Domus Dei/Domus ecclesiae
  • kevinfkevinf
    Posts: 1,185
    One of the ongoing tensions practiced in recent years is: what is the place that the Church gathers really a function of. Is it a Domus Dei (a house of God) or a Domus ecclesiae (a house of the church or literally "a house church"). Stephen Schloeder, writing in the Adoremus bulletin in August 2012 writes about this question from a perspective of current questions of architecture.

    As we can say with some veracity, architecture has a strong influence on ecclesiology, liturgy and music ( I myself work in a giant Hershey kiss). Schloeder posits the desire of many church architects of the mid-twentieth century to return to a pre-Constantinian model based on the simple notion of literally "returning to our roots" or "the church before Constantine was a "house-church model."

    I invite you to read this article and consider how these questions have had a direct bearing on shaping the trends of the last 40 years in architecture and thus of liturgy. As I noted earlier, I work in a what simply might be described as a giant Hershey kiss and I have been meditating on this issue as we start to look to build a new building. Many are clamoring for a more traditional architectural style and I hope that will prevail. But one can also hear the "house-church" folks responding in a way that demonstrates the tension noted above.

    Have at it ladies and gentlemen. It is not an easy read, but well worth the time to contemplate

    http://www.adoremus.org/0812Schloeder.html

    k
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,500
    Indeed worth reading!

    The editors of the Bulletin preceded this article, on the facing page, with an article on the subject of church architecture by the Holy Father. Very insightful issue all around.
  • Adam WoodAdam Wood
    Posts: 6,451
    I don't know about anyone else, but I want to see pictures of the giant Hershey Kiss.

    I think Trinity Episcopal in Boston (on Copley Square) is interesting model for a discussion such as this. It is undeniably "church-like" - a beautiful neo-Gothic structure. But the decor and colors used in the interior were chosen to emulate a (well to do, I'm sure) residential home. Additionally, the interior was modeled after the throne room of God as described in Revelation. It manages to strike a really amazing balance between clearly church-like and also welcoming and comfortable, in a sort of luxurious way that makes you want to stay there for a long time.

    The impetus for the general dumbing-down of church has, in large part, come from a well-intentioned idea that church should be more like our everyday life.

    I agree WHOLEHEARTEDLY with this principle...

    But I think it should occur from the other direction. Altars should not be more like dining room tables- dining room tables should become more like altars. In architecture, in dress, in behavior, in what kind of art and literature we allow ourselves to be exposed to- it's "everyday life" that needs to be transformed and conformed to the model of Christian Worship, not the other way around.
    Thanked by 1E_A_Fulhorst
  • Kathy
    Posts: 5,500
    In many Paris churches, and even in the Cathedral at Chartres (!), the post-Vatican II furnishings are dumbed down. Coherence was sacrficed in favor of the living room model.
  • E_A_FulhorstE_A_Fulhorst
    Posts: 381
    Ugly as Sin has some words to say about this.
Add a Comment