Yes, it's another round in the Battle of Aberystwyth where the Bishop wants to sell off the old church and build a new one some way out of town - there's an analogy lurking there somewhere.
As I seem to come under sniping fire from some who uphold the Bishop's plans I am posting this extract from The Cambrian News verbatim, sans comments from me:-
As I seem to come under sniping fire from some who uphold the Bishop's plans I am posting this extract from The Cambrian News verbatim, sans comments from me:-
This is monumental arrogance by Vatican
"HAVE A GUESS. A set of historic buildings in the Aberystwyth conservation
area. A long-running row over whether they should be preserved or demolished.
The claimed final decision - to pull them down – revealed to have been taken by
someone who neither owns them, nor has ever seen them, nor is ever likely to. A
decision taken by one Raymond Leo Burke, a 65-year-old American resident in
Rome. True or false?
False, you hope? Sorry. It’s true. Add to that an unsettling irony. That the decision to smash up a piece of Aberystwyth’s history was taken, of all places, within the walls of a World Heritage Site.
I refer to the Palazzo della Cancelleria, a Medieval palace, part of the Vatican. And our Raymond Burke, who works for the Vatican, from his office within this well-conserved edifice, never for a moment, we may conclude, considering Aberystwyth’s heritage - before striking from his map the church of Our Lady of the Angels and St Winefride and its presbytery annexe.
This the 1870s complex in Queen’s Road - the first Catholic church to be built in Ceredigion since the Reformation – which should be preserved not only as a venerated place of worship and because of its place in history, but because its pleasing unpretentiousness, its green setting, and as it is an important part of Aberystwyth’s Victorian and Edwardian heritage. The diocesan bishop, Tom Burns, wants the site sold to developers because, he claims, it would cost too much to renovate the church, while parishioners insist restoration is entirely affordable.
That Raymond Burke has got involved may seem odd. But not when you remember that the Vatican always knows best. Even when it doesn’t. A wisdom previously thought to be confined to matters religious. Now revealed to extend beyond telling people where they should go to Mass – in a proposed new church in Penparcau – to approving the destruction of a historic Catholic church integral to the Aberystwyth conservation area. This is monumental arrogance.
Such weighty decision-making must of course be easier if you’ve got a weighty title. Like Raymond’s, which the Vatican thinks entitles him to make decisions affecting people and places he doesn’t know and never will. Burke is Prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura. Note all those capital letters. Formerly Archbishop of St Louis, Missouri, before that a bishop in Wisconsin. Having shinned further up the ecclesiastical ladder, he is now a cardinal and the most senior official of the highest judicial authority of the Roman Catholic Church. One quakes.
No wonder Tom Burns, embracing the authoritarianism (sorry, solemnity) of Cardinal Burke’s edict, thought he’d include a bit of Latin in his letter telling parishioners of Rome’s sanctioning of demolition. “Roma locuta est. Causa finita est”, he thundered. Adding, sotto voce: “Rome has spoken. The case is finished”.
Burns is wrong. The case is not closed. He must agree to the reasonable request by opponents of demolition for their surveyors, and his, to discuss the condition of the buildings and restoration costs.
He must tell us why Aberystwyth’s parish priest, Neil Evans, wasn’t informed about a meeting between Burns and pro-demolition parishioners. Evans has now quit the diocesan board of trustees, saying he does not believe that “secret meetings (are) the best way forward.” He’s right.
Why is Tom Burns afraid of an open debate?"
False, you hope? Sorry. It’s true. Add to that an unsettling irony. That the decision to smash up a piece of Aberystwyth’s history was taken, of all places, within the walls of a World Heritage Site.
I refer to the Palazzo della Cancelleria, a Medieval palace, part of the Vatican. And our Raymond Burke, who works for the Vatican, from his office within this well-conserved edifice, never for a moment, we may conclude, considering Aberystwyth’s heritage - before striking from his map the church of Our Lady of the Angels and St Winefride and its presbytery annexe.
This the 1870s complex in Queen’s Road - the first Catholic church to be built in Ceredigion since the Reformation – which should be preserved not only as a venerated place of worship and because of its place in history, but because its pleasing unpretentiousness, its green setting, and as it is an important part of Aberystwyth’s Victorian and Edwardian heritage. The diocesan bishop, Tom Burns, wants the site sold to developers because, he claims, it would cost too much to renovate the church, while parishioners insist restoration is entirely affordable.
