Here is the Church, and There Go the Steeples
Yesterday Sheepshead Bites had a post on a story it’s been tracking concerning how the current congregation of the church at 3087 Ocean Avenue intends to tear down the steeples on its 142-year-old building. An organization called the Bay Improvement Group (BIG) is advocating for their retention and tried at one point to convince the…
Yesterday Sheepshead Bites had a post on a story it’s been tracking concerning how the current congregation of the church at 3087 Ocean Avenue intends to tear down the steeples on its 142-year-old building. An organization called the Bay Improvement Group (BIG) is advocating for their retention and tried at one point to convince the church’s owners to pursue landmark status: “We at BIG tried in the early 1990′s pleading with their Board of Directors/Trustees to Landmark the Church and they were sadly, ignorantly afraid of ‘Landmark status’ even though we tried to persuade them with experts in Church preservation, Engineers & Architects and myself, as an Attorney, to explain the great help they would have in obtaining Landmark status. They could have received State, City, Federal and private grants to restore the Church!” Today The Daily News picks up on the story, and has a quote from the church’s pastor about how the steeples are unsafe and the congregation can’t afford to renovate them: “‘We are concerned really about safety,’ said Pastor Jay Kyung Kim, who said the spires are cracked and leaning precariously. ‘If it falls down, it’s a tragedy.’ He hopes to eventually raise the cash to build new steeples, but has no idea how long that will take.” Sad stuff.
BIG Pleads For Savior Of Methodist Church [Sheepshead Bites]
Historic Steeples of 142-Year-Old United Methodist Church Will be Torn Down [NY Daily News]
Photo from Sheepshead Bites.
Carol Gardens;
I have no issue with BIG or any other organization approaching this church and encouraging them to consider preserving this steeple in some fashion. I DO have an issue with an organization that:
-urges them to sign up for legally-protected landmarking – thereby locking in a fixed cost to this congregation – and not digging into their own pocket to help out.
-after the pastor does not take up their advice, the organization calling him “Ignorant”. It reveals a lack of good faith.
People who behave in such a fashion richly deserve the title “Busybody”, in my book.
IJ- Yes, there will be some people who do look at it that way, but not everyone. And not most preservationists- the desire to preserve wonderful old buildings and neighborhoods is about preserving a sense of place and community.People underestimate the effects of our visual environment- I think it’s extremely important.
I wouldn’t mind attending a service with the Plusas. I’ve probably been to more church services in my life than synagogues and I can appreciate the dignity and meaning of the services and the churches, even if not of my own faith.
People on this thread who would like to encourage the church to preserve the steeples are simply expressing a point-of-view. Being a busybody would mean that I could actually prevent them from doing what they want to do. I don’t know the folks at BIG but they obviously CANNOT dictate, only bring attention to the situation. Sounds like they simply were hoping to assist the congregation in figuring out a plan–and were dismissed. Anti-preservation people here get so worked up when anyone even suggests that there is some value in preserving historic structures.
Cute church but nothing special. I’ll take the cute victorian next door and they can knock down the church so that I could become a subsidized farmer.
bxgrl, that IS how people look at it, though. I can personally show you that very attitude – it is always coming up.
We PLUSAs should all go to a service together and then have brunch afterward.
By Minard Lafever on February 11, 2011 10:56 AM
This little church is cute but it is no major architectural monument.
I agree. If the steeples have to come off, it’ll look just fine with the two entrances with the small gable roofs.
“why don’t the good folks at BIG dig into their own pockets and help out this congregation, if they love the steeples that much? How about organizing a fundraiser? How about getting local youths to pitch in to repair the church?”
I agree. Put your money where your mouth is.
I understood what you said perfectly, Benson, and I stick with my comments.
You have a nice day, too.
Not surprisingly I am agreeing with MM and minard. Churches and synagogues created as architectural renditions of their respective religious teachings. Many communities worked and saved to build churches they felt worthy of worshiping G-d in.They were embued with meaning. As far as the RC- perhaps if the Vatican cared more about its parishes, more of the billions they keep in Rome could be spent elsewhere, on better things than expensive papal robes and expensive art.
As for this comment: “My use of the term “eye-candy” and “adult disneyworld” were intended to represent what these buildings are to NON-believers. ”
Stereotype much?