Architectural Beauty and Christ’s Nature

  • Thread starter Thread starter joshringsell
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

joshringsell

Guest
What do you guys think of this criticism of traditional style churches:

Ornate and beautiful churches over-emphasise the divine nature of Christ and do not emphasise enough the human nature. Human life is not constantly about beauty and richness but is struggle and hardship for many. Therefore why decorate church buildings for He who is fully human and fully divine in such a way that it seems as if He is only divine? Christians should worship in a place that is modest with no real extravagance, but similarly no real depravity.
 
Last edited:
Personally I imagine it must be a wonderful thing to work on some part of a church creating an object of beauty as part of worship to our Heavenly Father. I feel our churches should reflect the great esteem we have for God in the architecture and interiors.
I also feel that that is a wonderful juxtaposition with the simplicity of our basic tenets and faith, and with the humility we should feel when approaching the altar.
 
I think it’s a bunch of bologna.

You cannot “Over-Empahsize” the divine nature of Christ. It is that divine nature which allows us to be redeemed and enter into eternity.

What’s more, the ornate nature of those Churches serves a dual purpose, both honoring God, and teaching the laity. In a well designed Church, the ornamentation serves the purpose of recounting Biblical tales. This is especially important when most people are illiterate and cannot read the Bible themselves.

That ornament they speak of as depravity is designed specifically to elevate the hearts and minds of the people to God. This person doesn’t know what they’re talking about, and is attempting to force the modernist / secular humanist distortion of asceticism onto Churches. They are, simply put, wrong.
 
Last edited:
Sounds like someone fishing for another reason to bash Catholicism. Nothing more.
 
Couldn’t we use the same logic to say that a really modest church over emphasizes Christ’s humanity?

Brawkok
 
Something like this(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
You can’t over-emphasize Christ’s Divinty, and I don’t think people who prefer very ornate churches are trying to do such a thing.
 
I can agree but I believe both simple and ornate churches are beautiful and for me all that really matters is that I can go into a church that is ad orientium with a crucifix and pray in front of the blessed sacrament
 
joshringsell said:
What do you guys think of this criticism of traditional style churches:

Ornate and beautiful churches over-emphasise the divine nature of Christ and do not emphasise enough the human nature. Human life is not constantly about beauty and richness but is struggle and hardship for many. Therefore why decorate church buildings for He who is fully human and fully divine in such a way that it seems as if He is only divine? Christians should worship in a place that is modest with no real extravagance, but similarly no real depravity.
Click to expand...
I disagree with it. I think we should put more care into the architecture and decor of God’s house than we do of our own homes and places of work.

If our home or space of work is more beautiful then our Church, something is wrong.

Beauty is of God. Therefore, it’s only right to celebrate beauty when worshiping God.
 
Chicken_Pigeon said:
Couldn’t we use the same logic to say that a really modest church over emphasizes Christ’s humanity?
Click to expand...
Or could say that a simple church emphasizes Christ’s humility. After all, He lowered Himself to the lowest of the low to redeem us.
 
But what makes Christ is the fact that He is divine too. That’s the more interesting part

Bokbok?
 
Last edited:
Yes and both parts are inseparable.

Plain churches are not some new post-Vatican II modernist plot. They have a long tradition in the monastic world.
 
Yeah I don’t agree with that at all. Especially as an artist and designer myself who believes the highest form of art is that which explicitly glorifies God. What better place to do that than a church? Art and beauty exist in a church for everyone to enjoy, not just a few things here and there created and purchased as art to sit in someone’s private collection, enjoyed only by a few. Would we all not benefit from having a beautiful place to sit and be with God despite struggles and hardships?

I don’t think there is a rulebook for how churches have to be as far as how ornate they need to be – but the premise that everything should be stripped down and simple would have robbed us of some of the world’s most beautiful art and architecture in history.

Quite frankly that attitude gives this implicit idea that art doesn’t matter and should have no prominent place and denies us artists our God given calling. Everyone’s greatest talents and resources – our creativity, our music, our designs, everything – comes from God and were meant to be shared to bring joy to others and to glorify Him. Beautiful churches are places that bring the most out of our talents, they are our gifts and expression of love to Him, and I believe that is pleasing to Him.
 
Last edited:
Part of having artistically elaborate Churches is to symbolize the Church’s immense spiritual and temporal treasure.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top