Universal Church Almost Ready, Still Ugly

Sacred spaces have always been built for reasons other than the worship of the gods or God. The temples of Rome were built to impress the people of the Empire with its might, as much as the might of the gods. St. Peter's Basilica shows, very impressively, God's might and power intrinsically tied to the considerable might and power of the Catholic Church. Chartres and Notre Dame convey the power of faith to an illiterate peasantry needing proof of God's majesty in a dark age, and the solid Victorian comfort of St. Bartholomew's in Crown Heights, is a symbol of a comfortable, upper middle class Christianity, where quiet beauty is not disturbed by a vulgarity of excess.

The undeniable fact is that all are extremely beautiful in different ways, expressing the genius, and depth, of man's quest for the beauty and the Divine. Places of worship have been the successful laboratories and galleries for most of the architectural, engineering and fine arts innovations and masterpieces in Western Civilization's history. (As you can tell, I really love sacred spaces.)

Sadly, the sacred spaces of most fundamentalist and evangelic faiths, of all religions, is not concerned with beauty on this earth. Their purpose in gathering is to solidify their beliefs amongst themselves, and to bring in converts and raise cash. They pride themselves on a simplicity and utilitarianism, and lack of worldly distractions. Personally, I find that another reason to run screaming away from any religion that rigid. To me, the evidence of a magnificent God who created the intricacies of the universe is manifested in the beauty of man's creation: in the incredible detail of an ancient mosque, the flying buttresses of a medieval cathedral, the enormity of scale of St. Peter's and the quiet peace of a New England church.

There may be a reason the best was done in a simpler age, without the distractions of technology or the fast pace of modern life. This building gets the job done, it shelters their operation, holds their worshippers, and does not detract with worldy frou-frou. It is better than a car filled lot, or a crack house. It is not a bad thing, but it certainly doesn't inspire. Too bad.

Posted by: Montrose Morris at November 10, 2008 11:37 AM

So true, Brenda. Many years ago, I sat next to someone on the B26 bus to Bed Stuy who was a member of the Pentacostal Elim Church, which took over a large, ornate Catholic Church on the Clinton Hill/BS border. She was trying to preach to me, and me, trying to be nice and make conversation, I said I had never been inside, and being me, see above, asked about the interior architecture.

"Oh, it's nice in there now", she said. "The first thing we did is pull down all of the idols, and bring the church back to Jesus." Being raised Catholic, I decided to change the subject for the rest of my ride. Who knows what they did in there. Low church, indeed.

BTW, St. Bart's, mentioned above, is classic high church Anglican/Episcopalian. Bells and smells. (That's full blown chanted mass, with processions, inscense, and lots of music.) There's something to be said for ritual and ceremony in a chaotic world. Not for everyone, I know, but I'm quite fond of it.

Posted by: Montrose Morris at November 10, 2008 5:30 PM

Thanks, Benson, although twenty years ago, I went over to the dark side, and became an Episcopalian, to the disappointment of some family members. As a veteran, and guitar playing participant of 70's Catholic folk masses, which were a great idea at the time, I understand the need for the formal ritual and ceremony, as well as a need for relating to people where they are.

Posted by: Montrose Morris at November 11, 2008 12:59 AM