Letters

Church architecture

Barry Ireland

Contents - Dec 2005 - Buy a copy now Editorial: Christmas: time for Christians to stand up! - Michael Gilchrist Synod on the Eucharist sets agenda for Benedict's pontificate - Michael Gilchrist News: The Church Around the World PRAYER: Melbourne initiative: a spiritual approach can defeat drug addiction - Anh Nguyen Episcopacy: Archbishop Chaput of Denver: America's plain-speaking Pope's man - Peter J. Boyer Formation: St John Vianney's blueprint for the priesthood back in favour - Fr John Cihak The Eucharist: gift of an interventionist God - Chris Hilder Cinema: New movie's balanced presentation of exorcism: The Exorcism of Emily Rose - Shannon Donahoo (reviewer) Letters: Medical research - Maureen Federico Letters: Enneagram - Br Con Moloney CFC Letters: Vatican II myths - Peter D. Howard Letters: Stem cell therapy - Brian Harris Letters: Evangelisation - Michael Dunlea Letters: Church architecture - Barry Ireland Letters: Priestly celibacy - Philip Holberton Letters: Catholic journal Letters: EWTN tapes - Daphne Thorose Books: The Cube and the Cathedral, by George Weigel - John Ballantyne (reviewer) Books: Good News About Sex And Marriage, by Christopher West - Kerrie Allen Books: In Memory of Me / Come to Me, My Children, by Christine McCarthy - Michael Gilchrist (reviewer) Books: Christmas reading from AD Books Reflection: Journey of the Magi and the search for truth - Cardinal George Pell

In his February 2004 article in AD2000, Dr Paul Mees drew attention to some unhappy consequences of church architectural fashion.

Perhaps even worse, it is obvious that some priests are disregarding the clear requirements for church interiors in the General Instruction of the Roman Missal and elsewhere.

A current example could be Middle Park in Melbourne, where the parish priest, without initially consulting parishioners, embarked on a costly proposal to make extensive changes to the heritage-listed church. His site plan included removal of the high altar, demolition and removal of the sanctuary, sidelining of the tabernacle to an unspecified location, replacement of the existing altar with one only 1.2 metres square, removal of the centre aisle, incorrect orientation of the interior and various other inappropriate changes not in accordance with Church law. Even the new pews proposed looked to be in breach of the General Instruction.

Predictably, there was almost total opposition to the proposal at the two sets of parish meetings where the plans and model were belatedly revealed and discussed. Following this rebuff, the parish priest held no more meetings and declines to have any.

Without the knowledge of parishioners, he then applied to the local Council, and later VCAT, for a planning permit for his $3.5 million project. While he now claims to have shelved his proposal for the church interior, the plans clearly show he has kept his options open. Therefore, in the absence of consultation, parishioners expect the worst.

The Archbishop has confirmed he will not allow changes that do not accord with the General Instruction. The mystery is, though, why the improper proposal was allowed to be drawn up and why it still manages to survive. Meanwhile, the urgent and expensive repairs needed to the church have not even been discussed with parishioners.

BARRY IRELAND
Middle Park, Vic

Reprinted from AD2000 Vol 18 No 11 (December 2005 - January 2006), p. 14