Advice on Altar Piece/Art

  • Thread starter Thread starter bowerj1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thanks for your response! Sorry, my link takes me straight to the picture. To clarify - yes it is the image of a face and a hand coming through wisps of metal. I believe it is supposed to be the Ascension. Which is a problem since Jesus rose and ascended BODILY. And I see no wounds on His hand.

As far as wether I should let it go…it will be tough for me to let it go! Also our bishop and priest do not like the image. It’s the leadership of the parish who may like it…
If the bishop and the pastor both dislike it, that works in your favor.

Maybe the pastor just needs a good excuse to get rid of it.

Perhaps it can be melted-down and sold for scrap metal and the money used to feed the poor. Maybe the pastor can announce that the parish is going to make a great sacrifice, inspired by Pope Francis concern for the poor, by denying itself the use of that sculpture and instead provide meals for hungry children and blankets to keep off the winter chill. Unless, of course, some members of the parish don’t care if the poor starve or die of cold. “Yes, my SISTERS and brothers, the church is not a sculpture on a wall. The church is the people, the Church is poor! Let us be poor! Let us remove this metallic symbol of capitalist excess! It is going to be painful. I know it will be. Perhaps we can cover the blank spot left on the wall by a symbol of Christ on the Cross to remind us of the great sacrifice we made in removing the metal sculpture and giving the proceeds to the poor!” Anyway, you get the idea.

Seriously though, it just might work. 😉
 
Hello,

This picture below contains an image of a piece of art that is directly above the altar at the parish I attend.

To me this is problematic in so many ways! I am considering my options and arguments, as I plan on approaching our pastor to possibly start the ball rolling on replacing it with a crucifix. We are fairly new to the parish, as we have decided for various reasons to attend other parishes in the area in the past. But we have lived in the area for many years. Now the parish has two great priests, and we are attending mass here, but I fear that some of the parishioners who have been around the parish for a while like this image. I think trying to replace this will be very controversial, but worth the effort and difficulties.

So - I would like honest feedback. I have a litany of reasons why the image is not suitable for Holy Mass. What do you think of the image/piece of art? What does it look like? Do you think it’s beautiful and worthy of being above the altar? How would you go about approaching a pastor about replacing it, and what arguments for its removal do you have? Looking for ideas and support!

(Also - if you like the image, let me know. I don’t want to assume everyone dislikes it, and I want to be mindful of other’s tastes…to a point).

Thanks,
Jesse
  1. First of all, there is a moratorium in this sub-forum on complaints. As a new member, you may want to visit this edict from the sub-forum’s moderator. It is post #14
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=17511
*Default Moratorium: Complaint threads/posts

Please don’t post complaints about any liturgy/ordained/parish. You may ask questions about the liturgy and the sacraments, but please don’t complain about what you saw or heard. Don’t post negative comments about what the Church allows, or about/directed at the ordained/religious.

Complaint/negative threads/posts will be removed. Thank you, everyone, for your understanding and cooperation.*
Presuming that this is determined to be within the moderator’s tolerance…
  1. Tastes in sacred art vary greatly. Below is The Resurrection in the Nervi Hall, which is where papal audiences have been held now for decades. Here, we see Pope Benedict in front of it, flanked by his attendants.
    http://wpmedia.news.nationalpost.com/2013/02/pope-4.jpg?w=940&h=627
    It is, frankly, not one of my most favourite pieces of modern sacred art but I have been in its presence too many times to count over the decades. It is certainly dramatic, especially in the space that is the Nervi Hall. Whether it suits my taste is immaterial since it is on its fifth Pope and its presence is their decision…no one else.
That this parish art work does not suit your tastes may be as equally immaterial.

I assume this is the image in question


  1. Frankly, I would encourage you, rather than approaching with “arguments” – which I can say quite adamantly would not have gone very far with this parish priest – that you rather gently initiate a dialogue with the parish priest about this…it is his province, not the parochial vicar’s.
Telling me things I needed to get rid of generally had the reaction of directing the person complaining to cease and desist, depending upon their tone and their attitude…above all if they were newly arrived people who had not even demonstrated a sense of commitment, investment, or stewardship regarding the parish, let alone integrating themselves into the parish family.

You are new to this parish and that is key. Do you know the origin of this piece? Is it a legacy gift? Do you care?

