The Cross in the Chapel: Rethinking Cate’s Traditions

By Paloma Rudnicki '27

The Katharine Thayer Cate and Curtis Wolsey Cate Chapel, built in 1961, was dedicated by Mr. Cate to his wife, who passed away in 1953. Despite popular belief, she is not buried there. The Chapel also won national awards when it was built—the architect George Russell won the AIA award for Church Architecture, Class III for his design. Its unique arches and large stained-glass windows have set it apart as what some consider the most beautiful and iconic building on campus.

When the Chapel was built, Cate was a Christian school, with 10-minute services every weekday and an hour-long service each Sunday evening held in the Johnson Library. These were then held in the Chapel after it was built. The services were Episcopalian, yet when the Chapel was built, it wasn’t consecrated as an Episcopal church in order to keep Cate non-denominational—allowing students from all faiths to appreciate the Chapel. The December, 1961 Alumni Bulletin mentions that although most students were Episcopalian; Roman Catholic, Orthodox Jews, Mormons, and other protestants were able to use the Chapel to practice their own religion and were excused to celebrate their major holidays. Stanley Woodworth, a former Cate teacher, noted in a speech that there was “an increasing aversion to formalized religion” in the late ‘60s, which led to different services from all religions being held.

The space was also used to host many distinguished speakers, like politicians and philosophers. Several Cate traditions, such as the Cum Laude initiations, the Baccalaureate Service, and the now-forgotten Ceremony of Carols at Christmastime, were created in the Chapel’s walls. The Chapel does also hold a lot of religious significance, as it was used for baptisms, confirmations, weddings, and memorial services over the years. In fact, Mr. Cate’s memorial service was held there, and his ashes rest under a plaque in the floor of the Chapel that says CWS (1884-1976). 

However, despite this rich religious past, Cate is now firmly a secular school. The Chapel is no longer respected through silence or formal attire. Religious services aren’t held there. So why are weekly meetings mandatory in a place originally used to practice one religion, under a large symbol of that faith? This is the question Cate students have been debating recently.

The person at the heart of these debates has been Ian Sheshunoff ‘26. He used his Servons speech to bring attention to an issue that has bothered him since he first visited the school in seventh grade and noticed the large cross in the back of the Chapel. He felt that it didn’t reflect Cate’s values of being a secular school. In an interview, he explained that, “In an ideal world, the cross gets removed. I think that at the end of the day, we are a secular school, and we value being a secular school and we value giving all students equal ability to practice and feel equally comfortable in this space as with all spaces on campus.”

As someone who does not practice Christianity, Ian asks that students of Christian faith consider what it feels like to sit in front of a major symbol of another faith. Another non-Christian, Chelsea Newlove ‘28, described what it felt like to perform in front of it last year with Chorale. “I was performing under cross, and I was watching a video and I'm like, ‘Wow, I'm under a cross.’ And I don't disagree with that religion. I think it's a beautiful religion, but it’s the fact that my religion is different. It's not that I don't want to be associated with Christianity or a cross, but it's just that I think it's not what I stand for at the end of the day.” 

But Ian also urges students of other faiths to consider how Christian students feel about the issue. The heart of the issue, as he puts it, is that “there's a lot of symbolism in the removal of the symbol just as there's symbolism in the existence of a symbol itself.” Many students feel removing it would be disrespectful to the history of their religion and the history of the Chapel itself, like Maree Hawkins ‘28. Citing the Chapel’s religious history, she said,  "I think that the cross should remain in the chapel without being covered or obstructed. The chapel is a Holy, sacred space and was created as such. It carries tradition, and it was built with the cross very purposefully. The cross is a symbol of love and sacrifice, and it shouldn't be taken down or covered.”

Maddox Tanaka ‘27 brought up the fact that the Chapel is a memorial site to defend the cross. “I think my issue is less with having it there, but more with removing it. Because, as far as I'm aware, it's the burial place of Mr. Cate and his wife, who are religious, and the cross effectively marks their grave. I feel like it would be a little disrespectful to remove it because of that.” Many others gave a similar reason, like Brady Mogenson ‘26. “The thing for me is, from what I know, it's a memorial chapel, even if it's non-denominational. And so taking it down is what I find an issue with.” Madeline Losey ‘26 agrees that we shouldn’t remove the cross. “Mr. Cate is  buried in there. We’ve got to honor his spirit.”

Others, like Ben Elkin ‘27 cited the architecture of the Chapel and its history as a reason to leave the cross up. “I think we should keep it up there. Not because of the religious factor of it, but just because of the historical context, where that chapel was made for Curtis Cate's wife. And obviously it's no longer an actual religious center, there's no masses or church there or anything. And I think that’s very understandable, but also, I think taking down a lot of the building, there is just no reason to. And I think a much better compromise is adding curtains or something.”

