Post intelligent and civil comments. Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the NLM
"...two-way tabernacle and Eucharistic broom-cupboard stuffed to one side, the net result of which is at least half the congregation has turned their backs on the reserved Lord."
Not to mention the Adoration Chapel (and Our Lord) is somehow strategically placed next to the toilet.
In the first drawing, the altar is labeled as a "table," which indicates the mindset with which the project was approached.
Even as cathedrals go, it doesn't work very well--where's the cathedra? Surely they know the presider's sedilia doesn't do double duty in a cathedral!
Cutting edge if this were the 1960s. Pathetic. Tom
I have been learning more and more about the Extraordinary Form and the traditional practices of the Church. The statement regarding the silent recitation of the Our Father caught my eye, as I have been wondering about it. Could any one direct me to somewhere that I can read more about this practice (or offer your thoughts)?
So the little square thingy off to one side labeled "table" is actually supposed to be the altar? The whole proposal is like a parody.
Where's the confessionals?
And do the pastor and asst. pastor really need double beds?
There is something called "Rec. Chapel" next to the Blessed Sacrament that could possibly be some kind of "confessional."
According to the architecture it would seem that they would not be promoting frequent sacramental confession anyways, but rather frequent gatherings (in the gathering space) in which people confess to each other theirs and everybody else's sins.
Where's the pipe organ?
Re the silent recitation of the Pater--I believe it is in the Divine Office and a number of longer blessings in the Extraordinary Form. As far as I know, the only *liturgical* instance (as opposed to the Rosary, etc.) where the whole thing is said aloud (as opposed to just the opening lines and then V. And Lead us Not into temptation R. But deliver us from evil) is in the Mass itself. The idea is that it was only recited fully aloud during the Mass of the Faithful, after all the catechumens had departed. I don't know whether that's an ex post facto rationalization but it seems believable to me.
In all fairness, sometimes people like large beds. In fact, double beds are seldom used for two people these days, with queens and kings preferred. Many of the children's rooms I've been asked to design in large houses have double beds in them and there's nothing untoward about it.
Looks like an hotel or an airport from the 70s. I've seen much more beautiful shopping malls: perhaps this should not be surprising insofar as they are the temples of this perverse generation...
This looks like a massive undertaking. Matthew, any idea how much the whole she-bang would run?
Pipe organ found. See the second floor blue print, for the location of the platform.
The second-floor plan has the pipe organ loft.
The terminology on the floor plan leaves MUCH to be desired. Terms like "presider" and "table" are non-sacral.
The tabernacle appears to be an afterthought. It, and the chapel which houses it, are right near the bathroom. I don't see any rooms designated for confession, nor any confessionals along the walls of the nave; the exception is the "Rec. Chapel" (which isn't a chapel, as far as I can tell) and which one can only access via the Blessed Sacrament Chapel, and which is ALSO right up against the bathrooms.
The Weekday Chapel has antiphonal seating, which seems out of place (unless the purpose is to have people looking at each other whole time). It appears to have two keyboards (compare with the main "worship area" which has a piano and a keyboard).
In both Mass-chapels, the altar ("table") is off-center. This hearkens back to EACW which proposes that an off-center altar "may be a good solution in many cases". What cases? What solution?
It's a shambles.
They still don't seem able to work out that the "Table of the Word" and the "Table of the Eucharist" are one and the same Table. The poor things, they must really be dull...
In the "old days" the Pater Noster was always said/sung by the celebrant alone, with Good Friday being the one exception. Could be wrong, but that's what memory serves.
Comparison to Protestants is not usually helpful, but I will venture out here to say that this resembles the wrong sort of Protestant edifice. It's like the meeting space for the non-liturgical kind of self-help Christianity you see on the television.
On the positive side, it was thoughtful to provide a place to store the choir when its not animating (I'm sure that there's a groovier word than that, but I'm dashed if I can recall it)the community...
Hope I haven't been too frivolous...
