www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Parish Life & Evangelization Church Architecture

I am not sure how to approach this without sounding derogatory to the Latin Church. However, I think this issue really ties into the Tithing topic and some of the moderization of the liturgy with the Charismatic movement.

First I want to say that I am not trying to point fingers at any one Church but I am using this link to a Church near my house as an example. Ok, here is the site http://saint.stmarys-school.org/constructioncam/

Now, do you think that is sort of New Age or Liberal methodology will ever make its way into the Byzantine Catholic Church?

I really am not sure what or how to say it. I guess the pictures speak for themselves.

I just want to add that this is a Very Serious Issue for me. The other Church near my house is like this one also. This is one of the reasons why I left the RCC and found the Byzantine Church.

Your thoughts on this subject would really help settle my soul.

With all sincerity!

I agree that where one worships has a big role to play in the development of one's spirituality. Although many of our Eastern parishes began their lives in rectory living rooms or borrowed locations generously provided by more established communities, when we bought our own facilities, we did it in our traditional ways. The fact remains that our liturgies require very specific things like icons, preparation tables, Royal Doors, 'kissing icons', etc. and we just can't willy-nilly do something innovative unless it meets our liturgical requirements.

The local Greek Orthodox parish here is in a completely circular building surmounted by a huge dome with about 50 small rectangular windows. The iconostasis is the open-grillwork type with the icons placed in the appropriate places. From outside, it looks like a spaceship. I refer to it as St. Close Encounters of the Greek Kind. I'm not overly comfortable worshipping there, I must admit since most of the Greek parishes I've attended are of the late 19th century time. Old mahogany woodwork, etc.

For better or worse, architecture is architecture. It's either good, bad or a disaster. And also a matter of taste. (I attended a Greek parish in Montreal in an old Gothic former Anglican church building. T'was a strange experience doing Greek in Gothic. But, hey.......)

If the building hinders the prayer life, then seek elsewhere.

Blessings!

[ 02-02-2002: Message edited by: Dr John ]

Have you ever seen the Greek Orthodox Church by Frank Lloyd Wright in Wisconsin? I think it also falls into the category of "St. Close Encounters of the Greek Kind."

You are right about our special requirements in Byzantine Church Architecture. As a first year architecture student, I am beginning to see all the little details that need to be looked at when building a church. Acoustics, effect of layout, materials used, etc., etc.

The easiest thing to do in my opinion is to take traditional models and just add in the modern conveniences - running water, heating, etc. Architects don't like to do this because they think they are just copying someone else's work, but hey, it's often the best way when it comes to our churches.

Daniil

Glory to Jesus Christ!

An unusual but modern interpretation of Eastern Building traditions is Our Lady's Maronite Church in Austin Texas. The Church is noted for its monolithic Dome that stands over the square walls of the Church in true Eastern pattern. But Our Lady's Maronite goes beyond having a dome. Significant other areas within the church were modeled after St. Simeon the Stylite's Basilica, now a popular, much photographed, treasured-by-archeologists ruin in Syria. Bowing to Eastern Catholic Tradition, the church remains orientated toward the east, unlike two of the three Orthodox Churches and most Roman Catholic Churches in Austin. It has a raised bema and a half circle dome that encircles their altar.

If you would like to look at photos of the church, you may find them on:
http://www.monolithicdome.com/gallery/churches/maronite/

I think that it may pleasantly surprise you as to how modern and ancient tradition can be nicely blended in the Eastern Catholic/Orthodox traditions to create a beautiful worship setting.

Your brother in Christ,
Thomas

Thomas,

That's a lovely Church but where is the iconostasis? I wish our Church had a website. You should see what Father Loya and our faithful congregation has done! It is beautiful and follows most if not all of the prescriptions.

Dan Lauffer

Glory to Jesus Christ!

Dear Dan,
I don't know. I have been led to believe by other posters on the Forum that the Maronites follow many more Latin Innovations than other Eastern Catholics do. I have been told this is because they never broke communion with Rome. The photos of Maronite Church altars in Lebanon do not appear to have the iconostasis.

I do know that members of my parish have propsed to our Antiochian Orthodox pastor that we should perhaps look at Our Lay's maronite Church as a sample of how a true Syrian (read that Antiochian) Church could look. We are in the midst of trying to get ready to leave our rented [formerly Baptist Church] and build a church true to our Orthodox Roots. it will have an iconostasis.

