|
We are sharing the following ideas, insights and arguments arising from our experience of the last seven years in the hope that they will help you in your own local conservation efforts.
Keeping our village churches...in our villages!
A Path to follow...by Church leaders
A Path to follow...by Municipalities
Why are heritage village churches so important?
Because they contribute to the social fabric of a community...
Heritage church buildings are bridges that link friends and families across multiple
generations. Our shared attachment to a common architectural
environment acts like a glue binding communities together and creates a strong social fabric that is such an important factor
in the quality of our lives.
Because they are daily reminders of our identity...
Their age, their history, their large size, their central location make them very effective daily reminders of
the values, the culture, the spirituality and the identity of a community.
Because they are storytellers of our past...
For instance, the two threatenned century-old church buildings featured on this website are the cultural and architectural
centres of two French-Canadian villages in Southwestern
Ontario and are the diminishing visual legacy of a
three-hundred-year-old community that traces its origins to
the foundation of Fort Pontchartrain in New France in 1701.
They
also illustrate the Québec influence on regional church
architecture in South Western Ontario. Annonciation church, built
in 1905, has a twin in Bécancour, Québec. Both were designed by
church architect Louis Caron of Nicolet, PQ. (The Bécancour church was
declared a historic monument in 1962). The two buildings are reminders of the presence and contribution of the French-Canadian community in the development of our country not just in Quebec, but also elsewhere across Canada.
Because they are testimonies to the skills, initiative and
commitment of our predecessors...
St-Joachim was designed and built in 1882 by the parishioners
themselves. Barn-building techniques were used in the design and
construction. The main beams were made from
three-hundred-year-old trees found nearby.The church has a simple romanesque style with details borrowed from other churches
from the region and from Québec.
Objections! Objections! Objections to heritage conservation!
"...Conservationists are focussed on the past.."
The exact opposite is true. The practice of replacing
instead of repairing is the way
things used to be, not what they are now and not what they will continue to be in the future.
The true visionnaries are the conservationalists, not the demolishers.
"...Owners have the right to do what they want with their property..."
Ownership does not confer absolute rights. Rights always come with responsibilities. Self-interest should not override all other considerations.
Everyone, individuals as well as institutions, has responsibilities
toward the well being of the community as a whole.
Whether the Church establishment likes it or not it owns buildings that are the pride and joy of two communities here in Lakeshore (and certainly elsewhere too). It is a justified pride because in the majority of cases those buidings were built, paid for and faithfully maintained by those communities! If Church leaders have the legal right to demolish those buildings, they have the civic responsibility not to do so.
"...but a public referendum supported the decision to abandon the village church.."
When a project is harmful, it is harmful no matter how many people have been persuaded to support it. And until a bad decision has been implemented, it is not too late to try to overturn it.
"... Buidings are only bricks and mortar..."
Is a Rembrandt painting only oil on canvas ?
The "bricks-and-mortar" argument ignores the fact that structures with historical or architectural value are components of our cultural and spiritual lives.
If they are only bricks and mortar, why are buildings the most important things that tourists want to see when they visit a region ? Tourists are interested in buildings because buildings are the best storytellers of a region's history. They are part of a region's identity.
"...What are we going to do with those building? We can't designate them until we know what use will be made of them..."
Heritage significance and designation relates to what a building has been in the past and what it is today, not how it will be used in the future. When a site is proposed for designation, the question on a municipal Council's table is : is the proposed building a storyteller of our municipal history and identity, or is it not ?
If the future use of all heritage buildings in Ontario had to have been guaranteed as a condition of their designation, it is likely that many of our heritage sites all over Ontario would have been lost. Buildings in rural settings would be particularly vunerable because finding a garanteed future use for them may take more time.
"...What if a designated building cannot be maintained over the years?..."
A fair question, but a designation decision is a reversible decision. In many instances a decision NOT to designate would be irreversible because buildings would be torn down. It is safer to err on the site of caution and avoid choosing options that are irrreversible.
*"...The community as a whole (in other words, the government) should help pay for the maintenance of heritage buildings..."
Yes it should. But until it does, do we let those buildings be demolished? If we do that, there will soon not be enough heritage buildings left standing to justify the establishment of a heritage building maintenance program!
Keeping our village churches...in our villages!
There seems to be a trend today of replacing community-based
churches with large regional mega-churches, often located on the periphery of villages and towns. This is a worrisome development which threatens the integrity and viability of many communities living in villages and hamlets. And it may cause the loss of many heritage buildings, especially in rural areas. Here are a few tips From SOS-Églises' experience, on how to resist that trend:
Be wary of words
The eventual fusion of the three parishes in our area began with a project called "clustering". The word ''clustering'' means bringing things closer together in order to establish relationships between them. It does not mean "combine" or "amalgate" or "fold into one". In a cluster, each element retains its own identity. In our situation there is no doubt that if the clustering proposal had been presented as a first step toward a full amalgamation of the parishes, the project would not have received much support at the parish level.
The shortage of priests issue
The concern that eventually led
to the replacement of the two heritage churches in Lakeshore is the lack of priests.
There is no denying that there is a shortage of priests.
