Esprit Futur : Le Corbusier and José Oubrerie at Saint-Pierre De Firminy, Firminy-Vert, France, 1968–2006

What is the secret mesmerism that death possesses and under the operation of which a modern architect – strident, confident, resolute – becomes rueful, pessimistic, or melancholic?1 Five years before Le Corbusier’s death at sea in 1965, the architect reluctantly agreed to adopt the project for L’Église Saint-Pierre de Firminy in Firminy-Vert (1960–2006), following the death of its original architect, André Sive, from leukemia in 1958.2 Le Corbusier had already developed, in 1956, the plan for an enclave in the new “green” Firminy town, which included his youth and culture center and a stadium and swimming pool; the church and a “boîte à miracles” near the youth center were inserted into the plan in the ’60s. (Le Corbusier was also invited, in 1962, to produce another plan for three Unités d’Habitation outside Firminy-Vert.) The Saint-Pierre church should have been the zenith of the quartet (the largest urban concentration of works by Le Corbusier in Europe, and what the architect Henri Ciriani termed Le Corbusier’s “acropolis”3) but in the early course of the project, Le Corbusier would suffer the diocese’s serial objections to his vision for the church – not unlike the difficulties he experienced with Notre Dame du Haut at Ronchamp (1950–1954) and the resistance to his proposed monastery of Sainte-Marie de la Tourette (1957–1960). In 1964, the bishop of Saint-Étienne requested that Le Corbusier relocate the church to a new site, but Le Corbusier refused and the diocese subsequently withdrew from the project. (With neither the approval, funds, nor the participation of the bishop, by then the cardinal archbishop of Lyon, the first stone of the church was finally laid on the site in 1970.) Le Corbusier’s ambivalence toward the project, even prior to his quarrels with the bishop, reveals...

Lessons on sin and forgiveness : a crisis in the Roman Catholic Church

One of the greatest challenges facing the Roman Catholic Church (the Church) across the world continues to be found in addressing complaints of child sexual abuse (csa) by clergy. The list of Catholic clergy in Australia who have been criminally processed for sexual offences against children is disturbingly long. As disturbing as this list is, more disturbing are the accounts of clergy who have not been criminally prosecuted, but protected within the cloister of the Church. It is increasingly recognised that the significant difficulty with child sexual abuse in Catholic Churches, in particular, has not been the presence of perpetrators but the response of Church leadership to allegations of csa by clergy. Those who have faced criminal charges have often done so due to the resilience of victim/survivors and not because of the support of Church structures or culture. The Church has been slow to come to terms with the realities of the perpetration of csa by its clergy and even slower to recognise the need to prioritise victims in any effective, just response. The church has been slowest of all recognising that there are significant cultural and discursive challenges to confront in addressing the management of csa by clergy. There is, however, progressive recognition of the role that discursive constructs of forgiveness have played in perpetuating the crises and ultimately in perpetuating abuse. The institutional praxis of forgiveness can be demonstrated not only in the Church, but in lessons learned from use of forgiveness as an institutional response to mass violations of human rights. This paper explores the juncture between criminality, church culture and forgiveness in responding to csa by clergy.