Download Issue PDF - The Institute for Sacred Architecture

N E W SThe long awaited revision of the GeneralInstruction of the Roman Missal,which accompanies the Roman Missal, hasbecome available in Latin from the VaticanPress. According to an analysis issued bythe Bishops Committee on the Liturgy, thecomposition of the present Instruction,which replaces the 1975 edition, remainsgenerally unchanged, although there aremany minor and some major alterations.The Instruction treats the renovation ofchurches when an old altar, impossible tomove without compromising its artisticvalue, is so positioned that it makes theparticipation of the people difficult. Anotherfixed and dedicated altar may beerected, and the old altar is no longer decoratedin a special way, and the liturgy is celebratedon the new fixed altar. The revisedInstruction speaks of a cross with the figureof Christ crucified upon it positioned eitheron the altar or near it and clearly visible,not only during the liturgy but at all times,recalling for the faithful the saving passionof the Lord, and remaining near the altareven outside of liturgical celebrations. Thesection on the place of reservation of theBlessed Sacrament has been adjusted andexpanded. Two options for the location ofthe tabernacle are given: 1) either in thesanctuary, apart from the altar of celebration,not excluding on an old altar or 2)even in another chapel suitable for adorationand the private prayer of the faithful,which is integrally connected with thechurch and is conspicuous to the faithful. Itis more fitting that the tabernacle not be onthe altar on which Mass is celebrated. Anew introductory paragraph has beenadded to the section on sacred images settingtheir use in an eschatological frame: Inthe earthly liturgy, the Church participatesSACRED ARCHITECTURE NEWSin a foretaste of the heavenly liturgy, whichis celebrated in the holy city Jerusalem, towardswhich she tends as a pilgrim andwhere Christ sits at the right hand of God.By so venerating the memory of the saints,the Church hopes for some small part andcompany with them. Throughout the revisedInstruction there is an increased emphasison the care of all things destined forliturgical use, including everything associatedwith the altar and liturgical books.Thus the tabernacle, organ, ambo, priest’schair, vestments, sacred vessels, and all liturgicalelements should receive a blessing.The original Latin text can be obtained onthe internet from http://www.nccbuscc.org/liturgy/current/missalisromanilat.htm. An approvedEnglish version has not yet beenmade available.Art can effectively communicate “thehistory of the covenant between God andman and the richness of the revealed message,”John Paul II said at the plenary assemblyof the Pontifical Commission forthe Cultural Patrimony of the Church inVatican City on March 31, 2000. John PaulII called Christian art “a particularly significantcultural good.” He emphasizedthat “The Church is not only the custodianof the past,” and “constantly increases itsown patrimony of cultural goods to respondto the needs of every epoch and culture.”He made further recommendationsabout the quality of new art, that its variousexpressions “develop in harmony withthe Church’s mind in the service of its mission,using a language capable of announcingthe Kingdom of God to all.”The Church of the Transfiguration, Orleans, MA, was dedicated this past JuneTwenty Cathedrals are being renovatedin the U.S., according to Fr. CarlLast, former head of the Federation of DiocesanLiturgical Commissions. Amongthe Cathedrals undergoing major renovationsare San Antonio, Detroit, Milwaukee,New Orleans, Memphis, Kansas City (Kansas),Covington, Savannah, Wheeling,Colorado Springs, Lafayette, and Honolulu.Other dioceses such as Houston,Laredo, Oakland and Los Angeles arebuilding new Cathedrals. In addition to repairingroofs, restoring stained glass andartwork, and replacing electrical and mechanicalsystems, many of these projectsare proposing major redesigns of the naveand sanctuary, removal of historic elements,and simplification of iconography.Some of the renovations have met with objectionsfrom preservationists, laity, andother people in their communities. Thecost of the Cathedral renovations is presumedto be over $150 million, while thetotal cost of new Cathedrals could be wellover $230 million.The Church of the Transfiguration wasdedicated on the feastday this June with afestive celebration that included banquets,fireworks, concerts, and specially commissionedmusic and dance. The Communityof Jesus, an ecumenical community of 325members in the Benedictine monastic tradition,is located in Orleans, Massachusetts,on Cape Cod. Their new abbey church ispart of the master plan for the communityand adds a worship space which accommodatesa full choir, orchestra, a 10,000-pipe organ, procession and sacramentalspaces, and up to 540 worshipers. The iconographyplanned for the church is rich inbiblical scenes and symbols of faith in castbronze, mosaic, stained glass, marble, limestoneand fresco. The apse mosaic, plannedto be 55 feet high, will illustrate the risenChrist and the Four Evangelists. ArchitectWilliam L. Rawn III of Boston, based hisdesign for the church on the Early Christianbasilica type at the request of the community,who wished to relate to the timebefore Christianity was divided. The 12,000square foot church is built with concretewalls sheathed inside and out with Minnesotalimestone, Douglas fir roof trusses 55feet above the ground, and a Vermont slateroof. The liturgical elements of altar, ambo,font and tabernacle were designed byKeefe Associates. Built for approximately$10 million, with an additional $3 millionscheduled for artwork, it is thecommunity’s desire that the church serveas a model for other new churches aroundthe country.4 Fall 2000 Sacred ArchitecturePhoto courtesy of The Community of Jesus

N E W SThe Chicago Tribune noted a new trendtowards public religious art in the Chicagoarea. A 33 foot tall stainless-steel sculptureof the Virgin Mary, Our Lady of the NewMillenium, has been trucked from parish toparish for more than a year. It even inspiredanother donor to commission a massivestatue of Jesus, the Icon of the DivineMercy, which was unveiled recently at St.Stanislaus Kostka Church in Chicago. It isscheduled to go on permanent display justfeet from the southbound lanes of theKennedy Expressway this fall.Built of Living Stones is the new nameof the Bishops’ Committee on Liturgydocument on art and architecture. Thedraft document, previously entitled DomusDei, was reviewed at the June meeting ofthe BCL and a number of changes weremade, according to Fr. James Moroney, Secretaryof the BCL. After a special Augustmeeting to review the revision, the AdministrativeCommittee considered the documentin September. The Committee judgedthe document to be ready for full debateand a possible vote at the November meetingof the American Bishops.The new entrance for the Vatican Museumsis now open, allowing access for20,000 visitors a day. In the inaugurationceremony, Pope John Paul II said that thecompletion of this project is proof of theChurch’s will for a dialogue between faithand art. This is the most ambitious of thearchitectural projects undertaken by theHoly See for the Jubilee year and cost $23million.Fr. Andrew Greeley criticized churchrenovations and modern liturgists in anaddress to the Religious Education Congressin Los Angeles this Spring. The novelistand sociologist said that “Unfortunately,since Vatican II, a highly authoritarianand doctrinaire perspective has infectedmany liturgists: All the beauty of thepast should be eliminated-only the pulpit,the altar and baptistery, nothing else. Ourbeautiful altars were stripped. With thebattle cry ‘we can’t do Vatican II liturgy in apre-Vatican II church,’ this kind of liturgisthas written off 2,000 years of Catholic artisticexpereience, 2,000 years of Catholicheritage. You tell people when they’re doingthis-removing statues, stations of thecross, vigil lights-that they are offendingthe Catholic people; and they say, ‘if you’reright, you don’t need an opinion poll tomake a decision; you don’t need to consultpeople.’” The liturgy, and the celebrationof all the sacraments, he said, quoting PopeJohn Paul II, must be appealing: “We haveto do them so beautifully that people outsidethe Household of the Faith will givesecond thoughts about the Church.”The Cathedral of Our Lady of Angels, under construction in Los Angeles, CaliforniaThe Cathedral of Our Lady of the Angelsin Los Angeles is planned for dedicationsometime in 2002. The $163 millionstructure is built on a massive 64,000square foot foundation – uniquely engineeredto withstand major earthquakes –with a nave one foot longer than St.Patrick’s in New York. The monumentalnave will seat 3,000 people and will havean 85 foot tall ceiling, a 200 foot ambulatoryand 24,000 square feet of alabaster inits windows.The Charlemagne corridor of St.Peter’s was dedicated in January 2000. Inkeeping with the Jubilee message of conversion,it is a place of recollected prayer,flanked by two lines of confessionals in thismonumental passage that rises to the basilica.“At least in the United States, it seemseucharistic teaching and preaching havebeen neglected, eucharistic adoration hasbeen discouraged outside of the Mass andeven the Mass sometimes lacks the prayerfulattitude it deserves” said Francis CardinalGeorge of Chicago. In his address atthe International Eucharistic Congress inRome this June, the Cardinal said that“there is a growing desire among theCatholic people for more clarity and insightinto our eucharistic faith and practice.”Because it is not simply a re-enactmentof the Last Supper, the Eucharist inthe tabernacle is worthy of the same venerationas the Eucharist on the altar duringMass. The cardinal said the eucharisticspirituality Catholics are called to live andto share with others must follow the stagespresent in the Mass itself: asking forgiveness,listening to God’s word, intercedingin prayer for others, offering gifts, consecratingthem, sharing in communion andgoing forth in mission.During the Eucharistic Congress inRome, Pope John Paul II said that withoutthe Eucharist, it is impossible to understandthe witness of missionaries and martyrsover the last twenty centuries. The celebrationof the Eucharist, he said, “is themost effective missionary action that theecclesial community can make in worldhistory.” The Pope said the Eucharist givesbelievers “the courage to be agents of solidarityand renewal, responsible for changingthe structures of sin in which individuals,communities, and sometimes entirepeoples, are trapped.”Earlier this year, the National Galleryin London featured an exhibition entitled“Seeing Salvation: The Image of Christ”,which aimed to put Jesus back at the heartof art history. The National Gallery’s director,Neil MacGregor, in explaining the reasonfor the exhibit said that Christianity “isthe fundamental element of western culture.The vast majority of these pictures arefrom British collections: it is our job to remindthe public that it owns these astonishingthings.”John Paul II’s Letter on the anniversaryof Aachen Cathedral referred to the tiesthat unite the Catholic community spreadover the world with the Church of Romeand the Holy City of Jerusalem. The Cathedral,dedicated to the Virgin, was built in800 at the request of Charlemagne, whowas crowned that same year in Rome byPope Leo III. Aachen Cathedral also containsfour precious relics that Jerusalemgave Charlemagne and that recall “withPhoto by Kirsten KiserSacredArchitecture Fall 2000 5

N E W SRendering of proposed changes to Milwaukee’s Cathedral ofSt. John the Evangelistprofound reverence events in thehistory of salvation.” The fourrelics are fragments of the newbornJesus’ diapers, the clothJesus wore around his waist onthe cross, the dress Mary wore onChristmas Eve, and the cloth ofJohn the Baptist’s beheading.The Archdiocese of Milwaukeehas unveiled a $10 millionplan for the renovation of the Cathedralof St. John the Evangelist.The plan for the landmark 1847structure, which includes aglassy atrium, a cloistered courtyardand extensive changes tothe cathedral’s sanctuary, drewpraise from city officials andcriticism from others. Along withreplacing the church’s outdatedmechanical, sound and lightingsystems, the original sanctuarywill be removed, and a new altarwill be placed in the middle ofthe nave. Seating capacity, now740, would be increased to morethan 900, with chairs arranged in theround. The architect for the project isHammel, Green & Abrahamson and the liturgicalconsultant is Rev. Richard Vosko.The 1931 statue of Christ the Redeemerthat overlooks Rio de Janeiro is being restored.The project is being funded by theBrazilian Environmental Institute, thenewspaper “O Globo,” and Banco Real. Atitanium mesh will be placed in the interiorof the 125 foot statue to conduct electriccurrent, preventing salt from damagingChrist’s robe.Brazil’s oldest church has been rediscoveredon a hill considered sacred by theinhabitants of Porto Seguro. Vestiges of theChurch of St. Francis, constructed between1503 and 1515, were discovered in Marchof this year. Up until the 1970s, Mass wascelebrated on the hill, although no oneknew exactly where the ruins were buried.Researchers of the University of Salvadorof Bahia made the find of the outside walls,the base of the belfry and the main altar.Chronicles of the time refer to the Churchof St. Francis as being part of the first urbannucleus established by the Portuguese inBrazil.The mystery of beauty was the subjectof a Lenten Meditation addressed to PopeJohn Paul II. Fr. Cantalamessa, the Capuchinwho delivered the series of meditations,quoted an Orthodox author: “God isnot the only one covered in beauty. Evilimitates him and makes beauty profoundlyambiguous.” Referring to Genesis, hespoke of Eve, who was seduced by beauty;she realized the fruit was beautiful, desirable,aesthetically attractive. This meansthat, although truth is always beautiful,beauty is not always true. This ambiguityis overcome by Jesus, who redeemedbeauty by depriving himself of it for thesake of love in the mystery of his passion,death and resurrection. In this way, the Sonof God demonstrated that there is only oneprecious thing: the beauty of love thatpasses through the cross and is purified bythe cross. Rather than closing one’s eyes beforeambiguous beauty, they must beopened wide to look at the transfiguredChrist. Fr. Cantalamessa ended by paraphrasingFyodor Dostoyevski: “It won’t bethe love of beauty that saves the world, butthe beauty of love.”The congress “Abbeys and Monasteriesin Europe’s Roots” was held inConques, France, on June 8, 2000. It waspart of the “Campaign for a Common Patrimonyof Europe,” promoted by the EuropeanCouncil, and was organized by thePontifical Council for Culture and the EuropeanCenter of Art and Medieval Civilization.Pontifical Council President CardinalPaul Poupard called the congress an invitationto study the value and importanceof abbeys and monasteries in the making ofEurope. Moreover, through this initiative,the Vatican reaffirmed its profound interestin Europe’s cultural and religious patrimonyand its desire to protect and make itaccessible to the greatest possible numberof people.A Second Floating Russian OrthodoxChurch has been provided by the Catholiccharity “Aid to the Church in Need”. Thefirst such ship has been serving on theVolga River since May, 1998.On July 11, 2000 a second wasconsecrated in Volgograd inthe name of St. Nicholas by theRussian Orthodox Archbishopof Volgograd and Kamyshin.These church-boats are in thespirit of the 35 “chapel cars”instituted by “Aid to theChurch in Need’s” founder, Fr.Werenfried van Straaten, the“bacon priest,” in Germany afterWorld War II. The agency isworking with the Orthodox inresponse to the desires of theHoly Father for the unity ofChristians. At present, its workstands as one of the few examplesof successfulecumenism with the RussianOrthodox.Over 3,000 artists met withthe Pope on the feast ofBlessed Fra Angelico. The artistslistened to the Pope’s callto conversion in the most difficultwork of art of all: the sculpturing ofChrist’s features on the stone of one’s ownheart. “The artist who can do this profoundlyis the Holy Spirit, but he requiresour correspondence and docility,” thePope said. At this point, the Pontiff intoneda beautiful song about Michelangelo’s cupola.Everyone present followed the wordswith attention, gazing on the beauty of theBasilica transfigured by the clear middaylight. “Seen from outside, it seems to curveagainst the sky over a community recollectedin prayer, as is the love of God. Fromwithin, instead, with its vertiginouslaunching to the heights, it evokes thework of elevation toward the full encounterwith God.” John Paul II proclaimedBlessed Fra Angelico patron of artists onFebruary 18, 1984.New England Jesuits are consideringrestoring the historic South End BostonChurch of the Immaculate Conception,fourteen years after they had dismantledmany of its artistic elements. The BostonGlobe reports that the Jesuits are “drivenby concerns over the structural soundnessof the church’s roof and by the fact that aonce-dying congregation is now flourishing.”While the Renaissance Revival church,designed by Patrick C. Keely in 1861, stillhas a 19th century pipe organ consideredone of the best in the world, 30-foot-highetched-glass windows, and rosette-strewnpale blue coffers on a barrel-vaulted ceiling,many elements were lost in the renovationfourteen years ago. Pews wereripped out and destroyed, the pulpit brokenand put in a closet, the communion railhidden, and Stations of the Cross andpaintings of Jesus, St. Andrew and St. John6 Fall 2000 Sacred ArchitecturePhoto courtesy Archdiocese of Milwaukee

