A voice from the past regarding St. Stephen's Church
Two emails received, written by John Pistorino, now living in Pinecrest:"Its amazing how a unthinking and uncaring pastor and architect can destroy our past without any remorse. I know those who helped fund and build St. Stephen's new church on McFarlane in the '50s did so with the understanding that the old church would always be preserved. Even with the destruction of the old wood parish hall in the '60s Father Hanna assured that the original church would always be a fixture for St. Stephen's. Now it seems the new generation has no respect for our history and is only greedy for the money the shops on Main Highway will bring. It's sad that all of what was built with love and care by the church's predecessors can so easily be cast aside by those entrusted with its future. Shame on Pastor Wilifred Faiella and the "architect" for allowing this to happen. Thanks to Ava Parks Moore for trying to talk sense to these senseless people."
and this:
"In the 1940s and in the 1950s I actually sang in the choir and was an alter boy in the old church. It was crowed and we always had outside seating. In fact I have a picture of me in my alter server robes standing in front of the old church in 1950 [shown here, with Father Hanna]. I remember the construction of the new church on McFarland and all of the money my parents donated to help build that church. I also served in the new church as an alter server until 1959 when I left for college. The many friends we had and the clergy assured that the old church would always be a "pillar" of the St. Stephan's parrish. My parents remained members until they died.
I am so disappointed and so sick that they did this to a part of Miami. The original buildings are still standing at Ransom Everglades and the Plymouth Church is still standing a few block away. What the heck was that architect thinking? They do teach respect for historic buildings in classes when you are studying for a degree."
Part of the on-going St. Stephen's saga
posted by Tom Falco at 10:00 AM
YOU MAY NOT LIFT THE PHOTOS & TEXT. IT'S COPYRIGHTED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY. YOU CAN HOWEVER SHARE A STORY ON SOCIAL MEDIA BY USING THE LINKS HERE.
For linking to this one story, just click on the time it was posted & just this story will open for sharing - only through social media. Not copying and pasting.
31 Comments:
Just wanted to say thank you to John, for his thoughtful comments as well as to say hello. Something tells me that as one of the best structural engineers in the state, he could have been helpful to St. Stephens in saving this building if they had any interest in doing so.
John was the alternate juror on my first jury trial, which had to do with the rape of a 16-year-old girl by her pastor. I would never equate what she went through with this situation, but I can't help but feel on a gut level a similar sense of betrayal, and I'm not even a member of the church.
What on earth are you thinking with paragraph two Michelle. I was completely thrown off the topic. I felt saddened by such a sincere letter about the church got through the your first paragraph and then wham What were you thinking about your self?
Is there a fine for destroying such a historically significant structure in Florida?
"Right" or "Wrong", St. Stephen's went through all of the required legal steps with the City of Miami. They cannot be subject to a fine, because in the eyes of the law, the did nothing illegal. So, in response to the above comment, no fine is justified in this specific case.
I have to chime in here on the illegal comment, because the word is somewhat ambiguous to a laymen. While I am not privy to all of the facts here, it is clear (with stated condition) that there was nothing criminal in tearing down the church. However, based on the allegations in many of the comments, the church may have opened itself up to potential civil liability to the parishoners and certainly to those that donated under false pretenses. Whether intentional or merely negligent, misrepresentations that are provided with the intent they be relied upon, can give rise to civil liability. However, the only thing that would now accomplish would be to punish and possibly bankrupt the church. I think the public embarrasment and fallout will probably serve the necessary purpose of ridding the church and the community of these actors and serve as a deterrent in the future.
oh, and I'm sure Michelle is just being a passionate advocate, as is her role. Sure a bit hyperbolic, but we all can be at times.
Anon 1:50. Thinking of John in the context of the destruction of the oldest church building in Miami brought back memories of that case I handled, which had a major impact on me on a personal level. Like the destruction of the Grove's historic church building, the church's behavior in that case elicited a visceral bad feeling. It was the kind of wrong that made you really upset, even though it didn't happen to you personally. Seeing a picture of a worker taking a sledgehammer to the cross on that historic church building made me have the same kind of horrible feeling. That is what I was trying to say, apparently inartfully. So, Anon, if saying on this blog how this destruction made me feel is "thinking about myself," then I guess I was. Isn't that what we are all doing when we share through these comments ... saying how we feel?
