Modern vs Traditional Church Architecture

  • Thread starter Thread starter PietroPaolo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
CB_Catholic said:
You have misinterpreted me. I do not like ALL modern architecture, you would hardly call me a fan, and I do not dislike ALL traditional architecture, there are many beautiful traditional churches around here that I like. I have seen some ugly (to me) modern churches with weird-looking statuary and paintings, and others are beautiful with their use of light, simple but elegant furnishings, restful colors, placement of the altar, etc. On the other side, I find gothic and baroque architecture too busy and too distracting. There is too much going on for my tastes, I can’t take it in. But the subject is not that important to my faith life, although I love and appreciate art.

Any “indifference” you may perceive is to the effect a building has on my faith. I am more interested in a person-Jesus Christ. There is nothing abnormal or unusual about that.
Click to expand...
I tend to agree. Good post.
 
I like them long and straight, parallel walls to the isles.

But the biggest key is paintings and / or stained glass windows of Saints or events, things that actually bring to life what is the history of the Church (history of this world).

I do not like it when Stations of the Cross are hidden in the back of the Church as if they are an embarassing necessity.
 
Brandon_Cal said:
I doubt this will be of much help (as I even admit it defies any discrete definition), but I prefer churches that look like churches. Whether modern or tradition, as long as I can tell by passing by them (without reading any signs) that they are indeed churches. I’m not very fond of church buildings that look like circus tents, auditoriums, or business edifices.

Now, I graciously admit that I can’t quite explain what makes a church “look like a church”. It’s just one of those things that you recognize upon experience. It’s almost like a quale of sorts. 🙂
Click to expand...
It’s long, but if you watch this you’ll be able to describe why. Let’s just say, you’ve got good instincts. 👍

instituteofcatholicculture.org/the-nature-of-beauty-the-catholic-tradition-beauty-sacred-architecture/
 
Pax Christi!

Gothic is great! Romanesque is good. After the 13th century, everything went downhill.

Some old Scandanavian churches look good. I’d like to see one in person sometime.

Most everything else disappoints me. The cathedral of the Holy Family in Barcelona is weird. Sometimes I like it. Other times…

Nôtre Dame de Chartres and St. Severin in Paris. THEM!!

God bless.

P.S. If your parish church doesn’t have rose windows, move to another parish!

GB
 
svid2 said:
Pax Christi!

Gothic is great! Romanesque is good. After the 13th century, everything went downhill.

Some old Scandanavian churches look good. I’d like to see one in person sometime.

Most everything else disappoints me. The cathedral of the Holy Family in Barcelona is weird. Sometimes I like it. Other times…

Nôtre Dame de Chartres and St. Severin in Paris. THEM!!

God bless.

P.S. If your parish church doesn’t have rose windows, move to another parish!

GB
Click to expand...
Everything after the 13th c went downhill?

http://www.hotelsinrome-italy.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/St.-Peters-Basilica.jpg
 
As long as churches are built around the tabernackle they will generally be beautiful. It’s when the tabernacle is placed off to the side or somewhere and there’s no focal point is when the whole thing starts to fall apart. The worst is when I see old churches like our cathedral which was originally built around the tabernacle but at some point they decided to move it off to the right of the altar for some reason. Makes little sense to me.
 
Well, we can like all the magnificent churches in Europe all we want…
but the fact remains it’s our home parish that matters the most to people.
I hope we all can be at peace with our own parish “appearances”.
I didn’t like my parish so much at first, but now I find it quite serene.
They did spend a lot of money of fine quality items, despite the fact that there are very few of them. The must-haves are lovely.
I doubt that most US congregations can raise enough $$$ to build something along the lines of the classic European churches. Plus, those churches took over a hundred years to build. My parish is desperate to pay the last 2 million off. It’s driving everyone crazy.
We need classrooms for catechesis, but may not build those until the sanctuary is paid off. Thankfully we have a lovely place for Mass.

Off topic, sorry. 😊

Peace. I’m enjoying this thread though. 🙂
post more pictures! 😛
 
PietroPaolo said:
What do you prefer? And why? Do you think one style over the other is more suitable for the Liturgy? Do you find it to be a matter of indifference?

I ask because I recently compared the original Basilica in Guadalupe to the one built in the 1970’s on my blog, you can see the post with pics HERE, and I admittedly am no fan of the new structure, which in some ways symbolizes the (IMHO) decline in church architecture mid-century.

Which leaves me wondering, does anyone out there actually like modern church architecture and if so did they all “come of age” before 1980?
Click to expand...
 
pianistclare said:
Well, we can like all the magnificent churches in Europe all we want…
but the fact remains it’s our home parish that matters the most to people.
I hope we all can be at peace with our own parish “appearances”.
I didn’t like my parish so much at first, but now I find it quite serene.
They did spend a lot of money of fine quality items, despite the fact that there are very few of them. The must-haves are lovely.
I doubt that most US congregations can raise enough $$$ to build something along the lines of the classic European churches. Plus, those churches took over a hundred years to build. My parish is desperate to pay the last 2 million off. It’s driving everyone crazy.
We need classrooms for catechesis, but may not build those until the sanctuary is paid off. Thankfully we have a lovely place for Mass.

