Brisbane church architecture of the1960s Creating modern climatic andregional responses to liturgical change

Lisa Marie Dauntldauntuqeduau

Abstract

The twentieth century was a time of massive upheaval in the intellectual theo-logical and architectural spheres of society Two world wars massive post-warpopulation growth and a building boom coincided with the Second VaticanCouncil and the liturgical movement within the Christian churches and encoun-tered the modern movement in architecture This prompted a demand for are-evaluation of church building design In Brisbane new approaches to churchbuilding design emerged in the 1960s with widely divergent results The archi-tects denominations and church parishes within the city mdash although all soughtto address liturgical change and emphasise the active participation of the con-gregation in the services mdash held different opinions on how the quintessentialchurch characteristics immanence and transcendence could be adapted tomodern times Analysing three exemplary Christian churches in Brisbane thisarticle demonstrates how in each of these designs their architects sought toevoke immanence and transcendence in a decisively new and modern mannerseeking inspiration from progressive ideas in Europe Britain and America whilestriving to create buildings suited to the climate of South-East Queensland Litur-gical change modern architecture and regional climate considerations providedcompounding opportunities to rethink church design from first principles

IntroductionThe twentieth century was a time of massive upheaval in the intellectual theo-logical and architectural spheres of society1 Two world wars massive post-warpopulation growth and a building boom coincided with the Second Vatican Coun-cil (1962ndash65) and the liturgical movement within the Christian churches and en-countered the modern movement in architecture This prompted a demand for are-evaluation of church building design Immanence and transcendence remainedessential characteristics but were now to be redefined along modern lines2 AsAmerican architectural critic George Everard Kidder Smith (1964) posited

Architecture being tied to mundane mechanics in addition to ordering space canrarely by itself evoke in the church mdash manrsquos most sublime building effort mdash that

224 Queensland ReviewVolume 23 | Issue 2 | 2016 | pp 224ndash245 | ccopy The Author(s) 2016 |doi 101017qre201631

httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpdxdoiorg101017qre201631Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore UQ Library on 11 Jan 2017 at 042109 subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use available at

Brisbane church architecture of the 1960s

elusive atmosphere which sets the church apart from secular building The artistmdash who clarifies and intensifies experience mdash can often by his talents take thechurch to greater heights3

In Brisbane new approaches to church building design emerged in the 1960s withwidely divergent results The architects denominations and church parishes withinthe city mdash although all sought to address liturgical change mdash held different opinionson how the quintessential church characteristics of immanence and transcendencecould be adapted to modern times This resulted in differing architectural responsesto what could be considered the same design challenge New liturgical changeswithin the churches emphasised the active participation of the congregation in theservice and led to new plan arrangements that gathered the congregation aroundthe altar and the priest Concurrently the architectural language used for churchbuildings shifted from Gothic styles towards new modern variants Analysing threeexemplary Christian churches in Brisbane mdash Holy Family Catholic Church inIndooroopilly designed by Douglas and Barnes architects (1963) Robin GibsonrsquosKenmore Presbyterian4 Church (1968) and St Pius X Catholic Church at Salisburyby Cullen Fagg Hargraves and Mooney (1969) mdash this essay will demonstratehow in each of these designs their architects sought to evoke immanence andtranscendence in a decisively new and modern manner seeking inspiration fromprogressive ideas initially in Europe then in Britain and America while strivingto create buildings suited to South-East Queenslandrsquos climate Liturgical changemodern architecture and regional climate considerations provided compoundingopportunities to rethink church design from first principles

Based on a review of the literature oral history interviews with eminent wit-nesses and plan analyses of the case-study churches this article traces the shiftsthat occurred in Brisbanersquos modern church building design Brisbane adopted newoverseas church building design ideas slowly and incorporated these with due con-sideration of the local building traditionrsquos ideas of climate appropriate design Todescribe how church building design ideas were adopted and also how they evolvedduring the 1960s this text is divided into three parts In the first part the liturgicalmovement and international developments in modern church design are explainedbriefly Citing the 1963 example of the Holy Family Church the second part de-scribes early 1960s Brisbane modern church design while the third part focuses onthe late 1960s and references both the 1968 Kenmore Presbyterian Church and the1969 St Pius X Catholic Church

The liturgical movement and modern church designThe liturgical movement which led to the Second Vatican Council strove for thereform of worship within the Christian churches Its beginnings have been tracedback to early twentieth-century Belgium where a young Benedictine monk DomLambert Beauduin (1873ndash1960) presented at a conference in Mechelen in 19095

Beauduin distinguished himself from other presenters as he was not concerned witheither lsquothe liturgy as a work of art or with the minutiae of ceremonial observancersquo6

Instead he called for spiritual renewal mdash for the liturgy to be lived by the individualand the collective of the church7 His appeals led to a renewal of the church inBelgium and set an example for Germany and Austria which soon followed suitthus paving the way for the Second Vatican Council which was held between 1962

Queensland Review 225

httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpdxdoiorg101017qre201631Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore UQ Library on 11 Jan 2017 at 042109 subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use available at

Lisa Marie Daunt

and 19658 This meeting of all Roman Catholic bishops from across the worldresulted in formal changes to the liturgy and rites Cardinal Montini (1897ndash1978who became Pope Paul VI 1963ndash78) stated in 1959 why liturgical renewal wasneeded

The spiritual decadence of our time demands itThe cultural development of our people demands itThe inner vitality of holy Church demands itThe teaching authority of the Church demands itThe eternal binding of lsquoDo this in memory of Mersquo demands it9

The active participation of the whole congregation and the priest addressing thelaity in their vernacular and facing them throughout the mass mdash especially for com-munion and the sermon mdash were significant liturgical changes10 Vatican CouncilII called for people to be more aware of Christ in their lives and the liturgy11 ThelsquoConstitution of the Liturgyrsquo became the key guiding document that was referencedby the clergy to gain an understanding of the requirements for church building de-sign Church building designers were urged to remember that lsquo[t]he church buildingexists primarily to support the liturgyrsquo12

