Theology of Architecture

[Peter]

I keep asking this, but no one responds. Why? Did you build your church without thinking about waht it says about God? Did you build it with people in mind or God in mind?

What theology guided your build team? C'mon folks, this isn't rocket science.

 

[winsome]

Perhaps because it's not a subject anyone has thought about much?

Perhaps because someone is so persistent on an odd sounding subject has a pet theory & we don't want to get involved?

Suppose you set the ball rolling!

Aren't EO churches cross shaped but with equal length arms (there is a word for it I can't remember)?

 

[cyberlizard]

buildings are built according to one rule: form follows function. how we function is dictated by what we blieve in our theology.

take for instance a raised platform at the front and rows of chairs in front.... tells me the bulk of the people are spectators and an important person(s) will be at the front officiating. This structure perfectly fills the theology of priest/laity or pastor/congregation mentality.

Allow me to recommend the book 'pagan christianity' by viola which addresses many of these ideas... it is a very good and challening read about how we 'do' church.


Steve

 

[Llauralin]

Yes, most traditional churches are cross shapedis possible. There's also generally a dome or steeple; in EO churches the dome has an icon of Christ in it, looking down upon the congragation from heaven. There is often some division between the alter and the congragation in many churches; mine has an iconostasis, for instance...

People could probably be more halpful if we knew what you were getting at better.

 

[winsome]

buildings are built according to one rule: form follows function. how we function is dictated by what we blieve in our theology.

Steve

Not just function, but the theology behind the function.

For example until the second vatican council (early 1960s) Catholic churches were cross shaped with a long nave, a sanctuary area at the front with an altar. The function was the Mass.

After the second vatican council most new churches were built more circular with the sanctuary and altar to one side (not in the centre). THe function was the Mass.

Why the difference when the function was the same?

Well until Vatican II the theological emphasis was on the sacrifice of the Mass and the priest facing away from the people "leading them to God".

After Vatican II the emphasis was more on the sharing nature of the MAss as a communion, so the form emphases people gathered around the priest who face them.

THat's just a crude summary.

 

[MamaZ]

What I want to know is this. Why does it matter what a building looks like to worship in?

 

[christianmomof3]

What I want to know is this. Why does it matter what a building looks like to worship in?

Exactly. The church is the people, not a building.
It is the ekklesia - the assembly of the called out ones.
The believers gathered together in Christ are the church wherever they may chose to gather.
The early church met in people's homes - not any specific building.
Christ in us the hope of glory is what is important - not what buildings we gather together in.

 

[Thekla]

archaeological findings support that the early house Churches were modified to suit their new ecclisiastical use; as the need and ability developed to create space for the ekklesia to come together to worship and glorify God, the design was yet another means to serve and rejoice in God !

 

[MamaZ]

So what I gleam out of this is that if we build a building in a certain way that this is serving God? Hmm Never heard of it.

 

[MamaZ]

Now I have heard of The temple being built the way God wanted it. and also the ark of the covenant. But for the NT believers I don't see any of which is spoken of.