Your brother in Christ,
Thomas

Dan,

The Maronite and Syriac Churches do not use the iconostasis. Traditionally they use a veil and are more conservative in their use of icons. In fact this is the case with the Armenians and Assyrians as well. Only the Copts also use an iconostasis. However, I have never seen a veil used in the Maronite Churches I have attended or seen. Many parishes in architecture and appointment aren't very different from Roman parishes. However, they are undergoing a restoration and many Latinizations are being shed. The parish in Austin is an excellent example. There are also some examples among the Chaldean parishes in building in traditional Assyrian/Chaldean architecture. I'll try and find the website so you can view them.

In Christ,
Lance, deacon candidate

RC Guy,

Well the outside looks pretty goofy, but until the inside is done it is hard to tell. To answer your question, no I don't think the liberal attitude will infiltrate the Byzantine Church. We are just far to conservative to tolerate that kind of nonsense. However, as far as architecture goes we have a few nontraditional style churches. Most were bought from Protestants and intended to be temporary until the parish could afford to build a traditional one but never got around to it. A few were intentionally built that way in the 60's and 70's. The insides aren't the empty airplane hangar design many Latin Churches are, however. The worst are simply without iconostasis and a little minimalist: one icon in the apse and one to either side of the altar. I have even seen some Greek Orthodox parishes with this interior arrangement. Whether this was intended to be permanent or they just hadn't been able to afford an iconostasis I don't know.

In Christ,
Lance, deacon candidate

[ 02-03-2002: Message edited by: Lance ]

Go to this page and click on the parish names to the left to see a picture of the Chaldean Catholic Eparchy's Churches. Mother of God, St. Joseph, St. Peter, and St. Thomas (at the bottom) are good examples of traditional Assyrian architecture.
http://www.chaldeandiocese.org/

RC,

I admit that this is the type of church architecture one would more likely expect to see in Nassau, "The Keys." or Belize. It does seem to be out of place for the Space Coast. (Unless they intend on using it as a navigation marker for shuttle landings ).

But St.Mary's is a missionary parish with excellent outreach ministries and they have a true passion for souls. And how many of our parishes, or Orthodox parishes, are able to send missionary teams to the Caribbean? St. Mary's can and they do. So, if the architecture is a bit exotic, can't we overlook that when we take into consideration that they are doing the work of the Lord in inviting souls to be the "temples of the Living God?" In other words, they have their priorities in order.

Also, more and more people from the Caribbean are settling in the Brevard County area and architecture that might seem exotic to us is just like home to many of these immigrants.

Sonny


BTW: Speaking of Brevard County:

My former pastor, Father Sean Heslin, presently pastor of Our Savior's parish in Cocoa Beach, was brutally assaulted and beaten this Friday afternoon.

He is in critical condition but, thanks be to God, he is expected to recover. Your prayers would be appreciated.

His attacker has been apprehended and Father Sean certainly would want us to pray for him, as well.

[ 02-03-2002: Message edited by: Sonny ]

Thomas and the rest,

You can not compare the building of St. Mary's to the other Maronite church you post.

1st there are LARGE TV screens that surrond the Church on the inside.

2nd there are NO statues or anything in the inside.

3rd there is NO altar just some little wooden table about 1 inch thick wood which looks like a lecture podume.

By the way there are no benchs just chairs that circle the so called Altar. Finally, there is no Baptism fount rather a POOL for FULL emersions in the front part.

Now, an interestng side note is that over 20 to 30% left because of the new building. What is worse is that many gave money because the priest told them what a beautiful building he was going to build. Once the people found out what he wanted to build they tried to get there money back.

There were many arguements with this church which resulted in the Knights of Columbas being KICKED out! Just recently they have been given permission to return.

In the Bible it says, Matthew 7:16-21 -
“By their fruits you will know them. Do people pick grapes from thorn bushes, or figs from thistles? 17 Just so, every good tree bears good fruit, and a rotten tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a rotten tree bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 So by their fruits you will know them.”

If so many people are upset by this Church and so many people I have talked to are leaving the Church then can this be Good Fruits?

Why must the Church divide us on these Issues?