Prior to this liturgical and theological renewal church worship had become aceremonial performance in Latin by the clergy with their back to the laity mdash therewas little to no engagement between the two As described by various 1960s writersthe laity were effectively coming to the church building to be alone and observethe priest who was also alone13 During the mid-twentieth century liturgiststheologians and the clergy increasingly recognised the need for change The churchbuilding and its artwork encouraged separation from the priest and at best offereda dignified place for personal devotional prayer The basilica processional planningused since medieval times created distance between the priest and the congregationwith rectangular processional naves the altar was positioned against the backwall of the sanctuary and screens often visually separated the sanctuary from thenave14 This separation existed across denominations to a certain extent It wasevident in the more ceremonial worship of the Roman Catholic and Anglicanchurches but less so in eastern orthodox churches15 In attempting to achieveimmanence for themselves the clergy had become inwardly focused on ceremonyand aesthetics For the laity devotional intentions were supported by the heavycontemplative Gothic architecture and lsquocatalogue orderrsquo religious artwork16 Theliturgical movement responding to the onset of modernity led to a recognitionthat a very different approach to worship and subsequently church design wasneeded to achieve transcendence No longer was transcendence to be sought solelythrough introspection and individual prayer rather it was to be pursued in relationto others as part of a gathered church community

As the liturgical movement unfolded in the church the modern movement in ar-chitecture also came to fruition Starting from the early twentieth century modernarchitecture increasingly rejected tradition and focused on the functionality of thebuilding ahead of its form New building technologies and novel materials (glasssteel and concrete) enabled architects to respond to function in ways that had notbeen possible before In 1943 Sigfried Giedion (1888ndash1968) wrote Nine Points onMonumentality recognising that a new modern monumentality needed to be foundas lsquoThe people want the buildings that represent their social and community life

226 Queensland Review

httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpdxdoiorg101017qre201631Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore UQ Library on 11 Jan 2017 at 042109 subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use available at

Brisbane church architecture of the 1960s

to give more than functional fulfilmentrsquo17 How and whether monumentality wasachieved in modern architecture or whether it was even needed then became heav-ily debated by architectural theorists18 This debate was topical to modern churcharchitecture where the balance between liturgical functional requirements and thedesire to achieve immanence and transcendence was not easily reconciled The ar-chitectural language used for church buildings was questioned and subsequently thegrandeur of the Gothic styles was no longer considered fit for a modern church Theliturgical movement in the church and the modern movement in architecture werecombined by architect Auguste Perret in his design for the church of Notre Dame LeRaincy in France which opened in 192319 Rudolf Schwarzrsquos 1930 Corpus Christiat Aachen (Germany) is also recognised as one of the first great building to combinethe two20 In the inter-war period in both Germany and Switzerland a number ofnotable churches were built that combined new liturgical planning and modernarchitecturersquos focus on functional planning to inform both the form and use of newbuilding technologies The works of four architects mdash Perret (1874ndash1954) Moser(1860ndash1936) Schwarz (1897ndash1961) and Bohm (1880ndash1955) provided what waslater referred to as modern church buildingrsquos foundations21 The destructive impactof World War II on European cities also meant that the need to reconstruct largeextents of Europe factored into the rapid emergence of architectural modernism onthe Continent22

The Anglophone world was slower to realise the need for church buildings toincorporate social change and be lsquomodernrsquo It was not until the late 1950s thatAmerica and Britain started combining the liturgical and the modern movement23

Liturgical and architectural writers of both countries noted their delays with em-barrassment In 1953 Kidder Smith (1913ndash97) lamented that for thirty years Euro-peans had engaged in lsquocontinual inquiring and sympathetic search for appropriatechurch architecturersquo thereby putting to shame lsquothe warmed-over Gothic whichwe still accept so readilyrsquo24 British architecture critic and Anglican priest PeterHammond (1921ndash99) similarly regretted lsquothat even in an age of space-travel theinsulating properties of the English Channel are still remarkable and that manyof the commonplaces of Trier and Zurich would still be regarded as revolution-ary in London or Oxfordrsquo25 They blamed the delay on the clergyrsquos reluctance toformulate new liturgical building briefs for their architects to act upon and thehesitation of clergy parishes and architects alike to shift from historicism (Gothicand Romanesque building styles)26 When the two movements finally did com-bine in Britain and America the change was gradual and ad hoc with isolatedexamples incorporating only some of the ideas of Europe Maguire (1931ndash) andMurray (1929ndash2005) were among a handful of architects in Britain considering theparticipation of the laity and the needs of the community as seen in one of theirfirst churches St Paulrsquos Bow Common a Protestant church built in 1956 MarcelBreuerrsquos (1902ndash81) St Johnrsquos Abbey Church in Collegeville Minnesota (opened in1961) was one of the first American churches to progressively combine the twomovements27

During the 1960s mdash a time of affluent optimism population boom and build-ing boom ndash numerous even staggering numbers of churches were built acrossthe Western world28 In this decade more churches were built in the world mdashincluding in Australia mdash than in any decade or since However in Australia aselsewhere many of these lsquomodernrsquo church buildings were only modern in form or

Queensland Review 227

httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpdxdoiorg101017qre201631Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore UQ Library on 11 Jan 2017 at 042109 subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use available at

Lisa Marie Daunt

materials A smaller sample of buildings were lsquomodernrsquo in the sense that they ex-pressed liturgical reform through their designs the plan and internal organisationof these churches encouraged congregation participation and their smaller scaleencouraged community participation mdash they were no longer a temple for God buta space for the community to worship together29 By focusing on three churchesbuilt in 1960s Brisbane this article illustrates how these different interpretationsof lsquomodernrsquo church design played out in Queensland

Queensland modern church design Early beginningsChurch building in Queensland declined during the Great Depression of the 1920sand 1930s and was further delayed by World War II with wartime constructionrestrictions not fully lifted until 195230 When building recommenced Brisbaneexperienced accelerated suburban growth as did parts of Europe and BritainHowever like America and other colonial countries Australiarsquos growth was uniqueto its spatial frontier mdash accessible land available materials improved wages aninflux of immigrants population growth (the lsquobaby boomrsquo) and the increased useof cars31 These positive growth influences all led to a need for church buildingsin Brisbane in the 1960s and over 120 were built during this decade32 Once theywere able to build again many parishes seized the opportunity to incorporate newmodern ideas in their church design

