More than a century ago, the Church of the Holy Communion, whose cornerstone was laid in 1844 at West 20th Street and Sixth Avenue (long before its official name change), hardly seemed notorious. Among the parishioners at the Episcopal church, whose distinctive notched towers were designed by Richard Upjohn, also the architect of Trinity Church near Wall Street, were John Jacob Astor and Cornelius Vanderbilt.
But a century later, a dwindling congregation led the church to consolidate and in 1976, after the last Mass was said, a commune called the Lindisfarne Association took over before decamping for Colorado a few years later.
The Episcopal Church then sold the property to the Odyssey Institute, a drug-counseling organization, for $495,000, before the club mogul Peter Gatien bought it for $1.65 million in 1983. Andy Warhol hosted the Limelight’s opening-night party, and soon crowds were lining up outside to get in.
RIP, William Augustus Muhlenberg. WAM was an advocate of church unity at a time when Anglicanism was being torn apart by the Oxford Movement. The Church of the Holy Communion was his answer. A free church, with elements of both factions integrated into Evangelical Catholicism. The site of the founding of the first order of deaconesses.
How sad it is that it has been desecrated in these ways.
He would be heartbroken by the present schism, but I suspect he would somehow persevere, ignoring the idiocy (and the idiots) surrounding him.
Thats all right. Matt Kennedy’s church has been sold to Muslims to become a Mosque.
[45] And [Jesus] entered the temple and began to drive out those who sold,
[46] saying to them, “It is written, `My house shall be a house of prayer’; but you have made it a den of robbers.”
Luke 19:45-46
Simply heartbreaking.
Sad when people think a building is the Church. No wonder we are in the troubled times we are.
The building has not been a church for over 30 years. Perhaps, just perhaps, continued handwringing over the uses to which the building has been put since the congregation collapsed is an example of the all too common Episcopalian “edifice complex.”
Yes, the building may have been an architectural treasure. But, as long as Episcopalians care too much about their architectural treasures (or worse, architectural treasures that they gave up decades ago), they will be missing a much greater point.
The scripture cited by #3 does not apply. The building at issue was presumably deconsecrated long ago. In any event, I’m not sure one can equate even an active, consecrated church, with the status accorded the Temple in Jerusalem. It was unique, and had a significance to the Jews that no single structure can have in Christianity. After all, for us, Christ is the Temple.
#5 and #6
A thing of beauty, lovingly built and consecrated to the glory of God, is not something to be cast off and dismissed lightly. It is tragic when it occurs.
I’m all for the free market but not in a building that once was used for God’s holy purposes, even if desconsecrated. But the quote above still applies because the building once was a house of prayer. It still has stain glass windows, likely representing The Story of Creation to Revelation. It still has a nave and transepts, making it cruciform in shape. And idolatrous commerce is going on inside this cross-shaped building. Sad, simply sad.
The Nave is now a [url=http://limelightmarketplace.com/limelight13.html] Festival of Shops[/url]. See also the [url=http://limelightmarketplace.com/limelight14.html]2nd[/url] and [url=http://limelightmarketplace.com/limelight15.html]3rd[/url] floors.
Now THIS is the real Episcopal Church’s story-line:
“But a century later, a dwindling congregation led the church to consolidate and in 1976, after the last Mass was said, a commune called the Lindisfarne Association took over before decamping for Colorado….”
to #7 and #8
The transition from a nightclub to the current use is probably a step up. Since the congregation did close, in the 1970’s, no less, the remaining value in the building is aesthetic and historical. Would it have been better if the building had been torn down? Perhaps. But it wasn’t, and the secular historic preservation rules may have made that possibility difficult. I regularly drive by a building that used to be a Lutheran church, and is now part of the “Abbey Office Park.” In Boston, there are former churches in the Back Bay that now are incorporated into condominium structures. In my hometown in Vermont, there is a former Unitarian church building that has, for over 35 years, housed a tiny, highly specialized manufacturing concern. I recently spoke to someone who was in the process of buying a former church in another town in Vermont, with the plan of converting it into a residence. In each case, it was probably a sad thing that the congregation that owned the structure folded, or moved on. But, in each case, the surrounding neighborhood probably benefited from a creative adaptation of the structure for a new use.
