Praxiteles
Forum Replies Created
- Posts
And here we are, the Fenning Liturgical Consultance. Quite clearly, it reproduces many of the tiring ideas coming out of the Chicago Theological Union – ideas taht have little or nothing to do withGeneral Instruction to the Roman Missal.
Re the cathedral of the Immaculate Conception Springfield Illinois.
This must be one of the most inmspired mouthfulls of guff to come from an American Bishop for some time:
“The building is still in good shape after all these years,†Lucas said. “But much of the interior beauty has been obscured by dirt and grime. … What was once flawless and inviting has become weathered and outdated.â€
And re. cathedral “restorations”, I wonder why the following sounds so familiar:
“A diocesan-wide steering committee has been considering the scope and details of the project for the past year. The Rev. Carl Kemme, vicar general of the diocese, is its chairman. The committee made its recommendations for the project to the bishop”.
The only thing missing here is the loca version of the HACK.
And, then there is the all to tried and tested liturgical solution which, we are told, stemms from the following:
“Carol Frenning of Frenning and Associates of Minneapolis. Frenning is a liturgical design consultant who works with churches throughout the country. She is a graduate of the Institute for Liturgical Consultants at the Catholic Theological Union in Chicago”.
Somebow or other, Praxiteles is not at all surprised by the emergence of the Chicago Theological Union here. This is afterall the same place as our friend Brian Quinn was fitted out as a liturgical consultant. The only thing about the Chicago Theological Union is the apparent shortage of ideas that it suffers from. The same old thing over and over and over agaon on both sides of the Atlantic.
The official description says the following:
“The sanctuary features Greek revival architecture.
* The church is modeled after St. Mary Major, a church in Rome.”
Praxiteles finds the reconciliation of those two pieces of information highly problematic.
There follows a list of local informed opinion pieces that are so anxious to tow the party the line that they appear to be directly borrowed from the DDR of Eric Hoenecker.
Not bad. IT could be greatly improved by greater attention to the decoration -paint ect and a few good picture would take the bare look off of it. Quite amazing that the two side altars managed to survive into the designs of the church and, having done so, managed to survive liturgical demolition. Remember, these derive fromt he nave altars in front of the medieval Rood Screens. It also looks as though fairly decent materials were used in the building and fittuing of the interior – e.g. floor.
@Praxiteles wrote:
As for the mosaic work, well…. what looks like a splurt of New Age celticania. Praxiteles very much doubts that it will ever reach the same level of artistic and iconographic integration as the mosaic floor in the Honan Chapel. The present example is simply gaudy and more at home on a Riverdance set.
Praxiteles has just realized that the object obstructing a clear view of altar and tabernacle here is the baptismal font! Well that just says it all – too much of the Chicago Institute and too little of the Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani.
It is also difficult to distinguiish the separation of sanctuarya nd nave here -as is required by liturguical law.
As for the glass piece, Praxitleles has to say that as a piece of glass work it would look splendid in the booking office of railway station or some such public place. But, not so as a fairly central element in this composition.
@ake wrote:
Nay, not so. haven’t you noticed the lovely red columns and the many chandeliers?
Are they porphyry?
As for the Baptismal font, we have already said sufficient on this thread to make it clear why this is juect not suitable and indeed insignificant as far as the Sacrament of Baptism if concerned. I mean, it is just a water spout of a type seen in the hall-ways most modern offices. Nothing here to suggest even a slight hint of St. Paul to the Romans on Baptism! Praxiteles has not been able to see where the Baptistery is located in terms of the church massing – but suspects that it is “parked” somewhere in a hole or a corner. Nothing here to resemble Burtint, or Hippo, or Carthage or Mount Nebo!
As for the mosaic work, well…. what looks like a splurt of New Age celticania. Praxiteles very much doubts that it will ever reach the same level of artistic and iconographic integration as the mosaic floor in the Honan Chapel. The present example is simply gaudy and more at home on a Riverdance set.
“……the new Holy Family church at Newington in Belfast. Not the way to go for a parish church….”
For a start, it is too low. The former Bishop of Down and Connor, P. Walsh, is by no means a colosseus in any sense of the word but here he is stooped over the altar.
“……the new Holy Family church at Newington in Belfast. Not the way to go for a parish church….”
