The Great Grotto Debate

Following is a copy of an e-mail I sent to Steve Butland concerning the proposed "Grotto" in Bellevue Park.

I share it with you as a preface to my further thoughts on the matter.

---

I wanted to voice my concerns regarding the proposed "Grotto" at Bellevue Park.

I was initially concerned that this Grotto, dedicated to the Virgin Mary, would be a monument to the Roman Catholic faith, and would be inappropriate in a city-owned park for that reason. If this was a more ecumenical installation, reflecting elements of other faith communities, I might be persuaded to support this project.

However, Mr Colizza's explanation and description, despite his assertion that it "does serve the public at large," only reinforces its reflection the Roman Catholic faith.

As well, this Grotto is not what I envisioned from earlier descriptions. To me a grotto is a small feature.

The City's News Release states that approval was given to use a "small portion" of Prince Island, and yet the drawings that accompany Mr Colizza's letter show it taking up MOST of that tract of land.

With the number of Roman Catholic churches that have closed there must be property owned by the Church which could be used for a Grotto such as has been proposed. I feel that such a denomination-specific installation would be better located on land owned by that faith community.

---

As I said in my letter, I have no objection to a quiet, contemplative space for people to go and meditate or pray. I do not object to such an installation being built on public land.

However, I do object to such an installation being very obviously and deliberately reflecting the beliefs of one particular faith group.

While our city may have been named in honour of the Virgin Mary, placing a statue of her in a public installation is not respectful of the beliefs of other faith communities.

Aside from having a figure of Mary kneeling in a Crèche at Christmas, Protestant denominations do not venerate Mary in the way the Roman Catholic Church does.

How would this grotto address the beliefs of our Jewish citizens? Or our Muslim, Buddhist, or Hindu citizens?

Another problem occurs to me as I write this: if the statue happens to get vandalized there will be a hew and cry raised about "intolerance." Such vandalism might be the result of intolerant attitudes, but also might simply be the act of the sort of hooligans that damage bus shelters, mailboxes, and playground equipment.

Such an installation ought to be as "vandal proof" as is possible, which in my opinion precludes any kind of statuary.

The other consideration is the "thin edge of the wedge" notion.

What if other faith groups want to raise money to build their own grotto?

What if Essar Steel seeks permission to build a Hindu shrine in Bellevue Park? Would people be as comfortable with statues of Brahma, Lakshmi, and Vishnu?

For that matter, what of the atheists and agnostics? They might also appreciate a quiet spot set aside in the park for contemplation, but I'm sure they would prefer it devoid of any overt religious symbology.

Where do we draw the line? Or do we even bother?

I have read comments from people who decry those who object to this grotto as "rednecks." There may be an element of intolerance in some people's objections, but I believe that many people who do object do so not out of intolerance, but because they recognize the need for such an installation to appeal to a wider audience.

I am a church-goer. I am very involved in my own congregation and within the wider community of the United Church.

Part of our faith tradition is what's commonly referred to as "The Great Commission," where Jesus told his disciples to go forth and spread the good news.

There's a difference, though, between sharing the good news and thrusting it in people's faces.

There's no denying that many religions have gone overboard on the overt displays of faith: statues, steeples, cathedrals of stone, steel or glass.

But while these stand in public view, they are not located on public land.

I do understand the intent of the grotto and, as I said above, I would have no problem with it if it was simply a "spiritual" spot, and reflected a more ecumenical standpoint.

My suggestion is two-fold:

1) Either build it as designed but without the Catholic elements (the statue and the name); or,

2) Find a more suitable location, perhaps on private, donated land, or land already owned by the Roman Catholic Church.

If it is to be placed on public land, it needs to speak to all people, not just one segment of the community.


But… that's just my opinion.