That Raymond Burke has got involved may seem odd. But not when you remember that the Vatican always knows best. Even when it doesn’t. A wisdom previously thought to be confined to matters religious. Now revealed to extend beyond telling people where they should go to Mass – in a proposed new church in Penparcau – to approving the destruction of a historic Catholic church integral to the Aberystwyth conservation area. This is monumental arrogance.
Such weighty decision-making must of course be easier if you’ve got a weighty title. Like Raymond’s, which the Vatican thinks entitles him to make decisions affecting people and places he doesn’t know and never will. Burke is Prefect of the Supreme Tribunal of the Apostolic Signatura. Note all those capital letters. Formerly Archbishop of St Louis, Missouri, before that a bishop in Wisconsin. Having shinned further up the ecclesiastical ladder, he is now a cardinal and the most senior official of the highest judicial authority of the Roman Catholic Church. One quakes.
No wonder Tom Burns, embracing the authoritarianism (sorry, solemnity) of Cardinal Burke’s edict, thought he’d include a bit of Latin in his letter telling parishioners of Rome’s sanctioning of demolition. “Roma locuta est. Causa finita est”, he thundered. Adding, sotto voce: “Rome has spoken. The case is finished”.
Burns is wrong. The case is not closed. He must agree to the reasonable request by opponents of demolition for their surveyors, and his, to discuss the condition of the buildings and restoration costs.
He must tell us why Aberystwyth’s parish priest, Neil Evans, wasn’t informed about a meeting between Burns and pro-demolition parishioners. Evans has now quit the diocesan board of trustees, saying he does not believe that “secret meetings (are) the best way forward.” He’s right.
Why is Tom Burns afraid of an open debate?"
My thanks to a Swansea friend for forwarding the extract.
I'm afraid Cardinal Burke is no exception to the "circle the wagons" mentality in Rome: if it's a battle between a local Ordinary and parishioners, Rome will always decide in favor of the Bishop. Has there ever been a case that ended differently?
ReplyDeleteIf you have a good solid Bishop who is trying to uphold sanity Rome will, on occasion, side with him, but not always. The miasma that has engulfed the Church for several generations now has produced a growing mediocrity among the high and the low in the clergy, and even the "good guys" are not immune to this disease.
Perhaps in an ironic turn the government will step in and side with those who want to preserve rather than those who want to destroy.
The Ecumenical and Infallible Council of Nicea II, the 7th E. C., actually anathematized bishops who sell churches or monasteries ... look it up....but Burke has followed the line of iconoclasts which took over Rome since J23's days...why just the other day, at the Summorum Pontificum conference at Rome, he dashed for cover when Sandro Magister began his talk criticizing Bergoglio's attack on Summorum Pontificum...a retreat which signaled the loss of affection of all those who hoped for a much more masculine response
DeleteOh dear, Richard, things are a bit quiet so you present this diatribe from a few weeks ago to get a reaction. It seems your 'Swansea friend' lent you his wooden spoon....
ReplyDeleteI've responded truthfully and tenaciously to previous posts.
a) The Vatican only became involved at all thanks to a protester (a monumentally arrogant one (?) who obviously doesn't accept the decision of the Signatura....so why bother to approach them in the first place?)
b) Parishioners asked to meet the Bishop privately, not secretly,as they were anxious at the situation here.
c) Full and frank debate took place when Bishop Tom visited our parish for the weekend as a result of meeting with parishioners in b)
Anyone familiar with the sorry situation in Aber will see this column for the skewed rant it is.
Sue
To quote from a letter in this week's Cambrian News:
ReplyDelete' The overwhelming majority of Aberystwyth's Catholic community hold Bishop Tom in the highest regard and support him in all that he is doing.'
'...the Catholic church is not a debating society and that good catholics accept the authority of the church in good faith.'
'twas ever thus. With a bit of luck the new church will look like the chapel of Casa Santa Marta to reflect a new dynamism.
ReplyDeleteFunny.
DeleteSue, just a suggestion, why not gather together a list of names of those parishioners in favour of selling off the established church. That way you could prove the numbers that you and your nameless supporters claim.