I have been in parishes where the family of donors were very much quite present and would have adamantly fought removal of what was a gift duly accepted that had been especially commissioned and, moreover, that had cost several thousand dollars.

You use many expressions that I find disturbing and that would actually shut down a conversation, were I the parish priest.
  • I think trying to replace this will be very controversial, but worth the effort and difficulties.
  • Also - if you like the image, let me know. I don’t want to assume everyone dislikes it, and I want to be mindful of other’s tastes…to a point
Actually, I don’t particularly dislike this image although I doubt it is one I would personally have chosen to install it…but that is a different question. Some priest did. And I imagine there is a history behind it. It is certainly not offensive. It is very difficult for me to offer any assessment since I do not have a context for the rest of the space and what it contains.

As for being “mindful of others’ tastes to a point,” if this were in your home, your tastes would prevail. It isn’t.

It is also not your decision as to what is “worth the effort and difficulties” in the face of a decision to “replace this will be very controversial”…that rests with the parish priest alone…as may involve, potentially, the diocesan commission on sacred art and also the bishop.

Also, are you planning personally to underwrite the total cost of its removal and re-purposing (presuming it was a gift that cannot simply be disposed of) as well as the total cost of a new installation? If the answer is no, that would also have shut down any further discussion when I was a parish priest. I remember people telling me what they wanted “renovated” and I told them that when they had the total financial cost in their hands, they could return and talk to me about the prospects of a renovation. Otherwise…I was not interested and had no time for it.
 
I think it is quite striking. I would not tend to call it an alter piece because it is not on the alter, but above and behind the priest. To me an alter piece would be ON the alter. While it may be distracting to some it does draw your attention to the Risen Christ. I would rather be “distracted” by the sculpture-and that is what it is-than by some of the stuff going on in the pews. Just my opinion. Peace.
All good points.
Before anyone goes to the priest, I would suggest a couple of things:
Don’t go with both barrels loaded…you’d be asked to leave. Not saying you would, but I’ve been on enough parish councils to know that the priests HATE being told what they ought to do.
Have in mind or bring pictures of exactly what you propose. He may have in mind something else, but he won’t know what the people are desiring unless you are specific.
HAVE A PLAN FOR HOW TO PAY FOR IT.
Real important.
Also, have a plan for where to relocate this piece of art. The entry to the Conference area? The Dining Hall? The lobby of the school? The foyer of the rectory? The narthex? They’re not going to toss it in the trash is my point. And don’t suggest such.

It’s not gorgeous, but I’ll wager it cost a fortune, and I sort of like it. 🤷

What is the design of the rest of the sanctuary? Is it modern as well? If it is, you may not get far. Parishes and those committees and architects that design such don’t make decisions lightly. There is probably a whole backstory to this piece. Try to find that our FIRST and then see if it’s worth pursuing. It may have been commissioned. If it was commissioned, it would be good to find out what the artist wanted to portray. Invitation to the table of the Lamb would be my guess.
It may have been a donation in honor of a previous pastor. But I would definitely investigate the history of this piece.
ASK. Your perspective may change.
:twocents:
 
The more I look at it, the more I like it.

The bulge in the carpet. Is that the Serpent lurking there, waiting to “strike at her heel?” The same one She will strike on his head.

What’s the meaning of the red cloth?

I would like to read an explanation of the various meanings depicted there.

Yes, the more I look at it, the more I do like it.
This is my favorite painting of the Annunciation. To me it is realistic–the expression on Mary’s face, the bodily posture, the beam of light suggesting the angel (they don’t really have wings), and the domestic look of the room. That probably is not a bed per se, but a couch with multiple uses. Homes back then were different than today in the USA.

I have been considering purchasing a copy of this painting to hang in my family room. I found an online site some time ago that has it. Tanner’s works are marvelous.
 
These are great, thoughtful responses. Thank you. I was looking for a variety of opinions and perspectives to help me get my heart and mind around the issues involved, and welcome everyone’s thoughts! I will ponder them today and get back to the thread soon. I also am meeting with Father soon, and your perspectives help me frame the situation. Thanks!
 
Perhaps it can be melted-down and sold for scrap metal and the money used to feed the poor.
I still suggest investigating the history of the piece. It would be a poor decision, IMHO, to sell for scrap metal a piece of sacred art and you will not cause a rift in a parish faster than getting rid of something that a parishioner paid for as a memorial. (Especially if the prior pastor is the one who approached a parishioner about paying for said art piece).

