Praxiteles

And Chuck,

What kind of imperialism are we dealing with that presumes to tell the frogs how to speak French? It might be better trying to teach comprehensible English, or even Irish for that matter, to the people of Belfast.

I have not jet seen Monkston, but the description provided for Ganlorenzo is sufficient to allows us to form the opinion that another disaster has been brought about by a group of people who know nothing about the liturgy and consiedrably less about the Irish neo-gothic movement. Clearly, the oeuvre of Pugin is currentlly in the hands of hay-barn builders whose mentors rise to nothing more than chip-shops. Just how and why has Ireland become so culturally (and religiously) detached? The likes of those involved in Monkstown show all the sympthoms of the post-colonial trauma that we usually associate with the farthest reaches of the Limpopo. 50 years ago, D Guinness started to try to do something to conserve the remnant of a certain aspect of 18th century Ireland. To-day, the Monsktown paddies are busily dismantling precisely what gave (and gives) them the only form of social identity available to such a reprehensible class. Keep A. White at the other side of the Lee, please.

Thqn you very much kennie for the kind remarks.

I doubt that Sirius is in a position to make a professionql comment on the liturgy as practised in the 19th. century. So far, he has produced no indication of knowing anything about the subject

And this is Caravaggio’s rendition of the same subject (1600):

http://www.artchive.com/artchive/C/caravaggio/st_peter.jpg.html

And this is Caravaggio’s rendering of the conversion of St. Paul on the opposite wall of the chapel (1600):

http://www.artchive.com/artchive/C/caravaggio/caravaggio_conversion_of_st_paul.jpg.html

The Martyrdom of St. Peter, Michelangelo’s fresco of 1546 in the Cappella Paolina of the Apostolic Palace:

According to tradition, Peter was crucified upside down, either on the Janiculum hill or in a circus arena between two metae, the pair of turning-posts or conical columns set in the ground at each end of the course. Artists have used both settings, depicting Peter on the cross at the moment of being lifted by soldiers, often surrounded by onlookers, or already raised in position, with a small group of women standing by in allusion to the similar group at Christ’s crucifixion.

In Michelangelo’s composition everything is centred in the fearful event; in triumph over pain and suffering. As in the fresco of St Paul, the main protagonist fits into an ellipse placed in the centre of the cross, extended on four sides by the disposition of the figures. This device lends to the design a clarity and strength which is absent from the restless Damascus scene, because there the fallen Saul appears suspended in mid-air at the lower edge of the picture, and the accompanying figures occupy different levels of space. In the Crucifixion, on the other hand, most of the figures are vertical; only those near the centre give the impression of rotating round the martyr. Their features betray the utmost horror, especially those of the women on the lower right who tremble with terror, and several onnlookers seem on the verge of madness

The Conversion of St. Paul on the opposite wall of the Cappella Paolina:

The conversion of Saul (St Paul) is the best-known and most widely represented of the Pauline themes (Acts 9:1-9). On the road to Damascus, where he was going to obtain authorization from the synagogue to arrest Christians, Paul was struck to the ground, blinded by a sudden light from heaven. The voice of God, heard also by Paul’s attendants, as artists make clear, said, ‘Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?’ They led him to the city where, the voice had said, he would told what he had to do. According to a tradition, connected with the medieval Custom of representing pride as a falling horseman, Paul made the journey on horseback. He lies on the ground as if just thrown from his horse, prostrate with awe, or unconcious. He may be wearing Roman armour. Christ appeares in the heavens, perhaps with three angels. Paul’s attendants run to help him or try to control the rearing horses.

In Michelangelo’s fresco the composition shows great depth of feeling obtained by the use of light and darkness that foreshadows Rembrandt and testifies to the heroic virtuosity of the aged master. A focal line traverses the the painting, its progression at once reveals the meaning of the composition. Starting at the top left it flows diagonally, along the figure of Christ descending and a beam of light. It follows a figure with raised fingers and another, bent over the fallen Saul, and circumscribes the ellipse of this body. From his right leg it curves back and upward in the direction of a horse galloping in the background, and loses itself in the undulating contours of the mountains with a vision of the heavenly Jerusalem faintly outlined in their folds – unless we accept a more literal explanation and call it Damascus. The high-light on the head of Saul and on the horse’s head confirms the symbolic meaning; the dim awarness of fallen man is touched by the lightning flash of grace, and as universal conciousness awakens in him, he loses his animal torpor and gains true knowledge.

Chuck E R Law:

Well, we cannot know everything in life. Although the cadences of Munster Irish are a little different, I must say that I do like the interlinguistic pun!

I also like the ecumenical-interpolitical-reference suggested by the interposed initials and their their pun on a well-known cipher!

