Men Only - Effeminate Church Decor?

[InnocentIII]

mosher:

The problem is that we have banners that look like Martha Stewart banners with big white words with bubble lettering that say Celebrate or Hallelujia and cute angels and pretty saints in all of our churches. Banners and flags with spring depictions. I swear I go into some churches and it is like everything was created from Hobby Lobby or some other arts and crafts shop. I think that is what some people mean by effeminate. This is in contrast to older generations when there was marble and carved wood. Ominous statues of the maryters and beautiful depictions of our Lady. There was definatelly something more manly about the decor of the parish back then.

An example of what you are referring to is right here in our parish church. Built in the late 70’s it is a typical “hide your light under a bushel church” which is rather fascinating as it is the only church in town (all the others are in our sister town across the river). We have a rather impressive crucifix on the sanctuary wall (dead center) but the only statues were two very “artsy crafty” statues of Our Lady and St Joseph together off on a side wall. Then our holy priest (he came after the church was built) placed a large old-fashioned statue of Our Lady in the sanctuary. Guess which statue has people praying before it?? The reality is that these days everything is about interior design - that is decoration. What was called “decoration” in the old churches was really about teaching the faith, that is the statues, the high altars, the rails etc were all part and parcel of the Catholic faith not extraneous to it. Too much of today’s churches are all about decorative effects divorced from the faith. Here is our sanctuary www.cathchurch.net/nsw/parish/Smithtown’htm

 

[tjmiller]

When I was received into the Church in full communion, the altar backdrop at Easter Vigil was decked out with 100 artsy butterflies. Now that the question has been asked, I suppose in retrospect that it was pretty feminine. But the symbolism meant a great deal to me, and looking at the photographs still sends a shiver down my spine.

That being said, I still immensely prefer the dark, stark, militant Gothic beauty of the Cathedral of Avila.

 

[InnocentIII]

Al Masetti:

The Church Impotent

Thats the term I was looking for to contrast with the Church Militant. Thanks.

 

[InnocentIII]

I would like to make a general point on male and female based on my fifteeen years experience as a high school teacher in both all boy schools and co-ed schools. I have noted that there is a distinct change in attitudes during the early teens although I am sure it also begins earlier. Boys begin to develop an interest in girls as romantic objects but lose interest in them as friends. As a result there is a clear separation between “mates” and “girls”. At the same time boys are tugging away from their mother and seeking a male role model. Thus anything that is seen as “girly” will be rejected. When I was a High School student at an all boys school most of our teachers were men and we had no problem with subjects like History or Languages because “manly” men were seen to be involved in those subjects. (I remember that the most macho - in a good sense - male in the school was out french teacher). Today most teachers of Languages and History are either females or feminised males. Boys instinctively turn off. My experience with my female colleagues has been that they have no concept of the male need for male space. They have no understanding at all of male psychology. (males don’t understand women either I should add). In particular the male reaction to anything girly is simply to avoid it while female reaction to things too macho is to try and change it. I agree that there are many reasons for the lack of males in church but I wouldn’t underestimate the perceived feminisation of the church whether it be in the decor, the use of female altar servers, lectors whatever.

Perhaps an example. We have Adoration each Sunday evening. There is usually a group of about 3-4 males out of the 10-12 who attend. With the exception of myself, the males do not initiate the rosary but just do the responses. Then one Sunday Father was ill and for some reason no female turned up except my wife who is very shy about such things. All the men who never said a word at adoration took turns to lead the responses. It was the first and last time it happened. Men just do not like participating with women. It may be sad but it is definitely reality.

 

[tjmiller]

Count me in as a Catholic man who does like to participate with women.
I belong to a Third Order in which guys are outnumbered by gals, 10 to 1.
Why has that never bothered me?
Because the greatest disciples of Jesus Christ have always been women.
Starting with His Mother…

 

[Libero]

I would like to make a general point on male and female based on my fifteeen years experience as a high school teacher in both all boy schools and co-ed schools. I have noted that there is a distinct change in attitudes during the early teens although I am sure it also begins earlier. Boys begin to develop an interest in girls as romantic objects but lose interest in them as friends. As a result there is a clear separation between “mates” and “girls”. At the same time boys are tugging away from their mother and seeking a male role model. Thus anything that is seen as “girly” will be rejected. When I was a High School student at an all boys school most of our teachers were men and we had no problem with subjects like History or Languages because “manly” men were seen to be involved in those subjects. (I remember that the most macho - in a good sense - male in the school was out french teacher). Today most teachers of Languages and History are either females or feminised males. Boys instinctively turn off. My experience with my female colleagues has been that they have no concept of the male need for male space. They have no understanding at all of male psychology. (males don’t understand women either I should add). In particular the male reaction to anything girly is simply to avoid it while female reaction to things too macho is to try and change it. I agree that there are many reasons for the lack of males in church but I wouldn’t underestimate the perceived feminisation of the church whether it be in the decor, the use of female altar servers, lectors whatever.