emoved. The restoration would be especiallysignificant in view of the long and bitterlegal battle over the Jesuits’ right to removemuch of the building’s interior. In1991 they won a precedent-setting rulingfrom the state Supreme Judicial Court,which held that it was unconstitutional forthe city to regulate changes to a church interiorby declaring it a historic landmark.Mount Sinai is claimed to have beendiscovered at Mount Har Karkon, in the IsraeliNegeb desert. In his book, Mysteriesof Mount Sinai, Emmanuel Anati writes,“we found the altar and 12 boundary postsat the foot of the mount. Those 12 pillarsare mentioned in the pages of the Bible [Ex24:4]. Then, some 60 meters away, the remainsof a Bronze Age camp. This is alsomentioned in the Old Testament . . . In aprotruding commemorative burial moundwas an altar, and underneath, the vestigesof a fire. On the altar there was a whitestone in the shape of a half moon, the symbolof the moon god Sin.”Austrian archeologist Renate Pillingerof the University of Vienna revealed the discoveryin Ephesus of Christian cave paintingsrepresenting St. Paul. In 1995, a cavewas discovered a few kilometers away fromthe city’s ruins. Inside the cave, there arepaintings depicting the Transfiguration anda sequence inspired by the Acts of theApostles, refering to St. Thecla and St.Paul’s preaching. Paul’s portrait is one ofthe best-preserved frescoes in the cave. It istoo early to state that the cave’s discoveryarcheologically confirms Paul’s presence inEphesus, which other sources, such as theBible, consider indisputable.The Basilica of the Agony in the Gardenof Gethsemani in Jerusalem wasrobbed in February. The robbery in the Basilicawas well planned. Two early twentiethcentury bronze deer were removed.The statues were life-size and located highin the tympanum of the building’s façadeat the foot of the cross.Cardinal Adam Maida plans to spend$20 million during the next three years todraw Detroit area Catholics back toBlessed Sacrament Cathedral in Detroit.Renovation plans include the addition of anew glass-and-steel wing to the north sideof the neo-Gothic church. The wing willbe near the main altar and flood the centerof the gray limestone building with sunlight.To meld the old with the new, anenormous stained-glass window will besuspended in the heart of the new wing.Stone arches around the altar will be transformedby curving metal-mesh sheets toform a multilayer abstract backdrop forthe Mass. Seating will expand from 800 to1,200. Much of the renovation budget isset aside for repairs. The badly-needed replacementof the roof is almost finished.Archdiocesan officials and architectGunnar Birkerts are finalizing buildingplans and deciding where a redesigned altar,pulpit and archbishop’s chair will beplaced. The major portion of the new constructionis expected to begin in May 2001and end by early 2003.Fr. Rasko Radovic, parish priest of theSerbian community of Trieste, in Italy, denouncedthe destruction by Albanians ofmore than 80 Orthodox churches andmonasteries in Kosovo, since the arrival ofthe U.N. administration. Some of thebuildings dated back to the 13th centuryThe $65 million Pope John Paul II Cultural Center in Washington, D.C. is expected toopen in November.N E W Sand were part of a considerable artistic andcultural heritage. Fr. Radovic said he didnot understand why the UNESCO, whichwas so active during the Balkans War, hasremained silent.CONFERENCES &EXHIBITIONSReconquering Sacred Space 2000: TheChurch in the City of the ThirdMillenium will be held at the PontificalUniversity of St. Thomas Aquinas in Rome,Italy, December 1 and 2, 2000. The conferencewill include lectures by an internationalgroup of architects, theologians, andhistorians on the contemporary renaissanceof Catholic architecture. An exhibition onnew traditional Catholic churches will beheld at Palazzo Valentini December 1-20,and a catalog of the exhibition will be publishedby Il Bosco e la Nave. The conferenceand exhibition is being sponsored by theAgenzia per la Citta, publisher Il Bosco e laNave and the Institute for Sacred Architecture.For information please contactdstroik@nd.edu or roscri@flashnet.it.Peter and Paul: History, Devotion, andMemories of the First Centuries, is an exhibitionrunning from June 30 until December10, 2000 at the Cancelleria Palace inRome. It will focus on the time when thetwo apostles were in Rome. The exhibitionwas organized by the Pontifical Council forthe Laity and the Directorate of Monumentsof Vatican City. Heavy assistance iscoming from the Friendship Meetingamong Peoples, an organization which ispart of the ecclesial movement Communionand Liberation, which for years has organizedtravelling exhibitions on historicaltestimonies of the faith. Vestiges from thecatacombs and basilicas: commemorativetablets, sarcophagi and gilded glass aresome of the items on display. Objects werechosen to reflect the life and motivations ofearly Christians: their relations with thepre-existing Jewish community in Rome;their confrontation with the polytheistworld; their vision of the beyond; movingtestimonies that, as Francesco Buranelli, directorof the Vatican Museum recalled, revealhow the devotion to martyrs was alreadydeeply rooted. The Eternal Cityowes virtually everything to Peter andPaul, explained Archbishop CrescenzioSepe, secretary of the Vatican Jubilee Committee.“Without the message of these twoapostles, the history of this city would haveended, in all probability, at the end of theRoman Empire. Indeed, without knowingPeter and Paul, one cannot understand allthe signs that the Church has left in streetsand squares of the city of Rome.”SacredArchitecture Fall 2000 7Photo by James McCrery

F E A T U R ECATHOLIC ARCHITECTUREAND NEW URBANISMAN INTERVIEW WITH ELIZABETH PLATER-ZYBERKElizabeth Plater-Zyberk is dean of theUniversity of Miami School of Architectureand a partner in the design firm Duany Plater-Zyberk and Company. She is an ardent promoterof New Urbanism, a movement that has beensuccessful in designing new communities astowns rather than subdivisions and revitalizingolder communties. Among Duany Plater-Zyberk’s best known projects are the towns ofSeaside in Florida, Kentlands in Maryland anddowntown West Palm Beach, Florida, alldesigned to be pedestrian-oriented with schools,churches, libraries and shops within walkingdistance of homes.Sacred Architecture: Why is itimportant for America’s towns, cities, andcommunities to include significant churchbuildings?Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk:Churches are an importantplace for community lifetoday. The very large,suburban congregationwith multiple activities isproviding a focus forcommunity in a landscapewhich otherwise does nothave one. In the poor urbanneighborhood, the churchprovides any number ofcommunity supportservices, including outrightsocial services such asfeeding the hungry. Acrossthe range of communities,churches are playing a veryimportant role incommunity life and itsquality.SA: How does the architectureof the churchwant to reflect that?EPZ: The church as aplace of civic gatheringJames C. McCrerycertainly should be reflected in its architecture.A number of issues are important inchurch design today in the various denominations,but the buildings also need toreflect their role in the community.SA: Why, if at all, should Catholics beinterested in New Urbanism?EPZ:Many aspects of New Urbanismhave to do with the goals of religion in general,but some in particular are related toconcerns which grow out of a RomanCatholic spiritual and intellectual foundation.I will offer three topics as examples: environment,society, and economy. The firstis environmental, and responsible stewardshipis an inherent part of understandingour role on the planet. Being a good stewardof the environment is very much a partAerial view of proposed village center with a churchof the New Urbanism’s core value system.I found it gratifying to read recently thatsome priests are preaching that urbansprawl is irresponsible.The second topic, perhaps more obviousto Catholics, is the social context. New Urbanismis concerned with structuring thephysical environment to promote a senseof community while enabling individualautonomy and empowerment, whether allowingchildren to walk to school or seniorsto live independently within theirhome community. An important aspect ofcommunity is interdependence and connectivity.By the proximity and interactionfostered by the physical environment, oneunderstands the role one plays in the community.The third topic regards the economiccontext. The New Urbanismproposes a frameworkfor an economic systemthat is supportive ofindividuals in community.The economic picture isone of collaboration, diversity,and establishingor enabling institutions,the workplace and commercethat facilitate thecommunity and ensure itslongevity.We’re living in a timein which commercial activityis extremely shortlived.Main Street is dyingat the hands of cannibalisticretail development.This does not promotea sense of community,and is not related toany sense of responsibilityfor people. We think thephysical environment canreflect a better way, a betterphilosophy.8 Fall 2000 Sacred ArchitecturePhoto : Duany, Towns and Town-Making Principles, 1991

F E A T U R EPhoto courtesy Duany Plater-Zyberk and Co.Masterplan for the Kentlands, Maryland, by Duany Plater-Zyberk and CompanySA: What role do you see the CatholicChurch being able to play in aiding the designor development of new towns?Should it have a role in it at all?EPZ: That is a very interesting question.I think the Catholic Church can playan important role in the revitalization ofneighborhoods. But I am not sure that itneeds to play an initiating role in newplaces, except insofar as the Church may beinterested in building a kind of ideal community.There is a design role that should beplayed by the Church exemplifying thecivic role, the community-focused role thata Catholic Church plays in neighborhoods.And the biggest impediment to this designrole is dimensions. From my own experienceof designing one church in a suburbanpart of Miami and my understanding ofcommon practice, I find that these churchesare very big.The big, suburban church that we designedhad to seat 800 in the main sanctuaryand then be able to expand to 1,000 or1,200 for special occasions in the Churchyear. Of course, you have to have parkingfor all of those people. Then usually thereis a small office component, and a communityroom, and possibly even a school.Consequently, the church campus is verylarge.Even in their smallest permutations,these campuses require an enormous siteand the isolation of buildings amidst parkinglots, like other institutions in suburbia.However, large dimensions can be mitigated.There are alternative solutions. Inthe new traditional neighborhood, the NewUrbanism, the parking is shared with commercialestablishments that are not usedmuch at night or on Sundays. In Canada,public and parochial schools share facilities.They are developed by the governmentand Church, and they share the bigticket items, things like libraries or playingfields, that also happen to take up a lot ofspace.In several Canadian projects, we foundthere was a feasible way to put schools togetherin the greenbelt between the severalneighborhoods from which they draw theirstudents, who can walk to school. The institutionon the edge, rather than at thecenter of the neighborhood, is the least disruptiveof its walkability.In the New Urbanism, that is, in a compact,pedestrian-oriented community, dimensionsand measures are extremely important.The way we build churches nowsometimes seems contradictory to the goalof making these places pedestrian-friendlyand acceptable.In older neighborhoods where thereusually are already churches, the initiativesmay have less to do with the buildingitself reacting to its role in the physical fabricand more with revitalization. Renovationshould not be accomplished in such away that the building becomes defensiveagainst hostile surroundings, or that it beginsto take apart the neighborhood bysuburbanizing the urban fabric around it.I have often thought that wealthy, suburbancongregations could adopt congregationsin the inner city and do some concreteprojects, like building and rebuildinghousing for people in those places. I amsure that this already goes on in variousparts of the country. But all involved haveto pay attention to the fact that the structureof the physical environment is important.Not only for increasing the economicvalue of the place over time, but to promotegood community.SA: From your experience with churchprojects, what are some of the issues in designinga new church building, whether itbe in an established neighborhood or in anewly planned development?EPZ: We designed a little church in aneighborhood in Miami. It was initiated bya pastor who thought that if he franchisedsmaller chapels, creating what he called“missions” within his large parish then hemight be able to influence behavior inthose areas which weren’t within walkingdistance of the big church.So, we designed one on a 50 x 100 footSacredArchitecture Fall 2000 9

F E A T U R EStreet facade of Mission San Juan Bautista, Miami, Florida, by Duany Plater-Zyberkand Company.lot in a traditional style. It is very simple,its vernacular details refer to the colonialprototype of Puerto Rico, the predominantethnicity of the neighborhood. Afront building at the sidewalk has a smallprayer chapel and an office for social services.Above the entry area is a smallapartment for a concierge, a caretakerkeeping an eye on the neighborhood. Behindthis is a courtyard, as you might findin a traditional Caribbean or Mediterraneanbuilding, and then beyond that is thenave, which seats about 200.SA: How many of these franchisedchapels are in this parish?EPZ: The intention was to have four.SA: Amazing, and how large is theparish?EPZ: It spreads out over a large areathat has both industrial and residentialneighborhoods in it.SA: That is a fine example of originalthinking on the part of pastors.EPZ: The pastor, Father JoseMenendez, a Cuban with a terrific amountof charisma, is at work in this parish withstruggling but very energetic immigrantneighborhoods. On his own initiative, heraised the money to buy a $40,000 lot. Thelot was sandwiched between a café withloud, bawdy music and a crack house.The first thing he did was erect a woodencross and put a sheep in the lot, becausethis was going to be called “Mission SanJuan Bautista.” The cross and the sheepboth survived there for many months. Heconvinced various people who felt a connectionto this neighborhood, the ownersof the local grocery store, and some contractorswhose employees live in thisneighborhood, to contribute their timeand money. It was built entirely with donationsof materials, time and money. Ittook four or five years to complete.Father Menendez’s great belief was thatthe church should be filled with art and beas embellished as any other church. Hedidn’t like the industrial lamps that wespecified, so he began seeking out thechurch furnishings himself. There is a fountainin the courtyard, which also serves as abaptismal font, constructed with marbleslabs he salvaged. He thenconvinced a Cuban sculptor todo a small statue of Saint Johnthe Baptist that stands on thefountain. He convinced apainter to do a mural on theceiling of the sanctuary. It is aheavenly scene full of peoplefrom the neighborhood.The church design symbolizesthe progression from theprofane to the sacred. Aftercrossing a short front yard ofgravel, the desert, one entersthe front building and walksover a mosaic floor of a coiledsnake with an apple in itsmouth, depicting the Gardenof Eden, the first sin. You arestepping on the snake as youbegin your procession fromthe profane to the sacred.Father Menendez found aJewish artist from MiamiBeach to do this mosaic ofEden. The project manager,Oscar Machado, is of a thirddenomination. So, here wehave a piece of art commissionedfor free by a Catholicpriest, executed by a Jewishartist, with a man of anotherdenomination as the art director, all lookingat Pompeiian mosaics for inspiration.SA: That is a great American story.What are things for the patron, thecongretation, and architect to be concernedabout in the commissioning of a church?Anything absolutely crucial?EPZ: Outside of the urban context,there is one crucial issue. That is the conversationor conflict between tradition andmodernism. In the Church this conversationexists, and it is marked by conceptionsof “pre-Vatican II” and “post-Vatican II.”There is a dominant directive towardsopenness, post-conciliarism and modernism.There are design advisors within thechurch at large who will be very explicitabout what this post-conciliar attitudemeans: “don’t do what you would havedone before,” “don’t enter on axis,” “thecross should not be on axis,” and so on. Onthe other hand, many people still have aninclination to the traditional form and avery emotional attachment to the history ofthe church, its ceremonies, its rituals, andits buildings.The modern/traditional discussion isunavoidable and very challenging. It requiresa sorting out of intellectual goalsand the emotional or visceral effect that aspace can have on a people’s spiritualstance. Obviously that wasn’t so much achallenge in the old Church. But I findthat truly challenging today, not just interms of design, but in terms of dealingwith the politics of the client and workingView of the courtyard of Mission San Juan Bautista10 Fall 2000 Sacred ArchitecturePhoto courtesy Duany Plater-Zyberk and Co.Photo courtesy Duany Plater-Zyberk and Co.

