Born Again

A special guest at this forum will be Father David Dye, Pastor of Mary Our Queen Catholic Church in Norcross, Georgia. He will discuss his vision for re-locating St. Gerard's. Other representatives of the Buffalo Diocese will be available to answer questions.

Will we be allowed to bring eggs with us?

Seriously, The question that needs to be asked of the good pastor is should a Christian group be spending the money and expending the human energy needed to move a building like this out of a distressed community such as Buffalo's east side to an affluent Georgia neighborhood. Perhaps the more christian thing to do would be to help support a Parish in Buffalo with their abundance of assets.

I've been saying this since I moved back from Pittsburgh. We need one of these churches to turn into a brewery restaurant.

One only needs to check out Church Brew Works in Pittsburgh to see how well it can be done.

http://www.churchbrew.com/

I have heard (maybe this can be verified at tomorrow's forum) that the Catholic Diocese has stiff use restrictions on decommissioned churches, one being that they cannot be used for the sale of alcoholic beverages. You probably have to wait for a Protestant church to go vacant.

I think that its unfortunate that people are looking at the potential relocation as a bad thing. Let's be reasonable. The odds that this church would be re-purposed are slim. It's not in an ideal neighborhood for redevelopment and Shoestring is right - the Catholic Church has VERY stringent restrictions on the reuse of churches, so no nightclubs, breweries, etc.

This leaves only a few available options for the building: community center (unlikely due to overhead and maintenance cost), occupation by another brand of church (possible), or it remains vacant and suffers the same fate as Transfiguration - abandoned and deteriorating beyond the point of repair (most likely).

Why wouldn't we want to see the Church not only preserved, but in use? Yes, I understand that it would be about 900 miles away, but it wouldn't be yet another piece of lost Buffalo architecture.

Let's put it another way. If Crystal Beach were closing today, would you vote for the Comet to remain unused and slowly deteriorating or would you vote for its dismantling, relocation, and reuse in another location? It might be far away, but at least its still around.

It's a Catholic Church asset, not a Buffalo asset. If they want to sell it instead of letting it sit & fall apart (which always happens) they should be able to sell it. It'll be exciting and fascinating to see them move such a large building so far away; I hope one of the TV networks makes a documentary about the process.

I just find it interesting that the church can find the money to move the church to a wealthy location but cannot find the money to maintain it is a struggling inner city neighborhood. WWJD?

As a former Pittsburgher, I can attest that the church brew works is an awesome brewery/restaurant, but also that it attracted investment in a neighborhood that was, to borrow the euphemism, "transitioning."

I, too, have heard that the Roman Catholic Diocese has limited re-use of its buildings. This is their prerogative, but I don't think it is wise. That being said, one still does not have to wait to open up a brewery in a church building. There are already plenty of former protestant houses of worship for sale, and others would likely entertain offers.

Steel, it's hard to support anybody with illiquid assets, and that is exactly what this building is--selling it provides liquidity. Hopefully, the cash will be spent well. I've said it before--the church needs to make changing lives and neighborhoods (for the better) a first priority, and preserving buildings a much lower priority. Investing less in buildings, and more in people is the way to go, which means finding new uses for the buildings, so that they can support themselves.

I look forward to the presentation/discussion.

I hope it does sell. Buffalo is jam packed with run down empty churches lining up for the wecking ball. Us it for the intended purpose, were ever that may be

Sounds like an interesting event in which I will attend. Maybe we can all pitch in and buy Steel a ticket from Chicago so he can see for himself, participate, and lead by example.

Maybe that is what Jesus would do, but how would I know, I'm a mere mortal

How have I attacked the church?

Instead of tearing down Wright's Larkin Building 50 years ago like we did, would it have been better to have it dismantled and moved to say, Charlotte? Unless there is a plan to reuse the church soon so maintenance can be kept up I can't imagine any future other than eventual demolition.

Another way to look at it - imagine it's 1979 and Amtrak has just shut down the Central Terminal. What could have been realistically done differently? Unless someone with deep pockets had moved in and maintained it for the last 30 years I see the same result without a viable use for the vast complex. Without a new purpose that is sustainable, I don't know how the church might survive so it's not unreasonable to move it.

You are right Steel--it would be better if the church (building) were still used for its intended purpose. But churches (people) are like any other bunch of people--they change. Unfortunately, this means that some people have fled the city, but there are other changes, too. While we value some special historic markets and banks and post offices, we also choose to build new ones. Does the church play the same role in society that it did as we entered the 20th century? Of course not. So why should we expect it to use the same buildings in the same places?

Obviously, I have a dog in this fight. The congregation I serve is in a building on the national register of historic places, but it was built not for the Elmwood Village of 2009, but for a congregation and a neighborhood that was radically different. We have seating for 1200 and 15 parking spots!