This is the solution many students have come to regarding the cross in the chapel: to put up a curtain that could be opened or closed according to the situation and discretion of the Servons speaker. Out of 35 respondents to my survey, 23 respondents wanted the cross to stay up, but 16 of those suggested a cover as a compromise for the community. In this scenario, the cross remains in its spot at the back of the chapel, but a curtain is rigged that could be easily put in front of the cross if someone requests. Some people are wary that it could cause judgement about who decides to keep it open and who closes it. As Chelsea put it, “If there were to be a curtain, if it's a Servons speech, it shouldn't be seen as disrespectful to close it and it shouldn't be seen as disrespectful to have it open. It's truly up to the person and that should not be a decision that people will judge. We want to make Cate an inclusive place.”

Other issues people have brought up with this compromise is the fact that the Chapel can never be fully secular. Lauren Hubbs ‘26 brought up the fact that the Chapel is in and of itself a religious site. “You also need to remember, just putting a curtain over a cross isn't going to change the significance of the chapel. There are crosses throughout the chapel, there's someone buried under the chapel. Just the space itself, it's more than just a cross and you're not taking that away by removing the cross in it. I think that that is the history of the chapel. There's something more I’d like to say. There's something more within that chapel and putting a curtain over the cross is not going to change that.”

Some have used the rest of the Chapel’s architecture to argue that the cross should just stay up, since you can never remove all signs of Christianity. Six respondents to my survey said that moving Servons could be a solution to people who are uncomfortable with speaking in front of a cross. Maree offered that, “In our case, the cross does not command prayer or belief in Christianity. If the cross causes offense to any students as we gather for Servons, then the solution is to move the Servons location, not to defile or cover the cross in the Chapel." However, others have rebutted this point, saying that the Chapel is a beautiful and spiritual place that has created an atmosphere of community and respect, making it a suitable place to hold such a personal tradition. 

Others have pointed out the fact that the cross in the back is a much more dominant form of symbology and so matters more than the rest of the Chapel, like faculty member Mx. LaMontagne. “There's something about that big cross...It's large, it's dominant, it's not subtle. And so, for me, I'm like, if there are people who are having a reaction to this, and I think part of the reaction is how prominent it is, that possibly covering it might be a solution that's less drastic than taking it down. But I just want everyone to feel welcome and included in the space. And I don't think the answer is to get rid of every cross that's in the space, because I think that's impractical, and overkill, and I don't think anybody's asking for that.” Ian Sheshunoff also added that despite not being able to remove all signs of Christianity—like the crosses on the doorhandles, the lights, and the stained-glass—the large cross in the back should still be considered by the students. “We shouldn't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. At the end of the day, we do treat these with different significance in our lives. So we should treat them with different significance when considering our policy plans around them.”

Since the Chapel will always have a spiritual influence on campus, another idea on how to deal with it is to bring back the celebration of all religions. Madeline brought this up to me first, an amused smile on her face as she said, “Cross in the chapel, right? You get rid of it, that's very cool. There are still the tiny cross sculptures all over the chapel. There are still the Bibles and the pews and there's still the giant red cross that’s in the stained glass. So unless you completely renovate the chapel and change the stained-glass, there’s always going to be some religious imagery. And I think while it shouldn't have been there in the first place, getting rid of the cross in the back isn't necessarily going to solve all of those problems. That is why I think, yes, we totally should cover the cross, but I think you should add other religious imagery there. Like, for example, for Hispanic Heritage Month, we have all of the flags in the dining hall. I think it should be similar in the chapel where instead of just covering up the cross—because it's already a religious space, you can't change that at this point—just embrace it and kind of like bring all religions into it instead of taking one away.”

Human Developement teacher Mrs. Mack brought up the same point, as she remembered how all religions used to use the space to give their own services. “I always wonder, why not bring other faiths into the chapel? Why not have flags all through? It's such a colorful place as is. You know, celebrate all these other faiths in there also, because it is non-denominational now. Like, we don't practice one faith. So have all the different symbols, like flags. But like something like that would be really make it more inclusive.” Mx. LaMontagne referred to this idea as, “Adding rather taking away.”

At the end of the day, there is no perfect solution to the cross in the Chapel. There is no perfect agreement or compromise that makes everyone happy. Everyone has unique and equally valid viewpoints on the significance of the cross, on the Chapel, on the actions Cate should take. What is needed now is communication. Until a majority consensus is reached, action can’t and shouldn’t be taken against the cross. Ben called for unity on the issue to remove the cross “if a two thirds majority says, ‘this impacts me religiously, like I'm not okay with this.’ And I think that it's totally fine, that if the majority of the students want it gone, then you can take it out. I just think that it's important to really consider, why do I want this gone?”

Everyone’s opinion needs to be heard and met with understanding in order for us to move forward and communicate about this. As several people put it, there has been so much change to the school this year, and many students have been left feeling like their opinions aren’t going anywhere. Lauren sees this as an opportunity to make our voices heard. “Where is this going? What are you taking from us? What is changing? Because right now, there's a whole lot of change. I think the cross could be a very cool example of students coming to compromise, but it’s bigger than the cross.”

Ian said that “decisions are made by those who show up, and I hope everyone on campus shows up on this. I hope everyone has an opinion, and, to anyone who's reading, I hope that if you haven't made up your mind yet, listen and talk to people who do, because I'm sure you'll find someone whose ideas resonate with you.”