To illustrate my previous comment, compare Joel Osteen's building. (Hoping the link works).
http://www.lakewood.cc/site/
Page...=LCH_floorplans
Terth and Matthew,
the practice of not saying the Pater aloud in front of the unbaptized was part of the disciplina arcani. The disciplina arcani also plays in important rôle in accounting for teachings/practices (the epiclesis e.g., if I remember correctly) for which there are no early written witnisses. You can read about it, e.g., in the Catholic Encyclopedia here: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/...then/
05032a.htm
Also cf. the Crystal Cathedral. http://www.pbase.com/peterkwok/i.../image/
32102951
Matthew, I'm not sure how much information you were given, or what confidences might have been sought, but is there any indication that this firm has designed Catholic churches previously? It is as if they took a standard blue print and dropped a couple things in it that would be necessary for liturgy.
Will--yes. But we're talking about it being said by the celebrant *silently* which is, as Gregor said, an additional aspect and related to the disciplina arcani.
Re several questioners:
I have very little info on the client, the budget, the architectural firm or even the diocese. I don't know who designed it or what the background is; all this comes from a reader who got info on it as part of a money request in the mail. Anyone who knows more, please let us know.
Did anyone notice that "Sacrament" is misspelled in the "Blessed Sacrement [sic] Chapel?"
This is just a pitiful effort. The ugliest Catholic church I have ever seen is in Paris, but this makes that look good! And the non-central altar -- please!
In an attempt to look for the good in this situation, I suggest we should all be thankful that Mike Brady can still find work.
This isnt Catholic. This isnt even Protestant.
The center of attention is clearly the "presider" (wait, I thought the point of modernist architecture was to de-emphasize the clergy?), the Altar-table isnt even centered and the Blessed Sacrament is hidden off to the side.
Why is there a multipurpose hall attached to this church- err, I mean, communal worship center- the entire thing serves that purpose.
Honestly, the Taj Mahony in LA is more Catholic then this!
actually the basilica of s. peter in rome is not much different in design. except that it does not have pews stuck to the floor permanently. in the churches i attend mass the priest always has his back to the reserved sacrament. if mass would be celebrated ad orientem this would not be the case. so it is priests who are daily encouraging that practice. if half the pews were eliminated in this design and kept in the back then the people could stand around the altar for the eucharistic prayer and it would be more real. otherwise it is just an illusion of community and promotes laziness, donothingness, and priestcenteredness...the hallmarks of clericalism. as for the word 'table' for altar...even in the eastern rites it is known as a table. you can have something big made of marble but, when combined with clericalism, it is nothing more than marble methodism.
In the East it is known as the Holy Table to be precise and of course it is typically veiled, etc. That is fairly significant.
As for standing around the altar, there is really no need for it, and if they are in the sanctuary it is actually contrary to the GIRM and a liturgical abuse.
I think that's actually a three-way tabernacle: main church, daily Mass chapel, and Blessed Sacrament chapel. That's gotta be a record!
The "mechanical fan room" is also directly above the Blessed Sacrament chapel and the Daily Mass altar. That's a recipe for disaster when the heat/AC kicks in. Or, maybe these guys are promoting an inaudible Canon.
If they *really* wanted the altar in the midst of the people (on three sides, that is) there are dozens of older precedents they could have recourse to without destroying the vertical relationship of the design and without deviating too far from the received traditional norm; Seville Cathedral and St. Peter's (which have variously rejas and a baldachin to demarcate the altar) come to mind. They could have achieved a somewhat centralized plan and an altar close to the people without destroying a sense of hierarchy. They took the easy way out.
I live in Saskatoon and sent these sketches to Shawn yesterday. The project is projected to cost $28.5 million. This building will also serve as the Chancery office for the diocese. It is not uncommon in Saskatoon to see the sanctuary arranged with the altar on one side of the sanctuary and the ambo on the other. I do not know which architectural firm was hired to design this monstrosity, but the current pastor of Holy Family Parish (which this building will replace) is the diocesan liturgical director and has been intimately involved in the designing of the building. Here's the contact info of the parish given on the diocesan website:
Holy Family
110 - 104th Street, Saskatoon, SK S7N 1M8 Ph: 374-7981 Fax: 374-5335
E-mail: holyfamily@shaw.ca
Web: http://www.holy-family.ca/
Pastor: Rev. David Tumback E-mail: dtumback@sasktel.net
The diocesan website can be found here: http://saskatoonrcdiocese.com/index.cfm
Also, if you look carefully at the sketches, you'll see that the floor is sloped like an amphitheater. Are you not entertained?