The best preservation is use, and ANY use of a historic building will actually be a re-use, because not even religious organizations go hundreds of years without change. Sometimes, to find a suitable re-use, creative thinking is necessary.

Frankly, if I had the kind of money to pour into that neighborhood, developing the church (people)--which I think the Roman Catholics and Protestants both ought to do, by the way, I wouldn't do it by investing in that building--especially if it had a buyer. I would sell the bricks, and use the cash to invest in what the people in the neighborhood need now.

Um, Rev. Drew? The UU Church down the street from you seats 600, has zero parking spots, and is the healthiest congregation in the neighborhood. Anyone who chooses a church based on off-street parking worships their car more than their god.

I agree with EricOak. The creepy subtext of the "ship it to Georgia" argument is that St. Gerard's is too good for a poor, mostly black neighborhood and they don't deserve inspiring architecture or things of beauty.

If magnificent edifices are theologically suspect because the building comes to matter more than the liturgy & teachings, then surely it is a sin for those wealthy Atlantans to spend a gazillion dollars dismantling & reconstructing St. Gerard's.

@shoestring. Agreed--one should not choose a spiritual community based on parking.

I also agree that the building should not matter more than the teachings.

Parking was but one example of how a building can outlive it's usefulness. Historic buildings are also difficult to heat/cool. The plumbing and electrical systems are often outdated, the rooms are often the wrong size, spaces are not accessible, etc.

I would also agree with you, Shoestring, that Atlanta is foolish, if not sinful, to purchase a building and ship it, but I haven't looked at all of the details. I suppose it is possible that there is a need for a building such as St. Gerards and the price is low enough that it is better to move it then to build anew.

I also don't know if the neighborhood has shown an interest in the building. Has there been an offer to purchase or even use the structure?

The problem I have a hard time wrapping my brain around with regard to this is the very supposed strong Christian ethic of helping the weak, washing the prostitute's feet etc. It seems to me that the church needs to be in the neighborhoods with people that need the most help not the neighborhood nearest your house in Amherst. Going to Church should not be about getting home in time for the game. When deciding which churches to close shouldn't Church leaders be asking how its members can sacrifice for the better of the poor?Church has just become a club or maybe that is all it has ever been. If this was a private social club that decided the hood had become a bit to rough I would not have any fault with their decision to leave. A church on the other hand promotes a higher mission than getting together for cards once a week. It is quite shocking to me to find this wealthy Georgia congregation to swooping in and take away the final symbol of that higher mission in this destroyed neighborhood. Perhaps they should instead donate that extra money they have laying around to establish an community outreach center and school on this site instead. That is what Jesus would do.

From the News, 2008: "The diocese has received no offers for the church, which needs a new boiler, roof repairs and leading for its stained-glass windows — which would total hundreds of thousands of dollars"

If you look at the 3-yr old satellite images online, many bad spots on the roof were already obvious. There are tress sprouting from the tower, today.

There are some ignorant and arrogant comments here tonight. It's taken about 15 years for 700 families to raise $3million to build their church in Norcross - ($6 per week, per family, for 15 years) - yet they are "wealthy", "swooping in", and have "extra money lying around". Wow. Meanwhile, the same advocates of 'walkable cities', want hundreds of suburban families to drive their cars into the City (and park several hundred cars around Bailey & Delavan) so they can support a church in what's become sombebody else's neighborhood. THEN they want to paint the people in Norcross as "SINFUL" because they want this church - but it's perfectly okay for Buffalo people to want the same church? Nuts.

If you must keep this building where it is, go ahead and do that; The Diocese says it will happily look at any offer. Then you can restore and maintain and heat the building (and pay taxes, unless you become yet another "non-profit"), and try to find a use for it, and try to keep the local thugs from vandalizing and stealing from it, etc etc ...

So, where's your money? Save this Buffalo History! Don't let the sinful, wealthy, wasteful Norcross families recycle "our" heritage! Wait, why haven't you already offered to buy it? Don't you have the means? Or would you like others to do this for you? Oh. That's what I thought.

If all they have is $3 Mill they won't be moving this building across the country. Or are they going to strip it and leave a hulk behind? Have you seen Our Lady of Lourdes?

Sinful? I don't know what you are talking about except that the church teaches that we are ALL sinners

People who attend church in the suburbs are most likely driving anyway so why not drive to the inner city where you can establish a strong community resource and institution that works toward eradicating of one of the greatest problems of our society - poverty and ignorance. Odd taht you consider this to be an "ignorant " statement"

If in fact the church considers this to be "someone else's neighborhood then we might have a clue to its decline. I don't think Jeasus would have left a place because he considered it someone else's neighborhood.

If the church has the resources to move this building to another city across the city is obviously has the resources to keep it open at this site as well, probably at a vastly lower price.

Well I guess we are saying the same thing then. Bureaucracy is keeping the church from realizing the core principles of its faith.

Forget the church, turn 'em all into discos.