The jumping off discussion area for the rest of the Deck. All things Lakewood.
Please check out our other sections. As we refile many discussions from the past into
their proper sections please check them out and offer suggestions.
William George wrote:I wish no disrespect or unfortune to any other parish. I just strongly feel the building and property are the best ones in Lakewood and deserve saving. There are several older buildings on the list. Coincidence?
USA Today wrote:In and around our nation's big cities, hundreds of Catholic parishes, schools and hospitals are consolidating and closing. Many of these institutions have long provided the foundation — as well as provided for the faith — of urban neighborhoods and immigrant communities.
In Manhattan's East Village, for example, St. Brigid's, which was closed in 2001, was built to be the spiritual home and social haven for refugees from the Irish potato famine more than 150 years ago. When plans to tear down the church were announced, preservationist groups sued Cardinal Edward Egan to block the demolition. Last month, an appeals court correctly dismissed the case.
At first glance, lawsuits like this are understandable. On reflection, though, we should see that such moves are misguided.
I also find it an odd time for the Pope to spend millions going to AIDS ravaged sections of Africa to speak against the use of condoms.
In the Congregational Church the Congregation owns the church they helped to build and maintain. Is there not some sort of clause in the Catholic Church. It seems that they would tear it down. Could it be as easy as the city citing them for their roof and the church having to fix it? Thus making the maintenance problem moot for another decade?
.
Jim O'Bryan
Lakewood Resident
"The very act of observing disturbs the system." Werner Heisenberg
"If anything I've said seems useful to you, I'm glad.
If not, don't worry. Just forget about it." His Holiness The Dalai Lama
William George wrote: If the Bishops intention is to gain revenue from the sale of properties, he should think twice about trying to sell St James.
Hopefully, the Bishop does not already have a buyer.
I wonder... Can the people of St. James Parish by their own church? Can St. Luke and St. Clements buy the church? What would be the public relations affect of a parish being forced to buy its own church from the Bishop? Can a parish have more than one church? Can St. Luke and St. Clements share priests with St. James? Does St. James have to be a stand alone church? What is the value of the land not occupied by the church? Can the land be leased to a developer with the lease payments going to preserve the church?
Some of the most impressive buildings in Lakewood are it's church's. Perhaps its time to start thinking about an alternative use for those structures before the wrecking ball claims them. I would hate to see the churches destroyed and the store front apartments preserved. Of course it's an assbackwards world so that's the likely outcome.
Bill, I cant' imagine the Bishop selling the church to a rogue breakaway parish that would promptly be excommunicated.
Selling to another denomination is theoretically possible, but I doubt there is a Lakewood/west side congregation which is seeking a new home AND is large enough to warrant the purchase of such a large building. An evangelical megachurch purchased the former Houston Rockets basketball arena and converted it into a 15,000 seat church. I don't see any such options here.
I've heard of church buildings being converted into housing. However, the housing market isn't good, and I dont' count on it improving anytime soon.
St. Hedwig is relatively small and less expensive to tear down, so I suspect that site will be developed within a few years.
If I had to guess, I'd imagine many of the large iconic churches (especially the inner-city ones like St. Colman) will simply sit vacant for a number of years.
I am not sure how the various protestant uprisings and various inquisitions affected churches in Europe. Yet when people go to Europe they encounter many church buildings hundreds of years old. Do they dick around about zoning issues and construction codes when the real estate goes up for sale?
I don't think any comparison to Europe would be apt. First, they have a tradition of keeping old buildings, while we build cheaply and expect to rebuild shortly; we are going to stay in a rural hotel this summer in Europe that is almost 300 years old, and that is hardly an exception.
Second, Europe doesn't have the separation between church and state that we do. Its common that a cathedral (which can take hundreds of years to build) will be started by one denomination and finished by another when the political situation changes.
For years here the news has reported the declining population contributing to the Catholic church; they have fewer parishioners, and fewer officiants. It seems that many of the people complaining of the closings were raised Catholic, but are no longer active. If we aren't paying the piper, perhaps we shouldn't expect the dance to continue.
I'm thinking perhaps the diocese could open a chain of Alice's restaurants to keep their real estate viable. I think it unlikely that the diocese would sell to a rival denomination, particularly as some of the Protestant churches are losing members also, and would hardly be in a position to buy.
Perhaps they will temporize. I understand that in times of economic distress church attendance increases, so as our government rushes us into bankruptcy, the churches should experience more business than ever.
perhaps "compare and contrast" would have been a better phrase.
I am one of those who imagines the Catholic Church still having mountains of Gold in the basement at the Vatican from the centuries when Spain was shipping it back from the New World. Assuming they did not blow it all on the inquisition.
Many of the old churches here appear structurally sound. I can't imagine them being much more expensive to maintain than in the past. Unless Mayor Cain tries getting them condemned for not having enough bathrooms and a two car garage. This may be a uniquely American problem: I understand most of the mansions on Millionaires Row on Euclid Avenue were gone within a few decades of being built. At least, that is what the tour guide said.
