House of God vs Den of Satan

  • Thread starter Thread starter InnocentIII
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I

InnocentIII

Guest
I think these two photos say it all about the battle within the Church between those faithful to Our Lord and those who have sold their souls to the Devil.

The first is the new Cathedral at Oakland dedicated to Christ the Light (has this ever been used as a Catholic dedication before). There is also a link to the groundbreaking ceremony photos. The Tongans and the St Columba Praise Dancers are my pick of the crop.

Oakland.jpg

christthelightcathedral.org/gb_photo_gall1.htm

The second is the new Cathedral at Houston dedicated to the Sacred Heart. The site says the following about the groundbreaking ceremony:
A colorful, prayer-filled groundbreaking ceremony was held on the site of the new structure that will change the face of the south side of Downtown Houston.
Click to expand...
The solemn blessing began in the sanctuary of the existing Sacred Heart Co-Cathedral at 1111 Pierce Street. Archbishop Joseph A. Fiorenza was joined by Coadjutor Archbishop Daniel DiNardo and Auxiliary Bishops Vincent Rizzotto and Joe Vasquez in leading a procession of clergy and faithful across the street to the site of the new cathedral. Songs of joy, the formal blessing of the ground and a ceremonial groundbreaking were then held on the construction site.
Click to expand...
Houston.jpg

What does everyone think?
 
A stunning church in Oakland and a beautiful one as well in Houston.

How wonderful to see all those nationalities part of our Catholic family at the ground-breaking in Oakland!

Both cathedrals reflect the wonderful diversity of our Church and its strength in building such beautiful Houses of God.

Thanks for posting all the photos.
 
40.png
fix:
Is that thing in Oakland a Catholic Church?
Click to expand...
Don’t get hung up on traditional perceptions. When they began designing “glass wall” skyscrapers, people were taken aback because the buildings didn’t look like what they expect office buildings to be. (Think Seagram’s Building in NYC)

The same with churches. I’ve been to Mass at a grass shack church overseas and at St. Patrick’s Cathedral in NYC. The Mass was the thing, not the building.

I think that a Catholic church is defined by what’s inside and not by what the walls look like.

Those are both beautiful churches and will do much to glorify God in their cities.
 
40.png
fix:
Is that thing in Oakland a Catholic Church?
Click to expand...
Frankly I would have said no if I hadn’t been told it was.

Richardols

I have no problem with the nationalities that are part of the Catholic Church … I do have serious problems with the presentation which is more about entertaining man than about honouring the Heavenly Father. IMO this borders on sacrilege.
 
40.png
Richardols:
Don’t get hung up on traditional perceptions. When they began designing “glass wall” skyscrapers, people were taken aback because the buildings didn’t look like what they expect office buildings to be. (Think Seagram’s Building in NYC)

The same with churches. I’ve been to Mass at a grass shack church overseas and at St. Patrick’s Cathedral in NYC. The Mass was the thing, not the building.

I think that a Catholic church is defined by what’s inside and not by what the walls look like.

Those are both beautiful churches and will do much to glorify God in their cities.
Click to expand...
While your comment is true in part - at least for Catholics - the Cathedral presents an image of the Church to the world. I do not think the Oakland building presents an image of the Church as Christ-centered. But then that is just my opinion.
 
40.png
InnocentIII:
While your comment is true in part - at least for Catholics - the Cathedral presents an image of the Church to the world. I do not think the Oakland building presents an image of the Church as Christ-centered. But then that is just my opinion.
Click to expand...
Your opinion is certainly valid. Given the Cathedral’s appearance, I expect that if you polled 10,000 Catholics, you will get 10,000 opinions of it. 🙂
 
40.png
Richardols:
Don’t get hung up on traditional perceptions. When they began designing “glass wall” skyscrapers, people were taken aback because the buildings didn’t look like what they expect office buildings to be. (Think Seagram’s Building in NYC)

The same with churches. I’ve been to Mass at a grass shack church overseas and at St. Patrick’s Cathedral in NYC. The Mass was the thing, not the building.

I think that a Catholic church is defined by what’s inside and not by what the walls look like.

Those are both beautiful churches and will do much to glorify God in their cities.
Click to expand...
A Church should look like a house of God, not be a question mark. That poorer areas can’t afford nicer property does not mean those blessed with resources should squander their talents on nonsense.
 
40.png
fix:
A Church should look like a house of God, not be a question mark. That poorer areas can’t afford nicer property does not mean those blessed with resources should squander their talents on nonsense.
Click to expand...
And with your opinion, and mine and innocent’s, we’ve got 3 of the 10,000 different opinions. 🙂
 
40.png
Richardols:
And with your opinion, and mine and innocent’s, we’ve got 3 of the 10,000 different opinions. 🙂
Click to expand...
True, but not all opinions are informed. 😛
 
40.png
fix:
True, but not all opinions are informed. 😛
Click to expand...
When it comes to aesthetics, I think that all opinions are equally valid as we are discussing matters of taste.
 
40.png
Richardols:
When it comes to aesthetics, I think that all opinions are equally valid as we are discussing matters of taste.
Click to expand...
Are not the Emperor’s clothes beautiful?
 
40.png
fix:
Are not the Emperor’s clothes beautiful?
Click to expand...
If they really existed, they might be. And those two cathedrals certainly do exist, so we can express our opinions of how beautifully (or not) the cathedrals are “clothed.”
 
40.png
Richardols:
If they really existed, they might be. And those two cathedrals certainly do exist, so we can express our opinions of how beautifully (or not) the cathedrals are “clothed.”
Click to expand...
That some think the cathederal is beautiful does not mean it is.
 
40.png
fix:
That some think the cathederal is beautiful does not mean it is.
Click to expand...
Is not beauty “in the eyes of the beholder”?

(If it wasn’t, a lot of us would never have been able to have gotten married! 🙂 )
 
40.png
Richardols:
Is not beauty “in the eyes of the beholder”?

(If it wasn’t, a lot of us would never have been able to have gotten married! 🙂 )
Click to expand...
To a degree. Some think a crucifix in urine is beautiful. We should be able to agree in some general sense what a Church should look like, or least what it should not look like.
 
40.png
fix:
To a degree. Some think a crucifix in urine is beautiful. We should be able to agree in some general sense what a Church should look like, or least what it should not look like.
Click to expand...
In a general sense, you’re right. The Devil is in the details, or in this case, in the particulars.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top