By Gretchen Keiser

Debate over a proposal to renovate and add on to the Cathedral of Christ the King took place for two and a half hours Feb. 26, with the details of the plan and underlying questions about cost, priorities, and the nature of worship and liturgy being aired.

Approximately 500 people listened to opening remarks and saw a slide presentation on the plans, which were being presented in full to the parish for the first time. Then microphones were opened for comments, with the moderator, parish council chairman Carroll Sterne, asking for alternating comments from individuals in favor of and opposed to the plan. When the meeting, which began at 7:30 p.m., ended at 10 p.m. as scheduled, hands were still waving and several hundred people were still listening to the debate.

At the start, Father Richard Kieran, parish administrator since last June, said that there would be “no further action on the proposal…until there is an opportunity to seek the wisdom and guidance of our next archbishop.”

The proposal, which has been in the drafting stage since last fall, has been drawn up with the services of architects Peter Norris and Kermit Marsh and a liturgical design consultant, Willy Malarcher, and has been reviewed in detail by four parish committees: parish council, finance, liturgy, and building and grounds. The liturgy committee endorsed the plan; response from the other three committees ranged from partial support to non-support.

The objectives of the proposal include completely remodeling the lower level of the cathedral building to provide improved and expanded space for a nursery, choir room, offices and conference rooms; to repair and update systems in the cathedral and ensure its structural soundness; to provide improved access to the cathedral for the elderly and the handicapped; and to improve the worship environment in accord with documents written since the Second Vatican Council.

The effort to update the worship environment, which would involve moving the altar forward and providing flexible seating around the altar; and adding a Blessed Sacrament chapel for private prayers and Mary chapel for daily Mass, was the aspect of the plan that provoked the most concern.

One speaker in favor of the proposal said that in raising his children he was “trying to get them interested in community, in active liturgy” and he liked the effort to bring the celebrant closer to the people and heighten the sense of community. “What we’re trying to do is create a functional area that will enhance our ability to worship with one another,” he said, adding that he supported Father Kieran’s leadership. “Where I come from pastors are to lead their flock, not ask for a show of hands,” he said.

However, another speaker noted that despite the flexible seating, over 400 people would still be sitting in pews in the cathedral “in front of the altar, military style.”

“This plan really does not accomplish its objective if its objective is to bring people into the Mass,” he said. “Three quarters of them are still in front of the altar.”

Under the proposal the seating, according to the planners, would shift as follows. At the present time the cathedral seats 616 people in pews which are closer together and tighter in space than present-day designs. Under the proposal, 424 pew seats would remain, and 175 seats in flexible arrangement around the relocated altar would be added. This totals 599 seats. For major cathedral events the Blessed Sacrament chapel and Mary chapel would be arranged so seating there would face the altar. This would add 128 more seats for a total of 727 seats.

In response to a criticism about the use of “folding chairs” for the flexible seating, Malarcher said they would not be folding chairs but “cathedral chairs.”

Malarcher, who spoke about the post-Vatican II development in liturgical design, called the proposal “an invitation” to consider change. He acknowledged that the documents on worship “do not negate the existing church,” which was built approximately 50 years ago.

“With the new concept of community, is there not some feeling of distraction when you seat everyone in the round?’’ asked parishioner Mary Dill, who said that she favored the renovation of the lower level and was open to possible changes in the worship area.

“It’s not easy if one is using Sunday Mass as their private prayer time, their time with God,” Malarcher said, as opposed to emphasizing worship in community with others. He also said that the distinction between the emphasis upon private prayer and the emphasis upon community was asking for a change in the “spiritual element” of people, a “very difficult part of themselves” to change.

While the proposal has generated conflict about the wisdom of altering the cathedral and provoked disagreement about whether the structure will be improved or damaged, Malarcher said, “I do not believe it (the conflict) is solved by counting” applause. “If you’re a family, you have to negotiate,” he said.

Results of a survey mailed to parishioners by a group of people who opposed the change to the worship area were announces at “350 opposed; 43 are for it.” But the survey results were questioned by a woman parishioner who said “most had not seen the plans” when they filled out the survey form. “To go on the results of that survey without people having had the opportunity to see the plans is not something we can do,” she said.

Parishioner Charlotte Hafley expressed concern about the moving of the Blessed Sacrament to a small chapel, and questioned what the proposed addition would do to several of the stations of the cross mounted on the cathedral walls. “Today more than ever in history we need private prayer,” she said, asking what the seating in the Blessed Sacrament chapel would be. “The priest is still the main celebrant of the Mass,” she added. “Although we are participants, we are not where our priest is.”

Later in the discussion, parishioner Nancy O’Neill said she welcomed the chance to have a heightened sense of participation and “the idea of a smaller chapel for daily Mass.”

She also thanked the administrator “for a very open process” of planning. “I think he has been remarkable in listening to all the resentful comments we’ve heard for the last six months and still stand up here before us tonight,” she said.

Two speakers, both longtime parishioners, said that the meeting itself was the most encouraging aspect. “I’m disturbed when I hear people bickering over a building. I’m disturbed when I get a letter or piece of paper on my windshield saying am I going to stop tithing because of renovating a building,” said Raul Trujillo. Although not completely happy with the plans, he said, “I’m encouraged by what I see tonight” in the open airing of opinions. “I pray we can keep on going” in building a community, he said.

“What is going on in this process is education. We’re getting a chance to come together, even if it’s to argue,” said Richard Farnsworth. He said that the process of altering the cathedral began 20 years ago after the Second Vatican Council and then was suspended. “Let’s work together and educate each other and come to a consensus.”

Parishioner Sara Jean Burke, who said she had been fighting against the plan, agreed that community was more important than a building. “A building a community doesn’t make,” she said. “The thing that needs to be worked on here is us.”

Among specific questions raised during the meeting were whether or not repairs to the roof and renovations to the lower level of the cathedral could be separated off from the proposed addition and accomplished.

“I wonder if we shouldn’t get on with the renovation of that basement, the leaking roof, get on with what is desperately needed here and now, rather than wait,” said Alex Smith.

Father Kieran said, however, that his plan was to present an overall design and approach to the structure rather than taking separate aspects on. He also said during the meeting that archdiocesan officials would be consulted about the prudence of proceeding with repairs separately.

It was also announced that the building and grounds committee would prepare a facilities master plan addressing the building and land resources of the whole site, including parking areas across the street and adjacent to the cathedral; the school; and the Hyland Center. Several speakers had asked that other options for land use be considered or suggested that repairs to the school were a higher priority than altering the cathedral. Father Kieran said the priority order he had established placed the cathedral first, followed by the school and then the Hyland Center. He said that the planning process was started by specific needs and complaints about the building that he encountered as new administrator in June 1987 and that he had been encouraged by four parish committees to proceed with the planning.

The emphasis was placed during the meeting on the fact that the proposal would proceed no further without the insights of the as yet unnamed new archbishop who will be pastor, by office, of the cathedral parish.