[quote="Jim O'Bryan"]
It was a shock to see St. James on the list. Half of my family has a long history there. I know that they had issues with roof, maintainence, and I suppose declining parishioners but they seem small.[/quote]
I can't speak to the rationale for the decision. We presented three, three-parish scenarios and the Bishop selected one of them. We indicated sites, but did not indicate whether closures or mergers would be most appropriate. The proposals were reviewed by three diocesan committees before a decision was rendered. Lots of folks have professed "insider information," which I am not privvy to. Considering that not a single decision was leaked in advance speaks to the discretion exercised during and throughout this process.
I am confident that we will get more information at the meeting of closing and merging parishes on March 25 and perhaps will have something to share from that.
I have a sinking feeling that many of these old buildings will just sit abandoned for a number of years, until the Church figures that emotions have died down, and people have gotten used to the new way of things ... and then they'll demolish them, because there won't be any buyers.
I hope your wrong, but I think your right. They wont do anything right away because feelings are to fresh and they dont want to pour salt in the wound. But after letting things cool down for a few years they are either going to tare them down because no one will buy them, or because they were left to decay so long they aren't able to be saved. But I honestly hope that will not be the case.
We might see a situation like that with the building at Lake and West 117, which apparently has been abandoned for many years, but whenever they threaten to raze it to make a parking lot, the community rises up in protest, but won't spend their own money to restore it. I know it was open to the elements for many years, but when I last looked the doors and windows had been boarded over, apparently to give the rats and pigeons more privacy. I think it might be on the National Register of Decaying Buildings now.
I wonder if we could buy it and use it for our new jail?
I'm glad many of you have such a cavilier sense of humor about pieces of people's lives being abandoned.
First, my high school, St. Augustine, gone. Now my grade school, St. James.
The hospital I was born in, St. John's.
The church I was baptized at, St. Coleman's.
Somehow I don't find it all that funny.
"When I dare to be powerful -- to use my strength in the service of my vision, then it becomes less and less important whether I am afraid." - Audre Lorde
Will Brown wrote:We might see a situation like that with the building at Lake and West 117, which apparently has been abandoned for many years, but whenever they threaten to raze it to make a parking lot, the community rises up in protest, but won't spend their own money to restore it. I know it was open to the elements for many years, but when I last looked the doors and windows had been boarded over, apparently to give the rats and pigeons more privacy. I think it might be on the National Register of Decaying Buildings now.
I wonder if we could buy it and use it for our new jail?
When I moved back to the area, I mentioned that I wanted to buy that building because it is so wonderful and do something cool with it. I found out from various sources that Marous Bros. Construction either owns it or has an option on it to develop it... that they haven't used... because of some serious issue with the site... something to do with a gas line? I don't know exactly what the issue is, but whatever it is is prohibitively expensive. The option to develop the property continues... and the building continues to decay. Bummer.
c. dawson wrote:I have a sinking feeling that many of these old buildings will just sit abandoned for a number of years, until the Church figures that emotions have died down, and people have gotten used to the new way of things ... and then they'll demolish them, because there won't be any buyers.
And I agree with this. Sadly, I think they are going to let these properties sit and rot. And then, when they go to demo them, there will be an uproar, but they will cite blight.
Let's start the work to have St. James declared a historical monument so it can't be stripped or demolished. It is an architectural gem. People flock to churches like this in Europe, and pay money to get in. An admission fee could be charged, it could be used as a concert venue, weddings could take place there, etc. Lakewood would be crazy to let this building go. Americans don't have enough respect for beautiful and historical structures.
I wonder, if the diocese are willing to sell it to someone besides another church, if there is a way the city could help find a management firm that could buy the building to use as a hall. As other have mentioned you could get married there, being a church it would only be natural. And as Bobbie said have concerts there. But how about also using it for receptions, community events, parties, etc. Anyone who wants more atmosphere then the Marriott can give for special events and conferences could hold them in the sanctuary. I’m not saying I want to see this building changed to fit these need but rather leave it as is, except for maybe the pews. Not to say I’m for getting rid of and trashing the pews, but any church minus the pews is essentially a large multi-purpose room. I don’t know, I think it might be cool to attend a wedding, and later the reception, both at the same old St. James. Or maybe go see a local band perform, or see a movie put on by a local group or student independent film. I know this is highly unlikely and will probably never happen, but it’s a nice idea. I would only say that if something like that did end up happening I would hope that they put in every contract that the building must stay intact as close as possible to its original state.
As far as making St. James a historical monument so it can’t be torn down, wasn’t there legislation passed after the Hall House incident to prevent things like that happening again. I thought essentially the legislation made it difficult if not all impossible to change or tare down any building the city considered to have historical heritage in Lakewood. That would mean that all we would have to do is get the council to pass a resolution making St. James a historical building in Lakewood and it would be protected. Now I don’t know if this is entirely correct, but its worth looking into.
