Bishop Levada to be "keeper of the faith?!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Randy2
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I have always loved the beauty of classic architecture, but once again I ask, what the heck does any of this have to do with a man’s orthodoxy? And now we are going to blame the decline of the belief in the Real Presence on the shape of a building.
 
pnewton,

No, I am not blaming buildings on the decline of the belief in the Real Presence, I am saying that the Churches we build today do not encourage reverance, they do not put a person in a holy setting…if you notice I sighted “not teaching” as a reason for not believing in the Real Presence. However, how we choose to worship, and what sort of Church we choose to worship in is often a reflection of our mindset.
 
pnetown,

When anti-septic, cold, Protestant-like Churches are built, and the Pastor approves of the design, then one can wonder where that Pastor’s mind is regarding orthodoxy.
 
pnewton,

I live in the suburbs of Chicago, not terribly far from the well known mega non-demoninational Protestant Church Willow Creek. Not long ago a local Church had a captial drive to build a new Church, which has been completed for some time. One of their driving themes was to compete with Willow Creek in terms of structure and overall setting. Sadly, the parish met its goal and they now have a Willow Creek-like structure, which really does not look like a Church at all, except for the cross on the outside. Meanwhile, in that same parish the old Church did not need replacing, but the school needed a large sum of money for upgrades…the parish got a Protestant-like Church, and the school is left wanting. That scenario is not unusual.
 
40.png
TPJCatholic:
When a person walks into a Catholic Church they should sense a growing sacredness as they approach the altar, with the Tabernacle either directly behind the altar, or just off to the side for all to see in plain view. The Churches should be majestically adorned with plenty of statues and stained glass that tell faith stories and remind of us the communion we share with the Saints. Stations of the cross should be boldly proclaimed and placed in prominent view so that everyone is reminded of what our Lord did for us and there should be no lack of veneration (through art and statues) of Our Lady. The place should ooooze holiness, for it is literally a house of the Risen Lord. We need to reclaim the sense of sacredness and holiness that we are blessed with–Jesus Christ resides in Catholic tabernacles and we should do everything we can to literally shout that (through the structure and through teachings) to everyone who walks into a Catholic Church.

If we do not believe it enough to make it deeply sacred, then why should anyone else believe?

The structure’s primary focus should be on Jesus, Mary, Joseph and the Saints…not on local traditions and desires.
I totally agree with this. The Church is the Body of Christ. The Catholic Church is the true Church. Why are people trying to make it look like a protestant church. I think that sometimes churches reflect the lifestyle, moral values, and people around it since the people are what make up the church. This seems to reinforce the fact that the Catholics in Sanfransisco are having some trouble perhaps with maintaining the true Catholic faith.

What has Leveda done to try to chanch the wrong thinking in this area, or has he tried to find a common denominator to make everyone happy?
 
All of the recent posts in this thread have nothing to do with the topic of this thread. 😦

Read post 13 again. Bishop Levada did not have anything to do with the construction of the cathederal. Would he have been a better bishop if he tore it down and had one built to would be considered more sacred?
 
When a person walks into a Catholic Church they should sense a growing sacredness as they approach the altar, with the Tabernacle either directly behind the altar, or just off to the side for all to see in plain view. The Churches should be majestically adorned with plenty of statues and stained glass that tell faith stories and remind of us the communion we share with the Saints. Stations of the cross should be boldly proclaimed and placed in prominent view so that everyone is reminded of what our Lord did for us and there should be no lack of veneration (through art and statues) of Our Lady. The place should ooooze holiness, for it is literally a house of the Risen Lord. We need to reclaim the sense of sacredness and holiness that we are blessed with–Jesus Christ resides in Catholic tabernacles and we should do everything we can to literally shout that (through the structure and through teachings) to everyone who walks into a Catholic Church.
:clapping: :clapping: Yes, yes, yes! Thanks for saying this so beautifully.

