- Status
B
basenji
Guest
Somehow this is both delightful and sadly true at the same time. Thank you.
R
reggieM
Guest
That was very good. Thanks for posting it.
L
Layman
Guest
If you’re ‘creeped out’ visiting a well ordered and sanctified Catholic Church, it’s you who have a problem. There’s only entity (and his minions and sympathisiers) who would be perturbed by that.
S
Soutane
Guest
Would you mind explaining your comment?I don’t necessarily care for what I presume to be your allusion.Hyperbole should be used sparingly.
L
Layman
Guest
Well, demons and those influenced by them and those who are wedded to sin aren’t going to be too comfortable in a well-ordered Catholic Church.
Some people are very comfortable in night-clubs and some find them hellish.
Some people are very comfortable in night-clubs and some find them hellish.
M
Maria65
Guest
I am saddened by the newer (post Vatican II) churches that are just plain - I’ll be blunt here - ugly. There is one where I live (which I will not name, but it is not the church I go to) built in the 1970s that doesn’t look like a Catholic Church - in fact, it really doesn’t look like a church at all. I tried to find a photo of it to post, but I notice their website has one small photo of a portion of the outside and that’s it. Don’t want to scare anyone away, I guess. 
D
dennis01
Guest
"But at least Protestants knew they were entering the sacred space of a religion with the self-confidence to welcome visitors on its own terms, to confront them with a culture nourished by the blood of martyrs and ambitious in the demands it made on the faithful."
Well stated.
S
Soutane
Guest
I detest protestantised versions of the Catholic Church.St Denis in St Catharines Ontario is a prime example-no kneelers,tabernacle hidden off in a corner,a glorified parson’s table employed as an altar,not a statue of a saint or Mary in sight.
However,wherever the Body,Blood,Spirit,and Divinity of Christ is present sacramentally in the Tabernacle,there IS the Catholic Church.Christ was born in a stable which became the first Catholic Church.
I doubt demons,or their adherents would be comfortable in ANY structure where the Blessed Sacrament is reserved.
H
Harri_Laaksonen
Guest
I like well appointed worship places as well and the Spartan simplicity of many modern churches, both Catholic and Protestant, is a bit stark for my tastes.
However, there are traditions of simplicity in the Catholic tradition. The churches of the Cistercians and Carthusians were known for simplicity. Decoration in the form of paintings, icons and statues was absolutely minimal and preferably not there at all.
Other monastic orders allowed more of a feast for the eye. The very opposite situation was found in the Benedictine Baroque of the 17th and 18th centuries. The Baroque and Rococo are a bit gaudy for my taste. I guess I appreciate architecture for what it is and for its time, but may churches look like sacred spaces and not secular auditoriums or stadia.
However, there are traditions of simplicity in the Catholic tradition. The churches of the Cistercians and Carthusians were known for simplicity. Decoration in the form of paintings, icons and statues was absolutely minimal and preferably not there at all.
Other monastic orders allowed more of a feast for the eye. The very opposite situation was found in the Benedictine Baroque of the 17th and 18th centuries. The Baroque and Rococo are a bit gaudy for my taste. I guess I appreciate architecture for what it is and for its time, but may churches look like sacred spaces and not secular auditoriums or stadia.
J
JReducation
Guest
There is also a matter of taste and comfort. I for one feel comfortable, if there is no battle of styles. If you take St. Patrick Cathedral and you install an altar the has very modern lines, no matter how beautiful, it will be an eyesore. It just does not work in a Gothic Cathedral.
However, when I was at school at Catholic University, we had the Shrine of the Immaculate Conception, which doubled as chapel and auditorium for the university. The shrine, despite its Romaneque style, not exactly what you would call old looking. It is very modern architecture. It’s chapels are very modern and its figures and art forms are very modern. But it is very consistent throughout the main nave. It’s art blends tradition with modern very smoothly, so that it’s not offensive to the eyes.
Now, the parish at which I work does not have a church and will not have one for ten more years. We have a multi-purpose building that doubles as a church. It is very pretty. The sanctuary is simple, but dignified. The tabernacle is very interesting. It’s very visible. But it’s not a typical style. It’s built into the wall. The door is very outstanding. It works quite well, for the time being, because you can divide the room when you have another parish activity. Again, it all blends well. Even the few statues blend well, because they are made with very simple lines as is the whole building. Some people don’t like it, because it’s not St. Patrick. But as I said, for me, as long as there is not a war of styles, I’m ok.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
However, when I was at school at Catholic University, we had the Shrine of the Immaculate Conception, which doubled as chapel and auditorium for the university. The shrine, despite its Romaneque style, not exactly what you would call old looking. It is very modern architecture. It’s chapels are very modern and its figures and art forms are very modern. But it is very consistent throughout the main nave. It’s art blends tradition with modern very smoothly, so that it’s not offensive to the eyes.
Now, the parish at which I work does not have a church and will not have one for ten more years. We have a multi-purpose building that doubles as a church. It is very pretty. The sanctuary is simple, but dignified. The tabernacle is very interesting. It’s very visible. But it’s not a typical style. It’s built into the wall. The door is very outstanding. It works quite well, for the time being, because you can divide the room when you have another parish activity. Again, it all blends well. Even the few statues blend well, because they are made with very simple lines as is the whole building. Some people don’t like it, because it’s not St. Patrick. But as I said, for me, as long as there is not a war of styles, I’m ok.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
R
Renko
Guest
I have been in such churches like the one you are talking about, and I believe they are downright disgusting, some look like an old cowbarn. and I am not exagerting in the least.
Modern! Yeah right. I would never belong to such a church.
