Should carpet be allowed in Catholic churches?

[lcg101]

I voted no, because of the issue of spilling the Precious Blood… how on earth would you clean that up adequately through carpet?!

 

[nickybr38]

The only reason I said no is because I have allergies and I find the carpets at most churches are ill cared for so I get sick when I have to kneel. Boo. :\

 

[Garyjohn2]

I think any kind of floor covering is fine. Do you realize the first churches had DIRT floors?

 

[Love_Divine]

Huh? What does carpet have to do with anything? Decisions on flooring have to do with things like cost, ease of maintanaince, noise reduction, temperature, not religion.

BTW, I have never seen a church (Catholic or otherwise) with “luxurious” carpet. Has anyone?

I have in the Cathedral of Christ the King in Hamilton, Ontario, but aside from the washrooms,that whole cathedral is luxurious.

I prefer carpet where I walk (not up in the sanctuary) because I hate the awkward moment of trying to quietly walk into church in my dress shoes and the noise just carries. I had a really awkward communion moment during a low Mass at a church with really good acoustics, and marble flooring .

 

[LPS]

I like carpet just fine. In fact, considering the “clop, clop, clop” I have to hear when some lady wearing wooden sole shoes or heels walks in late or carries her child out during the consecration, I prefer it.

 

[The_Curt_Jester]

Carpet really dampens sound. Many churches wouldn’t have a need for any sort of sound system if they’d just pull the carpeting out.

 

[purplesunshine]

Carpet really dampens sound. Many churches wouldn’t have a need for any sort of sound system if they’d just pull the carpeting out.

Do you know anything about acustics? That’s like saying deaf people could be much better off if the wore a hearing aid. Sound isn’t just sound. Carpet dulls things like echos and reverbaration that make it harder to hear.

 

[The_Curt_Jester]

Do you know anything about acustics? That’s like saying deaf people could be much better off if the wore a hearing aid. Sound isn’t just sound. Carpet dulls things like echos and reverbaration that make it harder to hear.

Churches used to be built with acoustics in mind because they didn’t have microphones back then. I’m sure the architects knew what they were doing.

 

[Melchior_1]

Carpets? Quick, call the Bishop!

 

[jwinch2]

Churches used to be built with acoustics in mind because they didn’t have microphones back then. I’m sure the architects knew what they were doing.

The architects were doing the best they could with what they had and since sound waves were not well understood, they designed far more on aesthetic lines than acoustic. If acoustics were a concern, they were concerned about sound carrying, not clarity.

One of the advances in concert halls (not to mention practice halls) today is that of sound absorption to eliminate having too much resonance in the room. Too much resonance actually makes it harder to hear with clarity, due to the echo and individual notes lasting longer and running together. For organ music that is great but for speaking or choir music it is not because the ability to pick up individual words is masked greatly. With the advent of sound dampening, composers were able to write music differently because faster runs of notes and more intricate passages could actually be heard by the audiences and picked up by the conductor in practice sessions. Composers in times before this wrote based on where they thought the piece was going to be performed.

So you could say that yes, a lack of dampening and increased resonance does make things louder, but it also makes ambient noise louder as well (people shuffling their feet, coughing, kids dropping something, someone walking, etc.). Decreasing the harmonic resonance of the room can decrease volume, but it also enhances clarity a great deal.

 

[corsair]

Right on the money, CurtJ. I’ve seen the acoustics improve dramatically by removing carpet. A center aisle carpet to dampen the “clip-clop” of heels can work but it still deadens the choir/schola sounds.

Of course, if your parish does nothing but “Haugen & Hass” music then I wouldn;t worry about it.

 

[Digitonomy]

Carpet is more “luxurious” than a marble floor???

I didn’t mention marble floors at all. ajpirc in his OP described carpet as unacceptable because it was too luxurious. ExLibris seemed to think it was unacceptable for the opposite reason, because we should strive for luxury, or in his words grandeur and majesty (which I think are pretty close), and carpet didn’t make the grade.

So I’m trying to figure out if they disagree why carpet shouldn’t be allowed, or if they agree but the explanations weren’t clear.

 

[Iotaunum]

I voted Yes - technically there is nothing wrong with Carpet in Churches. I prefer Marble/tiles, since it gives a sense of permenance to the Building which should reflect the majesty and permenance of God whom we worship in it. However, I have see carpet used properly which looks good. I have seen some old sanctuaries covered with carpet which look very fitting, royal and dignifyed. One concern would be, as a previous poster mentioned, the spilling of the blood/consecrated host particles on carpet which could be a problem. Also, as a more practical consideration, I think carpets tend to wear quite quickly due to the “traffic” (perhaps unappropriate term) in Churches. They start to look shabby after a while. Anyway, I would take a traditional Church with Carpets and high Altar anyday over the round building with small table like altar and marble floors any day of the week - mostly Sundays.