ReplyDeleteAre you setting yourself up as judge and jury? I feel no need to prove anything to you here, Richard. Overwhelming support for the Bishop was obvious during the open discussions during his visit. I'm not a part of any group, I have no 'nameless supporters', I just aim to put the other side of the argument which has been misreported in the media and on blogs such as yours. I am surprised that you have stooped so low as to give this rant - via your friend - further publicity.
DeleteSue
Oh dear, seem to be repeating myself - sorry folks!
DeleteSue
Just a question. Are they not listed buildings and therefore protected?
ReplyDeleteIn a word- no. In fact several Catholic churches throughout Wales are listed but not this one. I wonder no one has considered the case for demolition and rebuilding on the same site.
DeleteIt was one of the original options put before the parishioners, Patricius, but, again, it proved to be a very expensive option and beyond our means.
DeleteSue
Jacobi, I don't think so, the church is late 19th century, good and orthodox but not an outstanding piece of architecture.
ReplyDeleteNo, Jacobi, they're not listed. CADW 'official guardian of the built heritage of Wales', were approached on two occasions by those who are intent on renovation (twice) but CADW weren't interested.
ReplyDeleteSue
Sue, I believe that I have been fairly middle of the road here....it is just that the Bishop needs to face up to all of his parishioners - and, most importantly, to his parish priest. It was inexcusable to go behind his back and hold a meeting with some supporters of the scheme. But then a flaunting of the common courtesies such as responding to letters is the hallmark of the man. Please refrain from insulting me, it just gets tedious.
ReplyDeletePatricius - ah! good idea, trouble is, the diocese would not make big bucks from the sale of real estate.
ReplyDeleteSue, I'm afraid your reluctance to come up with names might indicate something.......yes?
ReplyDeleteRichard, I'm not part of any group, so don't have numbers available, but support for the Diocese's plans is widespread. What is insulting is the way a few parishioners run to the press etc. with lies and half-truths at every opportunity, purporting to speak on our behalf - which they do not - to garner support beyond the parish.
DeleteI don't think I have insulted you, Richard, despite several digs aimed at me personally....'sniping fire'? I'm only trying in my small way to get the truth across.
And by posting this column from The Cambrian News in the first place, aren't you endorsing it's content...hardly 'middle of the road'?
Sue
Sue,
DeleteOf course they would agree with the Bishop's nuChurch paradigm. You are all in it together.
People like you want to destroy the Church because at the end of the day you do not actually believe that it is TRULY the Church of Christ.
It's called mysticism not asceticism, but you are unlikely to understand what this means because you have failed to fully catechise yourself.
The reason why some people do not want old churches closed is because those, who have made sure that they are well catechised, understand that one of the most important teachings of the Catholic Church is that every aspect of Catholicism, from the liturgy, the colours, the statues, architectural features, the music, plainchant, incense, and vestments are all present to draw us towards the ultimate truths of Christ. Catholicism needs all of these aspects to draw us into the sacred and spiritual, so that people are led, using all of the human senses, into the inner truths of Christ's Holy Catholic Church.
When you have won and have got your Cromwellian style sanitised Church you will send more people to hell - FACT! This is because theologically those who seek the truth want something set aside from the secular world i.e. they search for the sacred.
Your new sanitised church will look and feel like the secular world. You will fail those searching for the truth!
You can't save people if you have not got all of the tools to help save them.
If you do not agree with what I have said then you need to understand that this is CORRECT theology. It is not made up, 'winging it', best guess theology which you are using.
Finally, I wonder why Catholic youth initiatives like Youth 2000, Evangelium, The Faith Movement, and Juventutem bother successfully drawing young people back to the one true Faith using correct theology when there are people like you (and the Bishop) undermining their work?
Watch this video - you might get the message (this is what is happening in the church these days - Get it?). Stop undermining the work!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQ0_NrURjVo
Ora Pro Nobis, having read past posts here by you, I expected this response. However, you read too much into the situation here, this is not some elaborate conspiracy. How many times do I have to repeat..we are not a rich parish,we cannot afford to renovate the buildings in question.
DeleteSue
Follow the correct theology Sue. Do not make your own up.
DeleteThe problem is you do not believe in God's providence.
Being a follow of Christ means that you have to have faith that whatever money is require will be given.
How do you think all of the churches which were destroyed after the reformation were eventually rebuilt in the same towns. Where did the money come from?