F E A T U R Eciding what to take back in order to fosterchange. But a lot of people do feel the lossof historical attachment. Certainly, ourteaching about the Church and the body ofChrist on earth has to do with its history.Christ existed at a very specific time in history,creation was time-based. Every religionbrings along its history, so why not allowthat physical continuity to occur?By the same token, we shouldn’t precludethe spiritual opening that discoveryand the new can provide.So, it is still not an easy time to figurethings out stylistically. We should certainlyhave the opportunity to rebuild or to carryon the traditions of building of a specificplace. The exhibit, Reconquering SacredSpace, that opened in Rome in November1999 has some terrific examples of traditionaldesign, but it represents a fraction ofchurch building today.SA: Do you mean to say that it is okayin America to evoke an architectural styleor place in time that isn’t American?EPZ: Yes, or even one that is traditionallyAmerican. Our early Puritan heritage,religiously based, produced some wonderfulmodels of churches that should be acceptableto us for reinterpretation. At varioustimes in American architectural historywe referred to earlier times for spiritualreasons. American Neo-classicism connectedthe new land to the democracy ofancient Greece. In the early Renaissancethe Italians were excited by the forms of aprior time that was pagan, cleverly integratingancient classical elements with theRoman Catholic imagery of the period.There is a rich tradition of Christian apwithany kind of committee.SA: From your experience canyou say that working with committeesis beneficial? Are you able tocompare working with a single patronor a particularly strong leader ofa committee versus a band of semiinterestedparishioners? Do youhave a preference?EPZ: I haven’t had the fullrange of experience. FatherMenendez was basically a sole client.Father Greer, the Good Shepherdpastor, did have a committee,but he played a strong leadershiprole. The committee was eager to expeditethe church because for 12years they’d had only a communityhall.I could give one word of adviceabout committees. Bring the conversationto intellectual issues and principlesand be very explicit as a designerabout what different formsrepresent. Be very involving. It isnot always easy for designers to explainwhat they do, but the more rationalyou can be, the better.SA: Fantastic advice. Let’s goback to your comment earlier aboutdimension. Do parish priests and committeesthink too grandly when they commissionchurches that must seat 800, stand1,200 and accommodate 100 priests in thesanctuary? Would it be better for communitiesto have several small churches orparishes than one large one?EPZ: Well, in Miami the Archdioceseis a wise steward and does not let parishesbegin projects before they are ready to payfor them. In terms of size, I do think thatsmaller would be better. But locations andthe shortage of priests can create problems.SA: A question on style. What do youthink about the way the Catholic Churchhas planned and designed its church buildingsduring the last 30 years?EPZ:This has not been an outstandingtime for church architecture or any otherkind of architecture. That is a statementthat stands alone. Maybe we could lookupon this as a transitional time. We wereasked to deal with all sorts of new issuesafter the Council, and now we are in ashakeout time. Hopefully we can learnfrom those first attempts and efforts.SA: I’ve attended other conferenceswhere it has been suggested that afterVatican II in the United States there was avery good atmosphere architecturally anddesign-wise for Iconoclasm to thrive. Haveyou ever thought about a possible link; thatperhaps the two phenomena fed eachother, resulting in a dearth of architecturaland artistic expression?EPZ: That is why I am being kindabout calling the last thirty years a “periodof transition”. Because, perhaps you needthese rough moments of discarding and de-Good Shepherd Catholic Church, Miami, Florida, by Duany Plater-Zyberk and Co.propriation of symbols from prior culturesand prior spiritualities. That is an age-oldkind of inclusivity or appropriation that wedon’t seem to be allowing ourselves now.One must acknowledge that for all thehopefulness of multiple interpretationsthat the abstractions of modernism promotes,the turning away from representation,from evolution, is not an enrichmentat all.SA: So, then what should be done withall of these abysmal churches out there?What do you have to say to the priest whohas been committed by his bishop to a parishthat isn’t going to build anything soon,but who has an empty hall in which to celebratethe Mass?EPZ: This is actually the design challengeof our time, not just in the realm ofchurch architecture. A great deal has beenbuilt in recent decades which doesn’t lenditself to addition, renovation, and enhancement.It is so autonomous, so aggressivelyindividualistic that it is hard to imaginehow to engage it. This is something thatwe need to be teaching designers: how todeal with the suburban context, individualisticforms and buildings that are far apartfrom each other with little hope of spatialrelationships. In the case of such a church,a parish priest should look for a very sensitiveand clever designer who can begindealing with the situation incrementally.James McCrery is an architect in Washington,D.C.Photo courtesy Duany Plater-Zyberk and Co.SacredArchitecture Fall 2000 11

A R T I C L E SANTONI GAUDI: GOD’S ARCHITECTMichael RoseAll the great cathedrals have taken centuriesto complete. The Cathedral ofthe Sagrada Familia (Holy Family) inBarcelona, Spain, is no exception. Begun in1883, only half of this imposing church isnow complete. Construction work, however,steadily continues as donations keepcoming in to support the work. Architectsestimate that the church will take at leastanother 40 years to complete. Some say itcould take as many as 150 years.Sagrada Familia is the most renownedbuilding designed by Spanish architectAntoni Gaudi, whose cause forbeatification was opened last year bythe Cardinal Archbishop ofBarcelona. The cathedral is a testamentto the architect’s faith. In someways, Gaudi’s Barcelona church resemblesthe great cathedrals of theMedieval age: Sagrada Familia wasbased on the plan of a Gothic basilicawith five naves, a transept, an apse,and ambulatory.It is designed with soaring towers,capped by spires, and is repletewith dense symbolism throughoutthe structure. Gaudi, however,wanted to create a “20th century cathedral,”a synthesis of all his architecturalknowledge with a visual explicationof the mysteries of faith. Hedesigned façades representing theNativity, Crucifixion, and Resurrectionof Christ; and eighteen towers,symbolizing the twelve Apostles, thefour Evangelists, the Virgin Maryand Christ. The Christ tower, the tallest,when completed will stand some500 feet high. To date, eight of theeighteen towers are completed. Eachis of a unique spiral-shape coveredin patterns of Venetian glass and mosaiccrowned by the Holy Cross.God’s Architect“My client can wait,” was Gaudi’sgenial response to his helpers whendelays occurred due to his constantchanges to the original plans. Gaudi alwaysacknowledged that his ultimate clientwas God, whom he felt was in no hurry.The architect wanted the finest and mostperfect sacred temple for his client. Hetruly worked ad majorem Dei gloriam, for thegreater glory of God.Gaudi, known as “neo-Medieval” in hisday, developed a unique style of building.His work is characterized by the use ofnaturalistic forms, and his approach cameto be known as the “biological style.”Sagrada Familia is known for its conicalspires, parabolic arched doorways andfreely curving lines. As in most of his work,Gaudi has created the impression the stoneused was soft and modeled like clay orwax.Gaudi directed the construction of thechurch from 1883 until his sudden death in1926. He became so involved with thechurch that he set up residence in his onsitestudy and devoted the last 14 years ofhis life to this most important of all hisprojects. He regarded Sagrada Familia as agreat mission. On June 7, 1926, Gaudi wasConstruction of Sagrada Familia continueshit by a street car. Three days later he diedat the age of 74.When he died, the people of Barcelonapopularly proclaimed him a “saint.” Therewas great commotion. Even though helived in a reserved manner, removed fromthe world, rumor of his sanctity had alreadyspread. No newspaper, not even themost virulently anti-Catholic, attackedhim. The director of the Museum of theBarcelona Archdiocese wrote an article callingGaudi “God’s Architect.” His architectureis an expression of his Christian commitment.From the very beginning of the20th century Sagrada Familia became anicon of the city of Barcelona, just as theEiffel Tower is an icon of Paris. And afterthe architect’s death, the people ofBarcelona regarded him as a patron of theirgrand city.There have even been documented conversionsresulting from the architecture ofSagrada Familia. The most prominent involvedtwo Japanese men. One is architectKenji Imai. He arrived in Barcelona twomonths after Gaudi’s death. He was travelingall over the world to meet the great architectsof the day, but by the time hereached Barcelona Gaudi was deadand buried. Even so, Imai was notdisappointed. Sagrada Familia madesuch an impression on him that,when he became a professor in Japanhe gave several lectures on Gaudiand, finally, converted to Catholicism.The other convert is sculptorEtsuro Sotoo, who worked for yearsfashioning statues on Barcelona’s cathedral,and ultimately became aCatholic.The Work ContinuesAfter Gaudi’s death, work continuedon the church until 1936. Thesewere the days of the bloody SpanishCivil War. The Communists, whohated all things Catholic, set fire toGaudí’s study which held his notesand designs for Sagrada Familia.Many of these were destroyed, butthe project resumed in 1952 using thesurviving drawings and models tocontinue the work. Today, the constructedpart is open to visitors aswell as the small museum that exhibitsGaudi’s original plans and models.Later this year, Cardinal RicardMaria Carles of Barcelona will inaugurateSagrada Familia with a solemnMass on December 31, the Feastof the Holy Family. The 150-foothighcentral nave is scheduled to betotally roofed by that date. Referring to theBasilica’s beauty, Cardinal Carles told aSpanish newspaper: “for me it transmits anevangelical message, very much Gaudi’sstyle.” Perhaps for that reason, AntoniGaudi is regarded still as “God’s Architect.”Michael S. Rose is editor of the St.Catherine Review and author of The RenovationManipulation: The Church Counter-Renovation Manual. He can be reached byemail at: mrose@erinet.com.12 Fall 2000 Sacred Architecture

THE SPIRIT OF MEDIATOR DEIA R T I C L E STHE RENEWAL OF CHURCH ARCHITECTURE BEFORE VATICAN IIIt is generally thought byliturgists and theorists ofliturgical architecture thatlittle occurred in the area ofrenewal of church designbefore the Second VaticanCouncil. The architecturalmodernism of the post-Conciliarera has therefore oftenbeen thought to representthe Council’s artistic intentions.However, before theCouncil, church architecturehad already undergone significantchange in responseto the Liturgical Movementand Pius XII’s encyclicalMediator Dei (1947). Statementsof popes, architects,and pioneers of the LiturgicalMovement point to a liturgicaland architecturalcontext which presents avastly different approach toarchitecture than the starkinteriors presented by manyarchitects after the Council.Despite the prevailing beliefthat architectural modernismwas the only availableoption for the modernchurch, the early twentiethcentury provides considerableevidence of representational,historically-connectedand often beautifularchitectural designs responsiveto the same principlescanonized in thedocuments of Vatican II.SacrosanctumConciliumgrew directly out of theideas expressed in the LiturgicalMovement and MediatorDei, and must be read inthat context to convey a fullunderstanding of the authentic spirit ofVatican II regarding liturgical architecture.The Liturgical Movement inAmericaArchitects and liturgists of the earlytwentieth century proclaimed an almostunrelenting criticism of Victorian ecclesiasticaldesign. It was, they argued, the productof a pioneer mentality in American Catholicismin which poor and under-educatedpatrons hired uninspired architectsand purchased low quality mass-producedliturgical goods from catalogs. In response,Denis McNamaraVictorian ecclesiastical design: St. Mary’s Church, New Haven,Connecticut by James Murphy, 1874architect-authors like Charles Maginnisand Ralph Adams Cram called for moreadequate ecclesiastical design and furnishings.At the same time, the LiturgicalMovement began to establish its presencein the United States. The movement’s leadersbelieved that American liturgy had sufferedunder an individualist pioneer mentalityas well, leading to a minimalist liturgicalpractice and general lack of understandingabout the place of the Eucharisticliturgy in the life of the Church. The LiturgicalMovement mingled with the pre-existingtraditionally-based architectural designmethods of the 1920sand 1930s, and over the nextseveral decades wroughtconsiderable improvementin ecclesiastical design.One of the earliest Americanmouthpieces of the LiturgicalMovement was theBenedictine periodical OrateFratres, a journal of liturgyfounded by Benedictinemonk Virgil Michel andbased on his studies of philosophyand liturgy in Europein the 1920s. One of thejournal’s first articles, entitled“Why a LiturgicalMovement?,” was written byBasil Stegmann, O.S.B., whowas later to become an activeparticipant in the Americanliturgical discussions. 1 Heexplained the need for liturgicalreform to an Americanchurch still generally unawareof European developments.Stegmann cited PiusX’s 1903 Motu propio whichexpressed the pope’s “mostardent desire to see the trueChristian spirit flourishagain” and which claimedthat “the foremost and indispensablefount is the activeparticipation in the mostholy mysteries and in thepublic and solemn prayer ofthe Church.” 2 Stegmanncalled for all members of theChurch to become intimatelyunited with Christ and form“what St. Paul calls mysticallythe body of Christ.” Themovement’s new concentrationon the baptistery, altarand improved participationnaturally lead to changes in church design.Other features of the Liturgical Movementincluded a “profound spirit of fidelity tothe Church,” a patristic revival, a new interestin Gregorian chant, the use of the Liturgyof the Hours for laypeople and themore frequent following of Latin-vernacularmissals. 3The early proponents of the LiturgicalMovement sought to improve liturgicalquality by putting the primary features ofthe liturgical life in their proper place. Previously,the prevailing individualist approachto liturgy meant that worshippersSacredArchitecture Fall 2000 13

A R T I C L E Snot only failed to follow along with the liturgicalaction, but often busied themselveswith other things, often pious enough, butunrelated to the Eucharistic liturgy. 4 Withrelatively little interest in making the liturgicalaction visible to the congregation, altarswere sometimes set in deep chancelsand attached to elaborate reredoses thatoverwhelmed their tabernacles. Variousdevotional altars had their own tabernacles,which quite often doubled as statuebases. Overly large and colorful statuesonly compounded the problem. With theBlessed Sacrament reserved in multipletabernacles, the centrality of the Eucharisticliturgy as a unified act of communal worshipbecame less clear. Since clarity ofChurch teaching on the Eucharist and liturgywere key features of the LiturgicalMovement, architecture changed to serveits ends.Liturgical Principles and ChurchArchitectureThe Liturgical Movement called for clarityin representing the centrality of the Eucharistand the pious participation of themembership of the Mystical Body of Christin the Eucharistic liturgy. At the most basiclevel, architects of the Liturgical Movementwanted to raise the quality of American liturgicallife. By making the liturgical regulationsof the Sacred Congregation of Ritesmore widely known, they hoped to bringabout consistent practice in order to increasethe reverence for the Mass and otherdevotions. Their concerns were not merelylegalistic, however. Intimately connectedwith these goals was the desire to increasethe active and pious participation of the laity,and architectural changes followed almostimmediately to serve that end.Maurice Lavanoux lamented in a 1929article in Orate Fratres that American architectsand liturgists often failed to veil thetabernacle, ordered low quality churchgoods from catalogues, and designedreredoses that enveloped the tabernacleand thereby failed to make it suitablyprominent. 5 Art and historical continuitystill had their place, but now the two primarysymbols, the altar and crucifix,would dominate. Lavanoux asked that artiststreat the altar with proper dignity, notsimply view it as a “vehicle for architecturalvirtuosity.” He quoted M.S.MacMahon’s Liturgical Catechism in describingthe new arrangement of the altaraccording to liturgical principles. Insteadof the old Victorian pinnacled altar with itsdisproportionately small tabernacle,MacMahon wrote,the tendency of the modern liturgicalmovement is to concentrate attentionupon the actual altar, to remove the superstructureback from the altar or todispense with it altogether, so that thealtar may stand out from it, with itsdominating feature of the Cross, as theplace of Sacrifice and the table of theLord’s Supper, and that, with its tabernacle,it may stand out as the throneupon which Christ reigns as King andfrom which He dispenses the bounteouslargesse of Divine grace.The intention to simplify the altar originatedin a desire to emphasize the activeaspect of Mass and clarify the place of thePrototypical “liturgical altar” from Liturgical Arts magazine, 1931Photo: Liturgical Arts, 1931reserved Eucharist.Advocates of architectural and liturgicalclarity received a new mouthpiece with thepremiere of Liturgical Arts magazine in1931. Its editors wrote that they were “lessconcerned with the stimulation of sumptuousbuilding than…with the fostering ofgood taste, of honest craftsmanship [and]of liturgical correctness.” 6 The resistance tomere sumptuous building and the emphasison honesty were means by which the LiturgicalMovement sought to correct the architecturalmistakes of the nineteenth centurywhile maintaining a design philosophyappropriate for church architecture.This call for honesty and simplicity was tobe extraordinarily influential for two reasons:first, it was echoed strongly inSacrosanctum Concilium, and second, with achanged meaning it became the leitmotif ofModernist church architects.Specific architectural changes appearedquickly in new construction and renovations.Altars with tall backdrops were replacedby those with a solid, simple rectangularshape and prominent tabernacles.Edwin Ryan included instructions on thedesign of the appropriate altar in the inauguralissue of Liturgical Arts. 7 He asked for“liturgical correctness” and included animage of two prototypical altars fulfillingliturgical principles. The rectangular slabof the altar remained dominant, and thetabernacle stood freely. Its rounded shapefacilitated the use of the required tabernacleveil. The crucifix remained dominantand read prominently against a plain backdrop.The tester or baldachino emphasizedthe altar and marked its status. Ryan madeit clear that these suggestions were notmeant to limit the creativity of the architectand that “within the requirements of liturgicalcorrectness and good taste the fullestliberty is of course permissible.” A builtexample from the firm of Comes, Perry andMcMullen gave the high altar of St. Luke’sChurch in St. Paul, MN a figural backdrop.The sculpture group stood behind the altarand not on it, was dominated by the crucifix,and contrasted in color with the largetabernacle. Clarification of the place of thealtar and the tabernacle did not necessarilymean a bare sanctuary and absence of ornamentaltreatment.Another influential journal, ChurchProperty Administration, provided informationon the liturgical movement and its architecturaleffects. With a circulation ofnearly 15,000 in 1951 that included 128bishops, 11,007 churches and 802 architects,the magazine reached a popular audiencebut included numerous articles on architecturewhich evidenced the ideals of the LiturgicalMovement. Michael Chapmanpenned a piece called “Liturgical Movementin America” in 1943 that spoke of liturgicallaw, tabernacle veils and rubrics,but his underlying thrust grew out of thecontext of the liturgical movement. The14 Fall 2000 Sacred Architecture

