The National Catholic Review

May 23, 2011

Vol. 204 No. 17Whole No. 4934 Download PDF


Current Comment
Teens and Torture; Anthropogenic Apocalypse?; OMG!; As Others See Us
Slippery Slope
Once critical of extrajudicial killings, Americans have lost their inhibitions when it comes to Islamic terrorists.


A Graced Moment
Roger M. Mahony

Welcoming the New Roman Missal

Worship Space Today
Roberto Chiotti, Richard S. Vosko

Trends in modern church architecture

Books and Culture

Is Paris Worth a Mass?
Dennis McNally

Space, place and liturgy at the Cathedral of Notre Dame

Liturgy, a History
J. Peter Nixon

Catechesis or history written by the victors?

A Social Imagination
Dennis OBrien

Charles Taylor argues that the modern world starts not with scientific discovery, but with a moral revolution.

Quality of Life
Vincent D. Rougeau

Martha Nussbaum's new book looks at the "human development approach" to social development.

Columns and Departments

The Word
Never Alone

Barbara E. Reid

'This God, This One Word: I'

John F. Kavanaugh

Of Many Things
Of Many Things

Drew Christiansen


Web Only

  Designing Sacred Space
Roberto Chiotti, Richard S. Vosko
We asked two experts, one an architect and the other a sacred space planner, a series of questions about church design today. In the May 23 issue, Roberto Chiotti and Richard S. Vosko suggest three things that American Catholics should know about church design. We also asked them to cite a recent project they admire, and to name an up and coming church designer.    The Editors While deliberating the submissions for the 2010 Faith & Form/IFRAA International Awards Program for Religious Art & Architecture, I was drawn to the St. Bartholomew’s Chapel in Valley Center, California by Kevin deFreitas Architects for the significant amount of site-harvested materials used in its reconstruction. The beautifully organic hues and texture of the sanctuary’s rammed-earth sidewalls, sculpted from 120 tons of sacred reservation soil, tangibly and symbolically ground the new sacred space within its sacred earth context, while manifesting the client’s desires to pursue LEED Gold certification. The roof appears to float above these walls, which are situated to afford visual connections to the congregation’s surrounding ancestral home. I think we should be encouraging up and coming church architects/designers to embody and reflect in their work an understanding of early scriptural teachings that emphasized the sacredness of all creation and not just the sacredness of humankind. As Catholics who are willing to re-claim these important insights along with embracing creation as a primary revelatory experience we can offer the world a significant contribution towards achieving an earth justice that will enable the realization of gospel values that promote peace and social justice for all. Our sacred spaces can and should become opportunities for catechesis, engaging our senses, awakening our spirits and inviting transformation. -- Roberto Chiotti There are several talented architects doing good work. One of them is Joan Soranno, FAIA (HGA Architects, Minneapolis, Minn.) who designed the Bigelow Chapel at United Theological Seminary, New Brighton, Minn. The shape of the place is evocative, refreshing and functional. The materials are organic and integral to the plan. Abundant natural light in this flexible environment creates an atmosphere that fosters a feeling of the sacred. One could say this chapel is a venue for experiencing the ineffable holy one in both an immanent and transcendent way (See photos). There are few design professionals who are bringing a fresh interpretation to the field of religious art and architecture. One of them is Victor Trahan, FAIA. His use of architectural concrete to create more ascetic places is inspiring and reminiscent of some of the more contemporary church buildings in the European Union. His designs invite the congregation to engage with the ritual actions that occur around various focal points without being distracted by excessive ornament or stylistic fashion. The use of light, harmony, verticality and materials invites contemplation even during public worship. -- Richard S. Vosko View a slideshow of newly designed churches.
  What We Learned
Michael N. Kane