Also, if you look carefully at the sketches, you'll see that the floor is sloped like an amphitheater. Are you not entertained?
Strictly Anonymous
One of my first thoughts on seeing this was to compare it with a theatre.
simply abhorrent....If the Holy Father were to mandate an Extraordinary form Mass in EVERY church I bet we would not see this rise from the blueprints this way...Let's keep praying for that mandate..
$28.5 million?!!! On that horrible mess??? That's only a little less than (if I recall correctly) the cost of the entire Guadalupe Shrine in LaCrosse!
On the other hand,
Sascatoon Diocese has less than 100K Roman Catholics, in a vast, wind-swept plain. It is a wheat growing breadbasket of Canada and it is possible to see something of a plow in the upward sweep of the bell tower.
In any case, it seems as if the bishop is making the cathedral also the site of his residence and office. One can assume as well that eventually a school will emerge.
As pointed out above, the church itself does resemble the centre of St. Peter's in Rome. And, St. Peter's wasn't built in a day. As time goes by, more will be added to this complex and I think it fits both the needs of the Diocese and the future.
And, in terms of the bathrooms, may I respectfully repeat the words of Blessed Pope John XXIII when he first saw the renderings for the then new North American College in Rome:
"Angeli non sunt."
Face it, folks. Sick minds think up sick floor plans like this. I couldn't care less what anyone else thinks but this is total mental-patient stuff. It's like the Los Angeles Cathedral. There is a deliberate off-centeredness to everything. Walking down the "nave" one has this feeling his equalibrium is off. It's boring and it's ugly. No doubt Saskatoon's cathedral will be the same way.
I hate to write this, but there is a world represented by the New Liturgical Movement and its readers and another beyond and this dreadful design for a new cathedral, retrogressive though it is, embodies it. Even sadder is that it would probably be approved in Rome. Some years ago I visited all the new churches built in the outskirts of the diocese in recent years, including the Jubilee Church. They were appalling. This abomination would have fitted like a glove.
Donald, what about the drawing resembles St. Peter's? I do not see it, and if I am wrong I would be glad to be corrected.
Yeah, I have to say that even as a Protestant, this design is not conducive to good worship. I'm actually all for the abolition of pews in our worship spaces, in favor of chairs that can be arranged or removed for various liturgical activities, and for one end of the room to be reserved strictly for sacramental activities. Worship in the round rarely works, unless the altar in the centre is immovable.
Um, why doesn't the sacristy open directly into the sanctuary?
Sorry to be off topic (but where else could I go?) - regarding the silent Pater: why would it be said silently in the Mass of the Faithful if the point of its silence is to keep it from being "taken" by others, etc. There are other instances I've seen - the Churching of Women, the Rite of Marriage in the Extraordinary Form. Aren't these places where it "could" be said out loud. I could see if it was praxis to say it silently in the streets, etc., but why these times, which signal to me to imply every time. (N.b. - I haven't read that thing from New Advent yet; and I'm not advocating for an out loud Pater, I'm just inquiring about what is foreign to me.)
At least the font is remotely near the door...
Maybe it's time for me to swim the Bosphorous.
I think I've seen this before...
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/
i...dralbody203.jpg
Let's not compare this monstruosity with the wonderful Basilica of St Peter!
Terth--no, it's said aloud during the Mass of the Faithful, and I thought it was usually silent elsewhere (though Dom Christopher tells me in the Monastic office it's chanted, so clearly there are exceptions. I don't know if in the rite of marriage it is said aloud or silently; in the '64 Roman ritual there's a lot of places where it says "Our Father (and then silently until) And lead us not into temptation."
Bob--calm down. Things are on the mend.
Thank you, dear Matthew; it'll take a lot more than this cathedral to make me do that, or the Thames!
I'm grateful for your encouragement, dear man. Love to you!
This thing is just awful. Too many bad things to comment on. My first reaction to the rendering was to notice the cars before the people.
