Rhabanus

@Praxiteles wrote:

I wonder whether we are not mixing up monuments here: is it not Tenerani’s (1866) monument to Pius VIII at the door to the sacristy of St. Peter’s , also in the South transept, that has the figures of the Apostles Peter and Paul?

Zapped again, Prax! Touche!

I had dashed off the earlier message nowhere near my usual site, on my way to another place. Indeed there was a confusion of monuments. For what it’s worth, I find both monuments somewhat static, though the statues of Sts Peter and Paul seem to me even more static than the figures on the monument of Pius VII.

Thanks for the photos. And for the corrections.

The statue of Pius VI which used to be in the confessio of St Peter’s was moved, was it not? I thought that it was repositioned at the end of the crypt near the exit. The upward gaze is less effective in its current location than it was when in the confessio. Of course, the statue may now be back in its original spot. I stand to be corrected.

@Praxiteles wrote:

She may have been prepared to receive him in England -and this was considered politically necessary to keep the Irish in their place – but Odo Russell, the unofficial Bristish Diplomatic Agent in Rome, made a formal offer of Malta to the Secretary of State, cardinal Antonelli. Antonelli, in a famous reply, thanked her Britannic majesty for her generosity and solicitude for the security of the person of His Holiness but assured Russell that there was little prospect of His Holiness being able to avail of the offer as he suffered greatly from sea-sickness!!

My point remains that, despite the several hundred years during which England had severed religious ties with the papacy, and in spite, too, of the anti-Catholicism that had become a salient feature of English public life, Queen Victoria was nonetheless prepared both to acknowledge the temporal claims of the papacy and to receive the Pope in a manner much more benign than was the attitude of HIS OWN PEOPLE! Give credit where itis due.

It is also to the credit of George III, the Prince Regent, and various ministers of state within the British govt of an earlier date in the nineteenth century that all but two shiploads of priceless booty plundered by Napoleon from the Vatican musea and art galleries were restored by Britain after 1814. [Apparently two ships sank. so perhaps some day part of the treasure may be recovered.]

The papacy had Cardinal Consalvi to thank for this arrangement. His diplomatic skills were quite remarkable. It was he who, when Napoleon in a fit of rage threatened to destroy the Catholic Church ‘overnight’, coolly replied to the Little Emperor that if 1800 years of priests could not destroy the Church, his army scarcely stood much of a chance. The British govt and people were charmed by Consalvi, who found a surprisingly welcome reception at the Court of St James’s.

When Pope Pius VII [over whose election in Vienna Cardinal Consalvi presided as Camerlengo] died, Consalvi assigned a Protestant to design the monumental tomb of Pius VII. It is the only monument in St Peter’s Basilica to have been designed and executed by a Protestant. This before the ‘age of ecumenism’. The figures of the Pope flanked by St Peter and St Paul, in classical style, are rather too static for my taste. Perhaps, Prax, you might add a photo of it on this thread and on the Brother Michael Augustine O’Riordan thread.

I assume that it was Consalvi and Pius VII who placed the kneeling statue of Pius VI in the crypt/confessio. The pontiff is portrayed gazing upwards in an attitude of prayer from the floor of the confessio to the Holy Spirit in the underside of Bernini’s great bronze baldachino. I regret to mention that that satue (which I much prefer to that of Pius VII) has been displaced by the modern Cristo Re altar and has been relegated to the last place in the chapel of the popes in the crypt of St Peter’s Basilica. Pius VI, who reigned as Supreme Pontiff during the carnage of the French Revolution, was later abducted by Napoleon and brought in a carriage across the Alps and eastwards to Vienna. The Pope was not granted even rest stops, even though he was suffering intensely from kidney stones. The rickety ride alone up the Italian penninsula and across the alps was a living martyrdom for the old man. He died in humiliation north of the Alps. His was the longest pontificate after Leo XIII.