High altar, St. Luke’s Church, St. Paul, Minnesotachanges at the altar, he claimed, weremeant to “direct the attention of our peopleto the inner significance of the Action performedat it.” The simplification of the altarand sanctuary was intended to help thealtar resume “its functional significance asthe place of Sacrifice; its very austerityserving to focus the mind and soul uponHim who is there enshrined, rather than onthe shrine itself.” 8 Chapman also critiquednineteenth century architects for reducingtabernacles to mere cupboards and reiteratedthat liturgical law forbade the nonethelesscommon practice of putting a statueor monstrance atop a tabernacle.The common abuse of using tabernaclesas stands for statues and altar crucifixes becameone of the immediate issues to resolve.This small but significant problemtied directly to the Liturgical Movement’saim to clarify the place of the Eucharist inthe life of the Church. Maurice Lavanouxlamented with “a sense of shame” that hehad once designed an extra-shallow tabernacle“so that the back could be filled withbrick as an adequate support” for a statue. 9Altar, tabernacle and statues were meant tobe brought into a harmonious wholethrough placement, treatment, and number.The various parts would amplify thetrue hierarchy of importance without diminishingthe rightful place of any individualcomponent of Christian worship orpiety. One author in Church Property Administrationtitled his article “Eliminate Distractionsin Church Interiors,” and suggestedthat all things which “distract attentivenessand reduce the powerof concentration” be removedor improved. 10 As H.A.Reinhold, one of the pioneers ofthe liturgical movement, put it,liturgical churches would “putfirst things first again, secondthings in the second place andperipheral things on the periphery.”11In the years leading up to theSecond Vatican Council, muchdiscussion continued concerningthe appropriate churchbuilding and the kind of designit required. The great majorityof architects and faithful held totheir traditions without fear ofappropriate updating. Whilecertain Modernist architectsbuilt high profile churchprojects, such as Le Corbusier’sNotre Dame du Haut (1950-54)and Marcel Breuer’s St. John’sAbbey in Minnesota (1961),most church architects avoidedthis type of modernism. Evenin 1948 when Reinhold suggestedthe possibility of semicircularnaves, priests facing thepeople, chairs instead of pews,and organs near the altar andnot in a loft, he would preserve his moretraditional sense of architectural propriety.Before the Council, a middle road of architecturalreform emerged, one that sharedideas with the Liturgical Movement andMediator Dei. 12Photo: Cram, American Church Building of Today, 1929The Spirit of Mediator DeiIn his 1947 encyclical Mediator Dei, PiusXII praised the new focus on liturgy. Hetraced the renewed interest to severalBenedictine monasteries and thought itA R T I C L E Swould greatly benefit the faithful whoformed a “compact body with Christ for itshead” (§5). However, one of the introductoryparagraphs explained that the encyclicalwould not only educate those resistantto appropriate change, but also addressoverly exuberant liturgists. Pius wrote:We observe with considerable anxietyand some misgiving, that elsewhere certainenthusiasts, over-eager in theirsearch for novelty, are straying beyondthe path of sound doctrine and prudence.Not seldom, in fact, theyinterlaid their plans and hopes for a revivalof the sacred liturgy with principleswhich compromise this holiest ofcauses in theory or practice, and sometimeseven taint it with errors touchingCatholic faith and ascetical doctrine(§8).Pius was concerned with abuses of liturgicalcreativity, a blurring of the lines betweenclerics and lay people regarding thenature of the priesthood, and the use of thevernacular without permission. In mattersmore closely related to art and architecture,he warned against the return of the primitivetable form of the altar, against forbiddingimages of saints, and against crucifixeswhich showed no evidence of Christ’spassion (§62). Mediator Dei offered strongrecommendations for sacred art as well, allowing“modern art” to “be given freescope” only if it were able to “preserve acorrect balance between styles tending neithertoward extreme realism nor to excessive‘symbolism’…”(§195). He deploredand condemned “those works of art, recentlyintroduced by some, which seem tobe a distortion and perversion of true artand which at times openly shock Christiantaste, modesty and devotion…” (§195). JesuitFather John La Farge, chaplain of theLiturgical Arts Society, lost no time in tak-Blessed Sacrament Church and Rectory, Sioux City, Iowa, 1958SacredArchitecture Fall 2000 15Photo: Church Property Administration, March-April 1958

A R T I C L E SInterior of Blessed Sacrament Church, Sioux City, Iowaing the words of Pius XII to the readers ofLiturgical Arts in 1948, even before the officialEnglish language translation was available.13By the 1950s, the use of contemporarydesign methods had begun to merge withthe liturgical movement and provided anew set of buildings which have receivedlittle notice in the liturgical and art historicaljournals. With a few notable exceptions,most architects worked within the requestsof Mediator Dei while adapting newmaterials and artistic methodologies tochurch design. Despite some argumentsagainst a supposed “false” and “dishonest”use of historical styles like Gothic, architectscontinued to either build overtly traditionalchurches or use new idioms whichmaintained a logical continuity with thosethat came before. Architects like EdwardSchulte and others who echoed Pius XII’scall for moderation in liturgical innovationfound few allies in the architectural media.Without much fanfare, they simply continuedto design church buildings that servedthe needs of the day.Schulte, a Cincinnati architect and onetimepresident of the American Institute ofArchitects, took an approach to church designthat truly grew organically from thatwhich came before. His Blessed SacramentChurch in Sioux City, Iowa appeared inChurch Property Administration in 1958 andprovided a dignified and substantial answerto the problem presented by the architecturalModernists: how to make a modernchurch which espousednew ideas in liturgicaldesign. 14 The generousopenings of the westfacade and the single imageof “Our Lord in theBlessed Sacrament” embodiednoble simplicity asexpressed by the LiturgicalMovement withoutsacrificing content or resortingto an industrialaesthetic. The interiorpresented a large sanctuarywith a prominent tabernacle,a dominant crucifix,all of it at once appropriatelyornamental andwithout distractions. Thelimestone piers supportedvisible truss arches whichfulfilled much of themovement’s demand for“honesty” in construction.The adoring angelspainted on the ceiling appropriatelyenriched thechurch in a style whichcopied no past age.Schulte satisfied the demandto focus attentionon the high altar by placinghis one side altar outsidethe south arcade. Most strikingly, heplaced the choir behind the high altar, satisfyingthe requests of those such asReinhold and others to restore what manyliturgical scholars believed to be an ancientPhoto: Church Property Administration, March-April 1958Holy Trinity Church, Gary, Indiana, 1959arrangement.Another novel yet historically continuousapproach to the Liturgical Movementproduced the Church of the Holy Trinity inGary, Indiana. Published in 1959, it used astyle called “modern classic” but partookof the ideas generated by the LiturgicalMovement. Architect J. Ellsworth Pottergave the exterior a campanile, porticoedentrance, and a dignified ecclesiastical airgrowing from continuity of conventionalecclesiastical typology. The plan proved adeparture, however, turning the nave 90degrees and putting the sanctuary againstthe long end. This arrangement gave all ofthe congregation direct sight lines to thesanctuary’s prominent tabernacle andforceful imagery. By providing seating for432 with only 12 rows of pews, the churchbrought “the congregation of Holy Trinitycloser to the main altar.” 15 Fulfilling the LiturgicalMovement’s requests for an increasedprominence for Baptism, the baptisterywas a substantial chapel-like room.Instead of competing with the high altar,another special shrine was pulled out fromthe main nave and given its own smallchapel. The desires of the Liturgical Movementwere incorporated within a churchwhich otherwise maintained a recognizablearchitectural continuity with olderchurches. It grew organically from thosethat came before.In one other example, an article entitled“Dignified Contemporary Church Architecture”appeared in Church Property Administrationin 1956 and presented theChurch of St. Therese in Garfield Heights,16 Fall 2000 Sacred ArchitecturePhoto: Church Property Administration, July-August 1959

A R T I C L E SOhio. 16 Designed by Robert T. Miller ofCleveland, the building used a palette recallinghis early days as a designer of industrialbuildings but nonetheless maintaineda sense of Catholic purpose. Thevery large church seated 1,000 people, usingmaterials of steel, concrete block, andbrick. Despite the incorporation of industrialbuilding methods, the architect wascontent to let the “modern” materials be ameans rather than an end. The tall campanileproved visible for miles and the westfront of the building offered a grand entry.A well-proportioned Carrara marble statueof St. Therese in a field of blue mosaic withgold crosses and roses was surrounded byan ornamental screen inset with Theresiansymbolism. A dramatic three-story facetedglass window with abstracted figural imagerygave the baptistery a grandeur it deserved.The sanctuary received dramaticnatural lighting over the high altar and itsprominent tabernacle. Images of Josephand the Virgin form part of the scene, butwithout altars of their own. The symbolismin the aluminum baldachino joinedwith the precious materials of the altar toestablish its proper status. The altar carriedthe simple but essential message“Sanctus, Sanctus, Sanctus.” Modern materialscame together with a decorous arrangementof parts to form a dignified contemporarychurch.These churches were built in the spiritof Mediator Dei. They eschewed the claimsof some for unusual shapes, banishment ofornament, and the use of exposed industrialmaterials. Despite the prevailing notionthat the post-war United States sawnothing but modernist architecture, in 1954three “traditional” churches were beingbuilt for every one “modern” church. 17Ironically, Modernist architect-heroes disproportionatelyfound their way into thesecular press, impressed other architectsand persuaded building committees. Nomatter how clearly the traditional architectsadopted features of the LiturgicalMovement, they could not compete withthe excitement of the stylistic avant-garde.The Modernist critique of traditional architecturereached all levels, from educationalinstitutions to popular culture to chanceryoffices.While leading architectural journalspraised the latest concrete designs, WilliamBusch, a liturgical pioneer and collaboratorwith Virgil Michel in the Liturgical Movement,asked readers to understand the truenature of a church building. In 1955 hepenned an article entitled “Secularism inChurch Architecture,” discussing the term“contemporary” and its associations withmodern secular buildings. Secularism inchurch architecture, he feared, would leadto buildings which would “lack the architecturalexpression which is proper to achurch as a House of God and a place of divineworship.” 18 Furthermore, he deniedInterior of St. Mary and St. Louis Priory Chapel, St. Louis, Missouri, by Hellmuth,Obata and Kassabaum. Featured in Liturgical Arts, November, 1962claims of some architectural modernists bywriting:A church edifice is not simply a placefor the convenient exercise of prayerand instruction and for the enactment ofthe liturgy. The church edifice itself is apart of the liturgy, a sacred thing, madeholy by a divine presence through solemnconsecration: it is a sacramental object,an outward sign of invisible spiritualreality. 19The concept of the church building as a“skin” for liturgical action, as would bepresented later in documents like Environmentand Art in Catholic Worship (BCL,1978), was absolutely proscribed. In fact,Busch criticized architect Pietro Belluschi,who would become one of the major forcesin American church architecture, for seeinga church as “a meeting house for people.”He asked instead:Where is the thought of church architectureas addressed to God? And where isthe thought of God’s address to man inhallowing grace? Are we to imaginemodern society as in an attitude of moreor less agnostic and emotional subjectivism,and unconcerned about objectivetruth and the data of divine revelation? 20H.A. Reinhold, a prominent voice of theLiturgical Movement, also urged moderation.He asked that architects neither “canonizenor condemn any of the historicstyles,” rather, “appreciate all of thesestyles of architecture, each for its ownvalue.” 21 Although he spoke of “full participationof the congregation” he cautionedagainst centralized altars.Other writers and architects had differentideas, and many church architects whoignored Mediator Dei often received considerablenotoriety. Articles in Liturgical Artsbecame more and more clearly alignedwith a “progressive” notion of liturgical reformat the same time that architecturalmodernism under architects like LeCorbusier and Pietro Belluschi were takinghold. Even before the arrival of the SecondVatican Council, Liturgical Arts was discussingabstract art for churches, presentingimages of blank sanctuaries, and encouragingMass facing the people. 22 Modernistarchitects and liturgists who privilegedwhat Pius XII called “exterior” participationin reaction to the individualismof the previous decades held the majorityopinions and established the normativeprinciples of new church architecture. 23The language of the Liturgical Movementfound its way into the documents ofVatican II and remains relatively unchangeddespite the variety of architecturalresponses that claim to grow from it.Phrases such as “noble simplicity” and “activeparticipation” were formative conceptsin pre-Conciliar design which nonethelessallowed for a traditional architecture, onesuitably elaborate yet clear in its aims. Incontrast to the conceptions of post-Conciliararchitecture promoted by architecturalinnovators, the 1940s and 1950s providecontextual clues for the architecture ofthe Liturgical Movement. It is reasonableto ask whether the writers of SacrosanctumConcilium had the larger history of the liturgicalmovement in mind when they calledfor “noble beauty rather than mere extravagance”(SC, §124).Similarly, in understanding Vatican II’sstatement giving “art of our owndays…free scope in the Church” (SC, §123),it can be remembered that Pius XI (reigned1922-39) had chastised certain modern artistsfor deviating from appropriate art evenPhoto: Liturgical Arts, November, 1962SacredArchitecture Fall 2000 17

A R T I C L E Sas he argued that the Church had “alwaysopened to door to progress…guided by geniusand faith.” 24 Moreover, the verywords of Pius XII’s Mediator Dei which read“modern art should be given freescope in the due and reverent serviceof the church” found their way intoSacrosanctum Concilium. The propercontext for this “free scope” comes inrelation to Pius’ other exhortationsfrom Mediator Dei: preservation ofimages of saints and the representationof the wounds of Christ on thecrucifix (§62), the priority given tointerior elements of divine worship(§24), the encouragement ofextraliturgical devotions (§29-32),the warning against seeing ancientliturgical norms as more worthythan those developed subsequently(§61) and the prohibition of the tableform of the altar (§62). Mediator Deiappeared only 12 years before plansfor the Council were announced, yetalmost immediately after the Council,architects and liturgists were defyingits requests. Even Paul VI critiquedartists for abandoning theChurch, and for “expressing certainthings that offend us who have beenentrusted with the guardianship ofthe human race.” While he askedartists to be “sincere and daring,” healso said to them:One does not know what you aresaying. Frequently you yourselvesdo not know, and the languageof Babel, of confusion, isthe result. Then where is art? 25Paul VI asked of artists the samething that the Liturgical Movementasked of architects: clarity and lackof confusion. In spite of great effortsto the contrary, architectural and liturgicaldisorientation has characterizedthe period since the Council,and many search for ways to reestablishthat clarity. Understanding the“spirit of Mediator Dei” and its resultantarchitecture may prove very useful.That the artistic recommendationsof Vatican II grew so directlyout of the context of the LiturgicalMovement and the recommendationsof Mediator Dei gives credenceto the idea that some of what came beforeVatican II might provide insight into understandingwhat the Council fathers intended.The liturgical architecture of thedecades before the Council need not be ignoredor seen as outdated relics of a pastage. In fact, forty-five years later, pre-Conciliarchurch architecture inspired by theLiturgical Movement might yield significantclues for proper implementation of therenewal.Dr. Denis McNamara is an ArchitecturalHistorian and the Assistant Director of the LiturgicalInstitute at the University of SaintMary of the Lake in Chicago.Church of St. Therese, Garfield Heights, Ohio,1956Altar, Church of St. ThereseNOTES1Basil Stegmann, O.S.B., “Why A LiturgicalMovement?,” Orate Fratres 2 (27 November1927): 6-10.2Stegmann, 6.3For a thorough explanation of the prioritiesof the early Liturgical Movement, see SergeKeleher, “Whatever Happened to the LiturgicalMovement? A View from the East,” in StratfordCaldecott, ed., Beyond the Prosaic (Edinburgh:T&T Clark, 1998), 69-96.4Jesuit father Keith Pecklers has aptlyelucidated the Liturgical Movement’s history ina recent book. See The Unread Vision: TheLiturgical Movement in the United States ofAmerica 1926-1955 (Collegeville, MN: LiturgicalPress, 1998.)5Maurice Lavanoux, “An Architect’sDilemma,” Orate Fratres 3 (14 July 1929),278-279.6“Editorial,” Liturgical Arts 1 (Fall 1931).7Edwin Ryan, D.D., “The LiturgicalConstruction of the Altar,” Liturgical Arts 1(Fall 1931), 29-33.8Michael Andrew Chapman, “LiturgicalMovement in America,” Church PropertyAdministration 7 (Second Quarter, 1943), 7.9Lavanoux, 280.10Charles J. Johnson, “EliminateDistractions in Church Interiors,” ChurchProperty Administration 10 (January-February 1946), 11-13.11H.A. Reinhold, “The LiturgicalChurch,” Church Property Administration 4(June-July 1941), 8.12Reinhold, 8.13John LaFarge, S.J., “Editorials,”Liturgical Arts 16 (February 1948), 39-40.14“Church, Rectory and Convent forIowa Parish,” Church Property Administration22 (March-April 1958), 56-59. For anotherexamples of Schulte’s work see “Church ofChrist the King in Dallas,” Church PropertyAdministration 20 (May-June 1956), 48-51,162.15“Holy Trinity Church in GaryIndiana…Closer Proximity of Congregationto Altar,” Church Property Administration 23(July-August 1959), 53.16“Dignified Contemporary ChurchArchitecture,” Church Property Administration25 (May-June 1961), 60-67, 199.17William Busch, “Secularism in ChurchArchitecture,” Church Property Administration19 (November-December 1955), 33.18Busch, 31.19Busch, 32.20Busch, 33.21H. A. Reinhold, “Speaking ofLiturgical Architecture,” Church PropertyAdministration 18 (September-October 1954),27.22See Liturgical Arts: Theodore Brenson,“Abstract Art and Christianity,” May 1954;Peter F. Anson, “Mass Facing the People,”November 1955; Roman J. Verostko,“Abstract Art and the Liturgy,” August1962. The August 1962 issue also illustratedmodernist churches including a brick andsteel box by Murray-Jones-Murrayarchitects at Sts. Peter and Paul Church inTulsa, OK, with abstracted art and liturgicaldesign by Frank Kacmarcik.23Pius XII wrote in Mediator Dei of interiorand exterior worship. While he valued theactions and ritual which made up exteriorparticipation, he claimed the “the chief elementof divine worship must be interior” (§23-24).24“Pope Condemns Ultra-Modern ChurchArt; Declares He Will Prohibit Such ‘Deviations’,”New York Times (28 October 1932), 5:2.25“The Homeland of Expression in Art is StillFaith, Prayer, and Religion: An address by PopePaul VI…May 7, 1964…at the Mass of theArtists,” Liturgical Arts 33 (November 1964), 2.18 Fall 2000 Sacred ArchitecturePhoto: Church Property Administration, May-June 1961Photo: Church Property Administration, May-June 1961