SOOO responsible in this time of $4+ gas to build a church that apparently everyone MUST drive to. Such great stewardship and ministry to the poor. Pardon me, but isn't Saskatoon a CITY? and couldn't they build it in said city?
Reaction to the architecture though is that it looks like it was built by either A. a local architect, or B. a "ecclesiastical expert" who builds for every denomination under the sun. Every cookie-cutter and cliche detail possible and not a drop of true symbolic depth or artistry.
Wait... What was at all dissapointing about the new cathedral in houston?
This "cathedral" = another case of the bland leading the bland. Take the time to email the diocese, and send along contact info for Stroik, et al.
I agree that this design is dated and quite ugly and non-liturgical. One would think the people responsible would be more careful to read the "signs of the times"
I disagree with the author's remarks about the new cathedral in Houston which is quite beautiful and full of traditional art.
That altar arangement reminds me of St. Joseph's Cathedral in Sioux Falls, South Dakota.
To see some pictures of it go to http://www.massoftheages.org/
Chr...masGallery.html
it is funny that you refer to standing around the altar as "contrary to the GIRM and a liturgical abuse". when people attend papal masses in the basilica of s. pietro almost all of them are sitting on plastic chairs and standing for the eucharistic prayer. the high altar is in the center and there are people standing around it on all sides. there weren't even chairs for them in previous centuries. they stood and genuflected or knelt on the ground. but they stood in a natural crowd not in a meetinghouse style arrangement. how amazing that johnpaulii, who introduced to the world the practice of repeated masses with people standing in stadiums and fields would then introduce the GIRM and force people to kneel at the individual parish level. what a contradiction...and also the end of the novus ordo. The GIRM is the transformation of the postvaticanii church into an allout form of grim, stonefaced nineteenth century protestantism...which was the initial goal in the firstplace...
I Love NY - I'm so sorry that the ambo and "people's altar" are immovable.
If you want to one that may be even worse, go to St Gianna's parish in Winnipeg and check out the video. The best part is the way that B16's words from The Spirit of the Liturgy are right underneath.
http://www.stgianna.ca/
Don't knock it too much. To paraphrase what one priest said of a local analogue, once the current Bishop retires, it will be turned into the most wonderful airport terminal...
Placing the Blessed Sacrament in such proximity to the toilets tells you a lot about how they are thinking here I'd say.
Canada got off easy.
Just came back from my hometown on vacation: Oakland, CA.
$125M for an oblong, upside-down mosaic, steel/glass BUCKET with fenceposts surrounding what clearly does not resemble an icthus, but does a football. Best hope scenario: it will look like the Lombardi trophy and they'll rethink the whole "Christ, Our Light" moniker and redub it "Our Lady of the Raiders."
But that would do the Raiders an injustice.
Wish I was kidding. It's truly a travesty sitting upon the best real estate in Oaktown, Lake Merritt.
I cannot believe Bsp. Vigneron bought this whole mess. Oh, the website and their diocesesan glossies dress things up, but I'll sum up with the words of my wife: "Where's Christ in THAT?"
Four words: Lex orandi, lex credendi.
Matthew: You're right - it is said aloud in Holy Mass. Sorry, I guess I was confusing it with the fact that *I* don't pray it out loud. (How selfish of me. See how much I still have to learn?) But, still, it's done silently in the Rite of Marriage and also in the Churching of Women (which there seems most ... odd, for lack of a better term).
Just so none of you think less of me - boy that's an ugly church. It evokes nothing of thoughts of heaven and everything of thoughts of a non-denominational pavilion chapel at a campsite.
Interesting...I've met the bishop of Saskatoon - this seems out of character
The one idea that I like is that the Diocese Offices are attached to the Cathedral. Imagine if the Bishop mandated that all employees go to Mass before the beginning of the work day, or in the middle of the workday right before lunch. Or if an employee had a problem during the day they could quickly stop in and have a prayer near the Blessed Sacrament. That would be a blessing that would come from this.
Michael--Houston Cathedral is a step in the right direction, but it is to traditional architecture what Richard Proulx is to chant. Not bad, but could be so much better. God is in the details.
