Co-Cathedral Of The Sacred Heart At 1111 St. Joseph Parkway

[H-Town Man]

I'm going to let the rest of the message drift away because I don't want to derail this thread.

I guess in my mind I don't associate monasteries with everyday Catholicism because most people don't go to monasteries or interact with monks or friars. Of the three monasteries I've been to, two operate entirely independently of the local archdiocese and take their orders from a higher power (someone in Rome, presumably). The third one may do the same, but I don't know for sure.

All of the monasteries I've been to have been very plain affairs. Not dirt-walls kind of plain. More like 1950's elementary school plain. I think this is for two reasons -- one, that they don't get a lot of visitors compared to a church. And two, because the monks and friars spend most of their time busying themselves with their ministry outside of where they live. Unlike a church, which is the spiritual center of a community drawing people in, the monastery is more on the outskirts of the ordinary person's church experience. Because of this, it doesn't need to be ornate or instructive. They'd, literally, be preaching to the choir.

Or at least that's been my experience. Your mileage may vary.

In the middle ages, monasteries played a very strong role in public life. I think both the ornate/extraverted approach and the simple/introverted approach have maintained a place in Catholicism throughout its history.

I agree with a lot of the other stuff you said.

[marc]

Ken Follet's THE PILLARS OF THE EARTH and sequel, WORLD WITHOUT END addresses some of the above mentioned topics.

Cathedrals of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance (and to some degree present day) were what the skyscraper movement in the US (1920s- 1930s and this new present day rebirth) is to Americans, for the most part. What i mean is an IDEA was being touted and needed a concrete, tangible representation of the abstract. In the case of cathedrals, the abstract was GOD. SO, builders, commissioned and sanctioned by the Church, of course, tried to convey the Heavenly on Earth. That is a more gentle idealist view. A more pessimistic one is that the Church was not only flouting its power through architecture, but subjigated thousands to build the monstrocities. I prefer the more idealistic approach. Also, keep in mind MOST people attending the massive Cathedrals were poor, illiterate, worked long hours outdoors and believed ( or were force to) pretty much anything the Church told them. SO, the masses had a concept of Heaven based on what the Church hierarchy told them. These days, i think because of our open and free thinking society (yes, even in Christianity), Cathedrals can still convey the Heavenly or otherworldly, but don't have to be too flashy or too gaudy because people's views about those matters have changed.

m.

[H-Town Man]

^^^Interesting post. I think one mistake that people make is to think that in the middle ages, everything was forced upon the poor, ignorant, helpless people by the big, powerful church. It is true that there was little freedom of thought at the time (although theologians had lively debates within doctrinal boundaries), but those cathedrals you see in Northern France were expressions of local piety. The pope and his curia in Rome did not force the town of Chartres to build a great cathedral, Chartres did it for itself, and built something much grander than anything in Rome at the time.

All those grand arches and details weren't just rhetoric meant to impose an idea, they were an adventure for the spirit. It's a mistake to say that the church was separate from the people, and that when the church built a great cathedral, it was taking money from the people. The people were part of the church - they identified themselves with it - and in their minds, the local cathedral was their own. It would be like saying that the city of New York stole money from all those poor New Yorkers so that they could build Central Park. Central Park belongs to the people of New York and is a spiritual boon for the whole city; ditto the cathedrals.

[musicman]

i decided to attempt the tour. i must say, it is well worth it. depending on the time of day, the lighting in the cathedral sure does highlight certain things. this statue sure caught my attention, it looked as if it was glowing. also be sure and check out the stained glass resurrection in front, the city skyline is at the bottom. it was hard to pick out from the exterior, but from the inside it was very evident.

[editor]

Ken Follet's THE PILLARS OF THE EARTH and sequel, WORLD WITHOUT END addresses some of the above mentioned topics.