The money does not come from man, it comes from God. If you fail to trust in God, or fail to become basically catechised, of course you will believe that you will not have enough money for your church.
The sad thing is that even evangelicals and pentecostals understand this basic theology.
The reason you believe that you do not have enough money for your church is because you fear the world, and do not give genuine honour to God.
Just because those around you fall into this trap does not mean that you have to.
Ora Pro Nobis,
DeleteI totally agree. Its not a matter of money here, its faith. In many parts of Europe, where there is not enough money to repair a church, it is allowed to sit, years, decades, even centuries, out of respect for the fact that it is the Lord's House, not the Bishop's property...when Our Lord wants He will sent someone to repair and restore it....to sell His house is sacrilege, and the Bishop by all these scandals is certainlly meriting hell....
As for his intentions in removing solid catholic forms from the life and memory of the faithful...anyone who can read can read articles about this the world over...it is a patent agenda point for the Modernists...and only those ignorant of the present crisis and who have eyes but do not want to see, say otherwise...
The church is a building, the Church is not. Our church and presbytery are not safe and cannot be insured. Major renovations have taken place since the building was fairly young...just cannot afford it any longer. Where churches are left to decay for decades, where do the faithful go to Mass? We use the catholic school hall and are happy to do so for the time being.
DeleteSue
Dear Sue,
DeleteAs a founder of a Church restoration society in my own country, let me respond to your comment with some constructive advice:
First, don't dispair, hope! Our Lord want's His house put aright, and those who work to this end will have His eternal Reward...saving an old Church is a work that merits eternal life....
Second, be proactive: Have you sought opinions from different engineering companies to determin just how unsafe or safe the Church is? Often insurance companies hire the most extremely fearful companies to survey properties, because they do not want to insure a property and want rather to have an excuse; but there are many companies which specialize in unique solutions for structural problems...seek them out...I would imagine that in Europe with so many old Churches there would be many of these.
Take measures to do fundraising aright. There are lots of organizations in Wales, England, Great Britain, and even abroad who fund Church restoration or would help. Set up a website, take on-line donations, have fundraising events.
Fourth, be sacrificial. If your Faith is important, then you will make the sacrifices necessary to insure that the next generation has a place worthy of worship. Ask parishoners, businessmen, local nobility, etc. to donate sizeable amounts, whether in cash, fix-assets, securities, for Love of Jesus Christ.
Fifth, don't give in to the pragmatism which comes from the world, the flesh and the Devil. Your Bishop should be gentle reminded that he as a duty to hope, not just to plan. I publically repuked my own on that point years ago, and it touched his heart so that he abandoned plans to destroy a third of the churches in his Diocese...
Finally, have a clear, transparent and financially independent process, so that donors do not doubt the intentions of the organizers, and are assured that the funds raised go to the salvation of the old Church, if that be your cause, or the construction of a new one.
Sue, get the numbers, that's an essential part of putting forward any view representative of a group.
ReplyDeleteRichard, why don't you try to find out numbers of parishioners supposedly backing the core protesters? I refer you back to my earlier post of 4:24am....
DeleteSue
It seems to me that Sue is making a very reasonable point regarding the poverty of the parish and one cannot feel other than immense sympathy for the parishioners so threatened with the loss of a church and/or potentially overwhelming debt. Given, however, that the church in this location is viewed as having a value beyond that of simple "use" to the parishioners- notably as a witness to the faith in the heart of this university town- then others, not least within the diocese, might be persuaded to help.
ReplyDeleteSue, I'm not part of a group, just an observer from afar and reporting word for word what has appeared in the press. If the Bishop had anything interesting to say on the matter I would post on that also.
ReplyDeleteI believe the truth of the matter is that there is a hard core of parishioners numbering c. 15 in number, who are backing up the Bishop. The rest are the ones who wish to stay put.
Oh no Richard, you're way out in your estimation there, but as I don't know EVERY individual who shares my view I wouldn't present you with a figure. That would be dishonest, and, hand on heart, I have been honest in all my postings here.
DeleteAnd, of course, my experience is first hand.
Quoting from a letter in this week's Cambrian News:
'As one of a small group of people who arranged to meet the Bishop in August, I feel I must rectify some of the errors made....'
'Fr Neil was not informed of our meeting with the Bishop in August. He has on several occasions said that he does not want to be involved.'