Once the structure ceases to be _a_ church, continuing to treat it as such approaches idolatry.
Franz,
In the case of the Unitarian Church, transitioning to a manufacturing concern would be a step up.
When the RC church in my hometown outgrew it’s century old building a few years ago, it built a new one on the edge of town and sold the deconsecrated building. It was bought by a woman who put in a restaurant which she initially considered calling “Holy Cow,” but realizing the offense that would cause, changed the name to “Victorian Abby”. It soon folded, to be followed by an information technology firm which also soon folded. It now stands empty and forlorn. I pass it twice a day and it always makes me a little sad.
6. Franz,
At one level I entirely agree with you. A building is a building. Nothing more, nothing less. But, I feel it is fair to give thought to the intentions of those who put their hard work and money into the construction of it.
The Episcopal people who built our building in Virginia, in the 1880’s, placed it into the hands of trustee “owners” with the provision that it forever be used as a place of Christian worship. That is a major reason why the current trustees have defended it in court against the onslought of the DioVA and TEC. Their worship is clearly post-Christian and does not follow the letter or spirit of the trust.
The easiest approach for our congregation would have been to run (not walk) from the building. It is frame construction, over 125 years old, and really needs to be dismantled and completely reconstructed. It is too small for our growing CANA congregation.
Still, we feel a tie to our forebearers and their wonderful vision to have a house of Christian worship in this place.
#13 —
The big difference in your case is that the building is still a church, at least as you describe it. It is still consecrated. It still has an active congregation, who are seeking to hold on to it, and to maintain continuity, as a congregation.
As a matter of prudence, it may be a debatable question as to whether it is better to attempt to hold on to the property, or to walk away from it. But, in terms of maintaining a continuous congregational life, it is at least worth debating.
I am unable to discern the similarity between the situation you describe and a building which does not have an active congregation, is not owned by a church or church body, and which has not been the home of an active congregation for over 30 years.
Back to Ralph’s #1, please, and the connection with the church’s founder, the Rev. William Muhlenburg. He was one of the greatest leaders of the Episcopal Church in the 1800s, or any time actually. Not the least of his claims to fame is that he was also the guy who first proposed something like the Chicago/Lambeth Quadriliateral. Coming from a German Lutheran family background, he indeed represented a genuine attempt to hold together the evangelical and catholic dimensions of Anglicanism at its best. The demise of his once socially prestigious church surely in part reflects the changing demographics of Manhattan neighborhoods over multiple generations.
I note that back in its heyday in Muhlenburg’s time, this upscale church could boast that its parishioners included the fabulously (or infamously) wealthy business tycoons John Jacob Astor and Cornelius Vanderbilt. So in one sense, anyway, there is a strange irony in what was originally the Church of the Holy Communion now becoming a shrine to “holy commerce,” America’s real religion.
It’s not the fate of this beautiful historic landmark that bothers me so much as the demise of Muhlenburg’s bold vision for a truly ecumenical church, in the best sense of that word. He wanted a truly 2-D or hybrid Episcopal church, that was genuinely evangelical and yet catholic at the same time. I want that and more, adding the charismatic dimension as well, for the full 3-D inheritance that Anglicanism can be at its best.
Alas, neither is now welcome in TEC. That’s the real tragedy here.
David Handy+
These buildings are now simply whited sepulchres. There will be a lot more in coming years.
But the Lord said, “Let the dead bury their dead, but you, come follow Me.”
Here is a story of a New Jersey Episcopal church that is probably going to sell its stained glass windows: http://tinyurl.com/yarmhr3