Basilisa Marie Posted June 30, 2011 Posted June 30, 2011 On one hand it does look a little less...intimidating? Don't get me wrong, I'll swoon over any church that looks as gorgeous as that one did in the '30s. At least the tabernacle is still in the center!
Totus Tuus Posted June 30, 2011 Posted June 30, 2011 [quote name='Cam42' timestamp='1309409376' post='2260667'] I'm pretty sure I didn't call YOU an iconoclast, but rather those who destroyed that church. Regardless of the mode of renovation, it is a sad example of Catholic architecture... I don't have to CONSIDER anything....I'm entitled to my opinion and I'm seriously sick of you judging the hell out of everything that I say. So, BACK OFF!!! So, before you go admonishing me, you should probably look into the context in which I post. You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. [url="http://www.stjoechurch.com/"]St. Joseph Proto-Cathedral[/url] was renovated in 1980. There was no fire or natural disaster, except for the architect. [/quote] "The context in which you post" is ambiguous when you say things like, "The iconoclasm JUST EXHIBITED is deplorable." Did you not think that we, who are used to being attacked you, would not interpret that as an attack on us? I did. So no, I don't feel unjustified for interpreting it that way. There was precedent for it. And I actually DO have an idea of what I am talking about, since an example of natural disaster necessitating renovations (which you would definitely consider iconoclastic) exists right in the middle of my hometown. I'm entitled to my opinion, too, and I'm not going to back off when I, or my beliefs (including the belief I have that what was exhibited in the photos was NOT iconoclasm). Brother, peace. You obviously have a lot of animosity towards the people around you. I apologize for setting you off, but I definitely feel justified in taking offense given precedent. I'm bowing out now, God bless.
Laudate_Dominum Posted June 30, 2011 Posted June 30, 2011 Something that was eye-opening for me was to read issues of the journal [i]Concilium[/i] from the '60s and '70s. [i]Concilium[/i] was founded by Rahner, Schillebeeckx, Kung, Congar, and others and was quite trend-setting back in the day. They would regularly dedicate issues to themes related to the reconstruction of Catholicism via liturgy, architecture, and the like. Another fascinating activity is to peruse old issues of [i]Worship[/i] from the time of Diekmann's editorship. Of course volumes of [i]Orate Fratres[/i] of the '50s and early '60s are similarly worthwhile. I imagine such resources could be found at any Catholic university library (I can testify to FUS). I had started to accumulate a nice private collection of old liturgical journals as part of my now dormant research project. As far as church guttings go the one pictured above isn't bad at all. I do however sympathize.
Laudate_Dominum Posted June 30, 2011 Posted June 30, 2011 P.S. I wonder what happened to teh high altar. I hope there was no desecration involved. I've heard one too many horror stories about that. smh...
Cam42 Posted June 30, 2011 Posted June 30, 2011 [quote name='Totus Tuus' timestamp='1309410035' post='2260673'] "The context in which you post" is ambiguous when you say things like, "The iconoclasm JUST EXHIBITED is deplorable." Did you not think that we, who are used to being attacked you, would not interpret that as an attack on us? I did. So no, I don't feel unjustified for interpreting it that way. There was precedent for it. And I actually DO have an idea of what I am talking about, since an example of natural disaster necessitating renovations (which you would definitely consider iconoclastic) exists right in the middle of my hometown. I'm entitled to my opinion, too, and I'm not going to back off when I, or my beliefs (including the belief I have that what was exhibited in the photos was NOT iconoclasm). Brother, peace. You obviously have a lot of animosity towards the people around you. I apologize for setting you off, but I definitely feel justified in taking offense given precedent. I'm bowing out now, God bless. [/quote] That is a gigantic load of carp. There was nothing ambiguous in what I said. I made a comment on the original post. It was not directed at you and it was not directed at anyone else. Attack? Nice assumption. Why is my defending the Church and her teaching discerned as an attack? Nevermind, that question just answered itself. You don't feel. You don't feel. You don't feel....well, I can't cater to the 2000 feelings on this board at any one given minute, otherwise I would drive myself crazy. I was not after you. I was not trolling you. I was not even egaging you. However, you feel that you can just lash out at me. And you can feel justified by it? Carp. There are natural disasters all over the place....I work in a town of about 2000 where a tornado hit this spring and leveled multiple homes. I grew up in a town that has chronic flooding from the two rivers which join just south of town....but you don't see me dragging it into the middle of this....oh my goodness (don't blasphemy)!!!! The only animosity I have is toward people who are constantly badgering me about being too Catholic....I don't care. Show me ONE thing that I have said that is at odds with the Catholic Church and I'll recant it. Show me. You're right, you do have a right to your opinion, but sometimes it is best that you don't voice it, lest you are willing to get a response and it may be a response you don't like. Thank you for the apology, it is accepted, but your justification is false....there was not one single attempt at making you or anyone else on this forum seem like an iconoclast. That is your mistake in judgment.