Well unless anyone is expecting some construction company to build a clone of the Cologne Cathedral in a few years, i think the houston cathedral is beautiful. It is the right shape, a good size, and is full of traditional decorations. Yet, it doesnt look antique at all. It looks brand new, modern, and up to date, yet proudly displays catholic tradition. I think it presents exactly the right message: our timeless catholic tradition can work beautifully in every setting, because it transcends time and space.
Regarding the new Oakland CA Cathedral: I wonder what would happen to all that glass in an earthquake? I've seen renderings and I frankly don't like it. That's a personal opinion and I am not an architect.
Across the Bay, the Cathedral in San Francisco finally "fits" the skyline. When it was first built, the Archbishop, Joseph McGucken, was actually a trained architect. It was hugely controversial in its day, but is now rather beloved. Perhaps because of all the many, many Sacraments celebrated there over the decades. Or, perhaps the late archbishop, hardly a liberal, was prescient?
I would imagine that when they tore down the original St. Peter's in Rome, there was an outcry. I do remember reading that when the current basilica was built, it indirectly led to the Reformation.
IMHO, it was worth the Reformation.
Final thought for the day: the Basilica Cathedral of the Resurrection (Church of the Holy Sepulchre) in Jerusalem could hardly be called beautiful. Yet, what happened under those domes changed the world.
Perhaps, buildings are not so important as the Faith? Sometimes I fantasize that we would be better off if we went back to house churches.
Pax vobiscum.
It must be a bad night...First, I read about these modern, thoughtless Cathedral plans, then I saw coverage of the 49th International Eucharist Conference on EWTN...rhythmic gymnasts with ribbons as part of the procession and a round modern altar...what is going on with our church? When is enough enough?
This looks like nothing more than a humungeous evangelical mega church-worship centre. Perhaps those are the expertise of this architect. Catholic it is'nt.The focus of our worship is Christ in the Eucharist, but they've put Him next to the loo. Rome needs to get busy with the decrees, because the Holy Father's lead-by-example approach is being ignored for the most part.The Eucharistic congress is a travesty of 1970's style full-out wacko liturgical abuse.Also-as for do-nothingness and clericalness- is that reader unaware that there are prayers to recite throughout the mass, besides paying attention.You don't need to be dancing and singing- it is'nt about US!
dont give them a penny, personally i have slept every night of my life in a single bed would the cure dars or st aloysius have a double bed certainly not and they would have taken the mattress off and slept on the wooden base
Yes, the decrees do need to come.
Andrew: I have nothing against modernity, but the detailing is clunky and dull, the marble veneering on the exterior excessive and flashy (money could have been spent on a proper baldachin instead); while nobody is expecting ornamentation on the level of Cologne Cathedral, a more interesting attempt to alleviate the blankness and badly-transitioned elements of many of the architectural forms used with a few simple moldings to serve for transition would have done wonders. It is the difference between "okay" and "masterpiece." The overall affect is not bad and the basic shape quite good, and many of the forms and proportions are in the right direction, but it is not enough to be merely 'adequate.' It is a diagram that has not been fully fleshed out.
People shouldn't modernize traditional architecture without a thorough grounding in its original form first; it's the difference between a Disneyesque approach and, for instance, some of the fine streamlined work done by Arthur Brown Jr. at the end of his career. [for instance, Coit Tower: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ima...:
Coit_Tower.JPG]
Also, it is not enough to just have traditional content--the forms must be of a good quality, and the art integrated into the design; plus, there are many aspects of the church which are not traditional (the naked altar without canopy, the odd font placement, etc.) and one may rightly question, given the historic old cathedral, if it was necessary at all.
How come the women get more toilets in their privvy than do the men?
How come the women get more toilets in their privvy than do the men?
Um... because women don't use urinals? I think that's a pretty standard practical consideration.
They make the presider's chair central, place the "table" (altar) to one side, and make the tabernacle a nitch in the wall that you pass on your way to the toilet, far from the center of the church and placed in such a way that most of the congregation has their back to it. I suppose the seats behind the presider are for the choir. What's probably not shown are giant TV screens where they can project the hymn texts. I'd be willing to be there will be no kneelers, and since the grand piano is given more prominence than the tabernacle, we can assume that most hymns would be accompanied by piano rather than organ (if indeed there IS an organ).