As a Byzantine Catholic priest, I have read with interest the many articles on the new translation of the missal for the Roman liturgy. The liturgy of the Byzantine-Ruthanian Catholic Church is of course different than the Roman Church, but we also recently implemented a new translation. A brief history of the process, and the lessons learned, may be of help to our Roman brothers and sisters. First, some background: Ss. Cyril and Methodius were ninth century monks from Thessalonika who traveled to the Slavic people of Eastern Europe. They translated the Gospel and the Byzantine-Greek liturgy into the language of the local people—what has become known as Church Slavonic. They wanted the people to hear and understand the Gospel and the liturgy. For centuries, Church Slavonic had been used for the liturgy in the Byzantine (Ruthenian) Catholic Church much like Latin had been used in Roman Church. In 1965, the Byzantine-Slavonic liturgy was published in English and promulgated in Byzantine-Ruthenian churches in the United States and Canada. This was consonant with traditional Eastern Christian thinking that the liturgy should be in the vernacular. The liturgy in U.S. Byzantine-Ruthenian parishes is generally sung in English. Some parishes continue to celebrate the liturgy in Church Slavonic and many retain well-known hymns in Church Slavonic or Hungarian. It’s meaningful to some, nostalgic to others. Few are able to understand Church Slavonic unless they have formally studied ancient Slavic languages.   Several years ago, the Byzantine-Ruthenian Church in the United States began looking at its English translation of the liturgy. Byzantine liturgical scholars, diocesan liturgical commissions and hierarchs proposed a revised translation to the appropriate Vatican authorities. The new text was approved.  Opinion and input from parish clergy or laity was not formally solicited. In 2006, Byzantine-Ruthenian priests were informed that the new English translations of the liturgies of St. John Chrysostom and St Basil the Great, the two principal liturgies used in the Byzantine Church, were ready to be introduced into parishes. Clergy and laity hoped that the new translation would make evangelization easier and that these liturgies would become even better understood. The revised text has presented significant challenges, such as the re-introduction of obscure Greek words and a slavish adherence to traditional plainchant.    Back to the Greek Like Roman Catholics, Eastern Christians have a great love for the Mother of God. The Byzantine liturgy references her many times. In the original English liturgy, the priest or deacon called attention to “the most holy, most pure, most blessed and glorious Lady, the Mother of God and ever-Virgin, Mary.” It was clear that we were remembering Mary. It may have been Byzantine-verbose, but it was poetically intelligible. Our liturgists decided that it would be more accurate to call the Mother of God by her Greek title of Theotókos (Θεοτóκος). The title Theotókos was adopted at the Ecumenical Council of Ephesus in 431. It means “God-bearer” and communicates theologically all the necessary Christological nuances that refute Arianism, Nestorianism and several other heresies common to the third, fourth and fifth centuries. Many Eastern Catholic Churches and most Eastern Orthodox Churches have always addressed the Mother of God as Theotókos in their liturgy. This had not been the case with Byzantine-Ruthenian Catholics. I admit I am conflicted about this important term. It is quite meaningful to a person with the proper historical and theological background. Yet I am not convinced that most parishioners who seek intercession from the Mother of God require this depth of understanding. It is a problematic word, too, from the practical point of pronunciation. After four years of modeling the correct pronunciation (“Thee-uh-tok-uh s”), the parochial variants of the word are astounding. (I’m sure the Mother of God has a sense of humor!) Interestingly, outside the context of the liturgy, I have not heard any of my parishioners refer to the Mother of God as the Theotókos since its reintroduction. In my mind, that tells a tale about the need for accuracy and the need for meaning. After reciting Nicene Creed, the presiding priest or deacon in the Byzantine-Ruthanian liturgy invites the congregation to enter into the great mystery of worship. The priest or deacon used to intone “Let us stand aright, let us stand in awe, let us be attentive to offer the holy oblation in peace.” The people responded: “The offering of peace, the sacrifice of praise.” In case anyone was confused about what an oblation might be, the response cued them to the meaning. This dialogue has now been changed. It is no longer an oblation; it is now “the holy Anaphora.” After more than four years of catechesis, I am still unsure whether this change has had a positive affect on the worshipper. To promote the parochial introduction of the new translation, a 467-page “people’s book” was introduced. Because worshippers probably would not understand such terms as epiklesis, anaphora, kontakion, polyeleos and Theotókos, the liturgical experts included a six-page glossary at the end. Congregants may consult the glossary to find the meaning of these theologically accurate Greek words. Yet I am left wondering if the usage of these exotic words impedes our understanding of and ability to participate in the liturgy. Perhaps the most insightful commentary about the book itself was made by a parishioner who said that it should be called “the turquoise beast” because of its color and complexity.