This post asks two questions. The first and most important compares the inferior layman David Hass to the superior Jesuit, disgraced Fr. Rupnik.
Father Rupnik was given privileges of forgiveness not granted to David Hass. Fr. Rupnik’s art remains in good standing, David Hass isn’t and in fact is banned in most places:
Catholic Churches Drop Hymns After Accusations Against Composer
David Haas, a composer known for “Blest Are They,” “We Are Called,” “You Are Mine” and other favorites, has been accused of sexual abuse and harassment by multiple women, an advocacy group says.
I am not sure what the difference is between the moral crimes of Fr. Rupnik and David Hass and why there is unequal treatment other than to say at the root of the unequal treatment is true clericalism.
Now, the second question refers to the art of Fr. Rupnik. Should he be treated like David Hass? That means, should his art be removed from the Vatican and other famous places where it exists?
Now, let me add a third question. Do you like Fr. Rupnik’s art. To be honest with you, David Hass music should be banned because it is awful not because of the moral peccadilloes of its author.
I think Fr. Rupnik has nice art, but it is too busy and distracting to me in a liturgical setting. Especially at the eye level of the altar, ambo and tabernacle, it over powers those three elements. Perhaps if his art were on high walls above the altar or on the ceiling it would not be so distracting:
Progressive liturgists in the past have not hesitated to tear out art in churches they “wreckovated”. Maybe it is time for these same progressive liturgists of Fr. Rupnik’s age (my age too) to recover their wreckovation techniques for his art, no?
Saint Joseph Church in Macon, a once Jesuit church and designed by a Jesuit, while ornate, its art is not distracting and the altar, ambo and tabernacle stand out and are not obscured by the art:
8 comments:
Timing is all for in time we hate what we often fear. And of course, as in real-estate, the three most important factors are location, location, location. Haas had the misfortune to be in the United States during a highly emotional period. His strength was his weakness: he brings attention to the hierarchy of the American Church; sometimes through polarizing music, sometimes through sexual predation. (His lyrics are what drove me from the NO and I believe are on the same arc as his sexual activities). So he had to go.
In contrast Fr Rupnik is in a position where he can support the hierarchy in other direct ways and his art is less obvious. I also think that the hierarchy is more lenient on clergy due to the stress they endure and the shortage of priests.
I despise the cancel culture which is unevenly applied. One's work, whether in writing, music or art should be judged on its own merits (or lack thereof). If David Haas were a model Catholic, I would still not use his simpleton, insipid, music.
Michael Angelo was no angel either. Fr. Rupnik should be praised for his art and condemned for inappropriate behavior as a priest and Jesuit.
Haas is no Artist, maybe a schlocky one. His musical offerings never should have been accepted into our churches.
Can we now please find some way to get rid of Marty Haughen and Dan Schutte?
The Macon Church is unmistakably Roman Catholic, balanced and cohesive. The others borrow heavily from the Eastern Church just without the icon screen, tabernacle on the cube altar, processional cross and ripidia immediately behind the altar and in the one photo, the book of gospels on the "throne" chair in the "high place" apse which would be the bishops's throne. The last photo of the risen Lord mosaic is just a miss-matched jumble. Waste of people's money and likely no where near as graceful as was likely the case with the displaced fixtures.
Regarding the photo with the tabernacle on that ridiculous pedestal, if that's supposed to be blood, even if symbolic of that which our Lord shed, it's just disturbing as portrayed.
Reflecting on this some more, the photo of Fr. AJM's former church is just so soothing to look at. Your eye is drawn up in a glorious way. Inspiring the love and care that went into its design, construction and evolution over the years. Each space is its own but it all culminates in such a unified way with the high altar being the central focal point. As mentioned, nothing overwhelms anything else, the side shrines are their own space in a cohesive way, there's no question where the focal point is - it's a recipe that's just worked and worked well over the centuries.
Those that get so laser focused on "nothing can take away from the altar" mostly create flat, uninspiring if not outright off-putting and non-cohesive spaces usually featuring the throne of Caesar above all else. Make sure the tabernacle is awkwardly stuffed between the makeshift folk band pit, precariously balanced on some stumpy pedestal and add some abstract statues bolted to the wall. Banners. Do Not Forget the Seasonal Banners! Groovy.
Post a Comment