The new bishop of Oakland CA, showed VOTF he means business and reclaims his turf.

Contra Costa Times ^ | Mar. 23, 2004 | Randy Myers

[m4629]

A publication for East Bay Catholics refused to run an advertisement and notice announcing a university-sponsored seminar that gathers scholars to discuss the Catholic Church's future.

As publisher of the Catholic Voice, Bishop Allen Vigneron of the Oakland Diocese rejected running an ad and notification item for the one-day University of San Francisco seminar, "Imaging the Future Church."

In a March 1 letter to the East Bay chairman of the Voice of the Faithful, Vigneron explained that his decision was based on critical comments on church doctrine he heard from group members.

[m4629]

It's about time, and it's our turn. Bravo, bishop Vigneron. Prayers of thanksgiving on the way.

[m4629]

Ping for some uplifting news on the west coast.

[AAABEST]

This was the Diocese of the infamous clown mass.

[Unam Sanctam]

YES! A bishop who stands up to protect Catholic teaching in its fullness.

[Desdemona]

Not all bishops have their heads in the sand.

[B Knotts]

This was the Diocese of the infamous clown mass.

Yes. The bishop has a huge task ahead for him in Oakland. But, it appears he has the right attitude. I've heard him before on the World Over, and he seemed to be quite orthodox.

They're in the early stages of building a new cathedral. When it gets to the design phase, hopefully we can compare and contrast with the Taj Mahony.

[Desdemona]

They're in the early stages of building a new cathedral. When it gets to the design phase, hopefully we can compare and contrast with the Taj Mahony.

Unless it's struck by lightening before the Cathedral in Oakland is done. Then we could compare and contrast with the new one in San Francisco. I just peeked in the doors, but the door handles were the heads of rams, snakes and dragons. That scared me.

[NYer]

This truly is good news! When will we in the Albany and Cleveland Diocese, be delivered!

[StAthanasiustheGreat]

If I could ping my list, I would.

[NYer]

Then we could compare and contrast with the new one in San Francisco. I just peeked in the doors, but the door handles were the heads of rams, snakes and dragons.

St. Mary's Cathedral - San Francisco

Above the altar is a kinetic sculpture by Richard Lippold. Alive with reflected light, the 14 tiers of triangular aluminum rods symbolize the channel of love and grace from God to His people, and their prayers and praise rising to him. The sculpture, suspended by gold wires, is 15 stories high and weighs one ton.

The existing St. Mary's Cathedral is the third such church that has served the Archdiocese of San Francisco. Old St. Mary's, built in 1854, is located on California Street at Grant Avenue. A second St. Mary's Cathedral was built on Van Ness Avenue in 1891, but this structure was destroyed by fire in 1962.

Immediately following that disastrous fire, Archbishop Joseph McGucken gathered his consultors to begin the process of planning and constructing a new cathedral. The Archbishop commissioned three well known local architects for the project - Angus McSweeney, Paul A. Ryan and John Michael Lee - who began submitting preliminary sketches for the new cathedral which ranged from traditional Romanesque to California mission style.

Plans soon took a dramatic turn as a result of a controversy ignited by an article written by architectural critic Allen Temko, who advocated a move beyond traditional architectural concepts to create a bold, new cathedral that would reflect San Francisco's status as a major international urban center. To build a cathedral which would reflect the soul of San Francisco, Archbishop McGucken added two internationally known architects to his team, Italian-born Pietro Belluschi, Dean of the School of Architecture of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who was placed in charge of designs, and Pier-Luigi Nervi, an engineering genius from Rome, who took over structural concerns.

Yes .. I think that about sums it up.

[Desdemona]

YOu know, usually, you can look at a church and recognize it as Catholic from the building design. That one, no. It's really ugly and reflects less San Francisco than modern architecture. And then there were the pagan symbols on the doors....

[AnAmericanMother]

Interesting < blech! >

We were talking with our rector about the construction of our parish church. He said they interviewed six architects, five of whom were Catholics and one Presbyterian. The parish committee talked at length about their desire for a traditional church that adhered to all the rubrics . . . but only one architect came back with what they had in mind - the Presbyterian. All the others submitted modernist lunacy, despite the committee's request. The Presby listened, so they hired him. The church is beautiful.

[walking in truth]

Could you offer up prayers of thanksgiving and fortitude for the Bishop of the Diocese of Rockville Centre the Most Reverend William Murphy who is fighting the good fight with VOTF-LI?

[NYer]

Now THAT looks like a church!!! Just beautiful and thank you for sharing those pictures.

[franky]

Is there not a sin of pride? Example of egos gone wild

[NYer]

Is there not a sin of pride? Example of egos gone wild

Yes, of course, but these architects view their 'interpretive' structures as 'inspired'. (We won't say where that inspiration comes from ;-D)

What many of them fail to see, however, is that modernist structures are very dated. They may appear 'bold' now, but within 25 years, those same buildings will look tired and worm. Oftentimes, the contemporary structure is constructed with concrete. That doesn't hold up well either.

[ninenot]

The Jebbies REALLY want to twist the knife in Fessio's back, don't they? Note that it's the Ignatius Institute which is sponsoring the malefactors and termites.

[johnb2004]

The left wing zealots strike again. Great bishop! VOTFs are relativists pretending to be faithful Catholics.

[Desdemona]

What many of them fail to see, however, is that modernist structures are very dated. They may appear 'bold' now, but within 25 years, those same buildings will look tired and worm. Oftentimes, the contemporary structure is constructed with concrete.

True. They aren't exactly built to last. Churches with stone and brick facades always look lovely. I have seen a few with orange brick from the 60's, but the main problem with them is that they are "in the round."

It's expensive to use good material - marble, oak (for pews), granite - but it lasts, and when used well and effectively, is very beautiful. Marble lasts a lot longer as a floor than carpet does, that's for sure.

[Desdemona]

What many of them fail to see, however, is that modernist structures are very dated. They may appear 'bold' now, but within 25 years, those same buildings will look tired and worm. Oftentimes, the contemporary structure is constructed with concrete.

True. They aren't exactly built to last. Churches with stone and brick facades always look lovely. I have seen a few with orange brick from the 60's, but the main problem with them is that they are "in the round."

It's expensive to use good material - marble, oak (for pews), granite - but it lasts, and when used well and effectively, is very beautiful. Marble lasts a lot longer as a floor than carpet does, that's for sure.