It is ill advised to remove and sell things without a better understanding of where they came from, the parties involved, etc. it might be better, if the pastor really wants to move it, to find another place in the sanctuary, a place in the chapel, or a place in the gathering space or hall especially if it is a memorial donation.
 
I still suggest investigating the history of the piece. It would be a poor decision, IMHO, to sell for scrap metal a piece of sacred art and you will not cause a rift in a parish faster than getting rid of something that a parishioner paid for as a memorial. (Especially if the prior pastor is the one who approached a parishioner about paying for said art piece).
If only priests in the 60s to 80s had such concerns…
It is ill advised to remove and sell things without a better understanding of where they came from, the parties involved, etc. it might be better, if the pastor really wants to move it, to find another place in the sanctuary, a place in the chapel, or a place in the gathering space or hall especially if it is a memorial donation.
So, you’re saying that you don’t care about the plight of the poor?

(Before anyone jumps all over me, that was sarcasm, folks.)
 
Perhaps a crucifix can be purchased for the sanctuary and the artwork moved to another place inside the church, the social hall, etc…
 
Perhaps a crucifix can be purchased for the sanctuary and the artwork moved to another place inside the church, the social hall, etc…
It has not been determined that there is no crucifix.
Just that he and some others doesn’t like this creation.
I would not think that a Bishop who dedicated this church would have permitted a church in his Diocese to be built without a crucifix.
:coffeeread:
 
It has not been determined that there is no crucifix.
Just that he and some others doesn’t like this creation.
I would not think that a Bishop who dedicated this church would have permitted a church in his Diocese to be built without a crucifix.
:coffeeread:
Absolutely.
 
Thanks again for everyones thoughts. I had a productive meeting with the pastor yesterday. To clarify, the only other crucifix present is a small processional crucifix that was initiated by the current pastor. There are no other crucifixes in the parish. As far as what the image is of it may have to do with the fact that the previous church (it was gorgeous) burned down 20 something years ago. I think the image reflects “rising out of the ashes” or something.

All comments have been helpful to me. Thanks again for your (name removed by moderator)ut. I feel like I have a better grasp of various ways folks may view the image.
 
Also I had a thought about the image in the Vatican at Nervi Hall. As far as I know that image is in an auditorium/hall. Not behind an altar where Divine Worship takes place. That to me is an important distinction. Nonetheless that piece in that hall is a good example and thought provoking, that even in the Vatican there are a variety of tastes…
 
Yes. I was told the current pastor instituted that.

Two other questions. My thoughts on the piece that keeping coming up in my
mind are: it’s problematic that there are no signs of Christ’s wounds on the image. And since Christ ascended bodily, the amorphous wispiness of the image seems to indicate otherwise. These are big theological details that are problems to me with the image. Thoughts?
 
Yes. I was told the current pastor instituted that.

Two other questions. My thoughts on the piece that keeping coming up in my
mind are: it’s problematic that there are no signs of Christ’s wounds on the image. And since Christ ascended bodily, the amorphous wispiness of the image seems to indicate otherwise. These are big theological details that are problems to me with the image. Thoughts?
There doesn’t have to be.
Our Archbishop has a PhD in canon law and has built probably around a dozen churches during his tenure here. Many of the big crucifixes are very ornate, but most are very simple. One parish has a huge San Damiano cross. Gorgeous, but really colorful and is hanging suspended above the altar. Facing sort of downward, toward the altar surface. Another has a Risen Christ version, with flowy robes depicted. You can’t really see much except for spots on His outstretched hands. Other, huge bronze ones, are such that from any distance at all, you can’t see wounds.
Ours as well see below:
 
The more I look at the sculpture, the more I like it. It is semi-abstract and you can see in it what you will. It is what is in your heart and soul that is important-not what is on the wall. Peace.
 
The more I look at the sculpture, the more I like it. It is semi-abstract and you can see in it what you will. It is what is in your heart and soul that is important-not what is on the wall. Peace.
Art is subjective, yes.

However, what is “on the wall” is extremely important in a Catholic church. The building is the House of God, the Holy Temple (insert many other names here). It needs to be a place that appropriately reflects its use (which is, above all, the Mass). Churches are not just materials to keep out the weather. They are an important aspect of the Christian life.
 
I do kind of like it, but not in that location. Is there somewhere else in the church it could be displayed?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top