That is really correct!!! - I am at an all boys school, and the subjects such as Technology, Sports and Sciences are always the high A level choices - apparently the others are more for whooses or girls.

Didn’t have an effect on me though. I am doing Politics, Philosophy, History and Religion.

 

[Libero]

Actually you would be surprised. I feel and would hope that I have a firm sense of the substantial nature of the Church and its objective truth. However, I went to mass yesterday at a parish that had “mood lighting” and a projector stating the words of hymns and responses for the people. These things and the general decor of the church made me never want to come back - it was too “sleep-over” atmosphere and not focused on the awe inspiring dignity of the Holy Mass. There were many other problems but this was enough to make me feel very uncomfortable.

Yeah, they tried to put a projector in our church once - it just didn’t work, it seemed so out of place

When I was received into the Church in full communion, the altar backdrop at Easter Vigil was decked out with 100 artsy butterflies. Now that the question has been asked, I suppose in retrospect that it was pretty feminine. But the symbolism meant a great deal to me, and looking at the photographs still sends a shiver down my spine.

That being said, I still immensely prefer the dark, stark, militant Gothic beauty of the Cathedral of Avila.

One cathedral I want to see for that reason is the Cathedral of Evereux, I saw a picture of it once, and it looks so awe inspiring…

 

[ChemicalBean]

InnocentIII:

…[Modern chuch decor] sets a tone that is subconsciously conveyed to men who instinctively dislike “frilly things” and who revolt at “Queer Eye for the Straight Guy” and who consequently feel uncomfortable in the church.

Whether this can be called “feminine” or not (depending on the definition of feminine you use) it is certainly “effeminite” in the original meaning of the word and that is a turn off for most men even if they can’t articulate why. We have lost that sense of the Church Militant and replaced it with the Church Humiliated.

(disclaimer: not a guy, but a couple of observations)

It seems to me that a lot of the people, men in particular, that I’ve been getting to know through our catholic student center’s liturgy team really like the “old” style of everything…church artwork, vestments, etc. I always just figured it was the timeless curiosity of youth for something new…in this case, something so old that it’s new. (Perhaps, this is why 40 years ago it was the exact opposite…) I never thought about it as a desire to re-masculinize the church.

But one thing that I find ironic is that the people who would think our churches are too feminine would likely advocate a return to the use of highly embroidered chasubles under frilly-hemmed albs, surplices, and cassocks. We want to have “manly-men” priests and make them wear that? It may be beautiful, but that’s about as girly as you can get without wearing a ballgown outright!

Actually, I tend to think of the modern, simplified, “naked”-looking church interiors as more masculine. Somehow they look earthier, more rugged, more raw, and I would associate that with masculinity. And this new look: it certainly isn’t the Church Militant, but it isn’t the Church Humiliated either. Perhaps it reflects the Church Humble.

 

[mosher]

(disclaimer: not a guy, but a couple of observations)

It seems to me that a lot of the people, men in particular, that I’ve been getting to know through our catholic student center’s liturgy team really like the “old” style of everything…church artwork, vestments, etc. I always just figured it was the timeless curiosity of youth for something new…in this case, something so old that it’s new. (Perhaps, this is why 40 years ago it was the exact opposite…) I never thought about it as a desire to re-masculinize the church.

But one thing that I find ironic is that the people who would think our churches are too feminine would likely advocate a return to the use of highly embroidered chasubles under frilly-hemmed albs, surplices, and cassocks. We want to have “manly-men” priests and make them wear that? It may be beautiful, but that’s about as girly as you can get without wearing a ballgown outright!

Actually, I tend to think of the modern, simplified, “naked”-looking church interiors as more masculine. Somehow they look earthier, more rugged, more raw, and I would associate that with masculinity. And this new look: it certainly isn’t the Church Militant, but it isn’t the Church Humiliated either. Perhaps it reflects the Church Humble.

I can see your perception but I think that most men would agree that it is not the case. A previous poster noted the Gothic (and I would and the Baroque) styles where perhaps the most manly and at the same time the most feminine. There seemed to be a beautiful harmony in those styles that greatly surpassed the Romanesque (very masculine but void of femininity) and definitely surpasses the modern trends. The problem found in the “naked”-looking churches (Art Deco and Minimalism and even Deconstructionism) are that they are contrary to our faith – iconoclasm. So, what is the solution? It seems that a return to the “old” styles would find the balance that is so necessary today to help the participation and attendance (and spirituality) of both sexes. It would help to de-hyper-emotionalize the faith and would again have a didactic (teaching) purpose.

Good books on the subject are:

Heaven in Stone and Glass
Architecture in Communion

sorry I don’t have the authors because my copies are loaned out.