What should a Catholic church look like?

[Aeolian]

You won’t SEE it, however, unless it’s

1. A Ruthenian or Ukrainian parish with less than opaque iconostas (you can see through the iconostas, or at least the doors, in many Ruthenian parishes and some UGCC ones)
2. During liturgy (as the doors are then open)
3. highly latinized (lacking an iconostas)
4. has an incomplete iconostas (like many missions and a couple Ruthenian parishes) sans doors.

You are absolutely incorrect. There is no Divine Liturgy to my knowledge where the Royal Doors are not open for at least the majority of the celebration. The royal doors share the same centerline with the altar and the tabernacle. While the priestly celebrant, concelebrant(s) or deacon(s) might block one’s view for part of the DL the tabernacle can still be seen throughout most of the celebration of the DL.

There might be traditions where the royal doors are left closed. The Ruthenian church is not one of them, at least in the USA.

I can even see the tabernacle quite clearly when the royal doors are closed at my church and the icostasis is hardly “incomplete.”

 

[adstrinity]

Did you understand what you posted a link to? There are six or seven rites of the Catholic Church depending on how you count. You need to distinguish between an actual RITE (such as the ROMAN or BYZANTINE Rite) and a tradition/church (small “c.”)

The most obvious example is the Byzantine RITE. There are 14 different recensions within the Byzantine Rite. Those different recensions are not “rites” but “churches” or “traditions.” I attend for example a Byzantine Ruthenian Catholic parish. Church = Catholic, rite = Byzantine, church/tradition = Ruthenian.

Hmmm. I am Latin Rite, so, I do not speak for any of the other one’s, nor should I really have to, but, thank you for this knowledge.