I believe the fact is that there was no sledgehammer taken to the cross. It has been removed and preserved for the new building.
After reading days and days of vitriolic comments towards St. Stephen’s and their parishioners, I ask the blog commenting community:
First and foremost are you parishioners or do you pick up pitchforks and torches at the first sign of a controversy in the Grove?
Second, third and fourth -- What is it that bothers you most:
Is it the fact that St. Stephen’s, after fulfilling all City of Miami requirements demolished a building on their own property for their own use? If you have issue with the City, fight them -- not a church that many ignore, but that helps many in our beloved Grove.
Are you upset that St. Stephen’s is replacing ONE retail location with ONE new retail location? Many in this blogging community supported The Heart of The Grove when it was an art gallery – the Grapevine even mentioned it was going to be renovated and remodeled. Did you stop to ask how it was going to be remodeled? (http://coconutgrovegrapevine.blogspot.com/2009/04/opening-reception-tomorrow-at-heart-of.html)
Ask yourselves, would a central figure in Coconut Grove destroy a building if it were deemed historical? Was this even the original building? If so, how do you know? The photos look different...as another commenter mentioned, just because it is old does not make it historical.
As a parishioner of St. Stephen’s, I knew the building was coming down because I asked questions, looked at the model and understood the scope of the project. They continue to have my full support.
As for the commemorative plaque, cross and bell – they are safe. The photos in other posts do not show the whole story. Also, the old black & white photo and the recent photo of the bell tower and façade of the original structure clearly show that the two bell structures were not the same. (http://coconutgrovegrapevine.blogspot.com/2009/05/wrecking-ball-is-doing-what-hurricanes.html)
While many here will attack me with harsh words and invective, I respect your right to voice your opinions on this blog without knowing me, what I stand for or how I feel about St. Stephen’s and the work they do in South Florida. For those who use their names, I respect your thoughts even though I disagree with them; for those who hide behind “anonymous” labels; your opinions are as anonymous as your names…they mean nothing.
This blog fulfills a necessary void in “covering” what is going on in the grove, all I ask is that all sides be presented fairly and without hyperbole. I enjoy reading the Grapevine and have learned much about this vibrant community. I just wish everyone would calm down and be willing to listen to both sides of the story...any story.
Thanks for reading.
-Allan
I have to laugh about our collective priorities.
While we are bemoaning the destruction of a church that is 97 years old, the President of the United States today submitted a budget of $3.4 Trillion putting the nation further in debt now clocked at $11 trillion or $36,000 per citizen and which will take more than 97 years to get pay off.
I could only wish citizen's would get as worked up about our debt as a small church which in most cases no one ever attended.
The chapel and loggia (twice around shop) and courtyard were a quaint historical center piece of the Grove that will never again exist. It was one of the few special places in the Grove. It gave the neighborhood a certain charm and character that only a nearly century old place can do.
To be left with another tacky retail building, and a gaudy oversized, overpriced school for Jorge Perez's kids, and worst of all a Disney World "replica" of the century old chapel facade should fit in quite nicely with CocoWalk.
This situation and how it was handled makes me sick. Thank you Saint Stephen's for screwing up the Grove even more.
Many of you keep saying we didn't use the building or didn't know about the building or didn't care about the building, but the Heart of the Grove used this courtyard and building. If you went to any of the art shows you saw and partook of the the quaint plaza with the fountain and the church. Thousands of people strolled by and enjoyed the ambiance during the large Arts Festival each February, so to say that people didn't use or appreciate it is nonsense.
Allen - Thank you. Ive been following these threads and find them completely absurd. Its nice to have someone who is an actual member of the church stand up and represent the other side of the story. Once again we have people flying off of the handle and casting judgment based on things that have been fabricated (smashing the cross) and, like you said, raising their pitchforks to condemn someone for doing what they wish to do with the property that they own. The drama gets even more dramatic. Who needs the Grove Playhouse when we have this?
