International Conference, October 7-11 2009. Religious Houses: A Legacy

Rationale

Outline of themes, details of selected questions

Throughout Europe and the Americas, religious communities have been driven by falling recruitment to leave the convents, abbeys, monasteries or missions in which they have traditionally lived and worked. Increasingly abandoned or in the process of becoming so, monumental religious houses still occupy strategic positions in the regional landscape or urban fabric, and maintain an important place in the collective memory and imagination of our societies. These soon-to-be-abandoned buildings also arouse the greed of many developers. The conversion of such structures into high-end office buildings, luxury housing and prestige hotels fires their imagination, particularly as the religious houses are often located on highly desirable sites, shielded by walls of green space—the very lungs of the cities that now surround them—or replete with intimate gardens, cloisters or courtyards protected and preserved from the modern hustle and bustle.

However relatively simple it may appear—technically, at least—the conversion of these convents, abbeys, or monasteries punctuating our human landscape is nonetheless fraught with weighty questions of heritage. Often inherited from distant historical periods whose architectural imprint they bear, treasured by individuals who zealously defend them as neighborhood oases, sought out for human rituals or as part of various spiritual quests, and often still invested with a genuine tradition and the heritage claims arising from it, religious houses become flashpoints for conflict when, abandoned by their religious community, they are threatened with demolition, replacement or outright appropriation for commercial or private purposes. But although everyone agrees on the landscape, architectural, historical or memorial aspects that might in most cases justify government involvement in the vocational change of convents, abbeys or monasteries, their abandonment and possible reassignment in a secularized society result in a broad spectrum of particular challenges, given the financial, legal, urban and even museological contributions required in changing their ownership and use.

The vocational metamorphosis of convents, abbeys, monasteries and missions calls forth questions on three levels—questions of ownership, questions of use and questions of memory. These are the broad themes that structure the questions we have chosen in putting into perspective the future of these buildings, the character of the surroundings (e.g., urban, peri-urban, rural) they helped create, and the legacy that they constitute both in space and in the collective imagination.

To begin, we will examine the ownership structure of religious houses and its impact on public appropriation and possible designation as heritage. This is particularly significant, given that the debate over the conversion of religious houses involves not only the buildings—as well as some of their furnishings—but also the surrounding natural or green spaces, often subject to considerable developmental pressure. The changeover from one ownership regime (a religious congregation or community) to another (an organization of civil society) involves numerous financial and urban planning issues, including whether to grant property tax credits, zoning, landscape and urban protection mechanisms, and others. How can the urban and fiscal ownership framework, with the financial levers it commands and the uses it prescribes, encourage or discourage the heritagization of religious houses?

Second, any consideration of the future of convents, abbeys, monasteries and missions must address the various aspects of how these properties might be used. Although turning these relatively multifunctional buildings and the broad parks that surround them into something new would appear to be simpler than converting a church, for example, the new functions might nonetheless conflict with some of the many heritage dimensions of the properties. Outside the buildings, conversion interposes itself into the relationship between the religious house and the very urban or peri-urban surroundings whose development it motivated; the question of use thus gives rise to a reflection involving the very meaning of the city. Within the buildings, conversion interferes with the buildings’ meaning, since in all cases the property’s function in civil society runs counter to symbolic dimensions that structure the whole, whether this involves using the main chapel—often the central feature of the structure—for purposes other than religious services, or more generally when the new function and the various religious symbols characteristic of the religious complex (e.g., stained-glass windows, iconography, cemeteries) are juxtaposed. In short, how do we reconcile the use we make of religious houses with the symbolic content that justifies their heritagization in the first place?

Third, the future of convents, abbeys, monasteries and missions poses a threat to the perpetuation of memory. The conversion problem thus involves both the tangible and intangible contents of the structure. The former are the archives, libraries and carefully preserved collections, which are sometimes highly sought-after treasure troves whose mere preservation puts pressure on our collective ability to store and classify according to recognized standards. Yet the contents of religious houses are also the memory of religious life and, more generally, the work that was embodied within the converted houses. How, when the religious community has departed these walls, can we perpetuate the memory of its activities as historical events? How, in spite of secularization, can we preserve and give value to the memory of the religious orders’ members?

Organization

According to these three themes—ownership, use and memory—and the issues they raise, the conference will be an opportunity to assemble, confront, assess, and verify the theoretical and practical feasibility of our proposals, which, both historically and for today, break new ground regarding the conversion and management of religious houses. Because this involves confronting the experiences of researchers, decision makers and professionals, the work of the conference will be structured into panels focused on one of the three themes, poster presentations and screenings of documentaries about conversion of religious houses.

This conference is thus meant to funnel ideas that will contribute to reflection and help resolve the problems posed throughout Western countries. by the abandonment of convents, abbeys and monasteries The gathering will therefore require researchers, decision makers and professionals to contribute through activities and discussions designed to stimulate and multiply the exchange of ideas.

An anthology will also be published and distributed to all participants before the conference. To ensure everyone has the same basic information about the diverse dimensions of the targeted problem and precise data to feed discussions, the anthology will contain a summary of our current knowledge on the questions and issues involved in the conversion of religious houses. A program of sightseeing tours will also allow participants to experience—and we hope, discuss—the solutions explored as applied to actual cases. In addition, the proceedings of the Conference will be published following the event by the Presses de l’Université du Québec, in the form of a scientific anthology.