Ugly as sin...
  • noel jones, aagonoel jones, aago
    Posts: 6,605
    UGLY
  • JamJam
    Posts: 636
    I've heard of this book. It seems no one was safe from the horrible architecture of the seventies... I thought at least there were no ugly Orthodox churches, until I went to this one a few weeks ago. Sure enough, it was built in '71. At least the inside was beautiful enough to make me forget the ugly outside.

    The ugliest Catholic church I think I've ever seen is the one built atop the ruins of St. Peter's house in the Holy Land. It looks like a spaceship. And, of course who can forget the infamous shark's fin of Franciscan University? (down the street a little they have a very beautiful little chapel, at least. I hear that the shark fin building was originally meant to be a theater, but was pressed into service as a church due to space and money problems. There are plans in the works to build a proper church which I'm sure will be much nicer.)
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,934
    I agree on some of the modern architecture. However, sin is not ugly. If it were, it would not have so much appeal.
  • noel jones, aagonoel jones, aago
    Posts: 6,605
    Is there not anything that we can agree upon?
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,160
    Au contraire, Charles. Sin is ugly, as the glamor of evil is always a borrowed good and not intrinsic to the sinful act.

    That weird church in the Holy Land was built by the "Neocatechumenal" movement, and it reflects their apparently ahistorical ideas about the liturgy.
  • AOZ
    Posts: 369
    Is this, or is this not, a salmon steak?
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,160
    @AOZ: Attention! Zis Rocket is departing shortly for Station Alpha!
  • Daniel Bennett PageDaniel Bennett Page
    Posts: 833
    With all due respect for the good people and good liturgy found therein, the salmon steak is even worse in reality that in photographs.
  • Mark M.Mark M.
    Posts: 632
    Salmon steak or not, I think that church would actually fare relatively well with Michael Rose (author of "Ugly as Sin"), for very specific reasons, at least as compared to some of the other quite disastrous examples he provides.

    It's an excellent book. I borrowed it from my parish library and found myself intrigued from cover to cover. I think the book would find a very friendly audience among those who frequent this forum.

    Just as we've long identified holiness, beauty of form, and universality as three distinguishing characteristics of sacred music, Rose also cites three necessary components of sacred architecture, namely verticality, permanence, and iconography. Furthermore, just as we on this forum have found folksy music to be reflective of flimsy theology, Rose does the same with architecture.

    Highly recommended!
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    Sin... looks good on the outside, but when it gets in it really gets ugly.
  • kevinfkevinf
    Posts: 1,184
    In the Archdiocese of Atlanta, a number of churches were built according to one architectural plan. There are at least 5 of them that are the same. In a more loving moment, they are called "pizza hut churches" because they espouse that dark wood restaurant flavor. I will not say what I call them when I visit them. Needless to say, we have a lot of very dated churches that I do not see how they can be renovated to look reasonably well.

    And the big architectural firm that works in the Archdiocese is run by a bunch of Baptists.
    Pray for us O Mother of God.
  • francis
    Posts: 10,668
    When will The Church chase out the riff raff and reclaim her honorable traditions in liturgical beauty in art, architecture and music? Come to our desperate aid Our Dear Lady.
  • Donnaswan
    Posts: 585
    Haven't you noticed that all Baptist churches built in, oh the last 30 or 40 years are absolutely identical? There must be one company that makes the steeples!

    We have a new church in our Diocese which is absolutely beauitful - you would all be in awe if you could see it- perhaps Forman would post some pics. However, it has almost bankrupted the congregation so far over budget. And no budget for a pipe organ built in at the beginning of planning, apparently. I'm sure Frogman will correct me on the details. But the bldg is breathtakingingly beautiful

    Donna
  • Donnaswan
    Posts: 585
    Oops- meant Frogman
    Forgot Spellcheck.:)
    Donna
  • Pes
    Posts: 623
    It would sadden but not surprise me to hear that churches are built with one eye cocked toward resale.