Nunsense Posted June 30, 2011 Posted June 30, 2011 The pictures aren't taken from exactly the same distance, so it's hard to see the overall effect with the columns, lights etc. I think that taking away the high altar (sorry, don't know all the correct terms for reredos, cover, etc etc - and don't need to be given them either thank you very much) was a shame but understandable since the Mass changed after Vat 2, but I do like the simplicity and the colour scheme and the way the stained glass windows stand out more in the second one. I do lament the loss of the standing crucifix but I think the renovation is a lot better than many I have seen. The one I was baptised in was changed so much that I didn't even recognise it when I went back there, and the tabernacle ended up in some metal monstrosity that looked like a really ugly renovated Tardis! I thought it was some science fiction thing standing in the corner and when my sister-in-law asked me what it was, it took me a moment to realize that it was the Tabernacle! lol So, although I don't think churches need never be renovated, and I can understand why they changed a lot of altars after the Council, I still prefer the high altar there so that both forms of the Mass can be offered. Before my Latin Mass church was given the sole use of whole church, they used to share with the NO Mass there (it was attached to a school and most of the parents wanted the NO so it was still offered as well as the EF) - they used to have a removable altar for the NO which was put to one side for the EF (the church had never been renovated and still had the high altar). Once the EF had been given sole use of the church the priest did some renovations and painting himself - some good and some I didn't like. He took away the angels at each side of the altar, which I liked but he did bring back the Communion rail so that was good! I don't think there is ever going to be a time when everyone is pleased but some renovations are better than others! And yes, this is just my opinion...
Cam42 Posted June 30, 2011 Posted June 30, 2011 [quote name='Laudate_Dominum' timestamp='1309410228' post='2260675'] P.S. I wonder what happened to teh high altar. I hope there was no desecration involved. I've heard one too many horror stories about that. smh... [/quote] I hope not either. I know of one parish in Minnesota where the mensa from the old high altar went into making the curbstops for the handicap stalls for cars. No lie, I've seen it with my own eyes...if I can find a picture I will.
BG45 Posted June 30, 2011 Posted June 30, 2011 [quote name='nunsense' timestamp='1309410845' post='2260679'] The pictures aren't taken from exactly the same distance, so it's hard to see the overall effect with the columns, lights etc. I think that taking away the high altar (sorry, don't know all the correct terms for reredos, cover, etc etc - and don't need to be given them either thank you very much) was a shame but understandable since the Mass changed after Vat 2, but I do like the simplicity and the colour scheme and the way the stained glass windows stand out more in the second one. I do lament the loss of the standing crucifix but I think the renovation is a lot better than many I have seen. The one I was baptised in was changed so much that I didn't even recognise it when I went back there, and the tabernacle ended up in some metal monstrosity that looked like a really ugly renovated Tardis! I thought it was some science fiction thing standing in the corner and when my sister-in-law asked me what it was, it took me a moment to realize that it was the Tabernacle! lol [/quote] Contrary to the beliefs on many worlds, the Doctor is not and has never been God. But I agree, it's hard to tell from the pics what happened to those smaller side shrines. It looks as if the alcoves are still there from the tiny bit we can see at the edges, but given the extent of the renovations I'm not sure if the contents would be the same.
mortify Posted June 30, 2011 Posted June 30, 2011 [quote name='Cam42' timestamp='1309408193' post='2260655'] Can someone point me to a place where the justification for destroying that church legitimately exists? The iconoclasm that was just exhibited is deplorable... I will weep a thousand tears over the loss of such a beautiful church. [/quote] The justification is in Modernism... shhhh
Cam42 Posted June 30, 2011 Posted June 30, 2011 (edited) [quote name='mortify' timestamp='1309413204' post='2260693'] The justification is in Modernism... shhhh [/quote] Really? Really?!?!?! Really. Edited June 30, 2011 by Cam42
Nunsense Posted June 30, 2011 Posted June 30, 2011 [quote name='BG45' timestamp='1309413122' post='2260691'] Contrary to the beliefs on many worlds, the Doctor is not and has never been God. [/quote] shhh Please don't tell my sister-in-law this - she thinks he is! I stopped watching the show after Tom Baker left even though I am a distant relative (way back through the Scottish side of the family) of David Tennant! [quote] But I agree, it's hard to tell from the pics what happened to those smaller side shrines. It looks as if the alcoves are still there from the tiny bit we can see at the edges, but given the extent of the renovations I'm not sure if the contents would be the same. [/quote] At our Latin Mass church, the side chapels were for Mary and Joseph, but nowadays there don't seem to be many of these left. I loved them.
Nunsense Posted June 30, 2011 Posted June 30, 2011 [quote name='Cam42' timestamp='1309413381' post='2260696'] Really? Really?!?!?! Really. [/quote] Well done Cam - I saw your original post via email - you deserve praise for editing it. I was just about to respond to it when I saw this one... good catch.