SPANISH COLONIAL SACRED ARCHITECTURETHE NEW PARISH CHURCH OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANOA R T I C L E SJust why it took a century and a half andmore to replace an historic parish churchdestroyed by earthquake in 1812 is too involveda story to tell here, and not very relevantto ecclesiastical architecture. Lincolnbuffs, of course, will want to know thatAbraham Lincoln played a role in it by givingthe ruins back to the Catholic authorities.What interests us most here is an exampleof architecture as a pastoral instrument.The San Juan Capistrano Regional Library,by the Postmodernist masterMichael Graves, sits on a knoll at the cornerof El Camino Real and AcjachemaStreet, occupying a curiously rural slice ofdowntown San Juan Capistrano. A quasimanneristinterpretation of Spanish Colonialarchitecture in early Postmodernidiom, it is striking for its diminutive scale,an overgrown architectural model in woodand pastel-painted stucco. It proudly displaysthe ubiquitous pseudo-classical elementsof 1970’s and early 1980’sPostmodern: squat, purely cylindrical columns;bare lintels; paper-thin barrel vaulting;and the mandatory Aldo Rossi-inspiredfenestration.Above Graves’ liberating interpretivearchitecture, across Acjachema Street andtoward the Camino Capistrano to the west,looms the massive figure of the new parishchurch of San Juan Capistrano. Datingfrom 1986, it is an opus of the architect JohnBartlett, then based in Arcadia, California.Built to replace the original mission parishchurch that was destroyed by earthquakein 1812, this faithfully Spanish Colonialchurch actually isn’t massive at all.The scale is in fact trompe-l’oeil. Just asGraves’s library disperses its mass bybranching out across its site, creating the illusionof smallness, the new parish churchconcentrates its own mass in a simpleunion of three separately articulated forms:the great cupola, a bell tower, and a centralnave and transepts. It is a Classical piece,an eloquent opus sacrum, one among agrowing number of works that presage therebirth of Classicism, in all its manifestationsof form and style, in the architectureof the Roman Catholic Church.We can only imagine the fuss thatwould have been raised had this fourteenyear-oldwork received more attentionfrom the art and architectural press at thetime of its dedication. In the case ofMichael Graves, imagination need play norole: his work, considered “too traditional,”has already been marginalized byPatrick James RileyThe regional library and parish church of San Juan Capistranothe governing elites of architectural criticism.Mr. Graves is now the only remainingpractitioner of note of a once-popular architecturalmovement, the sole survivor ofthe Postmodern shipwreck.The spirit of Torquemada is alive andwell in the world of architectural criticism.Books already are being burned, and altarsdefaced and overturned. What treatmentwill be reserved for the architects and builtwork of a true Classical revival in ecclesiasticalarchitecture, especially as this movementgathers more disciples? We know theanswer to that question. But the forces thatdestroyed the Postmodern movement willlikely be in for a surprise when they stagetheir inevitable assault on this authenticand most durable architecture.Spanish Colonial Architecture inAmericaCalifornia is peppered with buildings inthe Spanish Colonial style. From suburbanhomes to gasoline stations to major publicoeuvres, these edifices define the physicaland cultural landscape. Spanish Colonial isoften required by local design reviewboards and planning authorities as conditiosine qua non for obtaining a building permit.The “Mission style,” as Spanish Colonialarchitecture is most often called, hasbecome California’s official architecture.Like so much of California’s cultural produce,it has also come to symbolize, by unfortunateassociation with the recent cropof substandard design and construction, allthat is cheap, superficial, and speculativein the world of buildings.The “Mission style,” of course, wasn’tcheap or Hollywoodish in its original incarnation,the architecture of Spain’sAmerican colonies and, soon thereafter, ofthe missions founded by Blessed JuniperoSerra up the California coast. Like most ofthe Spanish-inspired architecture of theNew World, the “Mission style” derivesfrom Spanish Plateresque and Churrigueresquearchitecture.Late fifteenth-century Plateresque freelyborrowed the decorative motifs of the intricatelydetailed work of Spanish silversmiths,the “Plateros.” In the seventeethcentury, after the restrained Juan deHerrera interlude, decorated architecturein Spain reached an apotheosis in the exuberant—somewould say capricious—Churrigueresque baroque, named after theChurriguera, a family chiefly known in itsday for the design of altars. Characteristicof both the Plateresque and Churrigueresqueare the elaborate frontispieces thatare then applied to an otherwise flat facade.The architectural elements in thesedecorations, columns, entablatures, pedimentset al play a purely decorative role.With the Plateresque andChurriguerresque, Spain’s Gothic moment,based like all Gothic on structural purism,meets its end.The Spaniards eventually exported theirdecorated architecture to Southern Italyand to their colonies in the Americas. In the18 th century the Churrigueresque set rootsin Mexico, while a native brand of Plateresque,the Mexican Plateresque, less exactin the carving of ornamental details than itsSpanish forebear, emerged. This architecturewould come to define Spanish Colo-Photo: Church of San Juan CapistranoSacredArchitecture Fall 2000 19

A R T I C L E SExterior of the new San Juan Capistrano parish churchnial architecture in North America, includingthat of the California Missions.The Pastoral Power ofArchitecture and HistoryTo replace the original mission parishchurch, destroyed by an earthquake in1812, a new parish church in a Spanish Colonialspirit was built and dedicated in1986. For the pastor, Monsignor Paul Martin,the historicist architecture of the newbuilding served two critical purposes: thefirst was to maintain historical-artistic continuitywith the rest of the adjacent MissionSan Juan Capistrano; the second was togive the predominantly Hispanic parishionersa church building with a familiar face,making it for them a church they could feelcomfortable in.“This church is familiar to the parishioners,it reminds them of home, it establishesa link with their families and relativesback in Mexico,” says MonsignorMartin. “A modern church building wouldnot have served the needs of this diocese.”The design of the new church borrowswhat it can from the remains of the originalchurch. The rest, as explained by Dr.Norman Neuerberg, an expert whom MonsignorMartin consulted, was obtained bystudying similar churches in Mexico. Theplan is the same for both churches, a Latincross. Culled from the ruins are many ofthe ornamental details: for the carved stonedoorways, for the proportions of the broadintrados of the Roman arches, and in theuse of engaged pilasters at the nave andtransept. While the pictorial record of theold stone church indicates a quadripartiterhythm to the nave, the new parish churchhas only three bays, but wider and deeper.These are capped by sail vaults, eachpierced by an oculus, as in the original design.In the sanctuary of the new church wefind the first and only—insofar as we cantell—substantial departure from the collapsedarchetype: a dome of Renaissanceproportions raised on pendentives andwith a drum punctuated byclerestory windows replacesthe fifth sail vault that waslocated above the old sanctuary.The treatment of the exteriorof the new church is hardto decipher. Its stunted Plateresqueseems to be characteristicof modern CaliforniaMission architecture. It suggestsa stunted effort atachieving a Plateresque effect.While the Plateresquedesign is clearly implemented,the result is onlymoderately, or perhaps modestly,Plateresque. Doubtlessthis was intentional in thenew parish church, whichagain relied on the recordfurnished by the ruins of theold stone church. It is naturalto postulate a scarcity offunds, materials or of qualifiedmanodopera at the time ofits construction.Regardless of the reasons,the parsimony of applied ornamentationin the originalmight indicate something altogetherdifferent: the emergence,for whatever reason,of a newer Spanish Colonial iteration, perhapsa true “Mission Architecture,” understoodas Mexican Plateresque stripped almostbare of its essential decorative components.Gone are the characteristic intricatelydetailed columns and architrave, thetendrils and carved foliage of the traditionalPlateresque frontispiece. In theirplace we find an arched doorway framedby simple pilasters with a single flute. Thetympanum consists of a geometric fan pattern,a nearly complete reduction to essentialgeometries of a floral or vegetal motif.This blank Plateresque “canvas” neverthelessreveals the purity of the form of thisnew church, calling attention to its massand proportions and creating the illusion ofgreat size. Horizontal articulation of thebuilding consists of a single cornice band, asimple profiled element devoid of dentilsor other carvings. Even the bell tower, theonly major architectural component thatoffers any intermediate horizontal articulation,displays uniformly bare surfaces devoidof ornamental appliqués. The total visualeffect is sedate, placid, but neverthelessgrand.The ruins of the old stone church onceagain provided clues, this time for thepainted decorations of the interior. Theseare predominantly floral motifs in brightturquoise and gold tones, typical of coloristicinnovations that are proper to Mexicanpainting of the sixteenth and seventeenthcenturies. These developments in paintingactually precede the emergence and con-Interior of the new parish church20 Fall 2000 Sacred ArchitecturePhoto by Duncan StroikPhoto by Duncan Stroik

solidation of the Mexican Plateresque in architecture.An intriguing contrappunto tothe floral painted decorations is providedby the painted architecture that adornsniches and sometimes frames other artwork:it could reasonably be seen as a Plateresqueinterpretation of Renaissancequadratura, the use of painted architectureto frame a subject. It is in any case the purestand most readily discernible Plateresqueelement of the new church. Inpainted form, we can fully admire the architectureof the Mexican Plateresque, itsdelicate tendril work, its intricate vegetalmotifs, the full ornamental complexity deniedus, not necessarily for the worse, inthe built work.The Parish Church As SacredSignWilliam Whyte, the noted urban theoristwho died in 1991, coined the term“imageabilty” to describe the salient characteristicof an urban landmark. Not allbuildings are landmarks. To be a landmark,a building must be “imageable,” that is, itmust impress its image in the mind of thecitizen, and in doing so it helps the citizenunderstand the city better, and helps himfind his way about town. An “imageable”building, a landmark, is a sign. Like allsigns, it points to something other than itself,to a destination, to some other reality.“This church is familiar to the parishioners,it reminds them of home,” MonsignorMartin said of his new parish church. Thischurch is a sign to the ethnic Hispanic parishioners,a sign of their homes, their family,and their country of origin. It points toall these realities-- home, family, country--by pointing to the churches back home, thePlateresque and Churrigueresque churchesof Mexico. And like all successful churches,it points to a far greater reality, a “faith reality,”as Monsignor Martin called it, theSide ChapelPhoto by Duncan StroikPainting of the old Mission San Juan Capistrano, circa 1806Church founded by Christ.In Catholic theology, a sacramental is asacred sign that is similar to the Seven Sacramentsin its effects, but was not institutedby Christ Himself. The Code of Canon Lawdefines sacramental as “sacred signs bywhich, in a certain imitation of the Sacraments,effects–above all spiritual–are signifiedand are obtained by the intercession ofthe Church.” These sacred signs can be eithervisible, as in priestly vestments, or invisible,as in the blessing of objects anddedication of a church. The blessing of sacredobjects, which is a sacramental in itself,is a requisite if an object is to assumethe nature of sacred sign, that is, if it is tobecome a sacramental. Unlike the Sacraments,which were instituted by Christ, thesacramentals are instituted by the Church,through its intercessory power.Does the blessing and dedication of achurch make that church a sacramental?Sacrosanctum Concilium, the Constitutionon the Sacred Liturgy, doesn’t specify. But achurch building is sanctified thusly. Thechurch edifice, when it indicates the greater“faith reality,” is a sign. It is made a sacredsign by the blessing and dedication that itreceives. The new parish church of SanJuan Capistrano is a cultural sign that remindsparishioners of all that is humanlydear to them. It is also a sacred sign thatpoints to that which is divinely dear to thebeliever. It prepares and disposes the believerto receive the Grace that flows fromthe Sacrifice taking place within its walls atMass.The Rebirth of ClassicalEcclesiastical ArchitectureIn 1981, the late Italian architect, historian,and critic Bruno Zevi declaredPostmodern architecture “stillborn.” Lessthan a decade later, this prophet of Modernismwas proved right. Postmodern hasvanished from the architectural avant garde,A R T I C L E Ssurviving only in the works of its highpriest, Michael Graves, and rearing its headnow and then in the immense plantationsof corporate America’s office parks. The artand architecture intelligentsia will quicklypredict a similar fate for Classical sacred architecture.But it will be mistaken.The seeds of the demise of Postmodernarchitecture lay not in its “Post,” but in its“modern.” A public sickened by the havocwreaked by the Modern movementwarmly received and embracedPostmodernism until the truth set in: it wasnot an attempt to give modern architecturea classical face, but to give Classical architecturea modern face. Classical architecturewas reduced to a mere caricature, to aninfantile interpretation of ancient and timelessthemes and motifs.While the critics rejected thePostmodern right away because of thepresence of the Classical, the public rejectedit for the lack of a true Classical soul.In its essence, it lacked true “imageability,”and quickly became meaningless and insignificantin the true sense, that is, incapableof signifying anything, incapable ofbeing a sign.The intelligentsia will be writing theobituary of Classical architecture even asthe Classical suffers the labor pains of rebirth.“Rumors of its death will be greatlyexaggerated.” The unsung John Bartletts ofthis world will see to it that we have morechurches like San Juan Capistrano.SacredArchitecture Fall 2000 21Patrick James Riley holds a Bachelor of Artsdegree in Art History and a Master’s Degree inArchitecture from the University of Wisconsinat Milwaukee. He has practiced architecture inMilwaukee, Chicago, and the San FranciscoBay Area. He currently works for the firm ofMichael Ross-Charles Drulis Architects andPlanners in Sonoma, CA.Photo: Kammerer, Old Mission San Juan Capistrano, 1980

A R T I C L E SEUCHARISTICUM MYSTERIUM 55 AND THE FOURMODES OF PRESENCE:INADEQUATE PRINCIPLES OF CHURCH DESIGNRev. Timothy VaverekLast autumn I published an article inAntiphon documenting a discrepancy inthe 1967 English text of EucharisticumMysterium 56 which I speculated may havecontributed to a misunderstanding and narrowingof liturgical principles and architecturalnorms in the United States. 1 I suggested theseill effects arose because the mistaken text of EM56 recommended that the tabernacle be placedoff the altar in a separate chapel (whereas theauthentic text permitted placement on an altarin the main church) and because the misprintcreated the impression that the principles of EM55 should guide the design of new churches.EM 55 describes the Mass as a liturgical celebrationduring which four principal modes ofChrist’s presence emerge clearly and successivelyin the assembly, the Word, the priest, andthe Eucharistic species. This liturgical theoryclosely parallels and may well have influencedpost-conciliar church designs in the UnitedStates. Unfortunately, the Church intendedEM 55 to serve only as a practical recommendationon tabernacle placement, not as a statementof a new liturgical theory to be used in designingchurches. The present article will examinehow the theory found in EM 55 can favora particular type of church design and how thatdesign fails to reflect the authentic intentions ofthe Church. This analysis will reveal some ofthe underlying reasons for the long-standingcontroversy over church architecture in theUnited States and will suggest a direction thatcould help bring closure to that debate. 2The Rationale of EM 55 and ItsArchitectural ImplicationsThe Instruction Eucharisticum Mysterium(25 May 1967) desired, in light of the manifoldecclesial pronouncements on the Eucharist,“to draw out practical norms fromthe total teaching of such documents” sothat the Eucharistic mystery and “the relationshipsthat are recognized in the Churchteaching as existing objectively betweenthe various facets of the mystery [might]become reflected in the life and mind of thefaithful.” 3 EM 3 presents a number of doctrinalthemes from Church teaching whichare to be used in the Instruction as “thesource of the norms on the practical arrangementof the worship of this sacramenteven after Mass and of its correlation withthe proper arrangement of the Mass.” Severalof these themes are elaborated in partone of the Instruction as principles for liturgicalcatechesis. 4 EM 55 is found in a subsectionof part three entitled “Where theBlessed Sacrament is to be Reserved” 5 and,read in this context, it is clearly intended tobe a practical recommendation derivedfrom previously established principlessuch as those discussed in EM 3. Thereforeit is contrary to the nature of the passageand the stated intention of the Instructionto read EM 55 as establishing new theoreticalliturgical principles:In the celebration of Mass the principalmodes of Christ’s presence to hisChurch [footnote: see n. 9 of this Instruction]emerge clearly one after theother [successive clarescunt]: first he isseen to be present in the assembly of thefaithful gathered in his name; then in hisword, with the reading and explanationof Scripture; also in the person of theminister; finally, in a singular way underthe eucharistic elements. Consequently,on the grounds of the signvalue, it is more in keeping with the natureof the celebration that, through reservationof the sacrament in the tabernacle,Christ not be presenteucharistically from the beginning onthe altar where Mass is celebrated. Thatpresence is the effect of the consecrationand should appear as such.EM 55 is not meant to be anything morethan a practical recommendation on tabernacleplacement. In the discussion whichfollows we are not concerned with the actualrecommendation made by EM 55 thatthe tabernacle should be separated fromthe altar used at Mass (which may be justifiablefor a variety of reasons), but with theInterior of St. Jean Vianney Catholic Church, Baton Rouge, Louisianaspecific liturgical theory EM 55 has enunciated.Despite the fact that EM 55 makes noclaim to establish a liturgical theory toguide architectural designs, there is atemptation—made all the stronger by themistaken official English text of EM 56—touse the principles of EM 55 as a theoreticalbasis for church design. After all, EM 55 itselfuses this novel theory as the source ofits recommendation regarding tabernacleplacement. Thus, while EM 55 does not actuallyestablish a new theory de jure, itsprinciples might appear de facto to providePhoto courtesy Trahan Architects22 Fall 2000 Sacred Architecture

