I've posted on this before here and here, if you are not up with the play.
But the stoush of the removal of the Altar from the Teschemakers chapel carries on and is headed back to the environment court.
Apparently the new owners want to use the chapel as a wedding venue. And indeed in Wellington there is a least on ex Chapel, complete with Altar that has met that fate. It provides the aesthetic surroundings but not the sacrament for these events, including doubtlessly some same sex civil unions. You would have to wonder how those who originally built these places and donated the fittings would feel about their modern profane use.
In any case the people who have bought the property do not own the Altar, the Parish of the Holy Name in Dunedin does having been gifted it by the Dominicans, well before the property was sold.
Its amazing to me how people worry over heritage buildings, stone and mortar, while having no interest in and discarding the real heritage of those places, in this case the sacramental worship of the Catholic Church.
But the stoush of the removal of the Altar from the Teschemakers chapel carries on and is headed back to the environment court.
Apparently the new owners want to use the chapel as a wedding venue. And indeed in Wellington there is a least on ex Chapel, complete with Altar that has met that fate. It provides the aesthetic surroundings but not the sacrament for these events, including doubtlessly some same sex civil unions. You would have to wonder how those who originally built these places and donated the fittings would feel about their modern profane use.
In any case the people who have bought the property do not own the Altar, the Parish of the Holy Name in Dunedin does having been gifted it by the Dominicans, well before the property was sold.
Its amazing to me how people worry over heritage buildings, stone and mortar, while having no interest in and discarding the real heritage of those places, in this case the sacramental worship of the Catholic Church.
Agree.
ReplyDeleteI note that I haven't heard a single person who wants to restore the ChristChurch cathedral actually quote a motive that involves it's actual purpose. Very sad.
I blogged a couple of weeks ago about the Cathedral. Places of worship should be built by members of the church and funded by the same. Not the state.
ReplyDeleteSince I'm reformed, I'm not a fan of altars... but the descration of the sacrament of marriage but confusing the backdrop with the ceremony is so common among non believers.
We can have divine service in tents. On boats. The building does not matter. The faith matters.
I'd argue that the Anglicans should build the cathedral... Late. After dealing with the needs of the people.
But I am low church Presbyterian... and I frequently argue we should re-purpose warehouses for worship!
scrubone, what purpose? As a tourist destination, souvenir shop and cafe?
ReplyDeleteThe new owners (John and Joy Murdoch) are thieves. Have they no shame?
ReplyDeleteThought I said "original" rather than "actual".
ReplyDeleteThe purpose of a cathedral is to be a meeting place of worship of God. For His glory.
I'm with Chris actually - fancy buildings tend to get in the way. Some of the most meaningful worship I've ever been involved in has been in private homes.
Fancy buildings made visible the invisible, make real the intangible and I've seen the direct effects on one of my children while in the Catholic Cathedral in Sydney. He was able to touch Jesus' feet on the Cross and it struck my child that this person Jesus was real. The wonder on his face was extraordinary.
ReplyDelete