In Queensland modern architecture was influenced by Britain America andimmigrants arriving from Europe33 Social changes in the post-war period alsoexpanded the church building program After the war the state assumed a muchmore active role in providing for citizensrsquo health and wellbeing but the develop-ment of secular facilities where communities could meet including civic centreskindergartens and public libraries meant that the number of congregants began todwindle Counteracting this secularising trend the church increasingly supportedcommunity requirements for progressive social welfare education and leisure Sim-ilar to initiatives occurring in Europe and North America many church buildingsin Queensland incorporated spaces for all three of these functions either as part ofthe building in adjoining buildings or within the church precinct34

In church buildings as in other building types modernist architecture in Queens-land needed to be adapted to the local climate resulting in what has been describedas a regional or lsquohotrsquo modernism35 This desire for local identity and regionalismmost notably through consideration of the local climate directly impacted buildingdesign Church building designs like civic and secular buildings set out to addresshumidity and heat by limiting glare and solar gain while maximising ventilation36

The contained and closed-up buildings of Europe with bright skylights over thesanctuary and walls of glass were recognised as unsuitable for Queenslandrsquos climateand were not naively copied

However like Britain Queensland headed into the 1960s with a conservativeclergy There was a reluctance to embrace modern architecture and provide a newliturgical design brief Most notably Catholic Archbishop Duhig (1871ndash1965)was vehemently against modern architecture and in 1959 while modern churcheswere cropping up across Europe stated that lsquomodern ecclesiastical archrsquoture isabominablersquo37 Acknowledging the challenges faced by architects to design modern

228 Queensland Review

httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpdxdoiorg101017qre201631Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore UQ Library on 11 Jan 2017 at 042109 subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use available at

Brisbane church architecture of the 1960s

Figure 1

Western Facade Holy Family Catholic Church Indooroopilly State Library of QueenslandRoyal Australian Institute of Architects Photographs Collection

church buildings the 1959 centenary publication Buildings of Queensland cele-brated (perhaps too optimistically) the local achievements in this domain38

The concession to contemporary thought is so often limited to structural tech-niques the traditional plans and forms are merely presented in the garb of theprevailing Queensland construction methods and are hailed by both clergy andlaity as being daringly lsquomodernrsquo

A few enlightened clergymen are supporting their architects with the result thatthe first worthwhile examples of contemporary church design are emerging Thesebuildings demonstrate an intelligent use of materials and an appreciation of cli-matic influences An indigenous ecclesiastical architecture has arrived39

In Queensland as elsewhere church buildings of the mid-twentieth century wereoften criticised for being too conservative or not conservative enough While archi-tects and a few clergymen aspired to create both an architecturally andor liturgi-cally progressive building many less progressive thinkers could only relate to whatthey already knew and others in seeking progress achieved worldly aspirationsinstead Such tensions became starkly apparent when the Holy Family CatholicChurch was built in Indooroopilly a western suburb of Brisbane in the early1960s (see Figure 1)

In 1964 a year after the buildingrsquos opening William Lockett an English ar-chitectural and religious writer called it a lsquobizarre self-expression of architectsrsquo40

Queensland Review 229

httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpdxdoiorg101017qre201631Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore UQ Library on 11 Jan 2017 at 042109 subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use available at

Lisa Marie Daunt

Figure 2

Baptistery chapel link and northern side wall of Holy FamilyCatholic Church Indooroopilly State Library of QueenslandRoyal Australian Institute of Architects Photographs Collection

Lockett shared this revulsion with Kidder Smith who noted in The New Churchesof Europe

A number of architects mdash and their clergy mdash think that if they can produce anunusual shape for a church preferably freakish this is all which is required Beingstraitjacketed by most building types into more or less routine too manyarchitects when they get a church commission with its comparative freedomconsider the job a design toy for unbridled imagination and spatial acrobaticsIn this they are abetted by the clergy each of whom wants to prove that his parishis right on its toes There is too much concern about originality and not enoughon the emotional experience in religious space which makes such transcendingdemands on all concerned with church building41

Designed by William L Douglas and B Barnes between 1961 and 1963 the HolyFamily Catholic Church shows an expressive and experimental use of materialsbut with a traditional and conservative approach to liturgical requirements42

The complex is composed of two linked structures the church and the baptisterychapel (see Figure 2) The church is an off-white monumental scale pleated rein-forced concrete structure which is also expressed internally The western facadeof the church dominates the streetscape with a dark brown rendered surface witha vertical concrete element up its centre White moulded protruding statues of

230 Queensland Review

httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpdxdoiorg101017qre201631Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore UQ Library on 11 Jan 2017 at 042109 subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use available at

Brisbane church architecture of the 1960s

Figure 3

Interior Holy Family Catholic Church IndooroopillyState Library of Queensland Royal Australian Instituteof Architects Photography Collection

Jesus Mary and Joseph coinciding with the churchrsquos name adorn the wall Visitorsapproach either up a wide concrete stairwell from the lower side or from a con-crete courtyard to the upper side of the baptistery The expressive reinforced shellconcrete design was progressive for Brisbane modern architecture It followed thestyle of European reinforced concrete church buildings including Auguste PerretrsquosChurch of Notre Dame Le Raincy Dominikus Bohmrsquos Caritas Institute (1928)and St Englebert Riehl Cologne (1932) Marcel Breuerrsquos St Johnrsquos Abbey ChurchCollegeville Minnesota opened in 1961 not much earlier than Holy Family butSt Johnrsquos 1953 competition was widely published It is possible that each of thesechurch buildings and other reinforced concrete buildings influenced the architectureof Holy Family

