As a Christian who was raised in the church, the discussion from the chapter “Paradigms and Perspectives” concerning “Chartres and medieval aesthetics” stood out to me the most. Although I am not Catholic and have only been to one cathedral in my life (I believe it was the Crystal Cathedral in California), I still felt a connection to that section of the chapter. I found it interesting to read about an earlier purpose for the church and the perspective and attitude communicated by even the architecture of the cathedral itself. Believers, architects, and society in general, took the Bible’s statements about God much farther and much more literally than the same people do today. For example, I liked how the entire cathedral was an allegory for God, which was probably a reflection of the higher focus on aesthetics during that time period. I can only compare this view with my own experience with Christian churches; although they are slightly different belief systems and set in much different time periods, I can only discuss what I know.
Usually, Protestant Christian churches today are rather large (in larger cities at least), but I have never heard that the size of the building was meant to make worshippers feel small and insignificant in comparison to God. Also, some churches are actually considerably unattractive; the belief today, as far as I know, is that the building does not matter; it is what is inside the worshippers’ hearts that counts. Stained glass and the use of light is relative common in churches today, at least the ones I have observed, but I have never had it communicated to me that the purpose of this was to emulate the beauty of God. The purpose I have always assumed behind the stained glass was to show scenes from the Bible in picture form. In worshippers’ minds and hearts today, there is probably an agreement with Thomas Aquinas’ statement that “beauty is an essential, or transcendental property of God,” but it has disappeared from the architecture of today’s modern churches.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
If you ever get a chance to go to Europe to look at the cathedrals, you really should. I'm not very religious and I was still moved by the amazing architecture and all of the beautiful images and the sheer size of them.
ReplyDeleteI work for the Catholic Archdiocese in the property department over breaks, and as a consequence of that, I've seen a lot of the blueprints for the churches on the westside. I agree with you, Allison, that many of the more modern churches built today have lost that transcendental heavenly property that older churches had, and I personally think that even though worship is supposed to be internal, the design of the church does influence a person's perception of the service. Going to a large, beautiful cathedral with the sun streaming over the congregation through stained glass windows is a much different experience than sitting in a cramped, dimly-lit church with those really hard pews :( I think that as humans, we are affected by our surroundings, whether consciously or subconsciously, and maybe the people of Thomas Aquinas' day had it right when they built their cathedrals to get the most out of the service.
ReplyDeleteGreat comments!
ReplyDeleteI like your comments on the church...I have been able to visit several cathedrals (one anceint one in Greece too) and comparing it to modern places of worship, much of the magnificence has been lost. Today it is about cost effectiveness and functionality, but it is amazing to see the painstaking years of work it took to create some of these ancient places. One had indiviudal tiles that were about an inch square covering all of the vaulted ceilings in the vestibule. Today I could not imagine that ever being built because people are so focused on time and efficiency, but I beleive the size and details can go a long ways to enhancing the meaning and experience for a person.
ReplyDelete