In December of 2007, STEEL wrote about the closing of St. Gerard Church. At the time, his concern was that, like so many other closed churches left to languish and denegrate, St. Gerard would be one more loss.
View image
In May of 2008, WCP wrote about the Catholic Diocese plan, under the direction of Bishop Edward Kmiec, to form new a committee that would tackle the problem of reuse of churches that were closed as a result of parish consolidation - as was the case with St. Gerard's.
Following up in October of 2008, WCP wrote about the proposal to move St. Gerard to Georgia. Reader comments ran the gamut, with some vehemently opposed, while others thought the move made perfect sense. STEEL followed in September of 2009 with "Born Again," announcing a meeting that involved stakeholders and looked for answers.
Yesterday, this article appeared in USA Today. It is an in-depth study from several vantage points, and brings up the topic again of preservation by relocation. Surely, the removal of St. Gerard would be a loss for Buffalo, even as the bell still tolls, with a tree growing from its tower roof. Would it be best to move the church to a new life in Georgia, or allow it to die a slow death here?
BR>"Would it be best to move the church to a new life in Georgia, or allow it to die a slow death here?"
I vote c: keep it here and find another use for it.
Option c, exactly. I disagree with the false Hobson's choice presented by the last sentence of this article. By that logic, we should have shipped off or demolished the Darwin Martin House, the Calumet, the Webb, the Larkin at Exchange, the Genesee (now the Hyatt), the YMCA (now the Olympic Towers), the AM&A's warehouses, the Alling & Cory warehouses, the old post office (now ECC), the Connecticut Street Armory, the Granite Works buildings, the Genesee Gateway buildings, and many, many more. Imagine if Buffalo's citizens had meekly accepted that the only choice was demolition or expatriation of these buildings, and all of them were replaced by parking lots and dollar stores?
Besides, if this church in an Atlanta suburb has $15 million to spend on a historic church, I know for a fact that there are abandoned historic churches in Atlanta that they could restore and use. Why take one of ours when they could be contributing to healing their own community? Instead they just perpetuate the sprawl that led to St. Gerard's plight in the first place.
It wasn't "sprawl" that caused socioeconomic upheaval in Delavan-Bailey. The forces that lead to the abandonment of the neighborhood by its former residents are far more nuanced and complex than just "white flight".
I grew up in Kensingtion. Believe me, there were far more to the transition of Northeast Buffalo during the late 1980s and through the 1990s than meets the eye; the deep recession of the 1980s that drove residents to leave, a die-off of older residents, cheap housing prices that attracted absentee landlords and residents of much lesser means than the established lower middle-class population, a long legacy of the area being a "starter neighborhood" with the accompanying churn, and the growth of urban prairie on the East Side creating a housing shortage in established African-American neighborhoods further to the east, among other causes.
Why didn't people stay and fight? One reason: because people weren't as emotionally attached to the area as neighborhoods like South Buffalo or Broadway-Fillmore. Remember, long before racial transition, many people who moved into northeast Buffalo intended to leave when they could afford to so so; there was always a lot of churn. Who gets nostalgic for Kensington and Delavan-Bailey? Nobody weeps for The House of Sweets, the Kensington Theater, the Midway Tavern, or Costanzo's Bakery like they do for long-lost institutions in Broadway-Fillmore. People just didn't care about Northeast Buffalo as much, and the city made no effort to stabilize the neighborhood neither; politically, it has absolutely no clout.
I was referring more generally to the sprawl of church parishes. New churches are built in ever-widening rings, while the center is abandoned. They are building a new church in Swormville right now, while so many city churches like St. Gerard's languish and fall into ruin. I was just pointing out that this is the case in Atlanta as well and it would be a better thing for Atlanta for these funds to go into restoring their own built heritage.
I meant "Garden of Sweets". D'oh!
Like what?
* Smaller congregations can't afford it, and recent history shows that they haven't been the greatest stewards of other offloaded Diocese properties. Even smaller pre-WWII Protestant churches and synagogues throughout the city are falling into ruin, too, even though they're occupied and regularly used by African-American congregations.
* Residential? Remember, it's in Delavan-Bailey. No demand.
* Commercial? Remember, it's in Delavan-Bailey. No demand. Also, residential or commercial conversion would obliterate most of the interior architectural detail.
* Artist's performance space? Remember, it's in Delavan-Bailey. Remember, this isn't Elmwood Village we're talking about. This isn't an undiscovered neighborhood ripe for gentrification.
Unlike the remaining churches in Broadway-Fillmore/Polonia, Delavan-Bailey's former residents never had that level of attachment to the old neighborhood. The parish could not have survived on suburban churchgoers to boost attendance, unlike St. Stan's and others.
The only thing I can think of is that the wrong parish closed. Maybe the Diocese should have consolidated St. Lawrence (a small parish at the far eastern end of Delavan-Bailey) and St. James (the infamous "basement church"; a nondescript temporary structure built after WWI in Kensington) into St. Gerard, but what's done is done.
Dan>"Artist's performance space? Remember, it's in Delavan-Bailey. Remember, this isn't Elmwood Village we're talking about. This isn't an undiscovered neighborhood ripe for gentrification"
Only people living in the EV or some other gentrified area are interested in art?
Artist performance space or some type of community center sound like a decent idea.
And who would pay for this to be converted to art space? The tax payers? The city doesn't have the money, the county may go to a hard control board, it's broke, the state is broke. It's unfortunate to see the catholic church treat treasures like this the way they do but what is done is done. We can't keep using tax dollars for everything when so many jobs have been lost during these hard times. With taxes in NYS being what they are we need to reduce spending followed by reducing taxes to help entice the population from leaving and hopefully see a rise in the areas population. No developer is going to step in to this building for any use. That areas demographics do not make it a viable choice for development.
I wouldnt be opposed to government involvement in saving this place. As you and I have discussed at length, IMO the govt blows its money on far more wasteful and counterproductive projects than cultural and historic preservation. However as you pointed out, asking any level of govt for funding during our present economic crisis may not be realistic.
There are other ways of raising money such as soliciting private companies and philanthopic institutions(starting with the catholic church), fundraisers, community groups etc. Either way I dont think the funding source needs to e identified before making the decision is made to keep the place alive. Save it now and worry how to pay for it later. Time is a factor but contrary to a few claims in this discussion, the place isnt going to disolve by next spring.