However the internal arrangement of Holy Family is a conservative basilicaprocessional arrangement The altar is positioned at the western end of the spaceraised by a series of steps and covered by a copper civory43 Seven diamond shapedskylights placed near where the pleats in the ceiling meet illuminate the spaceSide-wall frosted awning windows further light the relatively dark space providecross-ventilation and bar distractions from the outside world (see Figure 3)

Immanence is achieved through the expressive structural form of the churchwith tall and slender volume and proportion of the space (the worship space is onaverage 9 metres in height and 37 x 13 metres in plan) while the arched details andthe pleated structure give the church a grandeur similar to its Gothic predecessorsThe skylights lead worshippersrsquo eyes up to heaven and the masonryrsquos materialityholds one in contemplation within its unique space

Queensland Review 231

httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpdxdoiorg101017qre201631Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore UQ Library on 11 Jan 2017 at 042109 subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use available at

Lisa Marie Daunt

Figure 4

Long sections Holy Family Catholic Church Indooroopilly UQFL289 Douglas Daly and Bottger Collec-tion Job 0122 Fryer Library University of Queensland

The link between the church and the baptistery a parabolic arched concretetunnel with parabolic arched openings along the sides demarcates the entranceto both buildings The baptisteryrsquos unique location outside the church space isintended to remind worshippers of the beginning of their relationship with GodIt is made of eight parabolic concrete arches arranged in an octagon and theconcrete form folds to meet in the centre where a tall slender spire rises One of themost interesting features of the baptistery is its incorporation of modern abstractartworks (see Figure 5) Early in his career Melbourne artist Andrew Sibley (1933ndash2015) designed and made the seven baptistery windows which fill the space withinthe parabolic arches The technique dalle de verre was first used in France for theChurch of Notre Dame Le Raincy Sibley also used this technique for the largetriangular window in the Stuartholme Chapel Bardon (1961) His abstract designsrely on a simple use of colour and form to create a space of beauty and inspirationwhich evokes the transcendence of God (see Figures 4)

Douglas and Barnesrsquo progressive thinking can be seen in their use of moderndesign and technology but renewed liturgical functional planning is less evidentWhile the creation of a column-free space assists laity participation the length ofthe church inhibits it the sight lines to the altar are unobscured but the distancefrom the back of the congregation is lengthy The baptismal chapel outside of the

232 Queensland Review

httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpdxdoiorg101017qre201631Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore UQ Library on 11 Jan 2017 at 042109 subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use available at

Brisbane church architecture of the 1960s

Figure 5

(Colour online) Baptistery chapel Holy Family CatholicChurch Indooroopilly Photo by author 7 February2016

main room enables the chapel to be the first thing worshippers encounter uponarrival and also removes this function as a possible distraction during worship ifpositioned in the sanctuary or the nave The limited liturgical design changes maybe less to do with the architect than the result of the clergyrsquos failure to address newliturgical changes Vatican II was held after the church had started constructionand changes to liturgical planning across Brisbane churches seem to have neededformal reinforcement from Rome to push the clergy to rethink their briefs forfuture church designs Throughout the 1960s Queensland architects increasinglyexperimented with reinforced concrete buildings and numerous examples werebuilt44 Holy Family is arguably one of the earliest examples and also one of themost expressive achieving immanence and transcendence through its form volumeand modern artwork

Queensland modern church design Moving to a new suburbanvernacularIn the late 1960s new suburban churches that demonstrated a more holistic rethink-ing about church buildingsrsquo form and planning were constructed in Brisbanersquos newsuburban communities These buildings responded to progressive church briefs re-quiring congregation participation and were sympathetic to their residential neigh-bours as they assumed a smaller domestic scale Immanence and transcendenceneeded to be reinvented in these scaled-down suburban churches Considerationof suburban context paring back religious elements and reconsidered floor plans

Queensland Review 233

httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpdxdoiorg101017qre201631Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore UQ Library on 11 Jan 2017 at 042109 subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use available at

Lisa Marie Daunt

Figure 6

Exterior Kenmore Uniting Church State Library of Queensland Royal Australian Institute ofArchitects Photography Collection

focused the priest and his (it was always a male priest then) congregation on theliturgy

When he was commissioned to design the Presbyterian Church in Kenmore(1966ndash68) Robin Gibson (1930ndash2014) one of Brisbanersquos lsquostarchitectsrsquo of the1960s returned to the essential requirements a Protestant church focusing on thesermon and gathering as a unified community45 The result lsquoa community church ina garden setting which was to serve a rapidly growing suburban arearsquo46 The parishselected the site in consultation with Gibson for its presence in the communityprominent address and natural beauty (see Figure 6)

Similar to the Holy Family Church the complex consists of two buildings (seeFigure 7) Here however these buildings are identical in size and form One housesthe church the other a Sunday school and a kindergarten The complex was en-visaged as a Christian Education Centre and was not just for its congregation butfor the whole community47 During the 1950s increased car ownership opened upsuburbs like Kenmore and development in the area increased the steady growthresulted in what the church itself has described as lsquoan avalanchersquo as lsquonew familieswere received almost weeklyrsquo48 Like other new suburbs Kenmore was generallydevoid of lsquocommunity facilitiesrsquo mdash an opportunity the church community took onHowever in contrast to Holy Family which measured approximately 46 metresby 14 metres and reached a height of over 16 metres (western street facade) theKenmore Uniting Church was domestic in scale and used domestic materials relat-ing both to its suburban location and the social movement within the Presbyterianchurch Each building measured approximately 22 x 22 metres (edge of the eaves

234 Queensland Review

httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpdxdoiorg101017qre201631Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore UQ Library on 11 Jan 2017 at 042109 subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use available at

Brisbane church architecture of the 1960s

Figure 7

Floor Plan Kenmore Uniting Church State Library of Queensland Royal Australian Instituteof Architects Drawing Collection

of the external verandahs) and their height was capped at 9 metres (top of sanc-tuary pitched roof) Both buildings were clad in off-white simple brickwork andtimber with hoop pine inside and out Free-standing white-bagged painted brickwalls acted as privacy walls containing planters In keeping with the vernacular ofQueenslandrsquos early houses verandahs provided shade and shadows to the exteriorand interior spaces From inside one could see though the glazing and over theplanters to controlled views of the surrounding suburbia49 The large glazed slidingdoors slid open on all four sides to naturally ventilate the worship space blurringthe distinction between inside and outside and making the verandah part of theworship space a lesson learnt from the timber and tin Queensland house50