[ 02-03-2002: Message edited by: aRomanCatholicGuy ]

It is a shame that anyone left; but as your statistics prove, the majority stayed and the C fo K members returned.

So, it is obvious that they have produced more good fruit than bad.

I am sure you are grateful that the majority of parishioners decided to stay and support the parish.

Sonny

Sonny,

I am not grateful that many of the laity decided to stay. The only Veto power we Laity has is with our pocket books. This church and the many like it I believe are wrong and reflect the new liberal positions which are throughout our Church both East and West. I am happy that the Church is in debt and not able to pay for the new Gym/Church (whatever u call it) building. I believe these priest have Personnal agendas that do not reflect Rome.

I might add that many have stayed because they new church is not finished. Plus, I dont think anybody is giving real money to the Church. I believe many will leave once the new Church opens.

I could go on and on how some of the things (I will not mention names) I have heard some of the nuns/priest say: like they wish for acceptance of Homosexuality, Women priest, Cardinal Ratz. would not get his way. In addition, I have gone to Mass in these Churches and Have seen Nuns give the HOMILY! They use Glass Chalices!

Ok, you think Waterford Crystal is Ok then here is what the Church says,

Current Norms (1975 GIRM):

290. Vessels should be made from materials that are solid and that in the particular region are regarded as noble. The conference of bishops will be the judge in this matter. But preference is to be given to materials that do not break easily or become unusable.
291. Chalices and other vessels that serve as receptacles for the blood of the Lord are to have a cup of nonabsorbent material. The base may be of any other solid and worthy material.

292. Vessels that serve as receptacles for the eucharistic bread, such as a paten, ciborium, pyx, monstrance, etc., may be made of other materials that are prized in the region, for example, ebony or other hard woods, as long as they are suited to sacred use.

New Norms - 2000 GIRM (not yet implemented):

328 Sacred vessels are to be made from noble metal. If they are fabricated from metal which produces rust, or from a metal less noble than gold, then generally they shall be gold-plated on the inside.
329 In accord with the judgment of the Conference of Bishops, in acts confirmed by the Apostolic See, sacred vessels may be made even from other solid materials which, in the common estimation of the region are regarded as noble e.g., ebony or other hard woods as long as such materials are suited to sacred use. In such cases, preference is always to be given to materials that do not break easily or deteriorate. Materials intended for all vessels which hold the Eucharistic bread such as the plate, ciborium, theca, monstrance or others of this kind should be likewise suitable to sacred use.

330 As to chalices and other vessels that serve as receptacles for the blood of the Lord, they are to have bowls of nonabsorbent material. The base may be of any other solid and worthy material.

Where is Glass/Crystal acceptable under these conditions? These Churches and the Bishops/Clergy are Dangerous to the Church and should be Exposed for what they are. I believe this is a SERIOUS issue that could end up effecting the Byzantine Churches. If these trends continue I would be afraid to see what the Future holds!

[ 02-03-2002: Message edited by: aRomanCatholicGuy ]

Actually, with regard to the Sacred Vessels, the "old canons" said they had to be of gold or other precious metal, or if that was not practical (i.e., $$$$), then at least the inside should be.

At the old John XXIII Center at Fordham, Fr. Ciszek showed me some old and VERY tall Russian chalices made of wood with wonderful iconography all over them. I suspect that they were very lovingly and devotedly crafted by the local woodworker, probably with varnish on the inside to prevent seepage, and then turned over to the local icon writer. Probably used in a small rural church deep in the forest. It was the best they had, and I'm sure that the Lord was pleased with their devotion and efforts.

As for glass, wellll.... But then again, I've seem some Waterford Crystal that was just magnificent and might be appropriate, and even a wonderful Czech crystal glass monstrance (with the appropriate jewels, of course). It was truly breath-taking -- and HEAVY!! The priest probably had to be built like a coal-miner!

I guess it's the devotion of the creators and the users that sanctifies. I must admit that when I saw the icon of OL of Mariapoch in St. Stephens in Vienna (before I had any contact with Ruthenians), I thought: Yikes. Folk art. Now I know why it was enshrined there, and this knowledge has completely changed my perspective.

Blessings, y'all! (I'm esconced in Atlanta for a CDC meeting, so I'm feelin' kinda Southern. But, it's pouring rain and 42 degrees. So much for the 'sunny South').