A R T I C L E Suseful and legitimate architectural criteriafor new designs. Since the four modes ofChrist’s presence are said to emerge clearlyone after the other during the liturgy, itwould seem that church designs shouldlead worshipers to focus attention successivelyon the congregation, the ambo, thechair, and the altar. At the same time, theprimacy given to clearly seeing these distinctmodes favors maximizing proximityand minimizing architectural or decorativefeatures which might attract attention orobstruct vision. The imagined designs thushave four foci and seek to establish thosefoci without the use of extraneous architecturalor ornamental elements. The result isa building that is principally a utilitarianstructure shaped by the minimalistic requirementsof the rites so that the modesand rites are free to speak for themselves.A circular church with the altar, ambo,and chair centrally located meets these criteria,especially if it is of modest size andhas no internal columns. The congregantsare then located as closely as possible toeach other and to the place where the otherthree modes will appear. The lines of sightare unimpeded and directed naturally towardthe modes without needing other elementsto draw attention. Since the assemblyitself is a single mode of presence, itsunity in the celebration is perhaps best expressedby placing the altar, ambo, andchair in the midst of the assembly with aslittle distinction as possible between thecongregation and the central sanctuary.The equal dignity of the modes suggeststhat neither altar, ambo, nor chair shouldbe placed at the exact center. The practicaldrawbacks to this design are the same asthose for the theatre-in-the-round: 1) someof the assembly faces the backside of thecentral space; and 2) there is no backstageor wing space allowing for hidden storage,access, and movement of equipment andpersonnel. These shortcomings can beovercome by a compromise in which thefloor plan is semicircular or fan-shapedrather than a full circle.The Inadequacy of the Principlesin EM 55I do not think it is overstating the case tosay that the type of design described abovehas characterized much of church architectureduring the post-conciliar period in theUnited States. The widespread use and encouragementof this style has created controversybecause the pattern does not fitwell with the designs of most pre-conciliarCatholic churches in the United States andtherefore does not accord with the sensibilitiesof those attached for historic, personal,or esthetic reasons to more traditionalor classical styles. The result hasbeen thirty years of debate and frustrationregarding the design of new churches andthe renovation of existing ones. Such conflictis natural to human life and is at timesPlan of Christ the King Catholic Church, Milwaukie, Oregon, by Pietro Belluschi, 1978unavoidable in the life of the Church as sheadapts to changing historical circumstances.The roots of the present conflict,however, run deeper than the challenge ofchange and adaptation. The design criteriadiscussed above, which so closely parallelthe theory of EM 55, do not in fact fully correspondto the Church’s understanding ofthe church building or liturgy and, in somedetails, actually violate the existing legislationgoverning the design of churches.These discrepancies arise because theChurch’s understanding of the churchbuilding and the liturgy center on theChurch’s participation in the Pasch ofChrist and have nothing to do with EM55’s novel theory of successive manifestationof four modes of presence.It is essential to keep in mind that the rationaleof EM 55 was not presented by theChurch as a statement of new theoreticalprinciples for use in liturgical theology orchurch design. To be sure, EM 55 seeks tojustify its practical recommendation on tabernacleplacement by appealing to what itevidently believes are legitimate theoreticalprinciples, but the context assures us thatEM 55 is intending to apply existing principlesand not to introduce new ones. ThatEM 55 does not provide an adequate statementof the Church’s previously establishedliturgical principles can be demonstratedby a comparison with the underlyingtexts of EM 9 and SacrosanctumConcilium 7. 6 SC 7 does not speak of fourmodes of presence and neither it nor EM 9states that the modes emerge clearly one afteranother during liturgy. A more fundamentaldeparture from SC 7 and EM 9 isthe failure of EM 55 to mention the sacrificeof the Mass and the Church as ways inwhich Christ is present. These are startlingomissions. After all, the Paschal Mysteryof Christ’s saving death, resurrection, andascension is present in the Mass as thesource and summit of the entire life of theChurch. 7 And the Eucharistic celebration isnot merely an ad hoc gathering of two orthree believers as EM 55 states; it is thepublic worship of God performed by theChurch, the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ,that is, by the Head and his members orderedin a hierarchical communion. 8 Indeed,for Vatican II the celebration ofChrist’s Pasch under the headship of thebishop is the principal manifestation of theChurch. 9 EM 55 does not convey this paschaland ecclesial vision of the liturgy, orground its novel theory on establishedprinciples. Therefore, it is not a legitimatesource of liturgical theory.The goal of the liturgy in the thought ofVatican II is the full, conscious, and activeparticipation of the Church and her membersin Christ’s Pasch by which God is glorifiedand humanity redeemed. 10 This participationleads to communion with Godand humanity in Christ. 11 Thus, the focusof the liturgy is on transforming union inChrist and His Pasch, not on the variousmodes of His presence. Liturgy understoodas participation is primarily a matterof being and becoming rather than one ofseeing or performing. The significance ofChrist’s presence to the Church (in farmore than four principal ways) is that bythis means we are enabled to become participantsin the Pasch (this is the entirepoint of SC 7). When mistakenly used as aliturgical theory, the novel rationale of EMPhoto: Clausen, Spiritual Space, The Religious Architecture of Pietro Belluschi, 1992SacredArchitecture Fall 2000 23

A R T I C L E S55 shifts the focus of liturgyfrom the end (participation inChrist and His Pasch) to a fewparticular means (the fourmodes). Liturgy is then easilyconsidered to be about makingor seeing Jesus present in ourmidst rather than about beingunited to Him in His PaschalMystery. We find here, ironically,a continuation of an impoverishedpre-conciliar liturgicaltheory that now awaits thearrival of Christ not only in theEucharistic species and thepriest, but also in the assemblyand the Word. Vatican II remindedus that something muchmore than Christ’s appearance isat the heart of the liturgy: ourparticipation with Christ in Hissaving work.Authentic Architecturevs. Defective DesignsBased on EM 55The implications of the teachingof Vatican II for architectural design areprofound. A liturgy which is a participationin the Pasch calls for a building whichis the place of the Pasch, an architecturalmanifestation of the Church and the Kingdom12 with space for symbols of Christ,His saving work, and the angels and saints.It is an iconic building which elicits andfosters communion through contemplationof the Church and the Kingdom—and notmerely through the seeing of the symbolsand the doing of the rites. Just as the life ofthe Church is not limited to participation inthe liturgy, 13 so the building’s iconic functionof symbolizing the Church cannot bereduced to its ritual function in liturgy.The building is therefore more than a utilitarianritual space. Its function is to be asymbol of the Church even when the liturgyis not being celebrated. Based on thisidentity and function as a sign of theChurch, the building is enabled to be anevangelical witness, a place of prayer, andan aid to full participation in the liturgicaland devotional celebrations which takeplace within it.Because the building is a symbol of theChurch, the people of God who possess anorganic and hierarchical structure expressedin diverse ministries and charisms,the general plan of the church should conveythis image in its unity and diversity byhaving distinct places for congregation,choir, and priests. 14 For this reason “thepart of the church that brings out [the] distinctiverole of the ministerial priest,” thepresbyterium (called the sanctuary in theUnited States), “should be clearly markedoff from the body of the church.” 15 Thisdistinction of the presbyterium reveals thehierarchical ordering of the Church underThe church building as representing the body ofChrist, by Cataneo, 1550.the headship of Christ present in the apostolicministry of the clergy. This explainswhy a layperson who leads a celebration inthe absence of the clergy does not sit in thesanctuary. 16 A church without a clearly distinctsanctuary risks being headless anddisordered.The focal point of the entire building isthe altar 17 because the altar is the symbol ofChrist and the place of His Pasch, 18 thetable from which we are fed His Word andHis Body and Blood. 19 The altar, then, isthe center of the thanksgiving accomplishedin the Eucharist and, in a sense, theother rites of the Church are arrayedaround it. 20 The altar is also the center ofthe presbyterium where the priest presidesin the person and name of Christ who isthe High Priest, head and bridegroom ofthe Church leading the people in prayer,proclaiming the Gospel and offering thesacrificial banquet. As the symbol of Christand center of worship, the altar thereforestands within the sanctuary at the headand heart of the church. It is fitting, then,that the location of the altar be singled outfrom the beginning of the building’s constructionby placing a cross on the spotwhere the altar will be raised. 21 A churchnot centered on the altar is not centered onthe Paschal Mystery of Christ.Unlike the altar that is a consecrated imageof Christ and the center of the church,the priest’s chair and the ambo are functionalappointments rather than focalpoints or liturgical symbols per se. Hencethe chair and ambo are not themselves objectsof reverence, or even attention, duringthe liturgy. They simply serve as placeswhere specific liturgical functions are carriedout and they are located and designedto focus attention on the liturgicalaction, not on themselves. 22 Thatthe altar rather than the chair orambo is the center of the liturgyand is properly the table fromwhich the Gospel and Eucharistare taken and distributed to thepeople signifies that the liturgy ofthe Word and the liturgy of theEucharist are not actually separateceremonies, but form a singleact of worship flowing fromChrist and His Pasch. 23 It is impossibleto juxtapose Word andSacrament (or altar and ambo) becausethe Sacraments are thegreatest proclamation of the Gospel;in them Word and deed areconjoined so that mankind isdrawn to participate in the veryMystery of Christ they proclaim. 24The liturgical theory in EM 55cannot adequately explain theChurch’s design criteria of hierarchicalarrangement and the centralityof the altar because of itsfailure to mention the Church andthe Paschal Mystery, the sourceand summit of the Church’s life. This fundamentalflaw leads to an impoverished architecturalstyle and is content to foster themanifestation of four modes rather than todraw the ordered assembly into contemplativeparticipation with Christ in HisPasch. Lacking any reference to the Pasch,the building loses its authentic identity asan icon of the Paschal Banquet which is theKingdom and becomes merely a shell thathouses liturgical ceremonies. Consequently,the role of the altar as the center ofthe entire Paschal celebration, a positionmandated by the Church, is surrendered tothe shifting foci of assembly, ambo, chair,and altar. This loss of center in turn threatensthe unity of the celebration, for example,by separating the liturgy of theWord (centered on the ambo) from the liturgyof the Eucharist (centered on the altar).Because the assembly is consideredonly as a group of disciples gathered in Hisname rather than as a assembly of theChurch, the building does not reflect thehierarchical ordering of the communityand so cannot function as a symbol of theChurch. This leads to designs which fail todistinguish the presbyterium (sanctuary)from the main body of the church as urgedby Church law. Designs based on the liturgicaltheory of EM 55 therefore literallyplace the assembly in a false relation to itsvisible head and to the altar, signifying afalse relation to Christ and His Pasch. It isworth noting that these design criteria,lacking any reference to the Paschal banquetand the ordered Church, tend to parallelthe sacramental and ecclesiological visionof congregational Protestantism. Thiscan be seen in a striking way by comparingpost-conciliar design and remodeling in24 Fall 2000 Sacred Architecture

A R T I C L E Sthe United States to the Gothic churchesrenovated by the Dutch Reform.We have seen that architecture based onthe liturgical theory of EM 55 is in a varietyof ways prevented from expressing thetruth about the Church and the liturgy: thatthere is no Eucharistic assembly (orChurch) without hierarchical ordering, thatWord and Sacrament flow from the altar ofChrist’s Pasch to the people through theapostolic ministry of the clergy, and thatthe Paschal sacrifice and banquet of Christcelebrated around the altar is the originand consummation of our lives and of allcreation. In short, architectural stylesbased on the principles of EM 55 are incapableof expressing adequately the theologyof the Church and the particular visionof Vatican II for the Church in our time. Becausethey fail to articulate the Church’s visionsuch designs are destined to ignore ordistort post-conciliar reforms and liturgicallaw, resulting in buildings which are fundamentallyinadequate—if not false—symbolsof the Church and which thereforesubject people to inauthentic expressions ofthe Church and the liturgy.ConclusionThe use of the liturgical theory of EM 55in the design of churches is tempting becauseit offers what seems at first glance tobe a nice, short, simple statement on the liturgy,apparently sound enough to resolvethe question of tabernacle placement, andseemingly mandated by the mistaken 1967English text of EM 56 as a basis for churcharchitecture. In addition, the principles itespouses have been widely accepted andimplemented in the United States for thirtyyears. But EM 55 was not intended by theChurch to be used as a statement of newtheoretical principles, and its failure tomention the Pasch and the Church rendersits theory inadequate as a guide for liturgyor architectural design. It is understandablethat few people have time to read orreread the Church’s diverse pronouncementson liturgy and architecture andtherefore rely on isolated passages thathave been most frequently cited on a givenissue. In the case of EM 55 this proves dangerousbecause EM 55 has been taken outof context and used as if it were an authenticstatement of established liturgicaltheory when it is not.The misuse of the principles of EM 55 asa theoretical foundation for church architectureresults in design criteria that distortthe purpose and structure of the churchbuilding. The building is reduced from beingan icon of the Church as envisioned bythe Council to being a functional spacemanifesting four modes and the rites. Architectsand those involved with churchdesign should therefore avoid developingor using design criteria based on the liturgicaltheory in EM 55 and its faulty notionof four successive modes of presence.Likewise they should not be guided by anytheory of church design which begins withritual requirements. Instead, all designsshould begin with the role of the churchbuilding as a symbol of the Church and theKingdom, the place of the Pasch, as statedin the Rite of Dedication of a Church, and bythe ecclesiology of Sacrosanctum Conciliumand Lumen Gentium. From this startingpoint designs should then consider the requirementsof the liturgical books and thegenuine devotions of the faithful. Througha continual return to these and other authenticsources of liturgical theology andlaw it will be possible over time to bringSt. Odulphus, Assendelft, Netherlands, as renovated by the Dutch Reform,from a painting by Pieter Saenredam© Rijksmuseum Amsterdamchurch design into harmony with the actualvision of the Church. The result willbe buildings which manifest and celebratenot only the four particular modes of presencementioned in EM 55, but others aswell and, above all, the Church’s ongoingparticipation in the Wedding Feast of thePaschal Lamb, the eschatological Kingdompresent now in mystery.Rev. Timothy V. Vaverek, S.T.D. is pastor ofSt. Joseph’s Church in Waco, Texas and a memberof the board of the Society for Catholic LiturgyNOTES1See “The Place of the Eucharistic Tabernacle:A Question of Discrepancy,” Antiphon 4:2(1999), 10-13, and the subsequent exchange ”ThePlace of the Eucharistic Tabernacle: Responses toTimothy V. Vaverek,” Antiphon 4:3 (1999), 25-34.The 1967 English text of EM 56 mistakenly saysthat the principles of nn. 53 and 55 (recommendingEucharistic chapels and a liturgical theory favoringlocation of the tabernacle off the altar) areto be used in new churches when it should citenn. 52 and 54 (one tabernacle placed on or off thealtar). This text remains in print in most Englishversions with the notable exception of ICELsDocuments on the Liturgy (Collegeville: The LiturgicalPress, 1982).2The present paper is concerned with the architecturalcontroversy. The underlying issues,however, are properly theological. I have prepareda separate article offering a theological critiqueof EM 55 which demonstrates that its principlesdo not adequately reflect the theology ofthe source documents or the liturgy. Since EM55 makes no claim to establish new liturgicalprinciples, appeal to the novel liturgical theoryof EM 55 is theologically misleading and unwarranted.3EM 2. All quotations are taken from Documentson the Liturgy.4EM 5-15.5EM 52-57.6EM 9 states:In order to achieve a deeper understandingof the eucharistic mystery, the faithful should beinstructed in the principle modes by which theLord is present to his Church in liturgical celebrations[footnote: see SC 7].He is always present in an assembly of thefaithful gathered in his name (see Mt 18:20). Heis also present in his word, for it is he who isspeaking as the sacred Scriptures are read in theChurch.In the eucharistic sacrifice he is presentboth in the person of the minister, “the samenow offering through the ministry of the priestwho formerly offered himself on the cross,” andabove all under the eucharistic elements. For inthat sacrament, in a unique way, Christ ispresent, whole and entire, God and man, substantiallyand continuously. This presence ofChrist under the elements “is called the realSacredArchitecture Fall 2000 25

