Liverpool - Two cathedrals and a Slavery Museum

Metropolitan Cathedral, Liverpool

We visited two very different cathedrals in Liverpool, the first of which was the Metropolitan Cathedral. This was very much a case of third time lucky.


They first tried to build it in 1850, on a different site, and in a gothic style by Edward Welby Pugin, son of Augustus Pugin, who designed the interior of the Palace or Westminster. This fell through due to lack of funds.

Lutyens Crypt, Metropolitan Cathedral, Liverpool

They tried again in 1933, with Sir Edwin Lutyens. He had a grand design, but although the crypt was built, WWII intervened, and the rest of the plans were abandoned.


You can normally visit the crypt for a fee, but it was mostly closed off when we were there, we could just dip in to one of the four rooms.

Metropolitan Cathedral, Liverpool

The cathedral was finally finished in 1967, to a design by Frederick Gibberd, and is rather more modern that the those early designs. The inside continues the contemporary feel, with Sean Rice's fourteen 'Way of the Cross' bronzes, and other works.

Liverpool Cathedral, Liverpool

The other one was the Liverpool Cathedral, which was in fact completed in 1978, later than the Metropolitan Cathedral, after taking 74 years to build.



Despite its newness, it looks far more traditional in style, although it combines that nicely with more modern touches both inside and out.



It is the largest cathedral in the UK, and the fifth largest in the world, with around 1700m² of stained glass. It was designed by Giles Gilbert Scott, who was only 22 years old at the time, and he was also one of the two architects, the other being George Bodley.

Liverpool Cathedral, Liverpool

The cathedral has some modern artwork inside, including pieces by five members of the Royal Academy of Art. Something that I understand, but find slightly incongruous, was the large shop and café that are situated right in the midst of the place.

Liverpool Cathedral café and shop, Liverpool

I know that visitors want these things, and as the cathedral is free to enter, they need them to make money for the upkeep, but do they have to be so obtrusive? I'm not especially familiar with the bible, but I seem to recall something about Jesus throwing the traders out of the temple. I am sure that there is a good argument for having it inside, perhaps to encourage people to spend longer 'with God', (or perhaps just to spend more money,) but for me, it made it feel a bit too commercialised, and less like the religious sanctuary that I associate with churches.

Liverpool Cathedral, Liverpool

They also have an interesting motto of "Liverpool Cathedral is a safe place to do risky things in Christ's service". I'm not sure quite what risky goings-on take place here, but it sounds more interesting than I generally find most church activities to be!



So of the two, which did I prefer? Well. despite the shop and restaurant, I liked the Liverpool Cathedral. I liked the more traditional shape and materials, and thought they combined really well with the more modern touches.

(More photos under the rest of the post)





Moving on from the cathedrals, to a subject that is the direct opposite of the sort of benevolent and kind behaviour that you would expect from a church. I'm talking here about our visit to the International Slavery Museum. If you're wondering why such a thing would be here, well of course many of the slave ships docked in Liverpool, so there is a clear connection to the historical events that it looks at.

The Museum had some really good aspects, with a strong focus on West African slavery, the history and culture of the people enslaved, the terrible Middle Passage voyage, and also the legacy of slavery. That last part was probably one of the more interesting elements, and it is a bit of a shame that they didn't take it even further, as it is an important part of understanding both overt racism, and in particular, the more complex issues of institutionalised racism, prejudice, and white privilege.

The last of those is a much used term these days, but very few people really understand what it means, seeing it as a suggestion that white people are better off financially and have an easy life, which of course many white people do not. But in fact the terms refers more to the societal disadvantages that black people face, that come from our history of regarding them as inferior, as possessions, and as dangerous, which was fundamental part of why we once considered slavery acceptable.

That kind of ingrained 'knowledge' has seeped into black and white people over the years, and it will take real effort to dislodge it. Most people know that slavery was wrong, and know - even those that are actually racist and don't agree with it - that black people should have equal rights, but the museum could have done more to widen that understanding to those aspects that are less obvious.

The Black Lives Matter movement is a classic example. It is a contentious issue, largely because many white people don't understand what it means. It isn't saying that black lives matter more, or that white lives don't matter. What it is saying is that, at present, too many people seem to regard black lives as less important, just as they did when they decided black people could be used as slaves, or during times of segregation.

And let's face it, inn the USA especially, they aren't wrong.  There has been a raft cases there of pretty atrocious killings of black people by the public - and more importantly by police - which have been defended because the killer 'felt afraid' of the person 'because they were black'. Not for any other reason. In those cases it seems pretty clear that, if the person had been white, they wouldn't have been afraid, they would have treated the white person more circumspectly, and they absolutely would not have just shot them.

That kind of evidence shows why we need reminding that Black Lives Matter too. After all, it is only once this movement started up that it finally brought attention to these cases. Our 'white privilege' is the difference between a white person generally seeing a police officer as someone to look to for help, and who will recognise us as an innocent victim, whereas a black person's experience is too often that they are stopped because they look suspicious, more likely to be assumed to be a criminal than a victim, and more likely to be shot.

White mothers don't have to school their sons in how to behave if you get stopped by the police - whereas is the USA especially, black mothers do. It is a privilege that we don't even know that we have, but black people certainly know that they don't! And whilst it is undoubtedly worse there, lets not pretend this is just the USA - we have some pretty dodgy sounding cases here in the UK too.

The other aspect that the museum touched on, especially in terms of places like Bangladesh, is modern day slavery, with sweat shops and forced labour, that is the awful truth behind far too many of our cheap clothes and other goods these days. Where it again could have done more, was in raising awareness of the issue of modern day slavery here in the UK.

Of course it is rather more discreet these days, but whether it be women trapped into the sex trade, people held in domestic service, or gangs of men being forced into working as labourers or fruit pickers, it is here, and in 2017, in a supposedly civilised country, that's a pretty horrendous thought.

That said, they are just areas where I felt more could be usefully covered, but I still think the museum was good, and it is worth visiting.

Lutyens Crypt, Metropolitan Cathedral, Liverpool

Lutyens Crypt, Metropolitan Cathedral, Liverpool

Metropolitan Cathedral, Liverpool

Metropolitan Cathedral, Liverpool

Metropolitan Cathedral, Liverpool

Metropolitan Cathedral, Liverpool

Metropolitan Cathedral, Liverpool

Metropolitan Cathedral, Liverpool

Metropolitan Cathedral, Liverpool

Liverpool Cathedral, Liverpool

Liverpool Cathedral, Liverpool

Liverpool Cathedral, Liverpool

Liverpool Cathedral, Liverpool