Also, tjp, is that wannabe megachurch you refer to Holy Family of Iverness, by chance? If so, I know what you mean.
 
harvey,

No, he would not be doing a good thing to tear it down. Yet, much can be done to Catholocize a modern Church, and from the pictures I have seen nothing has been done.
 
40.png
TPJCatholic:
harvey,

No, he would not be doing a good thing to tear it down. Yet, much can be done to Catholocize a modern Church, and from the pictures I have seen nothing has been done.
Maybe that’s how we can tie the church in with levada. much can be done, but he hasn’t. It’s remained the same. How has he tried to steer people back towards the narrow path of God? This is how it relates…
 
40.png
Lurch104:
What’s to know?
  1. Forbids the TLM Indult in his diocese.
  2. His diocese, on his watch, now pays benefits to homosexual “spouses”.
  3. Has been accused and successfully sued for protecting pedophile priests and punishing whistleblowers.
If I am wrong, please correct me. I have been attacked all day for pointing out these things, but absolutely no one has refuted any one of these assertions. I would love to be proven wrong and know that a wonderful, holy, orthodox man now heads the CDF. I have never heard of Bishop Laveda before this announcement. However, I found pages and pages of documentation to support the above assertions with a 30 second Google search. His talk in support of the faith is outstanding, but his actions leave much to be desired if what I have read is true.
Archbishop Levada permitted the Indult Mass when he was Archbishop of Portland, OR.

I had the privelege of hearing Msgr. Michael Schmitz of the Institute of Christ the King, Sovereign Priest on Saturday, as I posted in the link below.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=55935

Msgr. Schmitz was ordained by Cardinal Ratzinger and has met with him on a number of occasions. Msgr. Schmitz has the utmost confidence in Pope Benedict XVI to not only promote the Tridentine Mass but to end abuses in the Novus Ordo Mass.

Msgr. Schmitz stated that the Prefect for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith was the pope up until Pope Paul VI. The prefect works directly under the pope and can only do what the pope wants him to do.

Considering the length of time Benedict XVI spent as prefect, he isn’t about to let someone do anything on his own accord.

Don’t worry about Archbishop Levada. Benedict XVI believes he can work with him. I trust our new Holy Father.
 
for eternity,

I agree…time will tell if Bishop Levada has learned to take action in cases where action is needed.
 
40.png
TPJCatholic:
harvey,

No, he would not be doing a good thing to tear it down. Yet, much can be done to Catholocize a modern Church, and from the pictures I have seen nothing has been done.
Okay, that may be true, though I can’t tell much from the photos I’ve seen. Maybe I’ll drive by and check it out some time, though SF isn’t one of my top places to visit. (I live 70 miles away and usually drive further away, not closer.)

BTW, Father Fessio spoke Saturday night in Santa Clara at Our Lady of Peace where Ignatius Press had a showing of Bernadette. He spoke with great excitement over what he expects from Pope Benedict XVI, especially in regards to the liturgy. Since they are friends this is not surprising, but I’m still encouraged. I seriously doubt that Pope Benedict XVI would have selected Bishop Levada if he did not feel he would be of help in this regard.
 
40.png
TPJCatholic:
JNB,

I do not blame the Cathedral on Bishop Levada…was he present when it was designed and built?
The Cathedral was designed in the mid 60s and opened in 1970. Church design was going downhill trapidly even before Vatican II. I have seen pre Vatican II parishes that while still having all of the Tridentine trademarks such as a high altar, altar rails and cruciform seating, they still look like somthing of the Jetsons.
 
40.png
TPJCatholic:
otm,

This subject has little to do with beauty…it is about creating sacred places to worship and it is about teaching through the proper use of those sacred places.

In today’s Catholic world 70% of American Catholics do not believe in the Real Presence. Why should they, we do not give them any reason to believe? We are not teaching them the truth and we are giving them less then sacred places to worship. We build Churches that look more Protestant, then Catholic, with antiseptic and vast volumes of spaces arranged in half-circles and with very little clue that our Risen Lord lives within the Tabernacle of those Churches. People talk inside Churches like they are part of some social club, and why not, that is how many new Churches feel. People chew gum and eat food, and why not, many new Churches could easily be movie theaters.