Cathedrals of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance (and to some degree present day) were what the skyscraper movement in the US (1920s- 1930s and this new present day rebirth) is to Americans, for the most part. What i mean is an IDEA was being touted and needed a concrete, tangible representation of the abstract. In the case of cathedrals, the abstract was GOD. SO, builders, commissioned and sanctioned by the Church, of course, tried to convey the Heavenly on Earth. That is a more gentle idealist view. A more pessimistic one is that the Church was not only flouting its power through architecture, but subjigated thousands to build the monstrocities. I prefer the more idealistic approach. Also, keep in mind MOST people attending the massive Cathedrals were poor, illiterate, worked long hours outdoors and believed ( or were force to) pretty much anything the Church told them. SO, the masses had a concept of Heaven based on what the Church hierarchy told them. These days, i think because of our open and free thinking society (yes, even in Christianity), Cathedrals can still convey the Heavenly or otherworldly, but don't have to be too flashy or too gaudy because people's views about those matters have changed.

m.

What I didn't realize until I read it in a book today is that the whole thing about having a place of worship extend into the heavens is mostly a Christian thing. In the construction of even the great mosques, the attention is almost entirely lateral, while for Christians it's vertical. I noticed something similar in the Buddhist and Shinto temples I've been in. I wonder why that is.

[marc]

^^^Interesting post. I think one mistake that people make is to think that in the middle ages, everything was forced upon the poor, ignorant, helpless people by the big, powerful church. It is true that there was little freedom of thought at the time (although theologians had lively debates within doctrinal boundaries), but those cathedrals you see in Northern France were expressions of local piety. The pope and his curia in Rome did not force the town of Chartres to build a great cathedral, Chartres did it for itself, and built something much grander than anything in Rome at the time.

All those grand arches and details weren't just rhetoric meant to impose an idea, they were an adventure for the spirit. It's a mistake to say that the church was separate from the people, and that when the church built a great cathedral, it was taking money from the people. The people were part of the church - they identified themselves with it - and in their minds, the local cathedral was their own. It would be like saying that the city of New York stole money from all those poor New Yorkers so that they could build Central Park. Central Park belongs to the people of New York and is a spiritual boon for the whole city; ditto the cathedrals.

Well said. As you noticed, i indicated i took a more idealistic view. i suppose what i meant to say is that i take a more Spiritual view concerning the building of the Cathedrals. YES, i fully agree that the people building them, from the lowely laborers to the Bishops inhabiting them, had a BIG stake in the cathedral. Again, the above mentioned novels sort of gives different perspectives on people's ideas regarding the PURPOSE of the cathedrals. i guess what i was getting at was that a concept of the Heavenly on Earth was trying to be conveyed. AND, if one is to imagine HEAVEN, i suppose the pushing of architectural boundaries is to be expected. At least, i would hope so. i for one have no problem with ornate, lofty, ethereal expressions in architecture as long as it is not gaudy. Ostentation just for its own sake. Make sense?

m.

[marc]

What I didn't realize until I read it in a book today is that the whole thing about having a place of worship extend into the heavens is mostly a Christian thing. In the construction of even the great mosques, the attention is almost entirely lateral, while for Christians it's vertical. I noticed something similar in the Buddhist and Shinto temples I've been in. I wonder why that is.

Really? What about the lofty minarets? i visited a HUGE mosque in Paris and it definately evoked the Heavenly by making one look upward.

THE WHY OF VERTICAL? OK, here goes psyche 101. As we all know, humans have looked at the Heavens and the Stars for millenia. It only stands to reason that religion, from nature worship (honoring the Sun, Moon, Planets and Stars) to organized religions (like Christianity, Islam, etc.) would include in its tenets a striving to reach ......UP. I think architectural concepts like Houses of Worship and Skyscrapers convey a very similar concept. Both are pursuits which push people to go beyond themselves, and being creatures who have looked at and wondered about the cosmos since we crawled out of caves, i feel it makes perfect sense that most of our structures REACH up. To me, skyscrapers are not only a showcase of humanity's technological advancement, but also connotate the limitlessness of pure Capitalism. Cathedrals and other places of worship achieve the same. Tech. advancement, BUT also connotate the limitlessness of the Spirit.

That's my 2 cents worth.

m.

