Beautiful Churches and Their Meaning

bbbbbbb · Apr 12, 2015

WirSindBettler said:
Not to get too far off topic, but Russia never really had a "renaissance" or "baroque" period. It was just Peter the Great's beginning attempts to westernize, which I think failed in regards to Russian architecture. St. Peter's is beautiful, Baroque architecture is beautiful, but St. Isaac's is not.

Of course, the architecture of Western Europe took much longer to be planted in Russia. Thus, when it did take root in St. Petersburg it came in the full flower of the Baroque followed by the Roccoco. The same can be said for the United States which lacked anything resembling a Renaissance.

In any event, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I think we can safely say that there are some who have found St. Isaac's Cathedral to be unutterably gorgeous.

WirSindBettler · Apr 12, 2015

bbbbbbb said:
Of course, the architecture of Western Europe took much longer to be planted in Russia. Thus, when it did take root in St. Petersburg it came in the full flower of the Baroque followed by the Roccoco. The same can be said for the United States which lacked anything resembling a Renaissance.

No, the same cannot be said. The Mayans never hired an Italian to build a Mayan temple in the Baroque style. The people in the Americas who built Baroque churches were immigrants from those Western European countries that did have renaissances. Just look at the differences between German, Irish, Italian, and Polish churches in America!

bbbbbbb said:
In any event, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I think we can safely say that there are some who have found St. Isaac's Cathedral to be unutterably gorgeous.

Right, and there are people who claim that the Centre Pompidou is unutterably gorgeous as well. That doesn't mean the building's not horrendously ugly.

seashale76 · Apr 12, 2015

WirSindBettler said:
Right, and there are people who claim that the Centre Pompidou is unutterably gorgeous as well. That doesn't mean the building's not horrendously ugly.

And those people would be very wrong. A building that looks like a perpetual construction site is not beautiful.

WirSindBettler · Apr 12, 2015

Speaking of Baroque architecture, here are some really, really, really beautiful churches.

Peterskirche, Vienna

St. Peter's, Munich

Karlskirche, Vienna

Basilika Vierzehnheiligen, Bavaria

Kloster Ettal, Bavaria

Kloster Fürstenfeld, Bavaria

Wieskirche, Bavaria

Dresden Frauenkirche (Lutheran), Dresden

bbbbbbb · Apr 12, 2015

WirSindBettler said:
No, the same cannot be said. The Mayans never hired an Italian to build a Mayan temple in the Baroque style. The people in the Americas who built Baroque churches were immigrants from those Western European countries that did have renaissances. Just look at the differences between German, Irish, Italian, and Polish churches in America!

Right, and there are people who claim that the Centre Pompidou is unutterably gorgeous as well. That doesn't mean the building's not horrendously ugly.

I find myself to be rather perplexed because I really don't appreciate much of neo-Classical church architecture, especially poorly-done Neo-Classical churches, of which I consider St. Isaac's Cathedral to be one.

I think it is absurd to believe that a particular style of architecture belongs to a particular denomination. As you know, there are really spectacular Gothic Lutheran churches which were begun as Catholic churches. There are also spectacular Baroque and Roccoco Lutheran churches. Then, there are also Gothic, Baroque, and Roccoco Lutheran churches which leave much to be desired in an aesthetic sense.

Most of nineteenth-century English architectural discussion centered on the true English ecclesiastical style of architecture, which was assumed to be the correct style for all of English construction. A.W.N. Pugin got the ball really rolling - until he converted to Catholicism. That put a real damper on his claims for the Perpendicular style. Street and Burges, to name just two, strove mightily for the middle Pointed style. Burges did some really wonderful work in a thirteenth-century French mode, but that never really caught on because it was, after all, French. Butterfield did some spectacular work in polychromy which, but the end of the century, had fallen from grace.