The placement of the statue of Pope PIus VI at the base of the confessio of St Peter’s Basilica was itself a tribute to the faithful witness of this successor of St Peter and his close link to the Prince of the Apostles.

So … viewed in the historical context of the temporal humiliation of the papacy in the 19th century, Queen Victoria comes out of this mess looking rather good!

@Praxiteles wrote:

Pius IX made the front page of Wikipedia to-day. Not bad for someone born in 1792!

Beato Pio Nono cut quite a dashing figure as a young pope, not unlike the youthful John Paul II. Hailed as a ‘liberal’ upon his election in 1846 to the See of St Peter, it was just a few years before he was being attacked for ‘conservatism.’ A study of his life and times shows how meaningless such terms are in reference to the Church and to the papacy.

Menaced by the anticlerical forces of freemasonry, Gallicanism, republicanism, secularism, atheism, and other expressions of aggressive radicalism, Blessed Pius IX fled to Gaeta in 1848 (the year of revolutions) but returned to Rome, as St Peter himself had done in AD 64, to carry the cross as a worthy successor of that Prince of the Apostles. During his pontificate, the longest in history, Pius IX founded a number of national colleges in Rome, so that seminarians and priests from around the world might enjoy a personal rapport with the Pope.

Pius IX is responsible for two major events: the definition and proclamation in 1854 of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Mary and the convocation of the First Vatican Council (1870) during which the Infallibility of the Pope was defined and proclaimed.

The council disbanded with the outbreak of the Franco-Prussian War. Upon the confiscation by Garibaldi of the Papal States, Pius IX fled from the Quirinal Palace to the Vatican where he remained a voluntary ‘prisoner of the Vatican’ until his death in 1878.

Pilgrims to St Peter’s Basilica in the Vatican will have noticed directly above the impressive bronze statue of St Peter Enthroned (the toe of which is kissed by millions of pilgrims each year), there hangs a mosaic portrait of Bd Pope Pius IX framed in gold. Pio Nono placed it there as an ex-voto on the thirtieth anniversary of his pontificate. Until his time, a legend maintained that no pope would reign beyond 25 years (the supposed length of St Peter’s own Roman pontifcate [he had left the see of Antioch for Rome by divine call]). Well, Pio Nono not only exceeded the 25th year but went on to live another seven years, extending his pontificate to 32 years! His successor, Leo XIII, reigned for 25 years (1878-1903) and held the pontifical longevity record of ‘second place’ until beaten out by John Paul (1978-2005).

For an unusual, rather insightful, look into the day-to-day life of Rome in the pontificate of Pius IX, see the autobiography of Archbishop Robert Seton (eldest grandson of St Elizabeth Ann Bayley Seton), Memories of Many Years (New York: P.J. Kenedy & Sons, 1923). The book describes Rome under Pio Nono, then describes life in the Eternal City after the Risorgimento, in the pontificate of Leo XIII, and afterwards. Educated as a seminarian in Rome, Robert Seton laboured as a priest in the USA, then retired to Rome after fifty years of pastoral service. What a stark contrast he vividly draws of the Rome before and after the Risorgimento. A ‘must read’ for anyone interested in the history of the papacy, the Risorgimento, or the 19th century.

@Praxiteles wrote:

Re previous posting: note all the junk wiring strewn all over the place and the chairs are not even properly arranged on the platform of the sedilia!

It makes even shantytown look upscale. Though I imagine that his living quarters are ‘state of the art.’ Everything just so.

@ake wrote:

!!!!!!!!!!!
Sacred Jesus!!!!!!! How could that be?!!! Makes me sick.sick sick sick. That must have been the finest church in Dublin. If only somebody could be punished.

Ake, this was roughly my reaction to the debacle, as indicated much earlier on this thread. It took me a full week to recover from that revelation of the ‘before’ and ‘after’ photos of St Saviour’s Dominic Street. What a heart-breaker.