[editor]

Really? What about the lofty minarets? i visited a HUGE mosque in Paris and it definately evoked the Heavenly by making one look upward.

From what I read, the minarets are intended to be outward signs. They exist not so people will look up, but so that people will know that a mosque is right there. Which is part of the reason mosques have differing numbers of minarets -- the more you have (up to six) the more important that mosque is.

But what I was really getting at is the interior space. In cathedrals, the layout, design, and decorations beckon you to look up. In the mosques I've been to, it's all about being low. Which kind of makes sense since the faithful are expected to spend most of their time on the floor. When I get around to posting my pictures of mosques in Istanbul you'll see that they even went so far as to lower the chandeliers down to just about seven feet -- just above head level. The decorations don't encourage people to look upward and it appears the domes aren't so much about lofty feelings as the practicality of creating a large contiguous space with the technology available at the time.

THE WHY OF VERTICAL? OK, here goes psyche 101. As we all know, humans have looked at the Heavens and the Stars for millenia. It only stands to reason that religion, from nature worship (honoring the Sun, Moon, Planets and Stars) to organized religions (like Christianity, Islam, etc.) would include in its tenets a striving to reach ......UP. I think architectural concepts like Houses of Worship and Skyscrapers convey a very similar concept. Both are pursuits which push people to go beyond themselves, and being creatures who have looked at and wondered about the cosmos since we crawled out of caves, i feel it makes perfect sense that most of our structures REACH up. To me, skyscrapers are not only a showcase of humanity's technological advancement, but also connotate the limitlessness of pure Capitalism. Cathedrals and other places of worship achieve the same. Tech. advancement, BUT also connotate the limitlessness of the Spirit.

That's my 2 cents worth.

m.

But for some reason I don't see the "up" in the Shinto and Buddhist temples I've been to. The ceilings in some of them are forgotten and not even decorated.

[H-Town Man]

Well I finally made it into Houston to tour the cathedral firsthand over the weekend, and my previous comments are due for a little revision. The outside I found disappointing. I had expected it to be boxy and banal, which it was, and its dimensions seemed smaller than I had expected. I do not think the Houston rain and soot will be kind to its light-colored stone, either.

But the inside was stunning. I walked into the nave and gasped. Everything was proportioned just right, and it all came together for an intense effect. I was reminded of Italy. The stained glass clerestory windows were very nice, although I think they could have been taller, and perhaps my favorite part was the twelve stained glass windows of the apostles around the dome. The giant stained glass window in the front was quite impressive, as other posters have commented.

I can see what the bishop meant by "simple nobility." The place was somewhat simple compared to older cathedrals - not a lot of detail in the stone, which could be disappointing in certain places - but it nonetheless had a very grand feel, perhaps even more grand for its restraint.

One thing that seemed a little strange was the floating statues with the gold background in the transepts, one of which musicman posted a picture of. The gold seemed a bit glitzy - why not a mural or mosaic background? And the statues could use a traditional pedestal. We know that they're not really floating (there's a cleverly disguised, gold-painted support going into the back); making them look like they are seems to be playing on superstition. But maybe I'll warm up to them.

Overall, considering the interior alone and ignoring the exterior, I think this is definitely one of the grandest (if not the grandest) Catholic churches in Texas.

Edited May 12, 2008 by H-Town Man

[Vertigo58]

Finally made it!

I love this place. That's all there is to it.

I could sit in this place for hours studying every detail. Words cannot explain.

I'm getting verklempt!

[Vertigo58]

A little off subject but you simply must hear the choir and the pipe organ!

I have to shake my head in disbelief! For a minute there I thought I was in the Vatican. No joke. This is top notch. I must make it a point to go up there and see the organist "get down" on that keyboard.

PS, another major plus for this cathedral are the restrooms in front, large, spacious, roomy, etc. Hardly any detail is missed. Have to hear the organ people and the choir is just magnifico e bellisimo.

[GovernorAggie]

The lighted stain glass window and bell tower are very nice at night.