From what can be seen of it, Praxiteles is very much inclined to agree. It suffers from many of the defects we have already seen afflicting modern church building. Worst of all here is the Altar. In fact, it it so bad as to be unfunctional and unservicable.
Re the Waterford Churches kindly posted by Ake, nothing could be more justifiably criticised than the one with the so called “day-chapel. The interior is a visible nightmare.
@ake wrote:
Idiots! How can a church less than 200 years old need renovation to conform to current liturgical requirements, if you can then perform a liturgy 1000 years old or whatever in the same damn building! Surely we now need to de-reorganise all the churches for the requirements of the High Mass. And then un-de-reorganise them each week for the vernacular mass…
Who will rid us of these troublesome priests?
NO. The point is taht it was never NECESSARY to reorganise them for the present liturgy. Thta is the scandal of what has happened over the past 40 years and which the gerentocratic HACK is trying to perpetuate.
Well, do the Spanish know something that we do not? Here is certainly an unexpected one for the books!
Weel, I must say they are not the worst and do have several good qualities: e.g. the use of the octogan on the lantern and altar steps which exhibits some connection with Christian liturgical tradition. HOwever, Praxiteles thinks you do hit the nail fairly square on the head withe the question:
“Now, of course, what relation these buildings have to Catholic liturgy is another question. Yet, merely as pieces of architecture, with the very basic function of a gathering place with a speaker’s central area, they are decent pieces of work. As temples to modern secular spirituality they are pretty ideal, as Roman Catholic churches, well…. “
Starnge even that concatination “secular” and “spiritual”. Terms that would normally be regarded as mutually exclusive or even contradictory. Something of the orer of “a black white”.
Clearly, one of the majorproblems of post conciliar Catholic ecclesiastical architecture is the need to disengage from the exclusive identification of “post-conciliar” with “modern”. The Catholic tradition has never espused any particular architectural style and use all styles compatible with its core tenets. As far as Praxciteles can see, there is no necessary commection between “post conciliar” and “modern” -which means that “modern architecture” has to be relativised by other architetcural styles that are compatible with “post-conciliar”. Indeed, it may even be necessary toexamine some of the philosophical principles underlying modern architecture to see if they are compatible with Christian core tenets. That may in turn may require either a modified version of “modern architecture” or else its discarding as a means for making an adequate theological statement.
One of the great myths of modern church architecture:
6. The fan shape, in which everyone can see the assembly and be close to the altar, is the most appropriate form for expressing the full, active and conscious participation of the body of Christ.
This myth comes out of the extreme view that the assembly is the primary symbol of the church. While the fan shape is a wonderful shape for theater, for lectures, even for representative government – it is not an appropriate shape for the liturgy. Ironically, the reason often stated for using the fan shape is to encourage participation, yet the semicircular shape is derived from a room for entertainment. The fan shape does not derive from the writings of the Second Vatican Council, it derives from the Greek or Roman theater. Up until recently, it was never used as a model for Catholic churches. In fact, the first theater churches were 19th century Protestant auditoriums designed so as to focus on the preacher.
And here we have an accessible list of interesting articles by Duncan Stroik on some of the issues facing contemporary ecclesiastical architecture:
This must be one of the worst examples of a modern church yet seen on this thread. It is so awful it even manages to outstrip anything Richard Hurley could come up with:
The Holy Spirit, Rochester, Minnasota
http://www.holyspiritrochester.org/worshipspace.html
And here is some of the guff from the parish web page:
Big empty church with insignificant-looking table in the center. Why? Let the web page tell you: “The worship area…is intended to continue the sense of informality…The sanctuary for our worship space is in the center, with the assembly gathered around the altar…so everyone can be close to one another.” So, an informal room where people can be close to each other… and not the altar, not the Lord, but each other. Sounds like a living room so far.
Now, funnay about all that bein-closer-together bit. I think we might have heard a good deal about that in relation to a 21st century sancturay for Cobh cathedral.
And here is an item for which Mr. Duncan Stroik deserves absolute full marks – a decent sized sacristy. Most of the horrorw taht we have seen on this thread are usually equipped with shoe-box sized sacristies in which the proverbial cat could not be swung. The over educated people who design such closets forget -or perhaps never knew -that sacristies are places which have multiple functions -and not simpley that of vesting.
The sacristy here reminds Praxiteles of the main sacristy of Santa MAggiore with a hint also of the Sacristy of San Lorenzo in the Escorial.