But here in Lakeshore (and probably elsewhere where village churches are being replaced by new regional buildings), how is the construction of another church and parish hall going to alleviate
that problem? In SOS-Églises' view, this is a non-solution to an
obviously real problem.
In Lakeshore, SOS-Églises believes that what was initially a valid reason for introducing changes such as parish clustering became a justification for
a different project: replacing village churches with a
regional mega-church. If this agenda is applied across the province,
the traditional character of our villages will be dramatically changed because village churches are the architectural hearts of so many of them.
Getting the best value for our charity dollars
The construction costs of large replacement buildings will be a huge draw
on any community's resources, including here in Lakeshore. For years to come, much
of the parish's community activities will be focussed on fundraising for the new
church. This is likely to have a ripple effect across the community. Given their pledges to the construction project, parishioners will be less likely
to give as much to other local, regional and national charities.
The financial advantage of repairing over replacing
Generally, the basic soundness of century-old church buildings is unmatched by anything that we can build today at reasonable costs. In Lakeshore, the soundness of the existing buildings was confirmed
by a well respected architect who
inspected them in 2002. Repairing the existing
churches would have been much more financially sustainable
for parishioners because the repairs could have been done gradually
over the years as resources become available.
The new church construction project entails borrowing upfront a huge amount
of money with attending interest charges for years to come.
Church/villages partnerships
As a community-oriented institution,
the Church can benefit from a close partnership between
the parish and the village. Why the Church would want
to walk away from this relationship and settle outside
existing communities, and be on the geographical margins of society is hard to understand.Out of sight, out of mind..
The Big Box in the field syndrome
.
In our time of environmental awareness, few would disagree that astablishing a church complex in the middle of agricultural land is generally a bad idea. Churches belong in communities,
not out in a field like factory outlets open for weekend business! Integration should be the objective, not isolation.
Death blows for communities
With the coming of mega-churches "in the oatfields" there may eventually be pressures to relocate village schools
in close proximity to the new church
so as to reduce transportation costs.
With the schools and church relocated, there will probably come pressure to rezone more agricultural land in order to allow for residential developments in proximity to those institutions.
In a few years, what is now productive agricultural farmland will be lost to anonymous urban sprawl as century-old hamlets and communities fade away.
A Path to follow...by Church leaders
Following is a brief submitted by SOS-Églises to the Diocese of London in the context of a public consultation on parish reorganisation )
Meeting challenges has been a constant in the Church's long history. Let us hope that, as their predecessors have done in the past, today's leaders will be able to meet current challenges in a way that ensures that the Church enjoys a bright future as a dynamic and influential element in our communities.
There are pitfalls to avoid if this is to be. In the current situation concerning parish reorganization, the temptation will be great to focus primarily on statistical projections and to address issues from that strict point of view.
At this time, it would be important to recall the following statement contained in the October 4, 2003 Pastoral Letter from the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops:
"To enter into ever-deeper relationship with God -this Lover of Life- entails striving to develop right relations with nature and with other human beings."
To be true to its mission, the Church must not lose its ability to be a positive, relevant and integrated force in our communities. It is by example, not by words alone that it will best do that. Examples such as conducting its affairs in a way that is supportive of the legitimate aspirations of society.
As for the use of its buildings facilities, there are two specific community expectations that must be respected by every " good citizen", including the Church :
1) heritage stewardship
2) concern for the environment (which is sometimes expressed as the five "R"s : reverence, reduce, repair, reuse and recycle).
The Church as an organization can react in two ways to these two expectations.
It can try to dispense itself from the attending obligations. It can claim it has insufficient resources to meet the challenges because it owns a disproportionate part of the architectural heritage in need of preservation. The advantage of this approach is that it would allow for short term solutions.
But the negative impact that it would have on the communities affected and the bad example it would give to society as a whole would have other less desirable consequences for any organization that wishes to "develop right relations with other human beings".
If the long term well-being of the Church is to be protected, another approach must be used. This approach would conform to the two broader perspectives mentioned above, that is, the perspectives of heritage stewardship and of ecological responsibilities (the 5 "R's").
Such an approach would require that the following parameters be included in Diocesan planning activities with respect to facilities:
1. Priority is given to the conservation of existing buildings.
2. Continued use of those buildings by the Church is privileged because it is the most effective way to ensure their maintenance and conservation.
3. The construction of new facilities is not an option except in very special circumstances when available facilities are totally beyond repair.
4. Where the clustering of parishes creates a need for more space than what is now available in existing facilities, those needs are met by reconfiguring the interior of those buildings, or by making additions to the buildings.
5. It is never an option
a) to replace with a new construction any building that has heritage value.
b) to demolish any parish building that can be used by others for other acceptable purposes
6. Appeals are made to the community-at-large for assistance in the conservation of buildings that have heritage value since the buildings contribute to the quality of life of everyone in a community.