Modern! Yeah right. I would never belong to such a church.
J
JReducation
Guest
Well we have over 1500 families who consider this their spiritual home. They know that it’s a temporary arrangement and they make the best of it.I have been in such churches like the one you are talking about, and I believe they are downright disgusting, some look like an old cowbarn. and I am not exagerting in the least.
Modern! Yeah right. I would never belong to such a church.
We have 7 masses each weekend. The building seats 800. All the seats are taken. At the evening mass, which is for the young people, we have more than 800 between teens and their parents. We have 73 different ministries and a small school grades pre-k to three. On Thurs evenings we have adoration for the youth and adults who can’t attend adoration during the day on Fri. There are usually about 300 people at adoration and most are youth and their parents.
Many people say that one thing that draws them to the parish is the liturgy, adoration, the care for the poor and the fact that the brothers share the poverty of the parish. This was a parish that no one wanted to take. The brothers agreed to take it and build it up without salaries. What they eat is what is donated. They only get money from the parish to pay for utilities. Their habits and furnishings are provided through donations. If they don’t get enough food for all of them, they spit it among five. All money that enters the parish is split between paying bills, paying the mortgage for the porperty and putting a little aside for the future church. It will take about 10 years to get enough money.
We don’t make anyone attend the parish. But people come. I serve there about 9 hours a week. The rest of the time I’m at some respect life ministry. But they’re our brothers who run it and we support them by helping them keep costs down so they can save for the future church. Three of us who live about two miles away, each donate 5 to 10 hours a week to the 5 brothers there and we work with the parishioners in simple things like caring for the grounds other tasks that would cost money. The parishioners are awesome, despite the appearance of the temporary church.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
S
Soutane
Guest
Before our present parish of St John Bosco was built,masses were held in a Quonset Hut.Wherever the Body Blood Soul and Divinity resides in the Sacramental Form,there IS the Catholic Church.All else is straw.
J
JReducation
Guest
I would never say that I would not belong to a church or attend mass at a parish, because the building is ugly. It’s not about the building and it’s not about me. It’s about Christ and the Church. Like our own parish and many parishes that are broke. There are reasons why they have to use modulers, huts and multipurpose buildings. But when you’re there and you see a living breathing Catholic community that is full of life and you encounter the Eucharist, you have entered the Church. We must always be careful not to fall into a sin of arrogance. Walking away from something or from a community because it’s not to our satisfaction can lead us to fall into spiritual arrogance. We must think as Christ thinks. He prayed in the synogogue and on the mountain.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
J
jorgeraul3
Guest
I’ve been to a church with a dirt floor some walls made of brick and others of adobe. There was three benches, if you wanted to make sure you got a seat you had to bring something from home. Some of the roof over the altar was complete, other parts just had wood and no shingles and the very back was just covered with a plastic tarp.
That church was beautiful, the Eucharist was there and that’s all that really mattered.
That church was beautiful, the Eucharist was there and that’s all that really mattered.
R
reggieM
Guest
While that may be completely true in your case (and I would not doubt it), I have heard the same thing said many times and I can only regard it is a lame excuse at best, and an outright lie for the majority of times. My proof? The same parish that claims to be “broke” wastes money to remove altar rails, high altars and tabernacles. More importantly, a brief survey of the parking-lot after Mass shows a prevalence of Lexuses, BMWs, Mercedes and other pricey cars – which, while there is nothing at all wrong with owning any of them (as some need to in various lines of work - especially sales), its obvious that if the parish is supposedly too broke to afford a decent building in which to worship God, then it’s because nobody (from the priest to the lay-ministers to the flock) cares at all. Beyond that, they like going to church in a dump because they don’t have to take it seriously. Their own homes are decked out with the latest upgrades and they look splendid. Meanwhile, they worship Christ in a multipurpose room that is not even attractive enough to host a high-school basketball game.
So again, this was all done by design. Many people simply hated the old architecture and they were clamoring for huts, cinder-block boxes and meeting room churches. This, supposedly, was going to make Catholicism “more relevant to the common man”. Instead, it made Catholicism appear as a joke to many – who eventually left the Church. The fact that a parish puts time, effort and money into beautifying a church building means that they care, and they want others to experience the beauty of faith (through that one aspect – sacred liturgical art). It brings a sense of unity to the community and it shows a true reverence to the majesty of God.
Simple church buildings, appointed tastefully but not extravagantly are not what I’m talking about either. Certainly, the monastic, sparse style has an ancient pedigree and is quite wonderful for prayer and worship.
But I’m talking about the deliberate ugly, bland, neo-modernist cubicles that are designed to frustrate prayer and create a “sociable” atmosphere. This was done on purpose, and when the very many people who had to live with it began to complain, the parishes claimed that suddently, they were “too broke” to create something good.
We can then look at the churches built in the U.S in the 20s and 30s – during the depression in many cases, and see how magnificent they really are. Then we’re supposed to believe that churches built in the 1960s had to be made out of the cheapest materials and weakest design because everybody supposedly was “too poor” to create something of high quality and value.
… this post deserves a very non-smiley. I good rare chance to use one.
:bighanky:
J
JReducation
Guest
I do not disagree that there is often carelessness. There is also a fact that we can’t force people to put more money in the collection basket, even if they have it. But until we know what is going on in a specific situation, it is not good for our own inner peace to make a rash judgment.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
H
Holly3278
Guest
Exactly but Catholic Churches should still be beautiful. After all, they are where our Lord resides in the form of the Eucharist.
R
reggieM
Guest
At the same time, we shouldn’t assume that every analysis and evaluation of reality should be considered a “rash judgement” either. That tends to destroy the meaning of the term.
- Status