On altars:
From the period of St Pius X and the guiding principles of Dom Lambert Beauduin OSB onwards altars conforming to the liturgical decrees inevitably gained in simplicity and dignity. They came to achieve an unselfconscious beauty which was essential in the poorest altar set up in a wooden hut, or a room at St Louis, as in a great basilica.On Downside Abbey:
Many altars lose their beauty precisely because of their expensive embellishment. Many latter-day traditionalists confuse beauty with elaboration and that, I think, is evident in the St Louis oratory. The beauty of an altar depends upon its being designed, not for any subsidiary or non-liturgical purpose like the ornate exposition thrones of old, but for the one act round which the liturgy centres, the Sacrifice of the Mass.
But why should the appearance of the altar be of such supreme importance; why should it not only be correctly constructed for its purpose, but should also appear beautiful to the eye? The answer is that the Church has always regarded it as the representation of the Lord. She considers it to be the one likeness, the chief image of Him. But the altar does more than represent Our Lord, it interprets Him to the eye with an ordered variety denied by the most perfect statue of Him. This is reflected in the colours of the liturgical sequence, and the robing of the altar, as much as its proportions and innate dignity, has a vital significance and a universal appeal to the eye.
No pains, then, can be spared on the outward form of the altar; and no reverence it too great to guide our taste. The ornament we apply to the altar is such as we consider becoming to the person of Christ. This is the guiding principle for the choice of decoration and form of the altar. It is by this principle that such materials as lace (which mercifully does not appear on the St Louis altar) are judged to be suitable or frivolous. It is this principle which also decides whether simplicity or elaboration conveys the greatest honour.
The Church has pointed to the essential dignity of the altar, and laid down rules for achieving its outward effect. This can be assured only by obedience to the decrees of the Holy See which still apply to the use of the Roman Missal of 1962. Why go against them?
Dearmer's influence was non-existant at Downside, principally because medievalism in a fuller Catholic context was established before the Parson's Handbook was published and Comper had already designed vestments for the Abbey long before the St Dunstan's Society and Warham Guild had been started by Dearmer in 1911 or so.
With the completion of the altar in the Lady Chapel in 1913 it emerged fully-fledged, Then, in the same year, Dom Bede Camm arrived from Erdington and brought with him the needlework of the sisters at Southam which produced the distinctive dalmatics and tunicles. You could argue that there is more of a touch of Downside in Dearmer's endeavour than vice versa. In reality it was a feeble copying of Comper on a commercial basis.
Dom Edmund Fatt's achievement at Prinknash carried on the romantic medievalism of Caldey with a hefty chunk of indirect influence from Beuron. The Gothic vestments he produced were extremely good and a pleasure to wear, as I know from some in regular Jesuit use at the Sacred Heart, Wimbledon. They offered no encumbrence to liturgical actions. Comper's, on the other hand, sometimes needed to be turned back at the wrist to enable freedom of action. The vestments produced by the workroom at Downside largely followed Comper's patterns but, as time passed, used materials and braids infuenced by Beuron. You may, or may not, be persuaded by my evidence but I would advise you to forget Dearmer and go to safer principles.
Betjeman reference to fiddleback chasubles in mid-Lent pink certainly refers to Pusey House, Oxford, (even though Comper's work dates from after he went down) but his nostalgic poem, 'Anglo-Catholic Congresses' puts Travers at St Augustine's, Queens Gate, South Kensington, more prominently into focus. Comper was infinitely more serious as an architect and designer than him. He never embraced Folies Bergere liturgy which I notice is re-emerging with some force in certain quarters, but exemplified noble simplicity in the sense that Edmund Bishop meant it to be understood. Neither would be condemned by Mediator Dei, in the way that French and German monastic influence was. Nor were they part of the now largely forgotten breed of catacomb romantics. In Comper's case, his work became entirely accretive and was influenced by most styles and periods of the Christian centuries. In this way, and in his later planning, he points to the future as no other c20 church architect. His understanding of history, doctrine and liturgy was identical with Benedict XVI's.
I hope when the time comes for you to build your chapel you will use a good architect like Matthew Alderman or, in Britain, Warwick Pethers. Both know how Classic and Gothic architecture works without being superficial or pedantic. The majority of church architects these days have no idea. And I hope you will also consult Davis d'Ambly, in Philadelphis, for vestments and altar frontals. There is every reason for going for the best, even if it is an enemy of the good. And please put the altar beneath a ciborium magnum, gleaming in burnished gold.
Fr. Symondson is author of Sir Ninian Comper: An Introduction to His Life and Work, With Complete Gazetteer.
English Benedictine Congregation - Downside Abbey
CE
photo gallery
St. Louis Abbey
Percy Dearmer (wiki)
The Parson's Handbook by Percy Dearmer (1899)
REMEMBERING PERCY DEARMER
Biography and hymns of Pearcy Dearmer (1867-1936)
The Cathedral Church of Wells: A Description of Its Fabric and a ... - Google Books Result
Oxford University Press: The Oxford Book of Carols: Percy Dearmer
Percy Dearmer: An Authorized Biography - Donald Gray
No comments:
Post a Comment