I DISLIKE IT! I LIKE IT! A RENOVATION RE-ENCHANTMENT RUN AMUCK AND A RENOVATION REENCHANTMENT DONE THE RIGHT WAY AND BOTH BY ECCLESIASTIC STUDIOS AND SONS….

 The first “before” and “after” runs off the rails. While the after is better, it is way too much! Did I write, it is way too much! And on top of that, the baldachin contains a true altar with the tabernacle under it and then in front of that another altar. Two altars back to back when the before only had one! Why, oh why!?

It is inconceivable to me that bishops in some dioceses have no policies about having only one main altar when building new churches or having major renovations of older churches. 

Thus, I dislike this first “before and after” although the after is better than the before, to say the least, but overdone and of course those back to back altars which are not in the “before”. 

BEORE (UGH):

AFTER (UGH):

With this second renovation, I like it, but not completely. This is clearly a 1980’s structure that has seating on three sides of the altar. I get it; but I don’t think this configuration creates a better sense of community compared to straight seating that is more common in pre-Vatican II churches. In fact, it causes more distractions for everyone. But, alas.

The “before” isn’t that bad, but the after is much better. The altar railing is placed in the proper position, on the nave level, thus not becoming a visual barrier to the altar or obscuring it. They maintain only one main altar with a splendid, I mean, splendid reredos for the tabernacle and six candlesticks. This part is beautifully done! My only critique is the ceiling. It is overdone and should have been more muted. I find it distracting to the rest of the renovation, but alas!

BEFORE (NOT BAD):

AFTER (VERY BEAUTIFUL, VAST IMPROVEMENT):