876 until 1890 sees an increase in decorations. Between 1890 and 1900 builds several churches with centralizing tendencies, mostly in the form of hall-churches. In the fourth period Tepe’s development has ceased, and several of his designs are closely related to some of his older churches. Especially after 1900 Tepe occassionally built churches in Germany, while the competition in his own country became too strong. In 1905 Tepe moved to Germany, where he designed several more churches, and died in Düsseldorf in 1920, a day before his 80th birthday.The Gothic Revival in Holland
Architect No. 2
P.J.H. Cuypers (1827-1921)Petrus J. H. Cuypers, also known as Pierre Cuypers, was responsible for the design of many churches in neo-Gothic style in the Netherlands, and as such is one of the leading figures in the proces of catholic emancipation in the second half of the 19th century.
He was born in a family where an artistic interest was encouraged. Cuypers’ father was a merchant, as well as a church painter. Beginning in 1844, in a time when education of arts in the Netherlands was at a miserably low level, he studied architecture at the Academy of Fine Arts in Antwerpen, Belgium. Among his teachers were Frans Andries Durlet, Frans Stoop and Ferdinand Berckmans, pioneers of neo-Gothicism in Belgium. Cuypers completed his study 1849 with the best possible results and returns to Roermond as a celebrity. In 1850 he made a journey through the German Rhineland, where he visited the completion of the cathedral of Cologne. Ca. 1854 he attended classes by the French restoration-architect E.E. Viollet-le-Duc, who became one of Cuypers’ friends and a major influence in his entire career. Back home he became Roermond’s town-architect.
Cuypers was the man who brought craftmanship back in the Netherlands’ architecture. His office became a school for many architects who were taught all skills of the profession. Besides this, he also participated in a factory for religious art, Atelier Cuypers-Stoltzenberg, that provided complete church-interiors and was founded in 1852.
Besides designing new churches and other buildings, Cuypers also was responsible for numerous restorations of existing churches, including those of many medieval, now protestant churches. His attempts to restore parts of such churches back to their original state occasionally was a cause of conflict with the protestant community that used such a church. Apart from his architectural work, Cuypers was a gifted artist in other respects too, and his work includes several important monuments, tapestries and a piano, a gift to his second wife.
Although Cuypers’ churches usually are of a high quality, there are many reasons for criticism. Like most architects of that time, Cuypers had no problems with sacrificing the authentic look of a medieval church and replacing it with his own typical style, or even completely replacing a centuries-old church by a new one. Small villages saw their small churches replaced by cathedral-size constructions, and a church in Romanesque style could easily become a Gothic one if Cuypers decided that would be appropriate. He was convinced that his designs could compete with the greatest Gothic churches in France and probably were even better, and likewise thought a restoration was a good opportunity to ‘improve’ a church’s appearance, reason why his restorations have often been called falsifications since. For Cuypers churches and other old buildings were not simply reminders of the past, but objects that still had a function.
On advice of his friends, catholic writer, poet, art critic and future brother-in-law J.A. Alberdingk Thijm and French architect and expert on Gothicism Viollet le Duc, Cuypers moved to Amsterdam in 1865. The official reason Cuypers gave was that he needed a more vibrant and artistic environment. In reality, the controversy over his restoration of the Munsterkerk in Roermond will have played a role in this as well. This also gave him an opportunity to escape from the competition with his rival Carl Weber. In Amsterdam he built some of his most ingenious churches, forced by the limitations of the available space in this formerly protestant city. Besides, he also built several houses here. Although still the master of neo-Gothic, in Amsterdam he started to add Renaissance elements to his more profane designs, like the central station and Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam. These two buildings are among his most controversial designs, as many protestants were outraged that a catholic, a second-class citizen in their eyes, was commissioned to design two buildings that were regarded as being of national (read: protestant) importance. It’s ironic that with these two buildings Cuypers in fact invented the neo-Renaissance style, which became very popular mainly in protestant circles.
In 1894 he returned to his hometown, where he died in 1921, after having worked behind the scenes for his son Joseph Cuypers for several years.
Cuypers’ career can be divided in two periods. In the first period, the architect mostly built neo-Gothic churches which are highly influenced by 13th-century French Gothic and , to a lesser degree, Rhineland Romanogothic churches. Alberdingk Thijm urged Cuypers to fully study the Gothic architecture of that period, in his eyes the last truly catholic architectural style, which must be the starting point for the development of a new one. Like their never had been a Reformation. Cuypers’ marriage with Alberdingk Thijm’s sister further increases the bond between the two.
The second period of Cuypers’ career is the more interesting one. From the 1870’s, Cuypers starts combining his style with other influences. His knowledge of the national Gothic styles increases, especially as a result of his being appointed to national advisor for monumental buildings in 1874, his friendship with Victor de Stuers, an activist for the protection of historical buildings, and the expansion of the railroad. Also of importance is the St. Bernulphusgilde (‘Guild of St. Bernulphus’), a group of religious artists the most important of which is architect Alfred Tepe, which is so powerful in the archdiocese of Utrecht that Cuypers has no choice but giving in to their demands if he wants to get commissioned in this area which covers a large portion of the country. Other interests in this period include the Gothic styles of England, Scandinavia and Italy.
Cuypers was respected outside his country too. In 1870 he is appointed Dombaumeister of Mainz and advisor of the archbishop in architecture matters until 1877. In this function he restores the east part of the cathedral of Mainz, as well as restoring several other churches and building a few new buildings, until in 1877 Joseph Lucas, also from Roermond, succeeds him. In Belgium he builds two churches and completes or restores a few others.
Sadly, today Cuypers is usually remembered as ‘the architect of the central station and Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam’. Many of Cuypers’ more important designs have already been demolished or otherwise destroyed, but many still remain. Many of his drastic restorations have in part been made undone as the result of a change of taste.