The churchrsquos square plan dictates diagonal movement through the space al-lowing the congregation to gather around the altar A roof lantern that rises fromthe flat roof plane illuminates the sanctuary The larger volume over the sanctuaryprovides light but also accentuates the importance of the sanctuary The functionsof the lectern pulpit altar and font are all merged into one A simple table takestheir place with only a bible and an earth bowl placed on the table for the fontIn contrast to Holy Family Gibsonrsquos design strongly expresses the liturgical move-ments ideal of designing from the altar out and from the function of the spacefocused on the altar before determining the rest of the design He explained thatthis included

diagonal movement to allow gathering to take the ceremonial part away tomake the people part of the overall integrity of the design It is the diagonalthat makes it powerful The simplicity but not just a form turned A logical

Queensland Review 235

httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpdxdoiorg101017qre201631Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore UQ Library on 11 Jan 2017 at 042109 subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use available at

Lisa Marie Daunt

Figure 8

Interior Kenmore Uniting Church Royal Australian Institute of ArchitectsYear Book 1968ndash69 Queensland chapter of the Royal Australian Institute ofArchitects Building of the Year Award 1968 Church for the PresbyterianChurch Moggill

progression of what was wanted of the space and the importance of the altar [it is] synthesis and analysis to find the essence and then can become creative withthe things that matter51

Three cross-shaped columns and the walls behind the sanctuary support the struc-ture enclosed by glazing and encircled by verandahs The structure floats abovethe columns like an umbrella

The architectrsquos analogy of an umbrella relating to the sub-tropical quintessen-tially Queensland mango trees that were retained on the site became a guidingforce for the design The ceiling canopy is like a large egg crate of Queensland pineand plywood trusses under which family groups gather to worship (see Figure 8)The buildingrsquos simple form and detailing were commended and soon after its com-pletion it became the most recognised Brisbane church building of the 1960s In1968 it won the Queensland Chapter of the Royal Australian Institute of ArchitectsBuilding of the Year Award The jury commented

The handling of space form and character is of a high order and the buildingdemonstrates that good design can in itself be economical The precise controlof detail and choice of materials is particularly evident throughout the buildingand the judges were unanimous that this church is one of Queenslandrsquos mostsignificant buildings to have been built within the last decade52

However the churchrsquos modern simplified design also owed a great deal to Rev-erend Norman Kerkin whom Gibson described as an lsquoexcellent minister very

236 Queensland Review

httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpdxdoiorg101017qre201631Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore UQ Library on 11 Jan 2017 at 042109 subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use available at

Brisbane church architecture of the 1960s

Figure 9

Perspective drawing St Pius X Catholic Church Salisbury Hargraves Briggs JacuzziArchitects

avant-garde [who] understood what he really wantedrsquo53 Kerkin wanted to goback to the essentials and remove elements that inhibited the congregation frombeing like a family Gibson noted that for Kerkin lsquoChristianity was somethingthat was a whole thing not one person serving out Christianity to the others Hesaw Christianity as community workrsquo54 This enabled Gibson to look at the basicrequirements to see the deficiencies in earlier traditionally planned Presbyterianchurch buildings and attempt to redress them The aim was to find a religiousform that was a support to the religion recognising that going to church was moreabout gathering than traditions or processions up long central aisles55 Thereforethere is no formal entry and no nave or transept Light and space are the immanentarchitectural elements

This church continues ideas Gibson had explored in the houses he had previouslydesigned and that he had developed in conjunction with other noted Brisbaneresidential architects of the 1950s and 1960s with whom he had studied andworked prior to starting his own practice in 195756 For example unlike the otherstates of Australia modernism in Queensland retained a focus on a shaped roof(as opposed to a flat roof) as a modern vernacular emerged from the timber andtin Queensland house57 Several architects creatively explored this theme in theirdomestic designs Ideas borrowed from the Jacobi house by Hayes and Scott (1957)the Mathers House by Steve Trotter of Fulton Collin and Partners (1964) the SmithHouse by John Dalton (1966) and Gibsonrsquos own Mocatta House (1966) can all befound in the design of Kenmore Presbyterian Church58 The square plan the deepfloating eaves forming the perimeter verandah the extent of sliding doors the roofpitching up over the sanctuary the slab-on-ground construction and the buildingrsquossiting within the trees all emulate the emerging modern Queensland house

The 1969 St Pius X Catholic Church Salisbury designed by Cecil Hargraves(1930ndash) of Cullen Fagg Hargraves and Mooney is equally simple in form sittingbehind the trees and built of domestic materials (see Figure 9) Although modernin both form and materiality in contrast to Holy Family it does not dominatethe streetscape Similar to Gibsonrsquos Kenmore church St Pius X blends into itsresidential surroundings thanks to its materiality brown brick white horizontalweatherboard cladding and an off-white tiled roof A simple steel white cross

Queensland Review 237

httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpdxdoiorg101017qre201631Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore UQ Library on 11 Jan 2017 at 042109 subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use available at

Lisa Marie Daunt

Figure 10

(Colour online) Exterior St Pius X Catholic Church Salisbury Photo by author 2000

free-standing to the left of the entry denotes the building as a church mdash the onlyobvious indication of its function (see Figure 10)

The entry path lead directly to the small foyer and the floor sloped towardsthe entry of the worship space mdash encouraging the visitor forward The tabernacledominated the initial view as one entered The journey into the space was a simpleline from the lawn outside to the tabernacle with the altar seen behind One movedto either the left or the right to find a place within the arced seating arrangement Thetabernacle no longer blocked the view to the altar the whole of the sanctuary wasin view and one could also see the faces of other congregation members Seatingsurrounds the sanctuary on all sides except from behind and the congregationgathers around an island-like sanctuary A raised platform contained the tabernacleat the front a large solid marble altar in the centre which raised a further step alectern to the left and in front of the altar the font to the right and in front of thealtar and the ambo to the back and left of the sanctuary During the service thepriestrsquos movements were always facing the congregation (see Figure 11)