To Blind Mind: Thanks man for the kind words and support! You’re right, I had to pay $$$ to see shows like this at the Playhouse.
To Anon @ 9:28 PM; I’ll entertain your non-entity comment with the following queries:
Tell me, exactly how was the situation handled?
How would you have handled it if it were your property?
Do you know how long the church leaders planned this process?
Do you know how much information was provided to parish members and school families?
Were you involved in any of the events leading up to this “happening”?
What do you really know about St. Stephen’s other than the multiple negative comments by others left on this and other blogs?
If you answered “No” or “Nothing” to the last four questions; then you can feel sick all you want, but that’s all you can do. You have “no dog in this hunt.”
All you know is what you’ve read in the Miami Herald and the Grapevine. I trust the Grapevine more than the Miami Herald, because at least I know where Tom is coming from and his trigger issues. I respect that about him and this blog and agree with him on more than 80% of the topics he posts about. If we disagree, so be it. This is his sandbox; I read it multiple times a day and appreciate the forum.
I’ve seen the names of people I care about dragged through the mud on this blog and others without a concern for the truth as to the facts of the situation. For now, all we have are the accusations of one person, the righteous indignation of others and some serious wailing and gnashing of teeth, err stucco.
There is more to this issue than meets the eye Anon @ 9:28; start peeling the onion as to the real facts and stop crying about what my parish, my church, my house of worship has chosen to do.
Sheesh. So much drama over a deconsecrated building.
1. The argument that the church has the "right" to do what ever they want with their own property is wrong. Any business or residential property owner in any area has to follow certain city - county regulations for their "right".They did not have the right to build a 25 story condo with the property if they wanted to!
2.Even if they obtained the "legal right"to do what they did, where was their concern about the involvement with the community to have a dialogue about the decision.
Where is the respect for the people living here now to explain their actions as it involves those who live - work in the area.
3. To "allen" - yeah right too much talk about an "old bldg". Perhaps they should have tried for the "right" to put in a 25 story condo "new" condo.
Ok, JKH, I expect you to petition the community and make them aware next time you want to plant new shrubs in your yard or put up vinyl siding. You know, because anything people want to do with their property that is approved by the city should be cleared by the goddamn neighborhood too. Get over yourself already.
Yeah I say we get neighborhood committees to make us report each other to the authorities anytime any one of our neighbors takes flowers out of their flower beds or replaces the gravel in their driveway. It might have been historic gravel.
I never went to that church, and I hardly ever noticed it because of the wall thats there. Who the hell cares? If it wasn't used as a church and wasn't designated a historic place, and it didn't even look like a church from those last pictures I saw, then what the hell.
And besides if you really want the criminals in this from what I've read, who the hell gave them the permits to do it? Seems like a hell of a lot of people have been asleep at the wheel on this.
You all are hyperventilating about how bad these people at the Church are when THEY WERE GIVEN THE DAMN PERMITS! I'd like to know who the hell was asleep at the wheel 1-2 years ago (or whatever it was) in the permits department? Who oversees this kind of stuff?
As another St. Stephen's parishioner, I feel that the time to preserve the old church was 50 years ago when it was deconsecrated and turned into classrooms. The building contained asbestos, and there was also mold, neither healthy for anybody. There's a limited amount of space - not practical to build around the old building, which would have to be raised above flood level to comply with codes and regulations and probably would have disintegrated in the process. The budget for the project is not bottomless - you restore the old church or you build modern, "green" class space for the children. I vote for the children (and I don't have kids in the school).
The Cross, the bell, and the Plaques are being protected, restored, and preserved.
Just like the round stained glass window that was over the alter, and the 36"x48" Three Angels Bas-Relief that was by the altar in the old Church have been protected and preserved.
The latter were preserved when the building was converted into classrooms, because it was widely assumed in the parish back then - and always has been - that the old dilapidated building would probably be torn down to create better spaces for the day school students.