Hmm... it doesn't look like it will encourage people to pray.
SF St. Mary's fits the skyline now?
Our Lady of Maytag? Hmmmm.
Still looks funky from the Mission district to me; especially when you're in proximity to Mission Dolores.
Nice organ there, though. Hope the acoustical ambience has been improved over the last two decades since I sang there.
The nave - or perhaps more accurately, the 'worship space' - of this abomination appears to have historically its near antecedent in that of the inverted funnel that is the Cathedral of Christ the King in Liverpool.
It is things like these that should make us all realize that the battle for liturgical sanity is far from over. In fact, the worst years may just be ahead of us.
Oakland Cathedral. Saskatoon Cathedral. Sydney Cathedral (although at a far lesser scale). These misdirected renovations and constructions are occuring even as some of us speak and act as if a new TLM-only era is just about to begin.
Even as we celebrate in ecstasy about the London Pontifical Mass (which is doubtless an occasion for rejoicing), a far larger event and, for the moment, a more influential event -- the International Eucharistic Congress in Quebec -- is taking place. If you care to take a peek at EWTN's TV coverage, it is obvious that the liturgy there is being celebrated in the complete absence of any influence from the teaching or example of the current Pontiff.
Shawn wrote:
"This, on the other hand, is St. Jetson and All Rockets, or Our Lady of the Crashed Millenium Falcon."
)(
We can only hope this is also a tornado target.
Anon wrote:
"It must be a bad night... First, I read about these modern, thoughtless Cathedral plans, then I saw coverage of the 49th International Eucharist Conference on EWTN... rhythmic gymnasts with ribbons as part of the procession and a round modern altar... what is going on with our church? When is enough enough?"
When Rome gets a SPINE and says enough is enough. Until then, no end in sight.
Carolos wrote:
"If you care to take a peek at EWTN's TV coverage, it is obvious that the liturgy ( of the International Eucharistic Congress in Quebec ) is being celebrated in the complete absence of any influence from the teaching or example of the current Pontiff."
This is because that mental giant Pierro Marini is in charge of the whole thing and is a complete manifestation of that silly mentality of his.
Today's Divine Liturgy in the Byzantine rite was magnificent, even if the celebrants were having to figure out how to worship in the round. May this congress be Marini's swan song...back on topic,if the Canadian prelates permitted this Congress mess, no wonder a design like this is permissable. Also, St. Peter's is a church of altars, all properly placed. The Papal altar everyone knows is where it is due to it's positioning over the Tomb of St. Peter.And with the return of the proper altar arrangement, one side is really shut off from the congregation. So it cannot be used for justifying any other such altar placement...
Not to get picky, Matt, but Shawn will be the first to tell you he didn't write this item, I did. There's more than one person on this blog! (Though I know I need to post more frequently!)
This seems to be the new design for Catholic Churches of the 21st century, I suppose. Here in southwestern Illinois they are building a new Catholic church because the current church (from the mid 1800s) is "too small". They have plans for an octagonal church building (which, they claim, is the historical shape to symbolize the 8th day, when Jesus rose). AND the tabernacle will be located in a side chapel, NOT in the sanctuary. Ewwwww . . .
Here is the page about the church:
http://www.icc-columbia-il.us/
bu...ding_church.htm
I don't know if the floorplan is on the webpage (I can't seem to find it), but it looks strikingly close to the one for the cathedral mentioned in this blog entry.
But what can we realistically do? All the more reason that I cling to the Extraordinary form because the modern mass and its architectural novelties lead to more and more disrespect for the Eucharist and a negation of the glorious treasures that our Church Tradition has left us.
May God grant Pope Benedict many long years as he cleans up the mess that has become the Catholic Church . . .
I've visited Saskatoon and I lived in Canada briefly so I'll address a few things mentioned in this thread.
About the cars: Saskatoon is a city but it's a small city that's very spread out. They do have a public bus system but it's not very convenient outside of the (very small) downtown area. The Diocese of Saskatoon encompasses much more than the city - it's about a third of the province of Saskatchewan. Outside of Saskatoon it's all farms and prairieland. You need a car to get around, even in Saskatoon. The cathedral needs to have an ample sized parking lot to accommadate all those who wish to worship there. The only place to build a cathedral large enough for the needs of the Diocese is to build it on the outskirts of the city - where there's no public transportation.