[Vertigo58]

The lighted stain glass window and bell tower are very nice at night.

Speaking of the stain glass windows, you must see the one above the alter. While mass is in progress, the morning sun slowly creeps over the cattedrale producing a brief spectaular light display. Can't help but notice. One of those fast running speed up cameras would do good if filmed over the course of the day.

This weekend they added what sounds like trumpets while the choir sings. If I closed my eyes I would think I was in the Vatican, no joke. That choir is magnificant! Ottimo!

[Boris]

Went to see the Cathedral for the first time this weekend. It's beautiful

Adios

[citizen4rmptown]

it really is,

great pictures you took there

[marc]

Very NICE! i am touring DT this Sunday. This is definately on my list.

Thank you very much.

m.

[telwink]

Hey Boris~~! Great photos! I haven't been here yet, but these are excellent shots of the Cathedral. Thanks for posting.

[JackieR82]

Wonderful subject and amazing photos!

[marc]

Made my tour of DT and UT this weekend via the Energy Corridor.

Went to the Home and Garden Show at G.R. Brown- that was OK.

BUT, my DT highlight, i do admit, was touring the Cathedral, Disco Park and taking pix. of all the construction. As

soon as i learn how to download them to this forum, i will share.

Great things happening for H-town!

m.

[editor]

I just got this in the e-mail.

---------------------------------

Houston, TX -- November 10, 2008 -- Turner Partners Architecture, LP of Houston, Texas is pleased to

announce the completion of the Cathedral Centre project located at 1700 San Jacinto in downtown

Houston, Texas.

The Centre is a part of the Sacred Heart Co-Cathedral Church

[strickn]

Description and rendering look like the project will be fine for downtown *except* for the dead first floor. If they could do formal or informal micro- ground leases to let anyone activate that unused room along the street, that would be groundbreaking.

[native_Houstonian]

This building is the old Federal Reserve building that will be renovated for use by the Diocese. From what I understand, the basement (maybe it's the ground floor, but I was told basement) where the money used to be housed, will be for the Diocesan archives.

[cypressgal]

I know this is an old thread, and Catholic misconceptions aside, I'll say this much:

The 'old cathedrals' and churches in Italy took a minimum of 1 year, but usually 4 or more to build. It's why many have a facade that doesn't match the rest of the building as that was always done last and usually the original vision was long lost.

It wasn't just the poor, the wealthy would have side chapels built, decorated and named for their families. St. Mary Maggoria in Rome has a solid gold ceiling compliments of Queen Isabella.

In these times alot has to do with money. It's difficult to find good artisans to do intricate detail anymore without paying a pretty penny. The church doesn't have nobility anymore to pay for such artisans. It usually comes down to pay for artisan work inside or out, but not both [unfortunately, as I like the old style as well].

On another note, Christ the Redeemer in Cypress just finished their new church [which connects to the old church] in November. It has the traditional 'cross' shape outside. You can see pictures via their website at http://ctrcc.com/blog/?page_id=35 to see the finished church, scroll down to the "Dedication" photo album.

[editor]

The 'old cathedrals' and churches in Italy took a minimum of 1 year, but usually 4 or more to build.

Four years? I don't think any of the old churches of Europe were completed that quickly. Usually they took decades, or even hundreds of years, which is why different parts of them are sometimes in different styles and materials.

Using you example of Italy:

Florence's Cathedral (1296-1421 for the main building, until 1887 to finish the facade): 125-591 years

The Church of Santa Maria Novella in Florence (1278-1360): 82 years.

Church of Saint Mary of Health and Salvation in Venice (1630-1687): 57 years.

In these times alot has to do with money. It's difficult to find good artisans to do intricate detail anymore without paying a pretty penny.

It should also be noted that in the past, many of the world's greatest artists would decorate a church for free. It was considered an honor and a way to spread their name. Good luck finding anyone who will do that anymore.

