Praxiteles
Forum Replies Created
- Posts
The following links will give you an idea of how bells should sound:
Erfurt (Germany):
http://www.erfurt-guide.de/erfurts_big_bell.htm
Cologne Cathedral (Germany)
http://www.koelner-dom.de/domglocken.html?&L=1
Freiburg Cathedral (Germany)
– scroll down to “Hoerbeispiel”:
http://dompfarrei-freiburg.de/process.php?nav=muenster&subnav=glocken
On a completely different subject; Bells
I do not know how evident the absence of bells is in Irish churches and the almost total absence of a bell ringing tradition. Where good quality bells were installed, these have frequently been ruined by the application of cheap automatic clappers rather than automated bell-swings. The link below will take you to one of the best bellfoundries in Germany: Perner of Passau
It is just as well that we record for posterity the names of those who carried out the saccage of the Augustinian Church in Galway:
ProjectArchitect: Richard Hurley & Associates.
Structural Engineer: P.J. Tobin & Co. Ltd.
Quantity Surveyors: Noel J. Farrell & Associates
Building Services Engineers: Heavey, Kenney Associates.
Project Manager: Integrated Project Management: Fin Garvey.
Contractor: J.J. Rhattigan & Co. Ltd News of Church Renovation ProjectArchitect: Richard Hurley & Associates.
Structural Engineer: P.J. Tobin & Co. Ltd.
Quantity Surveyors: Noel J. Farrell & Associates
Building Services Engineers: Heavey, Kenney Associates.
Project Manager: Integrated Project Management: Fin Garvey.
Contractor: J.J. Rhattigan & Co. Ltd.
See photos of the Walk-About Tour hereTHE COST:
only €3.7 million
THE PLOT
In 2003 the Augustinian Community applied to the Galway City Council for permission to install new seating, floors, doors, lighting, and sanctuary furnishings, as well as providing disabled access and removing the Marian Shrine from outside the church.
THE GUFF
St Augustine’s was originally built in 1855 and its foundation stone was laid by the Galway historian James Hardiman on August 28 of that year. Although its old interior was much loved it had the disadvantage of reflecting a 19th century vision of Catholicism: that of a sanctified priesthood and a passive people – a vision no longer useful to today’s laity or clergy.
THE WRECKER’S MANUAL
As a result, prior to any planning application being made, the priests and laity of St Augustine’s discussed the proposed changes. This became known as the Augustinian Project. The project looked, not only at changes to the churches interior, but at how to develop a better sense of spirituality and social interaction in Galway city; greater participation by the lay community, and the future of the church and its community.
THE BOGUS “ANTIPHONAL” SOLUTION
The church’s new ‘antiphonal design’ should have both a practical and symbolic effect creating a welcoming entrance sequence and presenting the conviction that the people too are sacred. It is also to be functional through the more effective use of space, be user-friendly by removing barriers, and to make available a venue for recitals and plays.
MULTIFUNCTIONALITY
The changes to the Priory are designed to assist in fostering Galway’s Christian community. These changes are designed to ensure safe practice in the workplace; facilitate lay leadership; offer a youth ministry; provide education services in theology, philosophy, and scripture; practice of the Children’s Liturgy; to assist outreach services; provide counselling; provide a library, conference centre/public meeting rooms; to provide for small music recitals, and host and facilitate various support groups.
And do not forget Richard Hurley’s daft “untervention” in the Augustinian church in Galway!
This link will give an virtual tour of the horror that has been created.
http://www.augustinians.ie/galway/picture_gallery/newvirtual.htmThis is a virtual visit of the church before the Hurley wreckovation:
http://www.augustinians.ie/galway/picture_gallery/virtual.htmBelow will give you view of the church post 1924.
@Praxiteles wrote:
Back to the Institutio Generalis Romani Missalis !
If we accept that the Institutio Generalis Romani Missalis is the source for normative presecription on the subject of arranging liturgical space, as they call it, and specifically for the disposition of the sacntuary, then how do we explain this?:
While we are waiting for our architect friend to gather his thoughts on Drumaroad, I am wondering how the fundamental (dogmatic) distinction between the sanctuary or presbyterium and the nave is made in the lay-out of this church?
@Fearg wrote:
I think the original sanctuary in Armagh was located in the chancel. If you look very carefully at the central niche, you can still see where the tabernacle once was. The scale of the reredos also suggests that it was designed to dominate the cathedral, not just the 1904 lady chapel.