As for punishment, Prax informs us that this was the handiwork of Austin Flannery, O.P. (in)famous for his alleged translation of the Vatican II Conciliar and Post-Conciliar Documents. He flourished like the grass of the field in his day, as this type generally does.

But there is eternity to consider. St Alphonsus Liguori teaches that God in His mercy often gives the wicked a long and prosperous life in this world, because, knowing they will spend eternity away from His presence and suffering the everlasting torments of Hell, He postpones their misery and accords them much consolation in this life.

Nevertheless, it is difficult to resist your initial instinct to bring the knave to more immediate justice in this life as well.

As you can see from the results of St Saviour’s wreckovation, St Peter’s Belfast, the Catholic Cathedral of Armagh and other photos featured earlier on this thread, not to mention the current stirrings in Cobh, there is such a thing as UTTER SHAMELESSNESS. You have witnessed it.

Now you understand why the folks in Cobh prefer to apply PREVENTIVE medicine, providing of course that the cathedral there doesn’t collapse from the sheer insouciance of its administrators.

@samuel j wrote:

Fully agree pressure should be brought to bear on Greencore but willingness of Magoo to get involved
could well be used down the line as an excuse for a man so busy with the plight of his parishioners , he had little time left for trivial matters like the organising of sanding and varnishing of the cathedral doors.

Does create a convenient diversion for his talents……. meanwhile it is still not answered how he intends
to pay for the 200k or so wasted on his church plans….

Meanwhile no money is spent on maintenance…..as presumably no money left….

“…he had little time left for trivial matters like the organising of sanding and varnishing of the cathedral doors.”

That is why rectors are appointed, at least in North America. I thought that in Europe the chapter of canons often attends to the fabric. Is there no chapter in Cloyne? Should the chapter not be involved in identifying competent architects, engineers and artisans who can maintain the fabric of the cathedral whilst the bishop immerses himself in feeding his flock on the meat of sound doctrine supplemented by the pastoral milk of human kindess?

Who has been looking after the loaves and fishes in Cloyne? The precedent tends in the direction of multiplying rather than dividing these.

Is the bishop not covering his own assets?

@Praxiteles wrote:

And here is a picture of the Mortuary door. Clearly, it has not been cleaned or varnished for almost a decade. The Varnish has already peeled away leaving the wood exposed to the elements. The hinges and strap work show the same signs of some form of cancerous oxidization under the last paint applied to them. Needless to say, none of the hot-fotted denizans of the Cobh Urban District Council ever noticed this problem:

“Needless to say, none of the hot-footed denizens of the Cobh Urban District Council ever noticed this problem.” Is this lot receiving a stipend for being on the Cobh Urban District Council? If so, how much do they receive per annum? Or do they operate on the basis of the St Vincent-de-Paul Society – for charity only?

Note the bottom of the door of the Mortuary Chapel – the wood there is beginning to fall apart.

So, enlighten me: Is the CUDC an oligarchy of highminded citizens, a clique driven by self-interested agendas, a Kibuki theatre venting the long-suppressed aspirations of the newly unleashed Irish bourgeoisie/’Celtic Tigers’, a glorified Bridge and Kanasta club, a self-help society, a cabal of badinage and baksheesh? What? I am trying to get a handle on the precise nature of this body, the qualifications for membership, and its most recent accomplishments.

Someone, please enlighten my darkness. I merely want to know.

@Praxiteles wrote:

A further view of the mosaic in front of the altar rail in Cobh Cathedral. Note that since the benches in the transepts have been turned to face N and S -rather than their original E – they no longer fit and are now resting on the verge of the mosaic causing its complete dieintegration. Again, Cobh Urban District Council and the Heritage Officer of Cork County Council do not seem to be one bit bothered about this dilapidation. Please write your protests to Mrs Mary O’Halloran, Town Manager, Cobh, Co. Cork, Mr Pat Lynch, Town Clerk, Cobh, Co. Cork, Ms Louise Harrington, Heritage Officer, Cork County Hall, Cork, or to Mr. Denis Deasey, Architect, Town Hall, Cobh, Co. Cork. :

Thanks for the photos, Prax. What incredible ineptitude turned the pews, and with such results!