The Tabernacle: I visited a few churches in Saskatoon and in every one the tabernacle was not in the sanctuary nor was it visible from the nave. Only one of them had a Blessed Sacrament Chapel and it was in a very out-of-the-way location and hard to find. Another church had it in a small, walled-off space behind the sanctuary. In another it was in the sacristy (the only one where the sacristy led into the sanctuary).
The Sacristy: In all but the one I mentioned above the sacristy was located outside the nave in the vestibule (or space used as a vestibule) or in the very back of the nave. The good thing is that forces the priest and acolytes to always process in and out. The bad thing is that it forces the priest and acolytes to always process in and out.
The Confessional: The smaller churches had them in the nave. It's usually a small closet where you have a choice of a screen or face-to-face. Never could find it in the bigger church. It wasn't in the nave as far as I could tell.
Fans: The prairies can get very hot in the summer. Unbelievably hot. Yes, even that far up north. A/C is a must.
Bathrooms: Of course the ladies room is bigger than the men's room. It has to be. Have you ever seen the ladies room line at intermission at a concert or a play? Having more toilets does alieviate this.
Liturgies at the Eucharistic Congress: *Sigh* Par for the course I'm afraid. In my experience the vibrant, orthodox churches in Canada are the charismatic ones. They tend to not be interested in liturgical matters and may even introduce things that are tacky at best or skirting the boundaries of liturgical abuse at worst. FSSP parishes are too few and too far between up there to have much, if any, impact. I've never visited the Toronto Oratory but even so, it's only one church in one place. Seriously folks, the Church in Canada needs our prayers.
Looking at these plans I'm very much reminded of Holy Spirit Parish in Saskatoon (one of the churches I visited). It's the largest church in Saskatoon at present. It's as if they've blown it up and added the chancery offices on the side. The pipe organ, choir, and piano are in the same place in relation to the sanctuary as in Holy Spirit (off to the right in the front when you walk in, or upstage left to use a theatrical term.) The vestibule leads into the foyer that leads to the parish hall with no discernable separation - it all flows together. That is the church where I couldn't find the confessional. Nor could I positively pinpoint where the Blessed Sacrament was kept there either. The pews were cushioned and yes, they did have kneelers. They were used too. I would expect the same for this cathedral.
Saskatoon needs a new cathedral. The Catholic population up there has grown exponentially, making the current one too small for events like ordinations. That's a good thing. When I was told that there were plans to build a new cathedral I was genuinely happy for them. But I soon realized that what would be built probably would not reflect anything Benedict XVI has been teaching us about the liturgy by word and example. These plans are my worst fears realized.
Church-in-the-round: what a catchy idea. Consider this blight upon the land for DECADES to come in Saskatoon. Imagine the liturgies an abomination like this will evoke! The 'enthusiasm' is virtually palpable, and these are but the floor plans! The mind pales.
wow, what a trainwreck!
it appears as though the bishop chose the ugliest building he could find and then asked his flock to pony up 30 million dollars.
sadly, this has become all too typical.
The exterior profile reminds me of the hideous Clifton Cathedral (which is incongruously situated at the end of an elegant Georgian terrace - it amazes me how it got planning consent, but then, it was during the '70s).
As to the proposed building, one just has to look at Mark G. Boyer's depressing book, 'The Liturgical Environment: What the Documents Say'(Liturgical Press, 2004), to see where the inspiration comes from. Isn't there a cathedral somewhere in the US which doesn't have a proper cathedra, because the Ordinary thinks that every "presidential chair" is effectively a cathedra, or something like that?
As to round altars, there are quite a few in Hong Kong. They are carved out of wood, sometimes with a marble disk inlaid on the top, and are modelled on traditional domestic dining tables, which are round. I don't like them at all, but since the Holy Father celebrated Mass on a round altar during Lent I suppose they're probably here to stay, regardless of the law.
