The newest Cathedral

[jujubee]

Hmm, well since this thread has resurfaced I just thought that I’d let you all know that regardless of what people feel about the architectural style, I am very proud to say that on January 17 I will receive the Sacrament of Confirmation at the cathedral! I am so happy to be home I don’t care what the place looks like.

Thank you EWTN, Catholic Answers, Ave Maria Radio (1260am and 1620am)!

 

[Elizabeth502]

In the earliest practices of ‘confession’ in the Church, it was ‘not’ private but public. This eventually created scandals within the Laity and Clergy alike and was eventually practiced as a ‘private’ matter between the Laity and the Priest (who represented the Church).

Orthodox Christians still practice a largely ‘public’ confession. Although it’s normally difficult to actually hear what is said.

I understand all that, but we, of the Roman Church, are neither of the Orthodox tradition nor “in the earliest practices…in the Church.” This is not an Orthodox cathedral, nor meant to replicate “earliest practices.”

 

[CatholiCommit]

Hmm… Glad there are more posts to this thread, I don’t it matters where you worship as long as you acknowledge that God rules everything and everyone, and that we must continue with what God has planned for us and continue to be faithful and pray more

 

[Lepanto]

Hmm… Glad there are more posts to this thread, I don’t it matters where you worship as long as you acknowledge that God rules everything and everyone, and that we must continue with what God has planned for us and continue to be faithful and pray more

Sure, but why can’t we do so in buildings that truly reflect God’s majesty? Are acts of acknowledging God and beautiful churches mutually exclusive?

 

[JPUSC]

Hmm, well since this thread has resurfaced I just thought that I’d let you all know that regardless of what people feel about the architectural style, I am very proud to say that on January 17 I will receive the Sacrament of Confirmation at the cathedral! I am so happy to be home I don’t care what the place looks like.

Thank you EWTN, Catholic Answers, Ave Maria Radio (1260am and 1620am)!

Congrats!

 

[CatholiCommit]

Sure, but why can’t we do so in buildings that truly reflect God’s majesty? Are acts of acknowledging God and beautiful churches mutually exclusive?

We can and it is a beautiful symbol of Christ and God the Father, we are called to worship God and believe in his plan however we are called to spread the Word of God whether we have a church building or not.

what would happen if we did not have a such thing as a church building, would it make us less christian or make us lose faith in God and undo what Christ does for us? would not having a church if there were none teach us to count on God more ?

The answer to these questions are very simple and when we think about are logic, if we still had Ministers and Priests to spiritually guide us then that is what is important after all that is what we need. in the Bible times churches were outside or in tents there were not real buildings and people had faith and were not concerned with a building.

It is nice to be able to go somewhere that was created for us to worship in.

 

[AlanF]

We can and it is a beautiful symbol of Christ and God the Father, we are called to worship God and believe in his plan however we are called to spread the Word of God whether we have a church building or not.

what would happen if we did not have a such thing as a church building, would it make us less christian or make us lose faith in God and undo what Christ does for us? would not having a church if there were none teach us to count on God more ?

The answer to these questions are very simple and when we think about are logic, if we still had Ministers and Priests to spiritually guide us then that is what is important after all that is what we need. in the Bible times churches were outside or in tents there were not real buildings and people had faith and were not concerned with a building.

It is nice to be able to go somewhere that was created for us to worship in.

In Bible times christians were persecuted, they couldn’t build church buildings. Nowadays if someone is commissioned to design a church building they should design it to reflect the glory of God, to create a place to separate people from the rest of the world, to be ‘in the world but not of the world’. It should be a timeless house of God with a sense of the sacred, which I suspect this is not.

I don’t really like this argument: if we didn’t have church buildings we’d still be christians; it’s a bit like saying “we’ll just have to make do.” No. If they’re going to spend lots of money on a cathedral they should make it a jolly good one!

GB,
Alan.

 

[Aramis]

In the earliest practices of ‘confession’ in the Church, it was ‘not’ private but public. This eventually created scandals within the Laity and Clergy alike and was eventually practiced as a ‘private’ matter between the Laity and the Priest (who represented the Church).

Orthodox Christians still practice a largely ‘public’ confession. Although it’s normally difficult to actually hear what is said.

So do Eastern Catholics of the Byzantine Rite.

Sometimes, behind the iconostas, other times, in front of it.

