what is so bad about modern-looking churches?
every church design is a reflection of the era and culture they were built it
I think it is reasonable and, to some degree, appropriate to make a church building look like it is associated with the people who built it, but I think that should not be the predominant characteristic of a church building, at least of a Catholic Church building.
Such important physical elements of the Catholic Church as the buildings in which we celebrate the Eucharist should be designed and maintained for the glory of God, and with a vivid recognition of the very important fact that the Catholic Church is the Church established by Jesus Christ almost 2,000 years ago. I think our church buildings should appear to be part of the continued unity we Catholics share, and have shared for almost 20 centuries.
Our unity is not merely with the people in our parish or diocese, or even merely with the people now practicing Christianity around the world, but with the apostles and all the angels and saints. I think it is not best to make a church building look mostly like it is the product of a group of people who existed, for example, in the fourth or the seventh decade of this or that century. I think it would be not best nor nearly best, for example, to design a church according to Frank Lloyd Wright’s unique architecture, not because Wright built ugly buildings (which I think he sometimes did, although some were beautiful), but it would be not best because Wright’s design styles were something of a fad. They were not always wildly exotic, but they were special and distinct to a particular human designer and era a few decades long.
I think a Catholic Church building should not vividly remind a person seeing it of American pop culture in the 1960’s, or of the “all glass and aluminum” facades of American big-business structures of the 1980’s. I think that, not because such appearances are inherently horrible, but because they are so very briefly fashionable and suggestive of a certain brief episode in human history.
I think Catholic churches should predominantly look like they are a manifestation of Catholic people’s attachment to Jesus Christ and to Catholics throughout history. I think it is entirely reasonable to erect a church building with architectural features that are typical over the long term for the part of the world where the church is built. For example, stucco facades are typical in Mexico and the American Southwest, and have been typical for centuries. To build a church there with a stucco facade would be to harmonize with many centuries of architecture for that area.
I have no doubt whatsoever that my sort of concern about this matter is reasonable for me or other individuals to have, AND that my concern need NOT be the same as the concern of others about such matters. That is to say, I have strong opinions about this, but I don’t think it is wrong if other people care barely a bit about how churches are designed, so long as they keep out the rain and snow.
Buildings are huge objects. They are seen readily and frequently. I think that because a Catholic church building is so plainly visible it should look obviously like what it is, namely a structure built for worship of God by Catholics. I think a church building should be recognizable as a church without having to study it or wonder what it might be. Surely what happens inside is more important than the shape and facade of a church building. I just think that the shape and facade should make it obvious what happens inside.
Peace be with you.
.