We hope that the Diocese of London will seize this opportunity to provide innovative examples on how to look after one's interests in harmony with the values of the broader community. (End of Brief)
A Path to follow...by Municipalities
The following are extracts of a letter sent by the Chair of SOS-Églises to Lakeshore Council in September 2007 in support of the designation of the two churches)
''.....To members of Lakeshore Municipal Council,
...With the major concern being expressed today about the uncertainty of the domestic car industry which has been the backbone of our economy for many decades, Lakeshore must be extremely vigilant in its decision-making that affects the future. We must remain competitive with other towns if we are to be as attractive as they are in the eyes of business people, tourists, retirees, young families looking for a place to settle, entrepreneurs etc.
This competition between municipalities is all the more important today as the population is becoming more and more mobile and can choose where they want to reside, travel and make investments. Safe streets, clean air and water, good roads are not the only criteria any more that influence choices.
One area that many progressive municipalities across Ontario are giving more attention to in order to gain a competitive edge, is the richness of its identity. They are taking steps to ensure that this identity is protected like a valuable heirloom. Because a community's identity IS a valuable heirloom.
Fortunately, South Western Ontario, including Lakeshore, has the enormous starting advantage of having a three-hundred-year old history to include in its identity. It also has -Lakeshore especially- living remnants of the earliest epoch of Canadian history. Ours is the only region in Ontario that goes that far back in Canadian history. The architectural legacies of Pointe-aux-Roches and Saint-Joachim are storytellers of that distinctive feature of our town's identity.
I believe that there will soon be two "municipal leagues" in Ontario competing for human and financial investments: League A composed of municipalities, small and large, which have retained their historical character and identity, and League B composed of places which have not. League A municipalities will be where people would prefer to reside, work or visit. League B towns will be places that people will avoid if they can, or drive through on their way to a League A municipality! And it will be forever impossible for members of league B to join League A because once you have lost your identity, you cannot regain it. They will have allowed their heirlooms to be sent to the dump.
Therefore, I would strongly urge the 2007 Lakeshore Council to remember that the conservation of our identity, which we call heritage conservation, is not a frill. It is not one of those things which would be nice-to-have but that we can really do without. This kind of thinking would be a huge mistake with a big price to pay in the future. And it is a mistake that cannot be corrected. Once a heritage object is destroyed, it is gone forever.
The Province recognizes the importance of heritage conservation. As you know, it recently revised the Ontario Heritage Act.
Here are a few thoughts gathered from provincial documents:
...Identifying and protecting places that have cultural heritage value is an important part of planning for the future..
...Municipalities have a key role to play in conserving places that have heritage value.
...The designation of individual properties under the Ontario Heritage Act is one tool that municipalities have used to protect thousands of heritage properties in hundreds of communities in Ontario..
...About 17 000 properties have been designated under the OCA...
...Cultural heritage means tourist dollars for communities..
...Our cultural heritage helps us make sense of our rapidly changing world and guides us into the future
Let me now address a few specific points about conserving the two churches issue.
Conformity of those older buildings with the building code
There can be alternative solutions to building code problems. For example, the Ontario Legislative Buildings has a stairway and railing that caused problems with the code. A sprinkler system was installed to address the concern....
Playing by the rules
SOS has dutifully followed the prescribed process: from the early proposal in 2002 to an appeal to the conservation review board. During that process, every expert that studied the situation support SOS's position that the buildings are of heritage value.
In the main, we have not relied on divisive public activities, even legal ones. Our approach has been to make presentations, write letters and make attempt to dialogue with our opponents.
In 2003, SOS had to assume huge financial risks when it was forced to go to Court in order to assure that the municipality also played by the rules (the OHA).
Now we learn from the Conservation Review Board reports that the Diocese violated Article 33 of the OHA when it removed parts of buildings that are under consideration for designation.
Project Support
- It is interesting that while SOS is not a elaborately structured organization geared towards fund-raising, it has received over $100,000 in assistance from various sources.
- Media coverage has been extensive. Even provincial and national media found that the situation was of sufficient interest to give it coverage.
- The Lakeshore situation is known across Canada. SOS received paintings from students in British Columbia wishing to make a donation to the cause of heritage conservation in Lakeshore.
- The prestigious TV program Studio 2 sent a team in the region to cover the debate.
- Heritage-Canada named the church in St-Joachim Canada’s most endangered heritage site in 2005.
- The Minister of Culture of Ontario came to Stoney Point to meet with SOS representatives.
- SOS was invited to make a presentation at a national seminar on heritage conservation in Nova Scotia
- An SOS representative sits on a Heritage-Canada national task force on religious heritage conservation
- SOS received the 2005 Achievement Award from Heritage-Canada and the Prix Roger-Bernard from ROPFO, a heritage conservation provincial organisation
CONCLUSION
I will conclude by saying that the real issue on the table is whether Council will put into practice or ignore the municipal heritage conservation policy included in the Official Plan being drafted, and in the official plans of the amalgamated municipalities that are still in effect until the new plan is adopted.
Given all the supportive expertise received to date about those two century-old buildings, if they are not designated, then it can be safely assumed that the heritage conservation policy of Lakeshore are only words on paper and have little impact on decision-making.
I am confident that, on Tuesday, you will not miss this opportunity to protect two of our architectural heirlooms and thus take a step to make the municipality of Lakeshore a League A town.
David Tremblay
for SOS-Églises
|
|
