In our current Cathedral’s set up, you can see how things were turned upside down with the placement of the new free standing post Vatican II altar. Look at the bishop’s throne, which was not adjusted in any way since Vatican II and look at the old high altar. The high altar is one step higher than the bishop’s cathedra. From the sanctuary floor, it is four steps up. The cathedra is three steps up.
The new altar in its awkward placement, is three steps lower than the cathedra. The new and rather oversized ambo, the brown blob, is also three steps higher than the new altar. I get nose bleeds using it.
Houston we have a problem. Vatican II sanctuary design is the wild, Wild West. Whereas the pre-Vatican II sanctuary design had specific rules to follow in the placement of the altar, ambo and sedalia or cathedra:
I understand that in the Basilica Floor plan, the throne placement is reserved ( I hope) for an abbot or bishop. But at the Collegeville St. John Abbey Church, the throne is 9 steps higher than the altar. You have to have a very non humble bishop, abbot or priest who loves that and in the fabricated new liturgy he sits there pontificating in a royal way as the little people do readings, etc. It was an organic development and quite a marvelous one at that, when the altar was placed at the highest point and the cathedra on the side wall of the sanctuary’s Gospel side and a step(s) lower. At our Cathedral Basilica, the old high altar is one step higher than the Bishop’s throne. The new free standing altar is thee steps lower than the throne and ambo. That is corrupt!
The problem with the post-Vatican II ideology of “resourcement” there is no taking account of organic development and actually new and improved developments in the liturgy and liturgical placement of altar, ambo and chair (sedalia). Going back to the early Church is more absurd than going back 50 years and looking at what was thrown out and shown not have been given historic organic development, not fabricated wishful thinking that the early Church was/is so much better than what was occurring in the Church up until about 1965.
20 comments:
And the tabernacle should be restored to a central axis on the main high altar . .
The cathedral has so many tourists and tour groups going through, I am not sure it would be wise to return to the main tabernacle. The Sacred Heart Chapel seems ideal.
"Tourists and groups." What impact do "tourists and groups" have on the location of the tabernacle?
Do they upset Jesus or distrub His divine reverie? Is He offended by the group guides explaining the art and architecture of the building? If He's in the Sacred Heart Chapel, is he less offended when non-Catholic tourists don't genuflect?
And then there's "the main axis." Is the Real Presence more real when it is aligned with a building's arbitrary center line? Is this some kind of metaphysical geometry - a "line of sight" superabundance of the outpouring of grace?
The things that worry people are amazing...
You said it good grief. Read your post, physician and then heal thyself.
No, do your own homework. Read it and stop worrying about things that simply don't matter.
Tourists and Axes.... Good Grief indeed.
Wow. U r obsessed on this.
It's the obsession with the trivial that is of concern.
"Mama, Mama, the baby is on the stove!"
"But, does she have on her diaper?"
Wow.
Next we'll be all a twitter over whether or not the candles are 51% beeswax.
The question of the placement of the tabernacle aside, the altar facing the people should be removed and the high altar used. Just my opinion.
I think "tourists" and "Tour Groups" should be done away with. Its why Saint Patrick's has turned into a three ring circus and you cannot guarantee you will actually find a quiet place to PRAY if you visit.
"But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you." Matt 6:6
Dear Tour Leader.....
"My Fathers House is a House of PRAYER....but you have turned it into a DEN OF THEIVES.
Matthew 21:12-13
The tourists and tour groups don't engage in changing money, buying, selling, or any other commercial activity in the cathedral.
No one is stealing anything, so the DEN OF THIEVES comment is off as well.
For a group that often touts the power of "traditional" art and architecture, such as that found in the Savannah Cathedral/Basilica, to touch the soul and draw others to the Church, it is surprising that some here are willing to slam the doors in their faces under such flimisy pretexts.
And YOUR comment was off base about praying to your Father in "secret" if as you claim the power of traditional art and architecture can touch the soul. Thus your defense of noisy picture taking tourists who buy tickets that entitle them to scour every part of the architecture holding Cathedral, is also off base because they are a disruption for anyone who has any interest at all in quietly praying. Perhaps the tourists in Savannah are a little more sedate than my description. I can assure in New York City they are not.
I've been in the Cathedral-Basilica numerous times with tourists and have never found them to be noisy.
I have never noted any "scouring" being done by visitors. They walk up and down the aisles taking pictures, pointing, and being awed by the stained glass windows and other decorative elements. The windows, I will note, are especially brilliant at this time of the year - the low winter sun makes them gleam. Save for the occasional man who enters without removing his baseball cap, I've not seen anything untoward.
No on buys a tcket to enter the Cathedral-Basilica. A donation is encouraged. No, buying a ticket for the tour is NOT the same as buying a ticket for the Cathedral-Basilica.
If you go into a public building that you know has tourists visiting it and you are irritated because you are in a public building that you know has tourists in it, then the problem is yours, not theirs. That would be something like driving on a big roadway in a major city at rush hour and complaingin that the rush hour traffic is terrible.
So because YOU haven't seen anything untoward that means all is well. Lololololol!!
Ok then......
No, it doesn't mean that and I never said or suggested that.
Here's what I said and meant, "I've been in the Cathedral-Basilica numerous times with tourists and have never found them to be noisy."
No more, no less.
Of course now I must say that YOU are suggesting that ALL tourists are noisy, that ALL tour groups are "money-changers" who should be expelled, and that ALL times when tourists are present prayer in impossible.
See, that's why your argument doesn't work.
Actually a comparison was offered when I said perhaps the tourists in Savannah are more sedate.....which should tell you I am aware there can be a difference.........
And YES that has been my experience of the "tourist" world, which is obviously much different than yours. My opinion stands whether YOU think it works or not. I know many people who would agree with me, some who would disagree.....and some who think tourism in the Cathedral should be regulated heavily because it is so disruptive.
You obviously disagree which is fine with me......you will join the chorus of the many different opinions on the subject.
I think tourism in a Cathedral should be encouraged. Outside of Mass times, there is no one there praying 90 to 95% of the time.
Let the buildings be enjoyed as the works of art they are. They weren't built for private prayer.
Post a Comment