I hope that the good people of Cobh get off their duffs and down to those offices fortified with their letters to the proper authorities.

Such delapidation is intolerable!

DEMAND ACCOUNTABILITY OF YOUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES!

STOP THE BARBARISM!!

@Fearg wrote:

Such a shame – it was magnificent…

It certainly was magnificent! The destruction of that church alone will call down the upon the perpetrators sccourges of divine wrath, if it has not already done so.

Consider the words of Pope St Pius X in his Instruction on Sacred Music Tra le sollecitudini[the full text of which may be found on the Vatican website or at adoremus.org]. They apply equally to architecture as to music:

“Nothing should have place, therefore, in the temple calculated to disturb or even merely to diminish the piety and devotion of the faithful, nothing that may give reasonable cause for disgust or scandal, nothing, above all, which directly offends the decorum and sanctity of the sacred functions and is unworthy of the House of Prayer and of the Majesty of God.”

In this motu proprio [a decree issued “on his own initiative”] promulgated on the feast of St Cecilia (22 Nov) 1903, the Holy Pontiff identified among the cares of his pastoral office “a leading one … without question that of maintaining and promoting the decorum of the House of God in which the august mysteries of religion are celebrated, and where the Christian people assemble to receive the grace of the Sacraments, to assist at the Holy Sacrifice of the Altar, to adore the most august Sacrament of the Lord’s Body and to unite in the common prayer of the Church in the public and solemn liturgical offices.”

In preparing to address the liturgical abuses of his day, which pale considerably in comparison with the sacrilegious atrocities perpetrated by the ordained in our own dark age, the beloved Pope gave full credit to those who erected such beautiful structures as St Saviour’s, praising them for “the beauty and sumptuousness of the temple, the splendour and the accurate performance of the ceremonies, the attendance of the clergy, the gravity and piety of the officiating ministers.” To quote a silly ditty from the 1960s, “Where have all the flowers gone?” Where indeed?

Note the God-loving zeal with which the sainted Pontiff so ardently burned:
“Filled as We are with a most ardent desire to see the true Christian spirit flourish in every respect and be preserved by all the faithful, We deem it necessary to provide before anything else for the sanctity and dignity of the temple, in which the faithful assemble for no other object than that of acquiring this spirit from its foremost and indispensible font, which is the active participation in the most holy mysteries and in the public and solemn prayer of the Church. And it is vain to hope that the blessing of heaven will descend abundantly uppon us, when our homage to the Most High, instead of ascending in the odor of sweetness, puts into the hand of the Lord the scourges wherewith of old the Divine Redeemer drove the unworthy profaners from the Temple.”

How much more direct does a Supreme Pontiff have to get?

Must the good people of Cobh again rise up, ablaze with the ardour of renewed zeal, to dispel with the scourges of divine and human justice the profaners of that sumptuous temple?

Rorate caeli desuper et nubes pluant Justum!

@Luzarches wrote:

I’d thought I’d bring to attention a book on British Catholic churches that was launched last night. My boss came in to the office today with a copy.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Glimpse-Heaven-Catholic-Churches-Communication/dp/1850749701/sr=8-13/qid=1165020172/ref=sr_1_13/203-4213018-1577568?ie=UTF8&s=books

It’s not available yet on Amazon, is much longer than 96 pages, has great and rich illustrations, including of many chapels and churches I’d never knew existed, many that are well-known and a decent text containing a few barbs directed against some of the more egregious reorderings. It puts all the buildings into some sort of context. I wholeheartedly endorse it, for what it’s worth.

Thanks for the tip, Luzarches! I look forward to St Nicholas’ visit this year.