Good on you Fearg! There is an example of one who does NOT consider.
@brianq wrote:
Hi Prax,
What I meant was that Ashlin’s work was considered as the completion of the cathedral.
BQ
And by whom is it so considered?
@brianq wrote:
hi Prax,
Pietro de Gasparri is so pre vatican 2.
BQ
Have you any idea of who he is? You will be surprised to find that quite a bit of his stuff went into the making of the present Institutio Generalis Romani Missalis. Speaking of which, can we get back to our home work for to-night !
@brianq wrote:
mac,
Ashlin’s work was the conclusion of the original construction process. There have only been two reorderings.
BQ
I am not sure that you can talk of an “original” construction process in Armagh when the style changed for the first time twleve feet up the walls!!
Brain!
I do not want to take up too much of missionary time, but we might start with trying to distinguish the sanctuary from th nave of the church shown above. I was just looking at my old friend Pietro de Gasparri on the subject and the ultimate minumum to which he was able to reduce it to was: Duabus partibus ecclesia constat: sanctuario seu abside et navi: illud reservatur episcopis, presbyteris, diaconis, et comprehendet altare; haec reservabitur fidelibus et inferioribus clericis et in ea est ambo pro schola cantorum et lectoribus. Sanctuarium separabitur a navi per cancellos.. Roughtly, that would be: A church consists of two parts: the sanctuary and the nave. the former is reserved for bishops, priests and deacons,a nd contains the altar; the latter is reserved to the faithful and th lower clergy and contains the ambo for the schola cntorum and for the readers. The sanctuary is separated from the nave by a rail.
@Praxiteles wrote:
Back to the Institutio Generalis Romani Missalis !
If we accept that the Institutio Generalis Romani Missalis is the source for normative presecription on the subject of arranging liturgical space, as they call it, and specifically for the disposition of the sacntuary, then how do we explain this?:
For greater convenience it might be better to have the posting on a new page.
I have come across these pictures of the interior of St. Saviour’s Dominick Street, Dublin showing the church before the awful havoc wrecked by Austin Flannery OP:
@brianq wrote:
Hi Prax,
never too proud to admit when I’m mistaken – indeed Fr Jones was on the committee who prepared the draft text of POW for approval by the Irish Episcopal Commission for the Liturgy. (It was very late when I posted that).
So …… at best he was a co-author, one fourteenth to be exact! There is no way however that one can say that POW is his.
BQ
WHile I do not think that I raised this issue I suppose there is no harm in saying that he is dreary even in small doses!
@Sirius wrote:
Surely the original text of Mark’s Gospel was written in Greek. The various Latin vulgates were later translations.
Are you saying that you do not accept the authority of the English text of Mark’s Gospel which was read to the parishioners of Cobh at mass today?
Let us not get into the question of the accuracy or otherwise of English language translations of the Sacred Page.
Since the Council of Trent, Sirius, the Church has canonized the manuscript tradition of the Vulgate thereby making it authoritative. You would need to check that the English language text used in Cobh today was a text that followed the Vulgate rescension text and included its variants.
Any old fool knows that the Gospel text, as it come down to us, survives in its earliest rescensions in Greek – though it has not been ruled out that an Aramaic text might have pre-existed the Greek text. Be that as it may, as far as the Catholic Church is concerned, the canon was closed at Trent, the book determined and the Vulgate estalished as the source for the authoritative redation tradition.
@Sirius wrote:
What happens when you apply your Catholic filter to hypocrisy? Does it somehow become righteousness?
You have got it mixed up again. Read carefully. The Nova Vulgata is the original text. When this is translated, into say English, it is the Nova Vulgata that gets filtered. Not the other way around.
P.S. I do hope you had an opportunity to meditate on the second part of this morning’s Gospel pericope in moment of self-examination!
P.P.S. I must say that all this talk of “righteousness” is not very characteristic of theSouth of Ireland hmmmmm
@Praxiteles wrote:
I merely supplied you with the original texts for your contemplation. Nothing more nothing less. It is, I suppose, important that you hear the Gospel preached in the original rather than in a filtered version.
Let me rephrase that…. “important that you hear the Gospel preached in the Catholic original rather than in a filtered version”. In normal circumstances it would not have been necessary to qualify.