The shape and form of the worship space seem to be in direct opposition tothe central aisle arrangements of processional basilica churches The directionalfocus from the entry to the sanctuary is secondary to the form of the space whichemphasises a longitudinal view (see Figures 12 and 13) The roof planes are slopedaway from each other and a gable in the ceiling plane runs across the space Thisis further expressed by the batten-covered south-orientated skylight that runs theentire length of the space A second smaller skylight lights the space over the al-tar Glass louvres provide light and cross-ventilation complemented by externalcourtyard gardens Similar to Gibsonrsquos Kenmore church both the climatic designfeatures and the buildingrsquos form take reference from domestic Queensland buildingtraditions and their development into a modern vernacular in the 1960s The build-ingrsquos cross-section is reminiscent of Daltonrsquos residential designs Daltonrsquos Grahamhouse (1966) for instance increased natural daylight and ventilation throughoutthe house with a southern clerestory along this centre axis and corridor

Cullen Fagg Hargraves and Mooney was a prominent church design office Itdesigned approximately twenty of the thirty-five Catholic churches constructed inBrisbane in the 1960s59 Various ideas detailing and spatial organisation can berecognised in the architectsrsquo work They designed some of the first church buildings

238 Queensland Review

httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpdxdoiorg101017qre201631Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore UQ Library on 11 Jan 2017 at 042109 subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use available at

Brisbane church architecture of the 1960s

Figure 11

Plan St Pius X Catholic Church Salisbury Trace of Plan by author from Hargraves BriggsJacuzzi Architects

Figure 12

(Colour online) Interior currently under renovation St Pius X Catholic Church Salisbury Photoby author 7 February 2016

Queensland Review 239

httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpdxdoiorg101017qre201631Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore UQ Library on 11 Jan 2017 at 042109 subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use available at

Lisa Marie Daunt

Figure 13

(Colour online) Interior currently under renovation StPius X Catholic Church Salisbury Photo by author 7February 2016

with an altered layout catering for new liturgical considerations It therefore seemsimportant when considering liturgical and architectural changes within the 1960sto highlight some of the work and ideas of Cullen Fagg Hargraves and MooneyThe office tried to stay abreast of the related international ideas and church buildingdesign and expended considerable effort to understand the implications of VaticanCouncil II60 The magazine Liturgical Arts which informed building design forthe liturgy was recognised and referred to by the office for its interpretations ofdocuments published by the Catholic Church61

The officersquos keen interest in the churchrsquos new liturgical requirements can be iden-tified in its design of St Pius X which strongly focuses on the liturgy with eachsacrament given prominence within the space of the sanctuary The positioning ofthe altar in the centre of the sanctuary and the congregation is more pronouncedthan it is in any of the other Brisbane church designs of the period62 The design re-sponds to the desire for the congregation to be a community worshipping togetherfor each person to be a participant in the celebration rather than an onlookerBeing able to see the faces of other congregants contributed to this togethernessImmanence is achieved when the members of the congregation gather to face eachother and together the priest and congregation in worship aspire to achieve tran-scendence This was an ideal of both the liturgical movement and Vatican CouncilII

to transform the faithful from lsquosilent onlookersrsquo to active participators in theoffering the individual worshippers were to join with the priest to form one

240 Queensland Review

httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpdxdoiorg101017qre201631Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore UQ Library on 11 Jan 2017 at 042109 subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use available at

Brisbane church architecture of the 1960s

community united in sacrifice It was the task of church architecture to conformto this developing community of the altar confirming and strengthening it andproviding it with an environment in which each person should be in contactwith each and all with the altar participating visually and orally unhindered insacrifice of the mass63

As an architect designing church buildings in the 1960s Hargraves considered histask as needing to influence the clergy as much as possible but not dominating overtheir knowledge of the current liturgy However the conservative ideas and desiresof the clergy and parish congregation played a significant role in determining thefinal built design of many churches Having spent time working in North AmericaHargraves had learnt much about suburban church design and the use of domesticmaterials to focus the congregation on the liturgy as a community64 Conservativeresponses by the parish could be a limiting factor for church building design butthe changes required by Vatican Council II were not made without considerablethought by individual parishes In Brisbane each Catholic church was and is rel-atively autonomous with regard to building construction Therefore each parishconsidered the architectural changes required by the new liturgy separately and forthe purposes of its own congregation Of all the churches he designed Hargraves(to date) regards St Pius X Catholic Church as the most successful built response tothe liturgical brief65 This sympathetic church building is a direct outcome of theparishrsquos brief and the architectrsquos well-tested and researched approach to liturgicalplanning66

ConclusionBrisbanersquos architects and their church parish clients took on the challenge of de-signing church buildings in a time of compounding change The 1960s saw thebeginnings of Brisbanersquos move towards modern expressive experimental monu-mental church designs as opposed to Queenslandrsquos more conservative responsesof the 1950s However by the late 1960s Brisbanersquos church designs had movedon again with a unique Queensland response to the sub-topical regional climateand using Queensland domestic scale and materials these designs focused on thechurchrsquos function as a communal place for worship The former contemplative anddevotional characteristics of immanence subsided to make way for participationcommunity and liturgically sympathetic characteristics Different planning formsand materiality were required by the churches as Brisbane church architecture en-tered the 1970s

Endnotes1 Professor John Macarthur and Dr Janina Gosseye (School of Architecture University of

Queensland) provided advice and review during the preparation of this article

2 The terms lsquoimmanencersquo and lsquotranscendencersquo can be defined such that the purpose of churchbuildings is for God to be immanent in them and for people to transcend through themImmanence is the emergence of inherent or spiritual qualities A church building needs tobe immanent of faith belief and God Transcendence is to go beyond the grasp of humanexperience God is transcendent as He exists beyond the limitations and materiality of thisearth It is through immanence and transcendence that people worship together and have