Rose’s argument lies in the notion that Catholic Churches house the Real Body and Blood of Our Risen Lord…and that every facet of those Churches should try to point to that truth. We can learn a lesson from our ancietn Jewish brethren on this point, they held the Presence of God in the Holy of Holies in the highest place–the Jews treated the Holy of Holies with devout and true reverance to God’s Presence. That is how it used to be in Catholic Churches and it is how it should be today. When a person walks into a Catholic Church they should sense a growing sacredness as they approach the altar, with the Tabernacle either directly behind the altar, or just off to the side for all to see in plain view. The Churches should be majestically adorned with plenty of statues and stained glass that tell faith stories and remind of us the communion we share with the Saints. Stations of the cross should be boldly proclaimed and placed in prominent view so that everyone is reminded of what our Lord did for us and there should be no lack of veneration (through art and statues) of Our Lady. The place should ooooze holiness, for it is literally a house of the Risen Lord. We need to reclaim the sense of sacredness and holiness that we are blessed with–Jesus Christ resides in Catholic tabernacles and we should do everything we can to literally shout that (through the structure and through teachings) to everyone who walks into a Catholic Church.

If we do not believe it enough to make it deeply sacred, then why should anyone else believe?

The structure’s primary focus should be on Jesus, Mary, Joseph and the Saints…not on local traditions and desires.
Your statistics, like most statistics, tell only a small story, and the analysis I have seen of what was actually asked and what the results mean differ vastly. We could argue all day about them, but the questions asked in the survey you are most likely referring to show more an issue of lack of understanding of a sophisticated theological concept than they do of a basic understanding. I will be among the first to say that people have been poorly catechised over the last 30 to 35 years (although that is changing), but will not in any way grant you your first point as a generalization.

For the rest, again, I found it to be a holy place; I don’t know if the word “ooze” would come to mind. But if I was to compare it to, say, one of our older local churches in Portland, I would say that I prefer the cathedral to an older church which seems to have innumerable statues and statuettes in and around the sanctuary; I counted 32 when I finally caught myself during Mass there one day - and quit counting. Some people just love that. I find that distracting to say the least.

Again, what denotes holiness to one person is not necessarily what denotes it to another. I am not so naieve as to think that because something is different, or new that it is necessarily good. Time will tell that, probably more time than you or I have left.

Having said that, I was both impressed with and moved by the interior of the cathedral, and I have been to Mass there a number of times. I have also been impressed with, and moved by the austerity of the simple church (there are chapels that are probably larger) of Our Lady of Guadalupe Abbey, (Trappist) in Lafeyette, Oregon. so also the cathedral in Portland Oregon, which has a beautiful fresco on the wall behind the altar. And though I have only seen pictures of St Peter’s, it too is impressive, although it appears to be so hugh as to approach cavernous.

I would also point out that having the tabernacle behind the altar does not appear to be how most of the grand churches and cathedrals of old in Eurpoe were designed, so some of your response is really more about what you have been exposed to. Which goes to what I am saying: much of people’s response is caused by conditioning as opposed to necessarily something intrinsic, but it is passed off as intrinsic.
 
40.png
pnewton:
I have always loved the beauty of classic architecture, but once again I ask, what the heck does any of this have to do with a man’s orthodoxy? And now we are going to blame the decline of the belief in the Real Presence on the shape of a building.
Dear pnewton,

Please forgive me for barging into this and not providing details, but I do want to mention that I think you are mistaken. I have never been especially interested in this subject (architecture/beauty/adornments, etc of churches), but it does seem to be the conclusion of great leaders in the Church over many centuries (and apparently of the poor as well), that such things are indeed very important to the faith.

We do know from the explicit details that God gave OT personages regarding the structure and adornment of both the Tabernacle and the Temple (and even the vestments of the priests), that He considered these things of utmost importance.