Regarding Confess, I am not surprised that there will be no confessionals in the new church. I have been to a couple dioceses' websites from central Canada and they all insist that children receive first Communion before first Confession. They seem to refuse to take the clear directives from the Vatican. God have mercy. At my Cathedral, thank God but I'm not telling where it is, we have a traditional confessional. It is seated in a slightly larger room, if that makes any sense. One can have face to face confession, but when one enters, they cannot be identify until they sit down in the chair. Praise God, it is a little embarassing to kneel for confession when there is no actual confessional.
Pray for Canada
My three primary impressions and critiques of the Saskatoon Cathedral plans:
1) There is an obvious gap and rupture from what is largely familiar to Catholic sensibilities and tradition, thereby, giving a definite sense of a created fabrication.
2) Along with fabrication comes over-rationalization to try and force these plans into a Catholic mold which we have experienced over the past 40 years and we know it never works when there is such a large rupture from Catholic tradition. In fact, it has proven to be very harmful to the formation and piety of the faithful.
3) Finally, and I think one of the most important basic principles lacking, is the acknowledgement and understanding of objective truth and beauty. Both of which naturally raise ones heart and soul to God, Our Heavenly Father. Objective beauty cannot be forced nor rationalized, it just is, we see it in creation, and God created us with such innate sensibilities. Many studies have been done which prove over and over again the philosophy of objective beauty. Simple things like equal symmetry, balance, texture, and colour, play very important roles in how humans are drawn into an awe-inspiring state. The external vision of the Saskatoon Cathedral itself is offensive to objective beauty and even the first most basic principle of beauty is missing - symmetry.
"We're knights of the Round Table..."
Round altars are totally against custom and probably contra legem as well considering the four crosses at the dedication are supposed to be incised at the corners. I saw one at San Lorenzo when I was in Rome some years back, the one the Pope celebrated on. It is quite handsomely carved but totally untraditional and rather silly. The Temple altar had 'horns' (corners) after all. I imagine the Pope couldn't do much about the one he celebrated mass on (though I note Msgr Marini even managed to squeeze a cross onto its top!)
Deborah makes some great points. Objectively, even setting aside questions of style (which are important) the building is bad architecture: traffic flow is totally crazy (the day chapel is in the back? How do you get to it without going through a maze of hallways?), there's asymmetry everywhere, and there's a plethora of oddly-shaped or even triangular rooms. People, scientific studies have documented, feel very uncomfortable in triangular rooms.
The confessional is marked rec. Room and is just off the side of the adoration chapel, just like at Holy Spirit Parish in Saskatoon.
Aargh, this is reminiscent of what I've seen and heard about St. Mary Maytag in California, the thing that resembles the agitator of a washing machine.
Alas, the stop-sign octagon seems to be a pathetic replacement to a traditional cruciform shape. When the local planners at St. Francis in Bend, OR asked for input from the congregation, I offered my opinion that a cruciform shape was very important. I was summarily ignored; and our plans are now a new large stop-sign.
:{(
It seems that most of the Catholics in the Americas and Canaca are resisting tradition as much as possible. I can say this about my own parish priest who has destroyed the liturgy because its to hot to hold a proper mass in an unairconditioned church. This being said, the sad proposal being discussed here is of no shock to me.
The Tabernacle ACTUALLY looks as if it is a THREE sided: one facing the interior of the church, one facing the Blessed Sacrament Chapel, and one facing the Weekday Chapel.
What is it with Stop sign designed Churches. I was successful in stopping a stop sign chapel from being built two years ago.
The key is to shine the light on what is most true, not what is partially true. The other aspect is that people pay for beauty. This is a powerful argument. People don't want to give their money to a shoddy project, but will if pressured to do so by their bishop.
The thing to do is to have Dr. Denis McNamara from the liturgical institute go up there and give some free lectures to the people. John Paul was a great advocate of going straight to the people and letting them know what the real deal is.
Has anyone thought of putting together a Liturgical SWAT team for these kinds of situations?
IS the Extraordinary form even able to be celebrated here??? What if it were to become the norm once again....How will this fit the scheme of this building??? I can not even say Church as it looks nothing like one....Curious what others think about dual use.....
Has anyone noticed that the arrangement of the pews around the open space creates the outline of a martini glass? This building hurts my brain. Ouch.
Commenting by HaloScan