 

[ajpirc]

ajpirc in his OP described carpet as unacceptable because it was too luxurious…

Woh woh woh!!! I was simply asking if anybody thought that. I never said I thought it.

Don’t be changing the actual words that someone said into something they didn’t say.

Does anybody here live in Vatican City? That must mean I do.

 

[TrueLight]

Do you know anything about acustics? That’s like saying deaf people could be much better off if the wore a hearing aid. Sound isn’t just sound. Carpet dulls things like echos and reverbaration that make it harder to hear.

He’s right. That’s common knowledge. The Protestant church I sing in has horrible acoustics because it’s carpeted and the pews are lined with fabric as well. We as singers have to compensate, for example by over enunciating because of the sound absorption.

 

[Digitonomy]

Woh woh woh!!! I was simply asking if anybody thought that. I never said I thought it.

Don’t be changing the actual words that someone said into something they didn’t say.

Here’s your quote:

Do you think it helps compliment the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass or does it just make the church feel luxurious? Should the Mass be a luxury?

My apologies. I should have said “ajpirc speculated that some may find it unacceptably luxurious.” I didn’t realize that you are not among the “some.”

In my defense, you could have written “Do you think it compliments the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass or does it just make the church feel cheap? Should the Mass feel cheap?”. Since you apparently didn’t find that question as plausible, I think it’s reasonable to infer that on the luxury to cheapness spectrum, you place carpet more on the former than the latter side. Sailor Kenshin also seems to have taken you post in the way I did.

Returning to your question itself, I don’t think anyone so far has found carpet unacceptable because it’s luxurious. Some find it luxurious and thus acceptable, some find it not luxurious and thus unacceptable, some find it not luxurious but still acceptable.

 

[Digitonomy]

OscarsMama:

Also, since I come from the land of the ice and snow (truly, lots of snow), the carpet comes in handy. It gets the snow, ice, water from people’s shoes so there are no puddles for people to slip.

That’s why I prefer carpet - even without ice & snow, there will always be a bit of grit and dust on a hard surface. With a carpet, there is no worry about pant legs or dresses or shoes getting dirty from the floor or kneelers.

Stylites:

What an odd concept for a layman, coming around asking other people what should and shouldn’t be allowed in a Church, as if the Bishops will be waiting with bated breath for the results of this inordinate poll. Why not spend your time fretting about . . . “weightier things of the law; judgment, and mercy, and faith” ?

Let’s look more closely at Matthew 23:23

"Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, you hypocrites. You pay tithes of mint and dill and cumin, and have neglected the weightier things of the law: judgment and mercy and fidelity. (But) these you should have done, without neglecting the others.

Jesus is calling on us to attend to the smaller things, but especially to be sure to attend to the weightier matters. In contrast, your criticism exhorts the OP to abandon smaller issues, and uncharitably assumes the OP isn’t concerned about the weightier matters.

There are countless threads on this board about non-weighty issues. You can disagree with an OP’s point of view, but it’s bad form to disparage someone’s thread. If you don’t like a thread, don’t post and go to a different one.

 

[ExLibris]

I didn’t mention marble floors at all. ajpirc in his OP described carpet as unacceptable because it was too luxurious. ExLibris seemed to think it was unacceptable for the opposite reason, because we should strive for luxury, or in his words grandeur and majesty (which I think are pretty close), and carpet didn’t make the grade.

So I’m trying to figure out if they disagree why carpet shouldn’t be allowed, or if they agree but the explanations weren’t clear.

I admit my message wasn’t too clear. So let me try again:

The natural should reflect the supernatural. A church should attempt to materialize the fiery beauty and amazing complexity of the heavenly realm as much as possible.

Before Europe was taken over by the Humanist Renaissance, the Gothic Cathedrals of old would be the most amazing sight to the pagan or underprivileged. The Basilica of Saint Denis, Notre Dame, and Salisbury Cathedral would be a tiny piece of Heaven on Earth for our early ancestors.

It’s not just carpets that should be done away with, but all forms of Modernist architecture.

 

[Califman831]

carpet is a luxury and does not convey the need of humility before God. I would prefer it if the floors were dirt or cobblestone as is the case in many missions and churches in poor countries.

 

[Marian_Lutheran]

Being an organist/cantor/choir member, I would say a very firm “NO!” because carpet kills acoustics.