This little gem was posted on 15 June 2006 by the Catholic Communications Office in the wake of the last meeting of the Bishops’ Conference:

The decision of An Bord Pleanála regarding St Colman’s Cathedral, Cobh
The Bishops’ Conference has noted with grave disappointment and concern the decision of
An Bord Pleanála to refuse planning permission for the liturgical reordering of the
Sanctuary of St Colman’s Cathedral, Cobh.

The direction and order of the Board to refuse planning permission is being studied.
The extensive report of the Board’s Inspector, who conducted the oral hearing (28 February,
1-2 March 2006), and who recommended approval for planning, is also being studied.

Perhaps they should tells us what is gravely dissapointing them and causing such concern!

Oswald, let us try to simplify matters:

1. If I am in an ecclesiastical tribunal, then I have to present my case according to the terms of that system of law.

2. If I am in a civil tribunal -such as ABP – then, I have to present my case according to that system of law.

When it comes to “requirements” as far as Catholic worship is concerned:

1. In an ecclesiastical tribunal I will have to refer to the relevant liturgical law: The Code of Canon Law; the Institutio Generalis Romani Missalis; the Praenotanda of the Litrugical Books; and the authoritative interpretations given to these texts by the Congregation for Divine Worship. That is the system within which a case is presented and judged in an ecclesiastical tribunal.

2. In a civil instance tribunal, such as ABP, if we are talking about the “requirements” of Catholic worship, then that discourse must occur within the terms of that legal system. This is how you present what you have to say about “the requirements of Catholic worship” and it is within that system that a decision is made.

3. However, a definition of the “requirements” of Catholic worship can only be made in reference to the sources that I have outlined above: The Code of canon Law; the Institutio Generalis Romani Missalis, the Praenotanda of the liturgical Books and the authentic interpretation of these given by the Congregation for Divine Worship. This constitutes the objctive, public, OFFICIAL, definition of what liturgical requirement is for the Catholic Church.

It is this definition that has to be represented to the civil instance as Catholic “liturgical requirement”. Catholic liturgical requirement cannot be defined by reference to any other sources. If you do define “liturgical requirement” by reference to other sources, then it is not “Catholic liturgical requirement”.

It seems to me that it would be strange for a law to admit of a definition of “liturgical requirement” for every denomination according to the norms of their worship, except for the Catholic Church. Indeed, for ABP or any other civil instance to suggest that the liturgical requirements of the Catholic Church are to be defined by reference to sources other than those outlined above is an undue interference on the part of the civil state in the worship of the Catholic Church.

Furthermore, the Catholic Church has an official mechanism for ascertaining what a liturgical “rquirement” is. For a civil state to suggest that it can provide a substitute or an alternative for that system is not acceptable and an undue interference in Catholic worship.

All that one is saying here is to repeat a principle that is accepted in Irish law: when the law of a foreign state has a bearing on a case, the provisions of that foreign system are admitted by court in resolving the case. The Canon Law of the Catholic Church is regarded in the Irish law system as a foreign law jurisdiction. It has been admitted in cases. Precedents exists. In the Irish legal system, there should not per se be any difficulty about admitting the canon law regulating the liturgy if there is a difficulty about defining what “liturgical requirment” is.

On reflection, I am inclined to think that the position advanced by the HACK might not have been entirely motivated by mendaciousness. You have to take into account the collective professional ignorance of that body when it come to the liturgical sciences. All of the clerics on it are parochial clergy and are not expected to have expert knowledge of the disciplinary norms of Catholic Liturgy. None of the laity on the HACK had the slightest clue as to what they were doing. Alex White proposed a document that was a piece of consumate ignorance. Proposeing it was like shooting into hedge.

@Sirius wrote:

One of the options would be to build a new cathedral – but not on Great Island as Cobh no longer deserves the status of a cathedral town. Mallow is more centrally located to serve the diocese of Cloyne and has been designated as a “hub town” in the National Spatial Strategy. The Town Park there could provide an ideal site.

To return to this posting for a brief moment. Sirius seems thinks that the Cloyne Cathedra was set up in Cobh because Cobh had some special merit as a centre of population or for some other prestige motive. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Clearly, Sirius knows little of the recent history of the diocese of Cloyne.

Sirius should know that the Cathedra of Cloyne was set up in Cobh by a mere accident of history and the generosity of the Earl of Barrynore who afforded protection to the Catholic Bishop during the persecutions of the 18th. century. From 1749, the Bishop of Cloyne was sheltered by Lord Barrymore at Castlelyons. When the castle burned down in 1770, Lord Barrymore’s residence moved to Barrynore Castle at Carrigtwohill (and subsequently to Fota). With him moved the bishop who set up in Cobh. During the 18th. century, the Earls of Barrymore , especially James, the fourth Earl, prohibited priest-catchers from operating within their manorial domains in East and North Cork.