It’s even a licit option (but can not be the only option) in Latin Rite use. Latins have to have the option of a confessional where the priest can not see the penitent.

The actual content of the confession, however, is between the priest and penitent in all Catholic and Orthodox churches, provided the sins confessed are not reserved to the bishop, patriarch, or pope. (in which case, the penitent’s confession must be disclosed to the competent authority.)

 

[CatholiCommit]

In Bible times christians were persecuted, they couldn’t build church buildings. Nowadays if someone is commissioned to design a church building they should design it to reflect the glory of God, to create a place to separate people from the rest of the world, to be ‘in the world but not of the world’. It should be a timeless house of God with a sense of the sacred, which I suspect this is not.

I don’t really like this argument: if we didn’t have church buildings we’d still be christians; it’s a bit like saying “we’ll just have to make do.” No. If they’re going to spend lots of money on a cathedral they should make it a jolly good one!

GB,
Alan.

Alan-

I understand you point of view however I am not sure of your point, and you don’t know the first thing about me and you don’t know what I believe or know, so before you get off on a tangent read what I am saying and think of it in a different and constructive way. I did not say you had to agree with me on my comment and I was not really addressing you. However I am aware of this being a forum, so if you going to say that then I have saved you time in doing so.

At the same time, I realize that we are dealing with two different time periods, one being the Bible Times and the other Today’s Time. I was just saying that we could worship if we did not have churches today, it would be out faith and spirit in God that would see us through and help us realize what is really important. I think it is awesome that we do have churches that we can worship in and I know it is not about the buildings it is the symbolism of it and the meaning of going to church.

I am sure the new Cathedral we are talking about here is very nice and people like it that is fine, I never said I had anything against the church, not every church is built the same, it is unique in design and structure.

Some how I think you misunderstood me, this is not an argument nor was it meant to be.

 

[AlanF]

Alan-

I understand you point of view however I am not sure of your point, and you don’t know the first thing about me and you don’t know what I believe or know, so before you get off on a tangent read what I am saying and think of it in a different and constructive way. I did not say you had to agree with me on my comment and I was not really addressing you. However I am aware of this being a forum, so if you going to say that then I have saved you time in doing so.

At the same time, I realize that we are dealing with two different time periods, one being the Bible Times and the other Today’s Time. I was just saying that we could worship if we did not have churches today, it would be out faith and spirit in God that would see us through and help us realize what is really important. I think it is awesome that we do have churches that we can worship in and I know it is not about the buildings it is the symbolism of it and the meaning of going to church.

I am sure the new Cathedral we are talking about here is very nice and people like it that is fine, I never said I had anything against the church, not every church is built the same, it is unique in design and structure.

Some how I think you misunderstood me, this is not an argument nor was it meant to be.

I don’t know, perhaps I misunderstood.

What you appeared to be saying was that it doesn’t matter what the church building is like because we would still be christians without it. However, we would be christians without a house of God to celebrate Mass &c… The point I’ve been trying to make in this thread is that it does matter because one purpose of a churh should be to transend the outside material world, to fill one with awe and reverence for God, this new cathedral doesn’t seem to do that; it’s too worldly, modern, “innovative” and when Benedict XVI finally manages to destroy this false “spirit of Vatican II” it’ll be totally useless.

I hope I didn’t sound argumentative or rude in my posts, I didn’t mean to and I apologise if I did.

 

[Galnextdoor]

While most of us consider Gothic architecture to be “traditional”, what did the churches look like from 33 to say, 550 AD?

Granted, this new cathedral doesn’t look the least bit “traditional” as most of us view it.

But, does tradition evolve, at least where building architechture is concerned …

Think of the Roman and Greek structures if you want to consider what churches looked like from 33 A.D. to 550 A.D. The Acropolis was a Greek temple and there were similar looking temples all over Europe. The mosques of the late 600’s A.D. were breathtakingly beautiful. You can by the remains of the earliest synagogues that they were equally jaw dropping.

I think it’s only been in the last century, that people’s idea of what a church should look like has changed.

 

[Aramis]

I think it’s only been in the last century, that people’s idea of what a church should look like has changed.

No.

The 1600’s saw a rise of accusations of Catholic Iconoclasm along with the rise of protestantism. The Church’s architectural range has been slowly (and sometimes not-so-slowly) changing ever since.