And that was over 50 Years ago. The thought of getting a new building in that spot has been around for that long. The planning has been going on for a long,long, time.
It took this long for the Church to do it, going through all of the processes of informing parishoners, holding fundraising events, (even inviting old alumni and parishoners!)getting permitting, getting licensing, putting up signs to inform the community, and all the rest thats required in this type of undertaking.
Many, many, people were involved in these steps. In the Grove. In the City. In the neighborhood. Signs. Events. Yet it seems nobody in Coconut Grove saw it coming until a week ago.
Its especially hard for me to understand when past parishoners suddenly say they are shocked and appalled. It kind of reminds me of the Detective in "Casablanca".
I AM SHOCKED and I AM APPALLED. I was told all throughout this year and last at the fundraising events and during the fundraising campaign and even in church by the pastor herself that the front of the chapel was being preserved.
I feel totally betrayed by Pastor Willie Allen Faiella, the school Director, Silvia Larrauri, Bishop Leo Frade, the architect, Jenifer Briley, and the City of Miami.
Have they all of fallen under control of the projects manager, The Related Group? Their deceitful behavior and unethical practices would indicate so.
I am also surprised to learn the children of Related Groups President, Jorge Perez attend Saint Stephen's School.
I will be taking legal action to assure that all of the money I have donated to the church and school is returned. I think a class action lawsuit is in order.
Wow, more facts about mold, asbestos, and preserved pieces floating to the surface by actual parishioners. Surprise, surprise.
Oh, by the way, while cleaning my yard last weekend, I was raking up some leaves and accidentally raked up a historic skeleton of a squirrel who had perished there years ago. Please dont call the cops on me.
Have fun with your lawsuit, "Shocked & Appalled". You dont have a legal leg to stand on.
Can somebody please tell me exactly what St.Stephens contributes to the COMMUNITY. By this I mean not to their own parishioners.Do they have programs that benefit the community they live in. They certainly benefit from city - county services such as fire-police-etc as we all do. I know we all contribute by paying taxes. They have their private enterprises that competes with shop owners and they make money from parking lot fees. They certainly do not contribute to the marketing and clean up costs of the coconut grove art festival, they piggyback on this and make a lot of money from rejected artists and vendors. Was it too much for them to give back and involve the community instead of just taking? The fact that we are even having a lengthy discussion shows a lack of communication.
Hey, they tore down about 12 years the old Peacock family cottage "not a historical designation" " I never even saw it was there" " its old and musty" where the Guess store complex is now standing.That's what makes the grove a worldwide tourist destination - Guess shops, Starbucks and 24 hr fitness gyms. "If its Tuesday we must be in"- Coral Gables, Aventura,Downtown Dadeland, Sawgrass Mills ?
jkh,
Your failure to pay attention should not be confused with a "lack of communication".
JKH, to take the comment from “get a grip” @ 9:50 AM a bit further; perhaps you don’t read the Grapevine. Over the past four years, this blog has mentioned many activities which take place at St. Stephen’s. Also since you’re not informed as to what St. Stephen’s does for the COMMUNITY, I will enlighten you with a few of the ways this church helps out. Thanks for asking:
*St. Stephen’s helps the local (i.e.: Grove) COMMUNITY by providing space for the following organizations: All Grove Crime Watch, Alcoholics Anonymous & Narcotics Anonymous.
*St. Stephen’s parishioners help the COMMUNITY by donating food to the Coconut Grove Food Bank.
*St. Stephen’s helps those in the COMMUNITY who have or have been affected by HIV/AIDS.
*St. Stephen’s helps the COMMUNITY by assisting at the Homeless Assistance Center and by hosting a COMMUNITY brunch for those who need a hot meal.
*St. Stephen’s helps women in the COMMUNITY by working with Lotus House, a single women homeless shelter in Miami.
With respect to the Arts Show: The St. Stephen’s Arts & Crafts show is held ON the St. Stephen’s property and is set up and cleaned up quickly by church volunteers and staff. As for which artists get into which shows, how do you know the St. Stephen’s artists are “rejected” from the other show? Are you on any judging committees?
