What is your favourite form of Church Architecture?

  • Thread starter Thread starter SJP
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I have to say, I am not a fan of that archicture that Spiller showed. Nothing against him/her, but it does not seem like a place that lifts us out of here to Heaven. In the Eastern Churches, their church buildings are called Temples. I think that term is rather fitting, because the purpose of the building is to bring us closer to Heaven. What else is the liturgy other than Heaven on earth? The church building should reflect that.

Alaha minokhoun,
Andrew
 
Spiller said:
To the right of the altar in the Blessed Sacrament Chapel. The chapel is lit by a shaft of natural light from several stories above. It’s a gorgeous setting and it’s in full compliance with the GIRM:

GIRM315. It is more in keeping with the meaning of the sign that the tabernacle in which the Most Holy Eucharist is reserved not be on an altar on which Mass is celebrated. Consequently, it is preferable that the tabernacle be located, according to the judgment of the Diocesan Bishop,

a. Either in the sanctuary, apart from the altar of celebration, in a form and place more appropriate, not excluding on an old altar no longer used for celebration;

b. Or even **in some chapel suitable for the faithful’s private adoration and prayer and which is organically connected to the church and readily visible to the Christian faithful.
**

Even more important, it is a far more suitable location for the Blessed Sacrament as thousands of visitors/tourists pass through the cathedral each day. It’s a nice place to stop and pray before the Blessed Sacrament.
Click to expand...
I notice you seemed to have left out GIRM (314)
The basic provision made for the placement of the tabernacle is as follows: “In accordance with the structure of each church and legitimate local customs, the Most Blessed Sacrament should be reserved in a tabernacle in a part of the church that is truly noble, prominent, readily visible, beautifully decorated, and suitable for prayer” (314).
Click to expand...
So do I take a right or a left to get to the Tabernacle?
 
Harpazo said:
I have to say, I am not a fan of that archicture that Spiller showed. Nothing against him/her, but it does not seem like a place that lifts us out of here to Heaven. In the Eastern Churches, their church buildings are called Temples. I think that term is rather fitting, because the purpose of the building is to bring us closer to Heaven. What else is the liturgy other than Heaven on earth? The church building should reflect that.

Alaha minokhoun,
Andrew
Click to expand...
:clapping:
 
Harpazo said:
I have to say, I am not a fan of that archicture that Spiller showed. Nothing against him/her, but it does not seem like a place that lifts us out of here to Heaven. In the Eastern Churches, their church buildings are called Temples. I think that term is rather fitting, because the purpose of the building is to bring us closer to Heaven. What else is the liturgy other than Heaven on earth? The church building should reflect that.

Alaha minokhoun,
Andrew
Click to expand...
In fairness to OLAC, the place simply DOES NOT PHOTOGRAPH WELL. E.g. what looks like black glass on the outside IS black glass – it shields the interior “windows” of white spanish alabaster [that would opacify and break if exposed directly to the sun] through which the California sun is fused into a serene, cloud-like “glory” that fills the buildng with light. When you enter the nave from the long ambulatory, you feel like you have just shed 15 pounds. It is VERY elevating.

Again: NONE OF THIS COMES THROUGH IN THE PHOTOS.
 
SJP said:
I notice you seemed to have left out GIRM (314)
Click to expand...
Are you inferring that YOU are allowed to ignore GIRM #315 to meet your own definition of what is “good” or “best?”

In any event there is no question (at least to those who have visited the place) that the Blessed Sacrament Chapel is indeed “truly noble, prominent, readily visible, beautifully decorated, and suitable for prayer.”

Like St. Peter’s, OLAC does not repose the Blessed Sacrament in the sanctuary because there are simply too many visitors each day.
 
Spiller said:
Except for its price and some of its furnishings, this place is really growing on me:

I didn’t really think too much of it until I celebrated the Mass in it and then it sorta hit me.
Click to expand...
Celebrated ? Wow, I didn’t know you were a priest ! :rotfl:
 
Spiller said:
Are you inferring that YOU are allowed to ignore GIRM #315 to meet your own definition of what is “good” or “best?”
QUOTE]

No, I’m not inferring anything. I’m simply pointing out the fact that you seemed to have forgotten about GIRM 314. Why so defensive?
Click to expand...
 
mercygate said:
In fairness to OLAC, the place simply DOES NOT PHOTOGRAPH well. E.g. what looks like black glass on the outside IS black glass – it covers “windows” of white spanish alabaster through which the stark California sun is fused into a cloud-like “glory” that fills the buildng with light. When you enter the nave from the long ambulatory, you feel like you shed 15 pounds. It is VERY elevating.

Again: NONE OF THIS COMES THROUGH IN THE PHOTOS.
Click to expand...
I agree and it finally hit me. While I will never defend the price or some of the furnishings here is my conclusion:

Some great church buildings are works of art in themselves. They are often defective in many ways – ventilation, temperature, lighting, sight lines, etc. but they are indeed works of art in themselves.

OLAC on the other hand is all about showcasing the greatest work of art – the Divine Work of Art – the Blessed Sacrament, and the architect used every resource available to make that happen. There are no stations of the cross or confessionals in the nave of the OLAC. The entire focus is on the sanctuary and more specifically the altar and ambo.
 
SJP said:
Spiller;3877280:
Are you inferring that YOU are allowed to ignore GIRM #315 to meet your own definition of what is “good” or “best?”
QUOTE]

No, I’m not inferring anything. I’m simply pointing out the fact that you seemed to have forgotten about GIRM 314. Why so defensive?
Click to expand...
OLAC meets #314 with great dignity.
Click to expand...
 
