Beauty and Churches

Cardinal Ratzinger said:

For Plato, the category of the beautiful had been definitive. The beautiful and the good, ultimately the beautiful and God, coincide. Through the appearance of the beautiful we are wounded in our innermost being, and that wound grips us and takes us beyond ourselves; it stirs longing into flight and moves us toward the truly Beautiful, to the Good in itself.

. . .

The image of Christ and the images of the saints are not photographs. Their whole point is to lead us beyond what can be apprehended at the merely material level, to awaken new senses in us, and to teach us a new kind of seeing, which perceives the Invisible in the visible.

The sacredness of the image consists precisely in the fact that it comes from an interior vision and thus leads us to such an interior vision. It must be a fruit of contemplation, of an encounter in faith with the new reality of the risen Christ, and so it leads us in turn into an interior gazing, an encounter in prayer with the Lord. The image is at the service of the Liturgy. The prayer and contemplation in which the images are formed must, therefore, be a praying and seeing undertaken in communion with the seeing faith of the Church. The ecclesial dimension is essential to sacred art and thus has an essential connection with the history of the faith, with Scripture and Tradition.

Click to expand...

Art, Image and Artists

So what is more likely to lift your thoughts to God and His glory? Is it this?







Or is it this?

http://www.themook.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/IMG_8147.jpg



http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_tWhSj5H4C...AABoA/NA9K1vgMiHg/s1600/Church+Sanctuary2.jpg

The churches and cathedrals hold some of the most beautiful works of sculptors and craftsman you can find. Religious or not, if you appreciate true art, these are the places to go.

So what is more likely to lift your thoughts to God and His glory? Is it this?



Or this?



Because at the time those great churches and cathedrals were built the common people lived in the conditions of the first image.

These days, churches are built a little (okay, a whole hell of a lot) less opulent, but the common people live a significantly better quality of life.

soot said:

So what is more likely to lift your thoughts to God and His glory? Is it this?

View attachment 67158665

Or this?

View attachment 67158666

Because at the time those great churches and cathedrals were built the common people lived in the conditions of the first image.

These days, churches are built a little (okay, a whole hell of a lot) less opulent, but the common people live a significantly better quality of life.

Click to expand...

What's your point? We've become an decadent and materialist culture.

phattonez said:

What's your point? We've become an decadent and materialist culture.

Click to expand...

As opposed to this (which isn't at all decadent and materialistic):

phattonez said:

Art, Image and Artists

So what is more likely to lift your thoughts to God and His glory? Is it this?

Or is it this?

http://www.themook.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/IMG_8147.jpg

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_tWhSj5H4C...AABoA/NA9K1vgMiHg/s1600/Church+Sanctuary2.jpg

Click to expand...

No matter how well sculpted or painted or assembled, a man with a blood dripping from a thorny crown, hands and feet dripping from huge nails, and hanging lifeless.... will never be beautiful.

Otherwise, churches contain some of the best works of some of the best artisans.

beautiful buildings, certainly
but a church is not the building

justabubba said:

beautiful buildings, certainly
but a church is not the building

Click to expand...

A church is a building; the Church is not.

soot said:

As opposed to this (which isn't at all decadent and materialistic):

View attachment 67158673

Click to expand...

No, this is decadent and materialistic:





Expensive art, sure, but for the glory of whom? That is the difference.

phattonez said:

Art, Image and Artists

So what is more likely to lift your thoughts to God and His glory? Is it this?

Or is it this?

http://www.themook.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/IMG_8147.jpg

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_tWhSj5H4C...AABoA/NA9K1vgMiHg/s1600/Church+Sanctuary2.jpg

Click to expand...

More like this:

phattonez said:

What's your point? We've become an decadent and materialist culture.

Click to expand...

We've BECOME materialistic? Look at the old form of churches = materialistic.

The churches, instead of spending it many riches on the building itself, could have improved the lives of the people.

Aunt Spiker said:

We've BECOME materialistic? Look at the old form of churches = materialistic.

The churches, instead of spending it many riches on the building itself, could have improved the lives of the people.

Click to expand...

And what, fed them for a few days? A lot of good that would do. Tell me, do you find it the least bit odd that now with these ugly, horrific, plain churches, that vice is far greater than it was when we built churches in a style that you call materialistic? People have forgotten their creator, and look at what has taken its place: licentiousness and decadence.

phattonez said:

And what, fed them for a few days? A lot of good that would do. Tell me, do you find it the least bit odd that now with these ugly, horrific, plain churches, that vice is far greater than it was when we built churches in a style that you call materialistic? People have forgotten their creator, and look at what has taken its place: licentiousness and decadence.

Click to expand...