Oh, and btw, St. Stephen’s ONLY retail establishment was the Heart of the Grove gallery, which provided COMMUNITY artists a place to display their talents. This blog has been kind to promote gallery events and poster unveilings, perhaps you've missed the posts. As mentioned above, the new building will house one retail establishment to replace the Heart of The Grove.
Allan : are you a parishoner of the Church? Or just in general defending their decision? Just curious, since I am very interested in hearing from actual St Stephens people. I mean, if you are with SS, then you are saying that destroying the old building with historical relevance was ok? I get your need to stand up against "vitriol" but what about old-fashioned interest? That's what I hold, and am stupefied that this is ok with you - how about when you visit other cities and countries -- do you visit their historical sites and think to yourself, this is just an "old" building?
The difference between "historical" and "old" is the care that activists/preservationists/community put into ensuring that our geography and its artistic relevance has a legacy for our future kin.
Civics people !!!!
I say it all the time on this board.
Lucaya Street,
Apparently I missed the part where you clarified your own relationship with St. Stephen's, i.e., whether you are a parishioner or just another caviling outsider.
@ get a grip -
"caviling outsider" ?
If you are not a parishioner then your objections are automatically trivial? Nice thinking. I see how you people got here in the first place.
If I understand your meaning you're saying that someone who objects, that is not connected to St Stephen's, is an "outsider." For the record, I am not a parishioner, but was born here and have lived in and worked in the grove for decades. I have patronized the art show as well as King's Park for years, and bought Xmas trees there.
As a lifelong citizen of Miami think I have a right to raise objections when greed trumps art, as is the case time and again in this town, especially in the used-to-be authentic community we once had in this village of Coconut Grove.
First, having participated in renovation projects of historical buildings (The Miracle Theatre), we can immediately dismiss the statements made by Christopher: if, as he claimed, there was asbestos in the building, the manner of demolition would have made the problem worse, not better: in fact, it would have been illegal. So either there was no asbestos to begin with, or it had already been mitigated by the time of the demolition of the building. Either way, it does not factor into a decision to demolish an irreplaceable historic landmark.
As for "space around the structure", it must be pointed out that early on, the plans indicated that there WAS space.
Can Christopher show that applications for a variance to exempt the historic structure from being elevated to meet modern flood codes were submitted and denied? Because such exemptions are common in these projects, and even rejections can be overturned. As we've seen from the Mercy Hospital debacle, even approved variances can be reversed, if the public is made aware. This is something that Jorge Perez is all too aware of.
And of course, his involvement with the Parish stinks this all up to high heaven.
Since the original drawings (or at least, the original drawings released to the public early in the project) were never updated to accurately depict what was being planned, a case can be made that the Parish and its Board intentionally decided on a course that would mis-lead the public. After all, it's no secret that residents of the Grove are very protective of its historical elements.
Did St. Stephens make pleas for extra money so they could preserve the facade as they had led the public to believe was part of their goal? They did not.
No, St. Stephens has lied to the people of the Grove, and to many of its own parishioners. It's shameful anytime some lies to achieve their ends, it's inexcusable when it's a spiritual leader. As long as the current administration is in place, they do not deserve the community's support or patronage.
Greetings Lucaya.
Not sure what my travels have to do with this topic, but I’ll entertain you: When in Prague, Vienna, London, Paris or other older cities, I get the historic vibe from plenty of buildings. Of course I think…”this is an old building” if it’s an old building, but its age has nothing to do with its historical value to me. Notice, I say to me…because whether something is historic or has historical value is subjective to the community that designates it as such. What I find appealing about a building is only relevant to me.
I “get” that the Grove and Miamians need to preserve history, but doesn’t the item being preserved need to be historic? I get that some feel the structure was historic, but why wait until the last minute to do something about it?
Lucaya - Allen stated he was a SS parishioner in his first post here. There might be a decent amount of people like him that may be happy about the change to the church property. They just might not read that blog.
Whats done is done. Hopefully the new structure will become its own piece of history.
Post a Comment
<< Home