A R T I C L E Spresence not to exclude the otherkinds, as though they were notreal, but because it is real par excellence.”SC 7 states:To accomplish so great a work[i.e., the saving work of the Pasch(see SC 5-6)], Christ is alwayspresent in his Church, especially inits liturgical celebrations. He ispresent in the sacrifice of the Mass,not only in the person of his minister,“the same now offering,through the ministry of priests,who formerly offered himself onthe cross,” but especially under theeucharistic elements. By his powerhe is present in the sacraments, sothat when a man baptizes it is reallyChrist himself who baptizes.He is present in his word, since it ishe himself who speaks when theholy Scriptures are read in theChurch. He is present, lastly whenthe Church prays and sings, for hepromised: “Where two or three aregathered together in my name,there am I in the midst of them”(Mt 18:20).Christ always truly associatesthe Church with himself in thisgreat work wherein God is perfectlyglorified and the recipientsmade holy. The Church is theLord’s beloved bride... [so that] inthe liturgy the public worship isperformed by the Mystical Body of Jesus Christ,that is, by the Head and his members.7See EM 6 and SC 5-13, especially SC 10.8See EM 7 and SC 7.9See SC 41-42 and Lumen Gentium 26.10See SC 5-13 and 47-48.11See EM 12.12See LG 5-6 and Rite of Dedication of a Churchand Altar (RDCA) ch. 1, n.1 and ch. 2, nn. 1-3.13SC 12, see also SC 9 and 13.14See General Instruction of the Roman Missal(GIRM) 257. All citations from GIRM are takenfrom the second edition of the Roman Missal(1975). The third edition of the Missal with anew Instruction was announced as the presentarticle was going to the printer. There do not appearto be any significant changes relevant to thepresent discussion. The enumeration haschanged as follows: GIRM (1975) 257-259, 262,271, 272 are GIRM (2000) 294-296, 299, 310, 309.15GIRM 257-258.16See Directory for Sunday Celebrations in theAbsence of a Priest, 39-40 and General Instruction ofthe Liturgy of the Hours, 258.17See GIRM 262.18See RDCA ch. 4, n.1.19See Dei Verbum 21.20See GIRM 259 and RDCA ch. 4, n. 4.21See RDCA ch. 1, n. 6.22See GIRM 271 and 272. Note that thecelebrant’s chair is different than a bishop’s cathedrawhich is per se a sign of the bishop’s officeas teacher and pastor of the local church andInterior of the church of Il Redentore by Andrea Palladio, Venice, Italy, 1576hence is not to be used by anyone else (seeCaeremoniale Episcoporum 42 and 47). The Latin textof GIRM 271, unlike the English, does not actuallycall the priest’s chair a symbol. Because its locationcorresponds to the celebrant’s role as presider (not aspriest per se), the chair may be used by anyone whopresides in virtue of apostolic ministry (bishops,FROM THE PUBLISHERA NOTE TO OUR READERSpriests, and deacons). This is the underlyingreason a layperson may not use thecelebrant’s chair (see Directory for SundayCelebrations in the Absence of a Priest, 39-40).23See SC 56 and DV 21.24See SC 6 and Presbyterorum Ordinis 4.We would like to take this opportunity to thank you for allof your support for Sacred Architecture. With this, ourfourth issue, we finish our third year of publication. Thejournal has been an exciting endeavor from the start, and ithas grown in readership and impact. In order to keep thequality of the journal up to the highest aesthetic standards,we are publishing it two times a year. If you have not alreadydone so this year, please consider renewing your subscriptionand supporting the work of Sacred Architecture. We lookforward to hearing your comments on the journal and servingthe Church in the renewal of its architecture.Photo: Timofiewitsch, La Chiesa del Redentore, 196926 Fall 2000 Sacred Architecture

CATHOLIC IDENTITY, THE BUILDING, THE REACTIONSA VIEWPOINT FROM ANTHROPOLOGYRev. William J. TurnerA R T I C L E SIt has become evident recently that aplethora of opinions and reactions to liturgicalrenewal exist, especially as it appliesto sacred space. This fact is reflectiveof the concern of many Catholics, and itneeds to be seriously addressed.Today, an evergreaternumber ofCatholic laity are welleducatedprofessionalswho expect that an approachto renewal willreflect a more collaborativemethod of decisionmaking.A model for renewalthat does not includelistening to theirconcerns will often meetwith rejection. I suggestthat proposals for renewalneed to be testedin the light of the experienceof Catholics as wellas by the teaching of theChurch. If so, renewalwill become acceptableto such individuals,rather than becoming achallenge to their identity.Their history andtheir culture would thusbe respected and upheldas valuable.An understanding ofthe anthropological processof critical self-reflectionbecomes an importantelement here. Criticalself-reflection demandsthat an observerrethink categories andreorient perspectivesthat involve the effectsof the liturgical renewal.It is interesting tonote that when the Centerfor Pastoral Liturgyat Notre Dame celebratedits 25th Anniversaryin 1995, even liturgists felt that thefirst among significant losses in the last 25years of renewal was “Catholic identity.”The question may arise whether traditionalsymbols found in our church buildingsmay be changed. My respondentshave seemed to accept many of their symbolsas having eternal value that rise from acommunity history. They often report thatany new symbols proposed must respectthe older symbols.My research has encouraged many responsesfrom Catholics. In the light of reflectionupon this experience of commentsSt. Mary of All Angels, Chicago, Illinoisand concerns, I offer recommendations thatmay enhance successful implementation ofrenewal or refurbishing processes. Onemay wish to reflect upon the following:What is the Catholic identity of thisgroup of people? On what do they focusupon entering their church building? Dothey look for symbols that express “Catholicism”for them? A strong Eucharisticpresence and Eucharistic sensibility may benoted. This concept is not unanimously acceptedas primary, yet it is nonetheless acritical element of Catholic identity. Ideasfor construction or renovation seem to beappreciated by these individualswhen theyhave been applied withconsideration for theirlocal parishes, ratherthan being applied asuniversal concepts. (Forexample, a baptismalpool may not be appropriateto every parish,and indeed may be offensiveto some parishioners.This sensibilitycould change in the future.)Does the proposedrenovation exhibit a respectfor the history andexperience of this groupof people? It would bedifficult to respond tothis if an architect or artistwere not willing orable to spend time in acommunity and begin toknow these people inmany contexts. Theirhistory can be celebratedin many waysthat can bring aboutfeelings of trust ratherthan suspicion.What is the history ofthe parishioners’ relationshipwith leadershipin the parish? Whatmodels have been used?If the community hashad a negative relationshipwith its leadership,there may be a hesitancyto express trust in newproposals. Healing canoccur if the leadership iswilling to listen without an agenda of proposedchanges.How does a proposal for change effectthe concept of the church seen as “thehouse of God” apart from its use as “thehouse of worship?” This is a key distinction.The building is their sacred building,home to sacred things, and not just an edificefor sacred events and ceremonies, andSacredArchitecture Fall 2000 27

A R T I C L E SHave liturgicalartists,architectsandleadershipbeen led to arethinkingof pre-establishedcategoriesandperspectivesthroughoutthe processof renewal?This may beevident inthe developmentof flexibilityandthe use ofthe collabora t i v emodel ofdecisionmaking.Communicationwasa high priorityconcernin the experienceof myr espondents.Thatconcernmay need tobe addressedin aSt. Joseph’s Church, Omaha, Nebraskarenovationprocess. Theespecially not just Sunday Mass.Responses I have received indicate asensibility that proposals received by parishionerscome from a different energy,one that talks about “worship space.” Referenceto “focus” in a church building isnot clearly definable, but is certainly relatedto the sense of sacred. My respondentsreferred to this need for the familiarand comfortable, as they sensed an absenceof these elements in the outside world.Their “sense of peace” had been attacked.Their understanding of focus may be, insome cases, in conflict with renovation proposals.Church buildings vary as to focus.Foci have shifted several times over the lastthirty years.Has the process of listening to Catholicsbeen blocked by the goals, vocabulary, andinfluences of liturgical reform? Renewalhas been proposed with great enthusiasm,yet frustratingly blocked during the processof implementation. Have proposalsaddressed the experiences and considerationsof their congregations? To ask thisquestion is not to minimize the proposals,but rather to suggest a process that maysuccessfully implement suggestions thatsimple, yet often neglected, art of listeningmay prove to be the most important componentof a renewal or renovation project.This form of anthropological methodologycan be successful inasmuch as it bringsforward the voices of parishioners, relatingwhat is sacred for them, how that sense ofsacred applies to their church building, andwhat factors establish Catholic identity intheir minds. If one can propose that such liturgicalprocesses are indeed a “ministry,”then I would also propose that this ministrymust be carried out with such knowledge,with sensitivity to feelings and as aresponse to needs.Results of my research indicated the“things” that respondents felt make achurch “Catholic.” Although my samplingwas not from the entire Catholic population,nevertheless, from my experience inNorth America, I believe it to be true in ageneral sense. Let the reader investigateand find similar results:From their experience in churches,many Catholics feel the following items expresstheir Catholicity, and they desire tosee them present and visible in their churchspace in the following order:minister to the congregations who will experienceFirst Place: The Tabernacle (39%)a renovation.Second Place: The Crucifix(26%)Third Place: The Altar (13%)Fourth Place: The Baptismal Font (7%)Fifth Place: The Stations of the Cross(7%)Kneelers, statues, stained glass, holywater, confessionals were also of note, butto a lesser extent than the overpowering“top two” categories. Since I have done thisresearch, I have never entered a churchwithout thinking of these first two prioritiesfound in the minds of most Catholics Iknow.As the millennium is upon the Church,it is interesting that a strong, building, andemerging group of Catholics are policingwhat is happening in their buildings. Withall the energy of the news reporter in themovie “Network,” they are loudly sayingthat they are “mad, and they are not goingto take it any more!” This anger has beendeeply felt in the liturgical community,who with the kindest of hearts, but sometimeswith the strongest reaction, proposeliturgical and architectural reform. Mostdistressing to them, and I count myselfamong them, is the recent questioning ofpast proposals and liturgical documents bythe American bishops. This has also expresseditself in Rome’s response to concernsover translations proposed by ICEL,(The International Commission for Englishin the Liturgy). There seems to be a greatloss of confidence here. Much of this responsehas been a bottom up movement,initiated by Catholics who have addressedconcerns to their bishops. We are only nowreflecting on what this is saying and howwe should move forward. One such documentthat may be thought out of touchwith the sensibility of such Catholics hasproposed, and sometimes demanded locally,that the Tabernacle be moved to aseparate chapel away from the body of thechurch. Whether this directive is adheredto in the future will not only effect the sensibilityof Catholics in general, but also thefuture plans and proposals of artists andarchitects.Lest many Catholics become, what Ihave phrased: “voices crying in the wilderness,”I would hope and propose that thefuture would bring an openness to dialoguethat comes from those who see sacredenvironmental change as a processthat looks at the self and at others. I dare tosuggest that answers to this current dilemma,and the research that needs to bedone by liturgical reformers and church architects,for that matter, may be found withthe assistance of some of the methodologyof cultural anthropology.Rev. William J. Turner, is a Roman Catholicpriest of the Diocese of Lansing, Michigan. Thisarticle is a summary of his 1997 dissertation onCatholic identity and its relationship to theCatholic Church building.28 Fall 2000 Sacred Architecture

THE ROMAN ROAD TO THE BAROQUEE XHIBITIONSThe Triumph of the Baroque: Architecturein Europe 1600-1750Exhibition at the National Gallery of Art,Washington, D.C. May 21 - October 9,2000; at Musee des Beaux-Arts, Marseille,France, November 17, 2000 - March 4, 2001.Catalog edited by Henry A. Millon, publishedby Bompiani, 624 pages, with morethan 800 color and black-and-white images.Reviewed by Catesby LeighIt is no secret that art history suffers froma fragmented outlook. It tends to focuson the particularities of a given periodrather than the great continuities arisingfrom secular reliance on a canon of formsand conventions. The current architecturalexhibition at the National Gallery of Art inWashington, The Triumph of the Baroque: Architecturein Europe, 1600-1750, suffers fromthis academic tendency. The commentaryaccompanying the exhibition does not setthe baroque in its broader context.But the exhibition is wonderful nevertheless.Its main feature consists of 27 architecturalmodels. The models would beinadequate in and of themselves, for manyof them represent only parts of an overallscheme, or designs worked out in their architecturalaspects only, with the decorationmerely suggested or left out entirely.But the exhibition also includes paintings,prints, and photographs, as well as architecturalplans and elevations. These largelyfill in the gaps. Though wider in geographicscope, The Triumph of the Baroque isa welcome complement to a similar exhibitionof Italian Renaissance architecture thegallery mounted in 1994. It remains onview through October 9.The first and, for the purposes of thisjournal, most significant portion of the currentexhibition concerns Rome and papalpatronage of sacred architecture and civicamenities alike.The model for the Trevi Fountain (1733),commissioned by Clement XII and designedby Nicola Salvi, provides a vivid illustrationof the continuity of Romanforms. The Trevi model consists of thefountain’s monumental backdrop, a façadedominated by a great Corinthian order anda central niche. Closely akin to an ancientRoman fountain-building or nymphaeum,the façade is not baroque but classical in itstreatment. Its ample decoration is only partiallyindicated by the model, which doesnot include the sculpture in the roundadorning its flanking niches and attic. Evenso, the excellence of the design is obvious.The fountain-building occupies the formalpole in a scheme involving a fantasticallynaturalistic rock outcropping enriched bywaterfalls and statues of Ocean, whostands on a huge conch shell in front of thecentral niche, and a pair of Tritons andseahorses. A painting by Panini whichforms part of the exhibition shows thefountain in its entirety.A similarly scenographic conceptionanimates Bernini’s Cornaro Chapel in thechurch of Santa Maria della Vittoria inRome. The chapel is best known for thesculptor-architect’s Saint Teresa in Ecstasy, aterracotta model (c.1644) for which is onview. But the general scheme is revealed byan unknown painter’s meticulous depictionof the chapel from around 1650.Above, a celestial ensemble including theHoly Spirit and the angels encroaches upona window in the vault, leaving one to wonderwhether the window is real. In the altarbelow we have the statues of Saint Teresaof Avila and the angel, with the glory radiatingupon them. The altar is crowned by acanopy configured as a sort of half-brokenpediment, curvilinear in plan and supportedby columns. Three entablatures, oneof which is carried on by the pedimentcanopy,lie beneath the vault and the archsituated in front in it. The rich decorationincludes angels, putti, and swags carved inbold relief, and a harmonious variety ofcolor in the marbles employed. In the galleriesflanking the altar, sculpted membersof the Cornaro family discuss the divinespectacle among themselves. The world, indeference to the saint, has come rather as-Model of Smol’ny Convent, St. Petersburg, Russia, 1748Photo courtesy The National Gallery of ArtSacredArchitecture Fall 2000 29