Perhaps those of us who do not have a deep concern for this aspect of the faith had better give the benefit of the doubt to others who do.

God’s blessings, 🙂

Anna
 
otm,

My points really have nothing at all to do with how “I” feel about any given Church. My point speaks about why Churches are built:

(1) To gather together to worship God (thereby glorifying God).

(2) To learn the faith through hearing God’s Word (thereby glorifying God through listening to His Word).

(3) To join with fellow Christians in prayer and sometimes song (thereby glorifying God).

(4) To receive the Incarnate Word of God in the Eucharist (when we do this in a state of Grace we are glorifying God).

In essence we are on this earth to glorify God, not ourselves and our Churches should literally stand way above all other places in terms of giving God and His kingdom all glory.

As for Churches that have many statues, that is simply a reflection of our faith. The Catholic faith is all about God and His family of saints and angels…those statues are the same as having many pictures of your family on a house wall. By venerating the saints we are giving God glory, for those saints belong to God and are with God.

There is no evangelizing tool more powerful then example. People walking into our Churches are seeing the example that the particular parish has chosen to offer…we must try to do everything we can to make sure that the Churches we build give glory to God in every aspect and that the example is easily discernable by those in attendance. Anything less is not acceptable…imo.

As for tabernacles, that is another discussion. I will only say that if Jesus were to come to your home, where would you let him sleep? The kids room? The living room couch, or would you give him your very best room in the house to sleep? Take that scenario and apply it to Jesus in the Tabernacle…should he be shoved in the corner, or in a room where hardly anyone goes? Is that the way we glorify our Risen Lord?

We often forget that the Tabernacle contains God Almighty!

I once attended a Protestant Bible study and had been in it for some time and chose to not attend anymore (was to anti-Catholic in tone). I sat in the non-denominational sanctuary one day alone, I had just come from Adoring the Lord in the Blessed Sacrament. As I sat there in the sanctuary, I realized why I had to leave, the Lord’s Real Presence was NOT there…it really broke my heart with the knowledge that our separated brethren miss out on so very much, it is so sad to think of the hundreds of millions of Christians that miss out on the Lord’s Presence, and yet we Catholics all too often take Him for granted.

Whenever we drive by, or walk by a Catholic Church, we should try to remember to bow our heads and say hello to our Lord, for He is waiting there for us. We should love Him and glorify Him with every chance and with everything we do, including how we build Churches to glorify Him and not ourselves.
 
40.png
otm:
I would also point out that having the tabernacle behind the altar does not appear to be how most of the grand churches and cathedrals of old in Eurpoe were designed, so some of your response is really more about what you have been exposed to. Which goes to what I am saying: much of people’s response is caused by conditioning as opposed to necessarily something intrinsic, but it is passed off as intrinsic.
I don’t know why you think this, but the grand old churches I’ve seen all make the tabernacle the focal point. Unlike post-V2 buildings, which make MAN the focal point. This isn’t “provincialism” at work, but observation of fact. And this fact happens to match the theology/ideology of the “reformers” who designed these buildings.
40.png
otm:
What is disturbing is your complete lack of education in architecture and presumption that you know better.
Hmmm, would it be possible that you have been MIS-educated in architecture and that consequently you presume to know better?
40.png
otm:
You are welcome to not like it. But if you are “disturbed”, you might want to search out what it is that creates such a reaction.
It is possible to be “disturbed” by evil or even by ugliness without needing psycho-analysis. Not everything is “relative.” (And not that I’d grant any validity to psycho-analysis in any case!) 🙂
40.png
otm:
What back water provincial rock did you crawl out from under?
Open-minded, aren’t you?
40.png
otm:
But judging from little or no background other than immediate personal taste is judging from provincialism and ignorance.
Look, I’m all for expertise being respected, but sir, you are evidently ignorant of this subject whilst thinking yourself knowledgeable, and that is an unfortunate combination, don’t you think? Your aggressive attitude to others only compunds the impression.

Regards,
Aquinian.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top