I am in China as I write this. There is very little here in the way of church architecture as most Chinese Christians meet in houses. I flew into Beijing where I noted a very interesting Catholic Baroque style church. China, unlike the United States, is not a nation of immigrants. Should we chastise the Chinese Christians for having erected such a monstrosity? In another city I noticed a full-size replica of St. Basil's Cathedral being erected. Shall we chastise the Chinese converts to Orthodoxy for having erected such a monstrosity?

WirSindBettler · Apr 12, 2015

bbbbbbb said:
I find myself to be rather perplexed because I really don't appreciate much of neo-Classical church architecture, especially poorly-done Neo-Classical churches, of which I consider St. Isaac's Cathedral to be one.

We were criticizing the use of "non-icon icons."

bbbbbbb said:
I think it is absurd to believe that a particular style of architecture belongs to a particular denomination. As you know, there are really spectacular Gothic Lutheran churches which were begun as Catholic churches. There are also spectacular Baroque and Roccoco Lutheran churches. Then, there are also Gothic, Baroque, and Roccoco Lutheran churches which leave much to be desired in an aesthetic sense.

And when did I claim that a certain style of architecture belongs to a particular denomination? Rather, I was simply assessing the traditional architecture of a certain region.

bbbbbbb said:
Most of nineteenth-century English architectural discussion centered on the true English ecclesiastical style of architecture, which was assumed to be the correct style for all of English construction. A.W.N. Pugin got the ball really rolling - until he converted to Catholicism. That put a real damper on his claims for the Perpendicular style. Street and Burges, to name just two, strove mightily for the middle Pointed style. Burges did some really wonderful work in a thirteenth-century French mode, but that never really caught on because it was, after all, French. Butterfield did some spectacular work in polychromy which, but the end of the century, had fallen from grace.

I agree.

bbbbbbb said:
I am in China as I write this. There is very little here in the way of church architecture as most Chinese Christians meet in houses. I flew into Beijing where I noted a very interesting Catholic Baroque style church. China, unlike the United States, is not a nation of immigrants. Should we chastise the Chinese Christians for having erected such a monstrosity? In another city I noticed a full-size replica of St. Basil's Cathedral being erected. Shall we chastise the Chinese converts to Orthodoxy for having erected such a monstrosity?

And why are these churches monstrosities? I disagree with the approach to St. Isaac's. That is all.

Anyways, back to the topic at hand, beautiful churches. I did not mean to offend.

bbbbbbb · Apr 13, 2015

WirSindBettler said:
We were criticizing the use of "non-icon icons."

And when did I claim that a certain style of architecture belongs to a particular denomination? Rather, I was simply assessing the traditional architecture of a certain region.

I agree.

And why are these churches monstrosities? I disagree with the approach to St. Isaac's. That is all.

Anyways, back to the topic at hand, beautiful churches. I did not mean to offend.

No offence taken. Thank you for the excellent photographs. I regret that I am unable to post photographs from here, but look forward to seeing more beautiful church architecture.

WirSindBettler · Apr 13, 2015

Wesley's Chapel, London

First UMC, Tulsa

bbbbbbb · Apr 13, 2015

Wesley's Chapel got really spiffed up in the nineteenth century. In its original incarnation it was really plain jane.

rockytopva · Apr 13, 2015

Such a beautiful building! What shall we call it?

St Patricks?
St Mary's?
St Stephens?
St Pauls?
St Peters?

No! Not good enough! We shall call such a magnificent building the Church of God!

MoreCoffee · Apr 13, 2015

rockytopva said:
Such a beautiful building! What shall we call it?

St Patricks?
St Mary's?
St Stephens?
St Pauls?
St Peters?

No! Not good enough! We shall call such a magnificent building the Church of God!

Any place where God is praised, loved, and honoured is indeed beautiful in holiness. Thanks for the picture and for reminding us all that it is God who makes the church beautiful.