Off topic, sorry. 😊

Peace. I’m enjoying this thread though. 🙂
post more pictures! 😛
Click to expand...
Greetings from the land of magnificent churches! 🙂

No one commented on my pictures 😦
 
CutlerB said:
Greetings from the land of magnificent churches! 🙂

No one commented on my pictures 😦
Click to expand...
OH! Make no mistake…people are salivating over your pictures! 😃
You are blessed.
We just don’t have this for the most part, in the States.
The Shrine in Hanceville Alabama is nice though, love that place.
Our Lady of the Angels.
Wish I could post pictures of my parish…sigh.

God bless you, thanks for the photos.
Clare
 
I furthermore doubt that most American parishes can afford anything near what a contemporary architect would call a “modern masterpiece.”

Rather, if a parish truly cannot afford either a moderately decorated “traditional” church nor a “modern masterpiece,” then very often what happens is that something like a painted, made-over warehouse is built, which fits in neither of the two former categories.
 
My preference is definitely geared towards traditional architecture. There are very, very few modern Catholic churches that I actually think are attractive. The only one that actually comes to mind is Ave Maria Oratory in Ave Maria, Florida, it seems to mix old a new together a bit. My favorite type of architecture though is probably Byzantine and Romanesque. However, I also think that Armenian church architecture is neat, not sure what it falls under though.
 
CutlerB said:
Perhaps one could speak of it as of a painting: The Mass is the painting, and the architecture is the frame. A beautiful painting deserves a matching and worthy frame. 🤷
Click to expand...
What a wonderful metaphor! 🙂

As for my opinion, I would definitely go with the majority and say traditional architecture, with Gothic being my favorite and Baroque my second. I think my standard for rating the beauty of churches is Chartres Cathedral.
 
I think we’ve been around this patch more than once. But since you asked, not wedded to either modern or traditional architecture, but more wedded to simplicity. Here are a few examples both modern and old:

The conventual church of the abbey I’m associated with, Saint-Benoît-du-Lac in Canada:

i179.photobucket.com/albums/w312/OraLabora/SBL1_zpsf9075ae6.jpg

i179.photobucket.com/albums/w312/OraLabora/eglisesbl.jpg

The conventual church of a Trappist abbey in Quebec:

i179.photobucket.com/albums/w312/OraLabora/EgliseVND.jpg

On the more “traditional” side, the conventual church of an abbey in England. The nearest part was built in the the '90s but the older part in the '30s:

i179.photobucket.com/albums/w312/OraLabora/EgliseAbbatiale.jpg

Something VERY old but simple and I like it. Although it is an Anglican church, it was built before the Reformation, something like a mere 1400 years old but rebuilt and added to between the 13th and 15th centuries. St Serena’s in Zennor, Cornwall, UK:

i179.photobucket.com/albums/w312/OraLabora/Stsenara1.jpg

The notable thing in each is the lack of superfluous decorations and add-ons. This below is a church our choir sang in a couple of weeks ago. I’m less enamoured with this style (it’s 106 years old-sorry for the poor cell phone pic):

i179.photobucket.com/albums/w312/OraLabora/photo-1_zpsd27643c8.jpg

And this is horrible, the rebuilt church at Monte Cassino abbey (rebuilt after being accidentally bombed in WWII). Just wayyy too over the top for my tastes:

i179.photobucket.com/albums/w312/OraLabora/Italy%202009/DSCN0456.jpg
 
Love those first 3 pics…You’ve posted them before, and I always marvel at the beauty of these places. Thank you again for posting them.
 
YoungTradCath said:
I furthermore doubt that most American parishes can afford anything near what a contemporary architect would call a “modern masterpiece.”

Rather, if a parish truly cannot afford either a moderately decorated “traditional” church nor a “modern masterpiece,” then very often what happens is that something like a painted, made-over warehouse is built, which fits in neither of the two former categories.
Click to expand...
In our Diocese, Architects hired by the Diocese make those decisions, and they leave the interior appointments up to what the parishioners can afford. Many of the interior appointments are donated in name of some family or deceased person.
So I’m not sure where to lay the blame for some of the more “tastefully challenged” churches.
:hmmm:
 
This response will probably get lost in the rest of the responses, but I’m currently studying architecture as my major. We study a lot of church architecture, partly because churches are often more permanent buildings. I know that the church my parish recently built hearkens back to older precedents and, to me, could easily be considered Romanesque. I personally wish it were a bit more ornate, but it’s dedicated to St. Francis, and I can appreciate the beauty found in its simplicity. I haven’t had a chance to check out your comparison, but if it’s anything like some of the more mundane “modern” (read built in the 70s) churches like the ones in the suburbs surrounding New Orleans, then I would agree that their architectural quality has or had deteriorated for a while. Personally, I’ve noticed and heard that architecture is in a kind of transitional phase between postmodern, which it’s pretty much stayed in since around the time of Frank Lloyd Wright and le Corbusier, and whatever style is coming next, either with my peers and current architects, or whoever comes along not long after us.

I’m honestly more a fan of traditional architecture for churches. That, or architecture that reflects older church styles. But you have to keep in mind, church architecture itself went through a lot of changes over the centuries. There’s a huge difference between gothic and Romanesque and Rococo shudder. While I don’t always like modern churches, and even just modern architecture in general, sometimes I do. It depends completely on the individual building itself. Every architect is different. Even in my studio class, give every one of us the same design guidelines and you’ll end up with 16 buildings that are completely different, and likely all equally good designs.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top