So - while I find these churches to be beautiful (both old styles and modern - they are all very pretty to me. I especially like small, homely churches set in mountainsides and small towns) but flooding all of your riches into a building doesn't put food on ANYONE'S plate.

I guarantee you my parents haven't forgotten about God just because my dad has a motorcycle and my mother sews quilts in a big livingroom.

So - eep - yeah - let's not try to feed the poor because the food won't last very long. ?? I don't get your sentiment, here.

Aunt Spiker said:

So - while I find these churches to be beautiful (both old styles and modern - they are all very pretty to me. I especially like small, homely churches set in mountainsides and small towns) but flooding all of your riches into a building doesn't put food on ANYONE'S plate.

I guarantee you my parents haven't forgotten about God just because my dad has a motorcycle and my mother sews quilts in a big livingroom.

So - eep - yeah - let's not try to feed the poor because the food won't last very long. ?? I don't get your sentiment, here.

Click to expand...

Why do you think that the options are mutually exclusive? The Catholic Church has built beautiful churches for centuries, and what organization has been more charitable throughout history than the Church?

phattonez said:

Why do you think that the options are mutually exclusive? The Catholic Church has built beautiful churches for centuries, and what organization has been more charitable throughout history than the Church?

Click to expand...

I think the modern Catholic church is very different - the older Catholic church was corrupt in more ways than one.

Aunt Spiker said:

I think the modern Catholic church is very different - the older Catholic church was corrupt in more ways than one.

Click to expand...

Lame, even the older Catholic Church did more for society than any other organizations. The university system, hospitals, charitable giving, you name it. You're making a distinction without a difference.

phattonez said:

Lame, even the older Catholic Church did more for society than any other organizations. The university system, hospitals, charitable giving, you name it. You're making a distinction without a difference.

Click to expand...

They weren't 'a church' so much as 'a corrupt, tyrannical form of government who used god as a battering ram to enact injustices and govern society'.

Thankfully they are reformed.

No one should look to their past and think 'strictly a religious body' - because that's not how it was. They were the government.

Aunt Spiker said:

They weren't 'a church' so much as 'a corrupt, tyrannical form of government who used god as a battering ram to enact injustices and govern society'.

Thankfully they are reformed.

No one should look to their past and think 'strictly a religious body' - because that's not how it was. They were the government.

Click to expand...

Lol, ridiculous. Society would have collapsed without the Catholic Church. Your non-specific judgment is very telling of the biased and false history that you've bought into.

phattonez said:

Lol, ridiculous. Society would have collapsed without the Catholic Church. Your non-specific judgment is very telling of the biased and false history that you've bought into.

Click to expand...

Oh sure, because Protestants were just wretched folk - etc etc. Come on. If you're trying to defend how they behaved 1,000 years ago then surely you know what I'm referring to. You're calling me ridiculous? You're arguing that they were all awesome and stuff, not me.

They were a tyrannical form of government. End of story.

Does that mean they didn't do a few things that were beneficial? No - but don't pretend like they were divine and infallible when they have actually recanted their old ways and even apologized to people on behalf of their past actions.

If they can admit they were corrupt - then surely you can, too.

And they still are materialistic . . . all that glitters, you know. Seriously. Glam it up some more - gold threads and rubies. Mmmhmm. But hey - as long as they give more to the poor, right, then it's okay.

Just don't point fingers and claim OTHERS are materialistic when they ALL still do support the needy. Heck, even I do and I'm an atheist. Maybe people should call it a wash. People support people - end of story.

Our government supports its people too, without burning them at the stake or terrifying people into coming to church for fear that the Devil and his Demons are going to eat your soul. . . but does that make up for the wrong things our government has done? Hell no - don't lie and say 'yes - why yes it does.'

Call tyranny out on its ****, don't excuse it because they gave some alms to the poor. That's like giving the Devil a pass if he bought your soul so long as he cured cancer in return. Surely that means he's not so bad.

Aunt Spiker said:

We've BECOME materialistic? Look at the old form of churches = materialistic.

The churches, instead of spending it many riches on the building itself, could have improved the lives of the people.

Click to expand...

There's precedence for it in the bible and it had more to do with worship then materialism.

1 kings 6:29-32 "29 All the walls of the temple were adorned with bands of carved and embossed work, cherubim and palm-trees and other patterns, standing out in high relief; 30 the floor, within the sanctuary and without, he covered with gold. 31 At the entrance to the shrine he made doors of olive-wood, between five-sided pilasters; 32 doors of olive-wood, carved with figures of cherubim and palm-trees, and other sculpture in high relief; doors and cherubim and palm-trees and all the rest were covered with gold."