WirSindBettler · Apr 13, 2015

St. Patrick's, Manhattan

Exterior

Baptismal Font

Interior

Side Chapel

Interior

Side Chapel

Organ

Pietà

Main Altar, with original High Altar in back

St. Colman's, Cobh, Ireland

Exterior

Interior

WirSindBettler · Apr 13, 2015

I've been skirting around this for far too long. I disagree with this church theologically, and anyone with a basic knowledge of the Reformation will know why, and trust me, that disagreement is very, very deep seated. It is, on the other hand, completely breathtaking, and I would go there in a heartbeat (though I'd probably keep loudly hinting that it was built on the backs of wronged Christians).

Ladies and gentlemen, the largest Confessional Lutheran church in the world:

St. Peter's Basilica:

MoreCoffee · Apr 13, 2015

Saint Peters is built on a gigantic scale - so much so that the people within it seem tiny and the statues (being very large indeed) only make the people seem even smaller. It is unquestionably beautiful and magnificently decorated by master artists and master craftsmen.

I would not want it as my parish church - not because of any fault in the building - because it is such a tourist attraction. Even during papal high masses there are legions of people with their smart phones taking photos. It must be difficult for the faithful to use the side altars for a mass when tourists are walking around to disturb their worship.

I imagine that the residents of the Vatican City would use some of the other churches and chapels within the grounds for their worship - places where they can worship in peace and quiet.

bbbbbbb · Apr 14, 2015

MoreCoffee said:
Saint Peters is built on a gigantic scale - so much so that the people within it seem tiny and the statues (being very large indeed) only make the people seem even smaller. It is unquestionably beautiful and magnificently decorated by master artists and master craftsmen.

I would not want it as my parish church - not because of any fault in the building - because it is such a tourist attraction. Even during papal high masses there are legions of people with their smart phones taking photos. It must be difficult for the faithful to use the side altars for a mass when tourists are walking around to disturb their worship.

I imagine that the residents of the Vatican City would use some of the other churches and chapels within the grounds for their worship - places where they can worship in peace and quiet.

I agree. That is also a major problem with St. Patrick's Cathedral in New York City, Westminster Abbey in London, and St. Paul's Cathedral also in London.

WirSindBettler · Apr 14, 2015

Or, for modern simplicity while still maintaining meeting-house architecture, you could use the congregations of the Apostolic Christian Church, which almost look like LDS meetinghouses:

bbbbbbb · Apr 14, 2015

WirSindBettler said:
Or, for modern simplicity while still maintaining meeting-house architecture, you could use the congregations of the Apostolic Christian Church, which almost look like LDS meetinghouses:

I think there is a very fine line between plain and elegant as opposed to ugly and boring.

MoreCoffee · Apr 14, 2015

WirSindBettler said:
Or, for modern simplicity while still maintaining meeting-house architecture, you could use the congregations of the Apostolic Christian Church, which almost look like LDS meetinghouses:

bbbbbbb said:
I think there is a very fine line between plain and elegant as opposed to ugly and boring.

They have a court house look to them. With four seats for the judges behind their bench and many seats for the public gallery. All that is lacking is a dock for the accused.

bbbbbbb · Apr 14, 2015

MoreCoffee said:
They have a court house look to them. With four seats for the judges behind their bench and many seats for the public gallery. All that is lacking is a dock for the accused.

I agree. I have seen much more beautiful courtrooms.

MarkRohfrietsch · Apr 14, 2015

Just a simple cross at the front would make a drastic improvement; what says Chruch when you look at the photos?

Beautiful Churches and Their Meaning

bbbbbbb

Guest

Hoc Est Verum

Unapologetic Iconodule

Hoc Est Verum

bbbbbbb

Guest

Hoc Est Verum

bbbbbbb

Guest

Hoc Est Verum

bbbbbbb

Guest

Love to pray! :)

Repentance works.

Hoc Est Verum

Hoc Est Verum

Repentance works.

bbbbbbb

Guest

Hoc Est Verum

bbbbbbb

Guest

Repentance works.

bbbbbbb

Guest

Unapologetic Apologist

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency