(2 of 2)
Moral Crises. The majority of U.S. Christians are not yet prepared to worship in tents, and many American churches, in city as well as suburb, are hardly big enough to accommodate their regular crowds of Sunday worshipers. Moreover, plenty of churchmen see no conflict between service to man and obeisance to God. "I do not believe that not building a cathedral is going to solve the problems of the ghettos," says Georgia Baptist Layman C. H. Lampin. "On that philosophy nothing beautiful would ever be created at any cost." Even Urbanologist Daniel Moynihan deplored Bishop Donegan's decision to stop work on St. John's. "Three summers of rioting and out goes 50 years of zoning," he said. "Twenty centuries of Christianity and we conclude that in a time of moral crisis we will cease work on the most splendid place of worship ever conceived in the city. The retreat from magnificence has gone on long enough."
Moynihan also argues that "an era of great public works is as much needed in America as any other single element in our public life." If that is true, there is certainly no reason why the churches should not contribute their share—and Archbishop McGucken wisely notes that San Francisco "would become terribly secular without some skyline recognition of God."
Nonetheless, there is a widespread consensus that new cathedrals and churches ought to be significantly different from the old. First, they should be much more adaptable—designed not just as places of worship but as buildings that could house a variety of Christian activities, from study centers to theaters. Secondly, they ought to be ecumenical in sponsorship.
In the future, some churchmen be lieve, cathedrals will be built not under the auspices of one faith but through the cooperation of many.