E XHIBITIONStonishingly out of joint.Are the fountain and the chapel meresymptoms of a theatrical fad in Western design?Or does that very theatricality arisefrom enduring human preferences? Onlyfunctionalist superstition could cause anydoubts about the answer. But still, somewill wonder whether such flamboyant visualdisplay is as appropriate for a house ofworship as for a public fountain. From timeimmemorial, however, such display hasbeen indispensable to the creation of settingsfor worship exalted above the rudimentarybackground of daily life. And ofcourse profound insight into human modesof perception -- psychological insight, in aword -- hardly originated with the“moderns.” In Hadrian’s Pantheon, too, arich array of color and illusion lay at theheart of the architectural scheme, with thewalls of the great rotunda “dematerialized”in such a way that the skylit domewould seem not to be supported, but tofloat.Bernini, like his Renaissance forebears,was simply building on the artisticachievements of ancient Rome. Where isthe biblical injunction against such endeavor?From the Greeks the Romans hadinherited an architectural canon whose expressivepowers they vastly increased aspart of that great instinctive task of incarnatingthe sense of an ideal life beckoningto us during our earthly sojourns. After thelong medieval interlude, Christian Romeassumed this great legacy for its own artisticpurposes. This was only natural, for thattask is not specifically pagan, nor Christian,but human. And the result was thatthe expressive range of classical architecturewas once again broadened enormouslyover the course of several centuries.The real question, of course, is why themoderns eventually abandoned the classicaltradition. A hint at the answer is perhapsprovided by two enchanting, andquite large, canvases included in the exhibition.They are Panini’s Ancient Rome andModern Rome (1757). Each picture showsconnoisseurs and copyists in a magnificent,luminous gallery. In the first instance, thegallery is replete with great works of Romanantiquity in architecture and sculpture.(The architecture is shown in paintingscovering the gallery’s walls). In thesecond, works of the same kind from theRenaissance and baroque eras are on view.If it weren’t for the pictures’ titles, the casualviewer might well be oblivious to thechronological distinction. For what we encounterin both paintings is the same vesselof forms, to use Spengler’s expression. Or,to put it another way, we encounter thegreat cultural continuity that characterizeswhat Geoffrey Scott called “the Romanroad, which stretched forward and back tothe horizon, sometimes overlaid, but notfor long to be avoided.”Model of the Abbey Church of St. Gall, Switzerland, 1751The burden of historical consciousnesswhich the Enlightenment brought in itstrain accounts for the subject matter ofPanini’s pair of pictures as well as the famousquérelle between the ancients andmoderns, which got underway in Franceduring the 17th century. The utterly misleadingmodern notion of progress in thearts equivalent to progress in scienceproved profoundly disruptive to the classicaltradition. After all, Bernini’s art and architectureessentially involved the discoveryof new facets of an inexhaustibly fertileideal which had existed across the ages.The same applies to Sixtus V’s brilliantscheme of the 1580s for Rome’s spatial integration,which provided the urban frameworkfor major architectural developmentsof the baroque era. But pseudo-scientifictheories and the subjection of esthetics tosociology did away with the idea of designgrounded in the past.The Triumph of the Baroque shows theplastic possibilities of the classical canonbeing grasped far from Rome. Models forchurches in Austria, Germany, and Switzerlanddisplay baroque plasticity and ornamentalexuberance fused with theconical roofs and onion domes of northernEurope. Far more impressive, however, intheir unity of conception, harmonious proportions,figural appeal, and detailing aretwo superb models for ecclesiastic projectsin St. Petersburg. In both cases, Italian architectsincorporated local conventionssuch as the centralized Greek-cross planand the combination of four secondarydomes with a great central dome and alofty entrance bell-tower into theirschemes.The earlier of the two models is of theCathedral of St. Isaac commissioned byCatherine the Great in 1767. St. Isaac’s wascompleted in 1802, then demolished in1818 to make way for a more capaciousbuilding, the ungainly neoclassical pile ofthe same name. The second, and much thegrander, of the two models is of theSmol’ny Convent, which includes a centralchurch, girded by the convent’s residentialwings, chapels, and gardens, plus a greatperimeter wall. The model boasts typicallyRussian blue-and-white polychromy, whilea profusion of gilt ornament suggestsripples of flame running along its domesand towers. The convent’s brilliantly configuredbell-tower entrance, with its veryhigh, onion-domed central lantern perchedabove five orders and two flanking towers,was never built, but the rest of the designwas carried out.The exhibition also includes examplesof commercial, civic, military, and residentialdesign from different parts of Europe. Itserves as a reminder -- if a reminder wereneeded -- that it’s high time we tossed thequérelle aside and got back on the Romanroad.Catesby Leigh is a writer and architecturalcritic residing in Washington, D.C.Photo coutesy the National Gallery of Art30 Fall 2000 Sacred Architecture

B O O K SPONTIFICAL PATRONAGERejoice! 700 Years of Art for the PapalJubilee, edited by Maurizio Calvesi withLorenzo Canova, New York: Rizzoli, 1999.239 pages. $75.00.Reviewed by Michael Morris, O.P.REJOICE! is a very dumb title for a verysmart book. The title smacks too muchof those mindless felt and burlap bannersfrom the trendy 1960’s which look like anembarrassment to us now. But this bookhas the finer arts in focus. The Rizzoli publication,which is a compilation of twentyfouressays by a variety of Italian scholars,looks at 700 years of papal artistic patronagefor the Jubilee Yearsthat brought pilgrimsfrom around the worldto Rome. The superblyillustrated coffee-tablebook covers both artand architecture.Pope Boniface VIIIpromulgated the firstJubilee in the year 1300.His annus iubilaeus wasrooted in the traditionof the Hebrew feast ofthe Jubilee. The feast occurredevery fifty yearsand was dedicated tothe sanctification of society.There was neitherharvesting nor sowing;the land was left fallow.Freedom was restoredto the slaves, propertyreturned to its originalowners. Debts werecancelled. For the Christiansof the MiddleAges, the call to Rome was an opportunityto cancel temporal punishment due to sin.By papal edict, the faithful could gain indulgencesby going on pilgrimage and visitingthe sacred basilicas in the Eternal City.How often these Jubilees would be heldwas a matter not settled for several centuries.One-hundred-year intervals and thirtythree-year intervals (supposedly the lengthof Christ’s time on earth) were tried until itwas finally decided that the Holy Yearwould occur every twenty-fifth year, savefor special occasions when an “extraordinary”Jubilee might be called for specialreasons. Throughout the centuries, thepopes prepared for such events by sponsoringelaborate building programs andcommissioning beautiful works of art. APiazza del Popolo, Rome, Italysweeping view of these achievements is theobject of these essays, and they have beenmasterfully edited by Maurizio Calvesi, aprofessor of art history at the University ofRome.Students of architecture will appreciateespecially the chapter on the Jubilee calledby Pope Sixtus IV in the year 1475. Becausethe Holy Land was controlled by the Mohammedans,Rome took deliberate meansto become a substitute destination for pilgrimswho longed to go to Jerusalem. Thepapacy appropriated for itself and at thesame time confronted the potent symbolismof the Jewish High Priesthood and theglorious Temple of Solomon. The scholarsof this book prove that it is by no mere coincidencethat the dimensions of the SistineChapel are identical to the dimensions ofSolomon’s Temple. An inscription found inthe Chapel reads: “You, Sixtus IV, inferiorto Solomon in wealth, but superior to himin religion and devotion, consecrated thisimmense temple.” In 1500 the Jubilee ofAlexander VI embellished the Church ofSanta Croce in Gerusalemme, reputedlybuilt on the site of the Empress Helena’spalace, which contained the many relics ofChrist’s Passion retrieved from her extraordinaryarchaeological expedition to theHoly Land in the fourth century. He alsohad a group of medieval and ancient buildingshurriedly demolished (including thefabled Meta Romuli, a sepulchral pyramidnamed after the founder of Rome) to createa traffic-friendly avenue that connectedCastel Sant’Angelo with St. Peter’s Square.Running out of time, the pontiff was forcedto mobilize pilgrims to help clear therubble themselves! The conflict betweenthe remains of antiquity and papal buildingprograms continues to haunt the JubileeYear, but today more conservationistminds prevail.The art and illustrations of REJOICE!tend to favor painting and prints over architecture,but throughout the book thevarious art forms tend to complement eachother rather than compete. How else mightthe authors have portrayed the developmentsmade at the Basilica of Santa MariaMaggiore, the Piazza of St. Peter’s, and thePantheon without utilizing the graphicwork of Piranesi?Beautiful photographsrecord thecurrent state ofother Jubileebuildings: the CasinodelBelrespiro, thetwin churches ofthe Piazza delPopolo, the sacristyof St. Peter’s,the Museo PioClementino, andthe churches ofDivina Sapienzaand MariaMediatrice inRome. In comparison,a modelfor RichardMeier’s Churchfor the Jubilee of2000 looks jarringlyout ofplace. This modernistexclamation in the realm of classicismseems less a prediction for the futurethan a faint echo of masterpieces from thecentury past, most notably the Sydney OperaHouse. Yet it is the variety of artisticcommissions recorded in REJOICE! tyingparticular pontiffs with particular monuments,that reinforces in the reader’s mindthe important role of patronage in the advancementof the arts, a noble activity thatnot only dazzles the eye, but feeds the soul.Photo: Calvesi, Rejoice! 700 Years of Art for the PApal Jubilee, 1999Rev. Michael Morris O.P. teaches classes inart and film at the Graduate Theological Unionin Berkeley and directs the Santa Fe Institutefor Catholic Faith and Culture.SacredArchitecture Fall 2000 31

B O O K SCOUNTER-REFORMATION 2000The Renovation Manipulation: The ChurchCounter-Renovation Handbookby Michael S. Rose, Cincinnati, Ohio:Aquinas Publishing Ltd., 2000. 161 pages.$12.95.Reviewed by Christopher CarstensTaking to heart the final words of thecurrent Code of Canon Law, that “thesalvation of souls, which in the Churchmust always be the supreme law,” the recentbook by Michael S. Rose gives clarityand advice to the troubled soul experiencinga church renovation project. The RenovationManipulation: The Church Counter-Renovation Handbook attempts, in the wordsof its author, to “give the average layCatholic a clear understanding of the renovationprocess and ultimately theknowledge necessary to bringabout honesty and integrity inthe renovation of existingchurches as well as in the constructionof new ones” (p.6).Succinct, accessible, and rich inChurch documentation, TheRenovation Manipulation will be auseful resource to all parties involvedin the process of churchrenovating.In the years following the SecondVatican Council, Rose explains,many liturgists and architectsmanipulated more than justthe renovation process, interpretingthe principles of reform andsubsequent documents accordingto pre-conceived visions ofsacred architecture. The first ofRose’s chapters shows, ratherconvincingly, how much of thedirection of modern church architecturehas its roots in the theories of Lutheran architectEdward A. Sövik. Citing Sövik’sbook Architecture for Worship, Rose illustrateshow Sovik’s theories later came to beexpressed in the 1978 document of theBishops’ Committee on the Liturgy, Environmentand Art in Catholic Worship. Söviksays: “Down through the centuries churchbuildings have not been consistently seenas exclusively places of worship. Churchbuildings have been multi-purpose buildings,houses for people, used for a varietyof public and secular activities that nourishthe human and ‘secular’ life” (Sövik, p. 19;cited in Rose, p. 11). Accordingly, this“meeting place for the people” (Sövik, p.68) should have portable chairs rather thanpews; a separate room for eucharistic adoration;few religious images; and an altar“table” surrounded by the congregation.Familiar suggestions today, to be sure.St Joseph’s Church, Scotia, New York, after renovationAfter this brief history Rose familiarizesthe reader with what to expect “when thechurch renovators come to your parish.”The main facilitator of the renovationproject is the Liturgical Design Consultant,or LDC. The LDC, in conjunction withother professional liturgists, serves toimplement the renovation project. But beware:“While appearing to give architecturaladvice, the design consultant’s realfunction is to manipulate parishioners intoaccepting controversial changes to theirchurch building and into believing thattheir own input…is being taken into considerationin the renovation of theirchurch” (p.23). To this end the LDC incorporatesa manipulative strategy called theDelphi Technique, wherein a “consensus” isreached by creating factions among thepeople in the parish and then, under the directionof the LDC, propelling his or herown plan to the top: a “divide and conquer”strategy. Rose even goes so far as todissect the “anatomy of the process”: hiringthe design consultant, introducing theidea of “restoring” the parish to its originalcondition (which is, in fact, “renovation”),planning educational sessions where novelinterpretations of Magisterial documentsare presented, selecting a small likemindedcommittee to carry out the renovation,and finally the implementation of theplan itself.How does one avoid falling prey to sucha design? Rose spends the remainder ofthe book arming the “guy in the pew” withthe pertinent information. He gives a list ofresources that the LDC will most likely recommendto parishioners, answers some ofthe most commonly heard suggestions putforth by manipulative consultants, andprovides the appropriate excerpts fromChurch documents and a comprehensivelist of the documents that should be usedwhen responding to suspected dubiousclaims.Although speculative and cynical attimes, The Renovation Manipulation providesan articulate defense for “traditional”church architecture, a position not oftenheard today. The handbook (and it truly isa handbook) gives expression to many ofthe sentiments that disappointed parishionershave often felt but have been unable toexpress or defend. A work rooted in theConstitution on the Sacred Liturgy(Sacrosanctum Concilium) of the SecondVatican Council, as well as documents appearingbefore and after the Council, thisbook can help the current debate in liturgicalarchitecture.What the handbook lacks,though, is a clearly-defined theology of“the Church” in all her dimensions(hierarchic, apostolic, pilgrim,etc.) and the worship of thisChurch. Only with a clearlystated ecclesiology as a base cansacred architecture, in whateverstyle, reflect the true nature andliturgy of the Church. Only thencan such arguments concerning“traditional” versus “modern” architecture,pews versus chairs, orapse reservation versus a separatechapel for Eucharistic reservationbe resolved, since liturgical legislationis at times unclear or altogethersilent.The Holy Father, in TertioMillennio Adveniente (n.36), calledfor “[a]n examination of conscience[concerning] the receptiongiven to the Council.” At the endof this examination, held fromFebruary 25 th to the 28 th of thisyear at the Vatican, the Pope said: “Certainly,[the Council’s teaching] requiresever deeper understanding…the genuineintention of the Council Fathers must notbe lost: indeed, it must be recovered byovercoming biased and partial interpretationswhich have prevented the newness ofthe Council’s Magisterium from being expressedas well as possible.” The RenovationManipulation, while certainly having avantage-point of its own, does offer an intelligentand well-documented interpretationof the “genuine intention of the CouncilFathers” and should be considered seriouslyby any involved in this particular dimensionof the Catholic spiritual life.Photo courtesy Michael RoseChristopher Carstens is the Assistant Directorof the Office of Sacred Worship for the Dioceseof Lacrosse, Wisconsin.32 Fall 2000 Sacred Architecture

SACRED ARCHITECTUREA journal committed to the living tradition of Catholic architecture and art. SACRED ARCHITECTURE features articleson contemporary and historic church design along with news, book reviews, and commentary. The journal,now published biannually, contains relevant essays by architects, historians and theologians.SUBSCRIBE NOW!Yes! Enter my subscription to SACRED ARCHITECTUREOne Year (2 Issues): $9.95*Two Years (4 Issues): $18.95*Gift Subscription (recipient below)Accept My Donation of $ _______Name __________________________________________________________________Address ________________________________________________________________City/ State/ Zip __________________________________________________________E-Mail _____________________________ Fax ______________________________Mail to: Sacred Architecture • P.O. Box 556 • Notre Dame IN 46556For More Information: telephone (219) 631-5762, fax (219) 271-0522 or e-mail dstroik@nd.edu* U.S. domestic prices only. In Canada, add 7% GST plus postage. Payment in U.S. funds only. Outside U.S., add $5/ year for surface mail. Airmail:Canada and Mexico add $4/ year, elsewhere add $9/ year. Individual issues can be purchased for $6 per issue, including U.S. postage.

The Agency for the CityRome, ItalyThe Institute for Sacred ArchitectureNotre Dame, Indiana, USAIl Bosco e la NaveRome, ItalyRECONQUERING SACRED SPACE 2000THE CHURCH IN THE CITY OF THE THIRD MILLENIUMInternational Conference and Exhibition of Contemporary Liturgical ArchitectureConference:December 2, 20009:45 am - 6:00 pmatPontifical Institute ofSt. Thomas Aquinas,the AngelicumLargo Angelicum, 1Rome, ItalyFeaturing lectures andpanel discussions by notedinternational architects, arthistorians and theologiansExhibition:December 1 - 20, 200010:00 am - 7:00 pm DailyatPiccole Terme di TraianoPalazzo ValentiniVia Quattro Novembre, 47Rome, ItalyFeaturing recent projectsfor new traditionalchurches by internationalarchitects and artistsThe exhibition will be accompanied by a 300-page color catalog published by Il Bosco e la Nave.The catalog will feature the exhibited projects, essays by noted architects and art historians, and anintroduction by Francis Cardinal George of Chicago.Further information can be found at: www.euragency.com and http://village.flashnet.it/users/roscriIn the U.S., contact: Institute for Sacred Architecture P.O. Box 556 Notre Dame, Indiana 46556 • Tel./ fax: 219/ 271-0522 • E-mail: dstroik@nd.eduIn Europe, contact: Agenzia per la Citta Via Muzio Attendolo 63-65 00176 Rome Italy • Tel: 011 39 06 2148050 • E-mail: roscri@flashnet.itFor information about this year’s catalog, available in February, 2001, or last year’s catalog, contact New Hope Publications at 800/ 764-8444S ACRED ARCHITECTUREP.O.Box 556Notre Dame, IN 46556Presorted StandardU.S. PostagePaidPermit No. 6New Hope, KY