Spiller said:
I agree and it finally hit me. While I will never defend the price or some of the furnishings here is my conclusion:

Some great church buildings are works of art in themselves. They are often defective in many ways – ventilation, temperature, lighting, sight lines, etc. but they are indeed works of art in themselves.

OLAC on the other hand is all about showcasing the greatest work of art – the Divine Work of Art – the Blessed Sacrament, and the architect used every resource available to make that happen. There are no stations of the cross or confessionals in the nave of the OLAC. The entire focus is on the sanctuary and more specifically the altar and ambo.
Click to expand...
I think you are right. I did not have the privilege of attending Mass there, but I could see how perfectly the space was organized to focus on the amazing altar.

FWIW, I think the cathedral takes a lot of umbrage because of the Cardinal’s less-than-lovely reputation. That is unfair to a stunning piece of architecture.

The quality of the light must be experienced to be appreciated.
 
Spiller said:
Are you inferring that YOU are allowed to ignore GIRM #315 to meet your own definition of what is “good” or “best?”

In any event there is no question (at least to those who have visited the place) that the Blessed Sacrament Chapel is indeed “truly noble, prominent, readily visible, beautifully decorated, and suitable for prayer.”

Like St. Peter’s, OLAC does not repose the Blessed Sacrament in the sanctuary because there are simply too many visitors each day.
Click to expand...
Do they have a Tabernacle there or did they put Jesus in a chapel out of the way? It cannot be seen from the photo, but I could be wrong. In fact, I hope I am wrong.

Alaha minokhoun,
Andrew
 
Harpazo said:
I have to say, I am not a fan of that archicture that Spiller showed. Nothing against him/her, but it does not seem like a place that lifts us out of here to Heaven. In the Eastern Churches, their church buildings are called Temples. I think that term is rather fitting, because the purpose of the building is to bring us closer to Heaven. What else is the liturgy other than Heaven on earth? The church building should reflect that.

Alaha minokhoun,
Andrew
Click to expand...
Have you ever been to OLAC? The structure does a wonderful job of using natural light, sound (pipe organ, bells), smells (tons of incense), and sight (great and comfortable view of the ambo and altar) to bring us in communion with God and His Son.

The ambulatory alone does a wonderful job of helping us leave the secular behind for what is divine…

While I attend a Byzantine/Ruthenian temple weekly, it in no way does as good of a job as OLAC. Not even close.
 
Harpazo said:
Do they have a Tabernacle there or did they put Jesus in a chapel out of the way? It cannot be seen from the photo, but I could be wrong. In fact, I hope I am wrong.

Alaha minokhoun,
Andrew
Click to expand...
Don’t “hope you are wrong”. The cathedral is a tourist herd place. The reservation chapel is on the “south” side safely tucked into a place where people who want to pray there can DO that without a swarm of people snapping photographs all around them.

As stated above, the chapel is silent, intimate and a deeply prayerful place.
 
Harpazo said:
Do they have a Tabernacle there or did they put Jesus in a chapel out of the way? It cannot be seen from the photo, but I could be wrong. In fact, I hope I am wrong.

Alaha minokhoun,
Andrew
Click to expand...
The tabernacle is located in the Blessed Sacrament Chapel. When entering the main ambulatory (entrance) one has the option of entering the Blessed Sacrament Chapel (which always has several people in prayer inside) or continuing on to the nave.
 
Spiller said:
Have you ever been to OLAC? The structure does a wonderful job of using natural light, sound (pipe organ, bells), smells (tons of incense), and sight (great and comfortable view of the ambo and altar) to bring us in communion with God and His Son.

The ambulatory alone does a wonderful job of helping us leave the secular behind for what is divine…

While I attend a Byzantine/Ruthenian temple weekly, it in no way does as good of a job as OLAC. Not even close.
Click to expand...
AAAHhhhhhhhh! The AMBULATORY.

You come in the main entrance and must traverse this long, calmly lit, low-ceilinged corridor, walled by the nave on the right and with a window-wall on the left with lush plantings outside. By the time you have walked the considerable length of the building and slowed yourself down, then step into the soring space of the nave, so spectacularly lit by those alabaster walls, you have made a journey from this world into the next . . . VERY effective.
 
mercygate said:
AAAHhhhhhhhh! The AMBULATORY.

You come in the main entrance and must traverse this long, calmly lit, low-ceilinged corridor, walled by the nave on the right and with a window-wall on the left with lush plantings outside. By the time you have walked the considerable length of the building and slowed yourself down, then step into the soring space of the nave, so spectacularly lit by those alabaster walls, you have made a journey from this world into the next . . . VERY effective.
Click to expand...
Yeah, Moneo the architect really did a nice job on so many aspects on OLAC. Aspects which are totally lost by those who judge OLAC based on photographs.

That ambulatory is larger than most large parish churches and I thought it would take up too much space but it really does do a nice job of facilitating the transformation from the secular to the divine.

The 17th century retablo at the apex of the ambulatory and the artwork on the walls is world class stuff.
 
mercygate said:
I think you are right. I did not have the privilege of attending Mass there, but I could see how perfectly the space was organized to focus on the amazing altar.

FWIW, I think the cathedral takes a lot of umbrage because of the Cardinal’s less-than-lovely reputation. That is unfair to a stunning piece of architecture.

The quality of the light must be experienced to be appreciated.
Click to expand...
I think OLAC gets slammed for three principle reasons:

1.) As you say the cardinal’s reputation.

2.) Simple ignorance. The work of great artists and architects are often eschewed by those who lack the creators’ visions.

3.) Cost. While a great deal went to seismic considerations and land costs, the price of some of the furnishings are a real turn-off to me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top