Please let this be an end to it...
Sue
Sue,why do you find it necessary to make spiteful comments.It might be a good idea if you were to find something useful to do instead of making these unpleasant remarks.
ReplyDeleteSorry, Chrissy, but there are just so many lies and skewed facts about our situation in the media (press, blogs etc.) I have just been trying redress the balance. It is never a good idea to believe what you read in the press. I never intended to be spiteful, but if that's how you see it then I'm sorry.
ReplyDeleteYour own comment, however, is less than charitable...
Sue
I'm a bit confused here. We are told that there is not enough money to repair the church....but that there is enough money to build a new one. I understand architectural/structural issues fairly clearly, I believe, so I would really have to be convinced that money is better spent in building a new one.
ReplyDeleteAged parent
DeleteThe sale of the St. Winefride's site for development would cover the cost of the construction of a new church, presbytery and parish hall elsewhere in Aberystwyth. St. Winefride's and the presbytery was closed last year as it was no longer insurable.
Sue
Society, and much of the church , has for decades been living by " Sell the future to finance the present, have fewer or no children to live better."
DeleteThe individual details MAY be utterly blameless and sinless in this case, but it looks awful like the broad picture all over.
More -lio style - ought to be done to evangelize Aber's students, St winifrede's not necessarily the best site but the end of a suburb up a hill aint where students gonna walk, I don't like the plans smelling of a mere holding operation for pakablenear worship space till the present generation of wrinkly mass goers has passed on.
P:S : the experienced , perhaps purely human, frequently expressed opion of a late and dearly missed archbish:
ReplyDeleteThe Parish that has nothing beyond its means starting and has paid off all its debts is condemning itself to death.
The Church should act as its own insurer.
ReplyDeleteAnd I bet if the Bishop showed some confidence in the parish, the parish could fix its own church....
DeleteLike if he came a prayed with them, on his knees before the Most Blessed Sacrament, walked the streets of the Parish and invited the fallen away back to the faith; preached in public to the non catholics and encourages their conversion to the One True Faith, and gave good example of a penitential, mortified prayerful and ascetic life, so that all the power of his sacred office borne up on the wings of the Holy Ghost, might shine upon his flock and inspire, renew and rebuild them...
Amen.
DeleteEverybody here, whatever their views, has been praying about this for years now... but you also have to stand up for the truth, which is what I'm trying to do!
ReplyDeleteBad things happen when good men do nothing.
No idea where that quote originates, anybody care to enlighten me?
Sue
Sad to see so many of the Bishop's supporters telling outright lies here. The actual fact of the matter (which can be proved) is that 260+ of the 330 parishioners (at the last Mass count) support the retention of the parish church of St. Winefride's. The bishop dare not put it to an honest and open vote because he knows he would lose. What price a 'humble' church?
ReplyDeleteAnon 8:26pm: I happen to know that when a parishioner asked to see this list you write of (at the suggestion of the parish priest) she was told there was no petition/list of signatures. However, I do remember that parishioners were approached to sign up to receive more information on the situation, and many did so just to stop people harassing them after Mass. And could you point out the 'outright lies' by the supporters of the Diocese's plans...I failed to find any.
ReplyDeleteThe list has been supplied to the bishop and trustees. The people whose names are on this list have simply signed up to supporting our aim of keeping the parish church on the St. Winefride's site. One of the lies I am referring to is the repeated assertion by Penparcau supporters that a majority of parishioners support the diocesan plan and that the opponents are a small minority. Nothing could be further from the truth; but if you doubt this then why not put it to the vote? It's called democracy.
ReplyDeleteOn the contrary, support for the Diocese spans ALL areas of the parish, all parishioners being equal.
DeleteIt is obvious that support for retaining St Winefride's has diminished dramatically. This was demonstrated when full and frank discussions took place during the Bishop's last visit here.
And harassment of parishioners to garner support? No, people signed up, not in support of renovating St Winefride's, but were under the impression that they would be receiving further information on the situation. Also, I'll bet that a lot of the people on the list no longer live here having finished their studies!
No, ACTIVE campaigners of sos (which has nothing to do with the Aberystwyth parish or the Diocese of Meneva (sic) even though the core members are parishioners, let's not forget!) number about a dozenish, I'd say.