The only criticism I've heard from (some) fellow Knoxville Catholics is that it was expensive. The counter-argument I've heard, is that it was built to last 500 years. Someone said it had "no substance"? I disagree.
To me, it looks like a Catholic Church, which is, I think, what was wanted.
It has an altar --- a real Catholic altar, substantial and of stone, with relics embedded, not a little wooden Cranmer table--- under a baldacchino on which Mass can be celebrated ad oriéntem as well as versus pópulum, a Communion Rail, a respectable pulpit, and traditional sacred art adorning its dome.
Yes all the trappings.
Architecturally it is a plastic banana.
It looks Renaissance but does not feel or sound such.
Authenticity is as important in building as it is in theology. A building pretending to be that which it is not, is in my opinion, scandalous.
I have been to the cathedral several times.
There is some exceptional new classical churches. This is not one of them.
Compare to Houston's co-Cathedral of the Sacred Heart.
It looks like a masonic temple.