Queensland Review 241

httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpdxdoiorg101017qre201631Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore UQ Library on 11 Jan 2017 at 042109 subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use available at

Lisa Marie Daunt

their own relationship with God Achieving these this is what makes a church buildingunique from its residential secular and civic counterparts

3 George Everard Kidder Smith The new churches of Europe (London Architectural Publish-ing 1964) p 1

4 Changed to Kenmore Uniting Church in 1977

5 Peter Hammond Liturgy and architecture (London Barrie and Rockliff 1960)

6 Hammond Liturgy and architecture p 50

7 lsquoLiturgyrsquo is most simply defined by its Greek derivatives leiton (people) and ergon (work)A person is described as doing a liturgy when they perform a good work that benefitsthe community Over time only the unselfish acts associated with religion have retainedthis term The liturgy is the defining term of the acts performed as part of worship TheEucharist is the central act of the liturgy within the Catholic Church Protestant churchesfocus more on the lesson

8 Hammond Liturgy and architecture p 51 see also Edwin Heathcote and Iona SpensChurch builders (Chichester Academy Editions 1997) p 32

9 Cardinal Montini lsquoLiturgical formationrsquo Worship 33(3) (1959) 136ndash64

10 lsquoMassrsquo is also referred to as lsquothe servicersquo lsquocommunionrsquo is also referred to as lsquothe Eucharistrsquoand lsquothe Lordrsquos supperrsquo lsquosermonrsquo is also referred to as lsquothe lessonrsquo and lsquothe messagersquo Theseterms change depending upon denomination

11 Steven J Schloeder Architecture in communion Implementing the Second Vatican Councilthrough liturgy and architecture (San Francisco Ignatius 1990) p 20

12 Schloeder Architecture in communion p 16

13 See Hammond Liturgy and architecture and Judith Bennett et al lsquoVatican II mdash voice ofthe churchrsquo httpvatican2voiceorgdefaulthtm

14 These screens consisted of communion rails choir stalls and sometime organs

15 Noted by for example Hammond Liturgy and architecture and Heathcote and SpensChurch builders

16 Rather than procuring considered pieces of sacred art there was a tendency to purchasereligious art (eg statues) from religious furniture and art companies

17 Cited in Kenneth Frampton Modern architecture A critical history 3rd ed (LondonThames and Hudson 1980) p 223

18 Gregor Paulsson et al lsquoIn search of a new monumentalityrsquo Architectural Review 104(624)(1948) 121

19 Hammond Liturgy and architecture Hammond considered this to be the first church tocombine the liturgical and modern architecture movements Other authors also note thisbuildingrsquos importance but do not repeat Hammondrsquos statement

20 Robert Maguire and Keith Murray Modern churches of the world (London Studio Vista1965) p 14

21 Hammond Liturgy and architecture pp 59ndash60

22 However each nation set about rebuilding differently some taking the opportunity toexpress their national identity For a review of church building designs across Europe seeHeathcote and Spens Church builders

23 Heathcote and Spens Church builders p 63

24 GE Kidder Smith lsquoSix new European churchesrsquo Architectural Forum 99(6) (1953) 103cited in Gretchen Buggeln The suburban church Modernism and community in postwarAmerica (Minneapolis MN University of Minnesota Press 2015) p 4

242 Queensland Review

httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpdxdoiorg101017qre201631Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore UQ Library on 11 Jan 2017 at 042109 subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use available at

Brisbane church architecture of the 1960s

25 Hammond Liturgy and architecture p xv

26 Hammond Liturgy and architecture p 11 Buggeln The suburban church p 4

27 Victoria M Young Saint Johnrsquos Abbey Church Marcel Breuer and the creation of a modernsacred space (Minneapolis MN University of Minnesota Press 2014)

28 Louise Campbell Coventry Cathedral art and architecture in post-war Britain (OxfordClarendon Press 1996) p 2 The Western world is inclusive of Europe Great Britain andAmerica

29 The liturgical movement resulted in design brief changes including dialogue mass (usingthe language of the laity) mass facing the people (not the east wall) uninterrupted view tothe altar (high altar) removal of columns in nave (no side aisle separation) choirs movedso not between the altar and the congregation sanctuary lowered and framingscreensto sanctuary removed so less like a stage removal of distracting side altars one-roomworship space concelebrated mass (more than one priest able to celebrate mass at once)and longer altars for multiple priests shorter altars with a Eucharist focus of the altarcandles moved off the altar altar moved forward towards the congregation well forwardof the east wall rails between the altar and the congregation removed congregation seatedfanned on three sides and sometimes around the altar or wider plan eastndashwest liturgicalaxis not as commonly considered square oval elliptical plans ambo and priestrsquos chairsdesigned and located so that the priest does not have his back to the congregation chairsrather than pews devotional functions reduced (statues grottos side chapels stations ofthe cross pilgrimage shines) flexible multi-function spaces other educational and socialspaces as part of church buildings See Robert Proctor and Eamonn Canniffe Buildingthe modern church Roman Catholic church architecture in Britain 1955 to 1975 (FarnhamAshgate 2014) and Hammond Liturgy and architecture

30 Queensland chapter Royal Australian Institute of Architects publication committee andEJA Waller (eds) Buildings of Queensland (Brisbane Jacaranda Press 1959) p 55 HannahLewi David Nichols Philip Goad Julie Willis and Kate Darian-Smith lsquoMaking the moderncommunityrsquo in Hannah Lewi and David Nichols (eds) Community Building modernAustralia (Sydney UNSW Press) p 4 and John Macarthur Deborah van der Plaat JaninaGosseye and Andrew Wilson (eds) Hot modernism Queensland architecture 1945ndash1975(London Artifice 2015) p 168

31 Buggeln The suburban church Lewi et al lsquoMaking the modern communityrsquo p 8 PaulHogben and Judith OrsquoCallaghan (eds) Leisure space the transformation of Sydney 1945ndash1970 (Sydney New South Publishing 2014) p 131 Tracey Avery Peta Dennis and PaulaWhitman (eds) Cool The 60s Brisbane house (Brisbane School of Design and Built Envi-ronment QUT 2004) p 19

