Honestly, Holy Name Cathedral ain’t that great of a building. I think Blair Kamin, the Tribune’s architecture critic, put it best when asked to comment on the architectural significance of this church. He simply bypassed the question, suggesting that the spiritual significance far outweighs its architectural importance. In other words, “It sucks.”
In all honestly, I think that there are a lot of people in town (Cardinal George included) who probably would have been quite content had the entire thing gone down, giving us an opportunity to truly start anew rather than throwing even more money into that pit.
Yes, its the cathedral. That certainly has significance for the Archdiocese. And the place has stood on that land for well over a century. Still, it seems to me that more people in Chicago identify strongly with their own parish above Holy Name (of Jesus, an irony in that we never seem to actually mention the Holy Name, itself.)
I suppose that I’m thankful it was not burned to the ground, ultimately. But the fact we’re now going to have to deal with an even bigger problem than the ceiling falling and underlying structural frailties to renew a building that no one really likes, anyway, makes me wonder whether this is ultimately a good and worthwhile investment.
At least the Cardinal and his bureaucrats have their own fancy palace (which they confiscated and poured too much money towards rehabbing to their liking) now just two blocks away. Perhaps it will be opened to the People of God so they can see what was stolen and not adequately supported. One is left to wonder whether all the problems at the cathedral are not some form of omen, almost. Cardinal Mundelein’s revenge, perhaps? Or, maybe, Archbishop Quigley is sending us a message?
Did anyone notice in the press conference this morning that the Cardinal didn’t seem to like getting asked about the galleros? Yes, Francis, yours will hang there one day, also. It’s something to meditate upon.