BG45 Posted June 30, 2011 Posted June 30, 2011 [quote name='nunsense' timestamp='1309413540' post='2260697'] shhh Please don't tell my sister-in-law this - she thinks he is! I stopped watching the show after Tom Baker left even though I am a distant relative (way back through the Scottish side of the family) of David Tennant! At our Latin Mass church, the side chapels were for Mary and Joseph, but nowadays there don't seem to be many of these left. I loved them. [/quote] At home we have a side chapel for Mary and Joseph, not up here though. Really gorgeous, actual stonework lit only by candles. And you speak against Tennant despite sharing some blood with him?! I shall not allow my roommate to see this thread, for he would weep over that and not the original post. I've only seen Tennant and the new guy whose name I've not yet been able to remember for longer than an hour (though that could be the Doctor's doing).
fides quarens intellectum Posted June 30, 2011 Posted June 30, 2011 honestly, i think they both look beautiful - the new version could be worse. i wouldn't mind it if our parish looked that nice.
Nunsense Posted June 30, 2011 Posted June 30, 2011 [quote name='BG45' timestamp='1309414081' post='2260703'] At home we have a side chapel for Mary and Joseph, not up here though. Really gorgeous, actual stonework lit only by candles. And you speak against Tennant despite sharing some blood with him?! I shall not allow my roommate to see this thread, for he would weep over that and not the original post. I've only seen Tennant and the new guy whose name I've not yet been able to remember for longer than an hour (though that could be the Doctor's doing). [/quote] We have a large statue of the BVM in my current country church - it istoo simple for a side chapel of any kind, but the opposite side has a whiteboard for the hymn numbers... poor St J got left out! And I think Tennant is really cute (I didn't inherit those genes) and only found out about our relationship(!) by watching a TV program about him searching out his ancestors... and was surprised when they showed a birth certificate with some of the same rellies that I have! I just stopped watching the show when I left England where I was living at the time - even met Tom Baker in person then! Now I watch it if I catch it- otherwise not..... your roomate sounds like my sis-in-law!
Nunsense Posted June 30, 2011 Posted June 30, 2011 [quote name='fides quarens intellectum' timestamp='1309414196' post='2260705'] honestly, i think they both look beautiful - the new version could be worse. i wouldn't mind it if our parish looked that nice. [/quote] My point exactly! i wish I could go to such a nice church, even though it is renovated. Our small country church is weatherboard and probably quite old, but nothing at all attractive really. It's so plain it looks more like a Protestant church and I actually prefer the look of our local Anglican church, which is stone and really nice looking. So, if one has to have a renovation then it could have been a lot worse, considering some of the montrosities I have seen!
Maximilianus Posted June 30, 2011 Posted June 30, 2011 (edited) [quote name='MarisStella' timestamp='1309403523' post='2260619'] I seriously need to get this off my chest. It really breaks my heart. So here's what my parish church looked like in 1934: Beautiful, right? 2011: [/quote] I came across old pictures of my home town's cathedral and was shocked at the difference. It suffered damages from fires and earthquakes so renovations and repairs were necessary but a lot of elements were removed and changed over the years. It still a beautiful church, but not as majestic as it used to be. Edited June 30, 2011 by Maximilianus
faithcecelia Posted June 30, 2011 Posted June 30, 2011 I must confess I prefer the current photo. Don't get me wrong, the earlier one is lovely, but I persoanlly prefer more simple churches. My current parish has an extremely ornate church, with an awful lot of decoration, statues, etc. One day when there was Adoration there were so many candles and so much silverwork about that you needed a magnifying glass to see Christ. But then I'm a Carmelite so like simplicity
Maximilianus Posted June 30, 2011 Posted June 30, 2011 [quote name='faithcecelia' timestamp='1309429836' post='2260727'] I must confess I prefer the current photo. Don't get me wrong, the earlier one is lovely, but I persoanlly prefer more simple churches. My current parish has an extremely ornate church, with an awful lot of decoration, statues, etc. One day when there was Adoration there were so many candles and so much silverwork about that you needed a magnifying glass to see Christ. But then I'm a Carmelite so like simplicity [/quote] How's this for simplicity? [url="http://media.dwell.com/images/643*473/pawson-plain-space-Novy-Dvur-interior.jpg"]Cistercian Monastery of Our Lady of Nový Dvůr[/url]
dominicansoul Posted June 30, 2011 Posted June 30, 2011 necessary renovation or not, there is no reason to remove all that beauty you see present in the 1934 picture. There has been a deliberate movement from moderrnists within the Church to destroy the beauty, to destroy the splendor, to not give God the most we puny little humans can give. Look back to the cathedrals of the past. The Catholics back in those days spared no expense. Church buildings are supposed to reflect the glory of God. Look at the church Mother Angelica built. Look at the church the DSMME built. Look at what the Nashville Doms built. They give a lesson to all of us on what a church should look like. Its not just a building. There is nothing more uglier than modernist church architecture. And sometimes, modernizing a church takes millions. Why not spend that amount on making it more grand, rather than producing a sterile, decoration-free, image-free, bland environment? Yes, in the above photo, the modern version of that Church looks "okay" enuff. But I see no reason at all why they couldn't have left it alone.
Recommended Posts