    Thus, homogeneity.
  • eft94530eft94530
    Posts: 1,577
    Last night while looking for something else, my google net dragged up the following
    and I did not know what to do with it until seeing this Forum Discussion ...

    http://books.google.com/books?id=eYNjS56yx-0C
    When Church Became Theatre:
    The Transformation of Evangelical Architecture and Worship in Nineteenth-Century America
    by Jeanne Halgren Kilde
  • eft94530eft94530
    Posts: 1,577
    chonak: "Rocket is departing shortly for Station Alpha!"

    http://www.archive.org/details/destinationmoon

    http://www.archive.org/details/Assignment_Outer_Space
  • eft94530eft94530
    Posts: 1,577
    Pes: "built with one eye cocked toward resale"

    http://www.religionnews.com/index.php?/rnstext/buffalo_finds_success_in_new_life_for_old_churches/
  • incantuincantu
    Posts: 989
    Actually, the so called salmon church looks very Catholic to me compared to the others. Despite its rocket ship shape, I can clearly see representation of the Trinity and the mandorla in the design. I don't think the objection is so much with modern vs traditional as much as modern traditional vs modern anti-traditional. Isn't it the same with music?
  • CharlesW
    Posts: 11,934
    "frogman noel jones CommentTime17 hours ago
    Is there not anything that we can agree upon?"

    We agree on the ugliness of modern architecture. It doesn't have to be ugly, since I have seen some modern buildings that look decent. I wonder how much of the ugliness is caused by a desire to cut costs and speed construction.

    "We have a new church in our Diocese which is absolutely beauitful - you would all be in awe if you could see it- perhaps Forman would post some pics. However, it has almost bankrupted the congregation so far over budget. And no budget for a pipe organ built in at the beginning of planning, apparently. I'm sure Frogman will correct me on the details. But the bldg is breathtakingingly beautiful

    Donna"

    Donna, that construction project was incompetently managed. It was allowed to run years past the construction deadline. No wonder they are broke!
  • chonakchonak
    Posts: 9,160
    @eft94530: I'm actually thinking of a silly little skit from the 1960s TV language series "Guten Tag, Wie Geht's"; thus the German akzent.
  • dvalerio
    Posts: 341
    > I wonder how much of the ugliness is caused by a desire to cut costs and speed construction.

    Here in Portugal we've had a few years ago a new cathedral built in Fatima. It was very, very expensive and many people took an offense at that («why doesn't the Church give the money to the poor», etc.). I believe it's appropriate to spend money to build a cathedral; I'm just sorry that instead of a cathedral we ended up with this monstruosity.

    In Lisbon a new parish church will be built. It will be useless (it's too close to the 16th century church of my former parish and to other churches) and also very expensive. And what do you think this «church» will look like?

    So the lesson is, around here the ugliness is caused not because there is no money, but because the Church doesn't know how to spend it.
  • Pes
    Posts: 623
    This is the way forward: http://www.stroik.com/portfolio/shrine-of-our-lady-of-guadalupe/

    Simply magnificent. It makes one want to be holy, which means it is itself inspired.
  • JamJam
    Posts: 636
    I bought this book from that site, and it came in today! My only disappointment with it so far is that the pictures inside are black and white... I was hoping for color. But it looks very promising. I haven't read it yet, but I will soon.
  • JamJam
    Posts: 636
    hey, sorry for the double post! But I have finished reading this book. It is VERY GOOD. The only thing that would make it better would be color pictures.

    It's not all just ragging on the ugly churches. He starts out by describing Notre Dame as an example of a great cathedral. Then he posits, with examples, that the three key elements that make a cathedral a wonderful worship space are verticality, permanence, and iconography. That is, whether the worship space brings our minds up to God (usually achieved with literally vertical spaces), whether it is a permanent part of the landscape, and what it teaches us about the faith on its walls, windows, etc. Then he takes a hypothetical pilgrim from the street, seeing the steeple or bell tower in the distance, through the narthex, into the nave, to receiving communion, and then back out onto the street again. After such a wonderful experience of church, when he takes the same hypothetical pilgrim into a modern church, you can see exactly how awful and difficult it is for him. The next chapter he uses to explain the faulty theology behind ugly modern churches: pinpointing exactly where and why they go wrong. Then he ends on a note of hope, talking about once-beautiful churches that are being restored to their former glory, or how to refurbish/rebuild churches ugly to begin with.

    The chapters are laid out well and overall I think his argumentation is wonderfully sound and never cynical or judgmental. He taught me a lot. Now I'm wanting to read a similar book from a Byzantine perspective--he mentions Byzantine style churches once, but doesn't go into them much (why should he? he's Latin rite). I'd just be interested in seeing the slight differences (iconostasis instead of communion rail, etc.). Nevertheless, I loved the book and would recommend it to anyone.
Add a Comment