[Vertigo58]

Archbishop Daniel N. DiNardo lead the services at last nights huge special Chrism mass. I had not attended a service her in a good while but it never ceases to amaze me of what a grand place this is. Aside all the features and grandness of the building, its the effect the mass has on myself period. Sure wish Haif came with sound effects. The choir must be large and the sound of the Baroque pipe organ is something one must experience 1st hand. If I closed my eyes I would think I were in The Vatican, seriously.

There had to have been over 1,000 in attendance last night and lasted a very long time. There were several processions as mass commenced. There were many uniformed men from Knights of Colombus leading in just before the (hundreds of new priests) entered & were seated. There were rows and rows of Sisters from numerous Convents from around the state in various colored attire. Reminded me of when we saw the Pope in Toronto for World Youth Day (Google) several years ago.

There were several local news cameras on site to capture all of the images and action that night. Surreal.

Edited April 9, 2009 by Vertigo58

[Tommy]

The project at hand is to repair and restore a main door as well as two side doors on the historic former Sacred Heart Co-Cathedral. As you can see below in the photos the doors has surfer some damages throughout the years.

I will be looking for some volunteers and handymans to come out one weekend and give a helping hand. Also, I have never done anything like this before so I really have no idea where to start; so any input and advice would be nice. The door is also 98 years old so it is important to be careful to not ruin it.

If you are interested in volunteering please get in touch with me. This does also count as community service so if you need some hours this is a prefect opportunity.

Thank You again

Before Photos

After/Damage Photos

[fatesdisastr]

I would love to help, in fact I would be honored if i could. That is if you are still needing help after all this time.

Edited February 13, 2010 by fatesdisastr

[writeonbro]

The project at hand is to repair and restore a main door as well as two side doors on the historic former Sacred Heart Co-Cathedral. As you can see below in the photos the doors has surfer some damages throughout the years.

I will be looking for some volunteers and handymans to come out one weekend and give a helping hand. Also, I have never done anything like this before so I really have no idea where to start; so any input and advice would be nice. The door is also 98 years old so it is important to be careful to not ruin it.

If you are interested in volunteering please get in touch with me. This does also count as community service so if you need some hours this is a prefect opportunity.

Thank You again

Before Photos

After/Damage Photos

Those vandals are really bold. Thy shall not deface a church may not be one of the commandments and obviously no very high on the list of things that HPD wants to catch people doing. They could take a few of the cops staking out the freeways for people running late for work and make a dent in the fires, thefts and vandalism that is running amuck.

[infinite_jim]

[Marcus Allen]

Sublime.

[arche_757]

Four years? I don't think any of the old churches of Europe were completed that quickly. Usually they took decades, or even hundreds of years, which is why different parts of them are sometimes in different styles and materials.

Using you example of Italy:

Florence's Cathedral (1296-1421 for the main building, until 1887 to finish the facade): 125-591 years

The Church of Santa Maria Novella in Florence (1278-1360): 82 years.

Church of Saint Mary of Health and Salvation in Venice (1630-1687): 57 years.

It should also be noted that in the past, many of the world's greatest artists would decorate a church for free. It was considered an honor and a way to spread their name. Good luck finding anyone who will do that anymore.

Free today = At no cost.

Free in the Medieval/Renaissance Ages = they were paid with food and housing.

 

[(Otto Mation)]

Piwejimenez has added a photo to the pool:

Downtown Houston

Click here to view this photo at the HAIF Photo Pool on Flickr

[hindesky]

[editor]

On 5/21/2023 at 4:28 PM, hindesky said:

Nice place.  Terrible acoustics. 

[hindesky]

[ChannelTwoNews]

https://www.khou.com/article/news/local/church-fire-downtown-houston/285-28fc706c-5c4c-4877-9103-b19ed18af6b0

"HOUSTON — Firefighters have responded to a two-alarm fire at the Co-Cathedral of the Sacred Heart Church in downtown Houston Friday morning.

Fire officials said that as of 6:15 a.m., the fire had been tapped out.

Fire officials told KHOU 11's Stephanie Whitfield that the fire may have been mechanical, possibly an elevator motor caught fire."

[hindesky]

Fannin St. is still blocked off on the west side of the building.