32 Lisa Andersen lsquoResponses in ecclesiology Examples of Brisbane church building designin the 1960srsquo unpublished undergraduate thesis University of Queensland Note LisaAndersen changed her name in 2001 to Lisa Daunt

33 Macarthur et al Hot modernism The impact of modern architecture increased with thenew university courses and the talented leadership within tertiary institutions includingRobert Cummings and Austrian emigre Karl Langer

34 Lewi et al lsquoMaking the modern communityrsquo

35 Macarthur et al Hot modernism

36 Climatic design features include verandahs eaves operable windows (including large baysof louvres in later 1960s church buildings) and shaded skylights These may seem ba-sic but it is the extent and careful integration of these that sets Queensland churchbuildings apart and this is what architects describe when interviewed about theirdesigns

Queensland Review 243

httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpdxdoiorg101017qre201631Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore UQ Library on 11 Jan 2017 at 042109 subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use available at

Lisa Marie Daunt

37 Department of Architecture University of Melbourne lsquoCross sectionrsquo no 80 (June 1959)noted in Macarthur et al Hot modernism p 260

38 The illustrations shown alongside this statement were St Stephenrsquos Church Coorparoo(HG Driver) Mary Immaculate Roman Catholic Church Brisbane (JP Donoghue c1928) Church of Latter Day Saints Coorparoo (1958) St Peterrsquos Church of EnglandProston (Fowell McConnell and Mansefield in association with Lucas and Cummings c1939) and St Matthewrsquos Church of England Townsville (Ford Hutton and Newell 1957)However these churches were all conservative with their lsquomodernrsquo design limited to theirsimplified form and material selection when compared to their more ornate timber andstone predecessors

39 Royal Australian Institute of Architects and Weller Buildings of Queensland p 35

40 William Lockett (ed) The modern architectural setting of the liturgy (London SPCK 1964)

41 Smith The new churches of Europe p 14

42 In 1955 Bill Douglas commenced private practice in Brisbane as William L DouglasArchitect and joined in partnership with Barry Barnes as Douglas and Barnes in Brisbaneand the Gold Coast in 1957 until the partnershiprsquos dissolution in 1972 when the practicereturned to Douglasrsquos sole ownership (UQFL289 Douglas Daly and Bottger collection1955ndash88 Andersen Responses to ecclesiology

43 The east altar location and west entry location do not appear to be a formal requirement inthe churches discussed in this article The Church of England and earlier church buildingsseem to have adhered to this church design lsquorulersquo more strictly Further research is requiredto ascertain whether this informed Brisbane modern church design

44 Jennifer Taylor 2004 lsquoThe Australian contextrsquo in Avery Dennis and Whitman Coolp 4

45 Macarthur et al Hot modernism p 177

46 Queensland Chapter Royal Australian Institute of Architects 1968 lsquoBuilding of the YearAward 1968 Church for the Presbyterian church Moggill Road Kenmorersquo Architecture inAustralia (Nov) 949

47 Queensland Chapter lsquoBuilding of the Year Award 1968rsquo 949

48 Kenmore Presbyterian Church The light in the heart of Kemmore 100 years of Presbyte-rian tradition and development in Kenmore and districts (Kenmore Kenmore PresbyterianChurch 1973) p 10

49 Marion Wilson 1986 lsquoModern church architecturersquo unpublished undergraduate thesisQUT p 117

50 See Deborah van der Plaat Andrew Wilson and Elizabeth Musgrave 2015 lsquoTwentieth-century (sub)tropical housing Framing climate culture and civilisation in post-warQueenslandrsquo in Macarthur et al Hot modernism

51 Gibson 22 June 2000 cited in Andersen Responses to ecclesiology

52 Comment from the jury report (J Dalton W Grieg J Ralton G Peterson and NMiller) cited in Royal Australian Institute of Architects lsquoBuilding of the Year Awardrsquop 949

53 Kerkin was reverend at Kenmore Uniting Church between 1964 and 1970 Gibson 22 June2000 cited in Andersen Responses to ecclesiology

54 Gibson cited in Wilson Modern church architecture p 117

55 Gibson 22 June 2000 cited in Andersen Responses to ecclesiology

56 Avery Dennis and Whitman Cool

244 Queensland Review

httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpdxdoiorg101017qre201631Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore UQ Library on 11 Jan 2017 at 042109 subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use available at

Brisbane church architecture of the 1960s

57 Philip Goad lsquoThe Australian house in the 1960srsquo in Tracey Avery Peta Dennis and PaulaWhitman (eds) Cool The 60s Brisbane house (Brisbane School of Design and Built Envi-ronment QUT 2004) p 9

58 Residence of the Year 1966 RAIA Queensland chapter awards cited in Philip Goad lsquoTheAustralian house in the 1960srsquo in Tracey Avery Peta Dennis and Paula Whitman (eds)Cool The 60s Brisbane house (Brisbane School of Design and Built Environment QUT2004) p 9 42 amp 45

59 Andersen Responses to ecclesiology and the work-in-progress listing for Frank L (FrancisLeo) Cullen 1909-91 lsquoArchitectural drawings 1930ndash1986rsquo in Frank Cullen Fryer MSSUniversity of Queensland

60 Hargraves 12 April 2000 cited in Andersen Responses to ecclesiology

61 Hargraves 12 April 2000 cited in Andersen Responses to ecclesiology

62 Hargraves 12 April 2000 cited in Andersen Responses to ecclesiology

63 Henze cited in Heathcote and Spens Church builders p 40

64 Hargraves 12 April 2000 cited in Andersen Responses to ecclesiology

65 Hargraves 12 April 2000 cited in Andersen Responses to ecclesiology

66 Hargraves 12 April 2000 cited in Andersen Responses to ecclesiology

Queensland Review 245

httpswwwcambridgeorgcoreterms httpdxdoiorg101017qre201631Downloaded from httpswwwcambridgeorgcore UQ Library on 11 Jan 2017 at 042109 subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use available at