Aunt Spiker said:

Oh sure, because Protestants were just wretched folk - etc etc. Come on.

Click to expand...

I never brought up Protestants.

If you're trying to defend how they behaved 1,000 years ago then surely you know what I'm referring to. You're calling me ridiculous? You're arguing that they were all awesome and stuff, not me.

They were a tyrannical form of government. End of story.

Does that mean they didn't do a few things that were beneficial? No - but don't pretend like they were divine and infallible when they have actually recanted their old ways and even apologized to people on behalf of their past actions.

If they can admit they were corrupt - then surely you can, too.

And they still are materialistic . . . all that glitters, you know. Seriously. Glam it up some more - gold threads and rubies. Mmmhmm. But hey - as long as they give more to the poor, right, then it's okay.

Just don't point fingers and claim OTHERS are materialistic when they ALL still do support the needy. Heck, even I do and I'm an atheist. Maybe people should call it a wash. People support people - end of story.

Our government supports its people too, without burning them at the stake or terrifying people into coming to church for fear that the Devil and his Demons are going to eat your soul. . . but does that make up for the wrong things our government has done? Hell no - don't lie and say 'yes - why yes it does.'

Call tyranny out on its ****, don't excuse it because they gave some alms to the poor. That's like giving the Devil a pass if he bought your soul so long as he cured cancer in return. Surely that means he's not so bad.

Click to expand...

I'm calling out your unhistorical BS narrative that you're following. Again, you point to no specifics, just some image you have of some evil organization planted in your head. It's not based on reality.

Monserrat said:

There's precedence for it in the bible and it had more to do with worship then materialism.

1 kings 6:29-32 "29 All the walls of the temple were adorned with bands of carved and embossed work, cherubim and palm-trees and other patterns, standing out in high relief; 30 the floor, within the sanctuary and without, he covered with gold. 31 At the entrance to the shrine he made doors of olive-wood, between five-sided pilasters; 32 doors of olive-wood, carved with figures of cherubim and palm-trees, and other sculpture in high relief; doors and cherubim and palm-trees and all the rest were covered with gold."

Click to expand...

???

Solomon builds the temple

1 Kings 6 NIV - Solomon Builds the Temple - In the four - Bible Gateway

11 The word of the Lord came to Solomon: 12 “As for this temple you are building, if you follow my decrees, observe my laws and keep all my commands and obey them, I will fulfill through you the promise I gave to David your father. 13 And I will live among the Israelites and will not abandon my people Israel.”

- Yes, how convenient for the Archdiocese and Popes. Don't tell me that God needs gold.

Seriously - if that's not materialistic then I don't know what is.

The Bible encourages people to live in squalor, shun earthly things, and give all their riches to God (at that time - that meant The Catholic Government). How convenient for the Catholic Church.

- I'm an Atheist for a REASON, as you can clearly see.

The Modern Catholic Church - I might rib the past but these days they're not plucking out people's eyeballs so they're not that bad. Materialism notwithstanding.

phattonez said:

I never brought up Protestants.



I'm calling out your unhistorical BS narrative that you're following. Again, you point to no specifics, just some image you have of some evil organization planted in your head. It's not based on reality.

Click to expand...

Dig a deeper hole and pile the fill on your head all you want. I know my WORLD HISTORY. I'm willing to extend props for the truth AND that means the good and the bad. You're pretending the bad that they themselves have apologized for and turned away from DIDN'T EVEN HAPPEN?

Tune in to reality for a while.

Enough said.

Aunt Spiker said:

???

Solomon builds the temple

1 Kings 6 NIV - Solomon Builds the Temple - In the four - Bible Gateway

11 The word of the Lord came to Solomon: 12 “As for this temple you are building, if you follow my decrees, observe my laws and keep all my commands and obey them, I will fulfill through you the promise I gave to David your father. 13 And I will live among the Israelites and will not abandon my people Israel.”

- Yes, how convenient for the Archdiocese and Popes. Don't tell me that God needs gold.

Seriously - if that's not materialistic then I don't know what is.

The Bible encourages people to live in squalor, shun earthly things, and give all their riches to God (at that time - that meant The Catholic Government). How convenient for the Catholic Church.

- I'm an Atheist for a REASON, as you can clearly see.

The Modern Catholic Church - I might rib the past but these days they're not plucking out people's eyeballs so they're not that bad. Materialism notwithstanding.

Click to expand...

This thread has nothing to do with any injustices done by the "faithful" in the past, it's about beautiful churches which as I've shown has precedence in the bible. The decadence of Solomon's temple was done out of worship and deference to God. Sure God doesn't need it but when you are sacrificing by giving up to God something of extreme value to you it is a show of his importance and worth in your heart. You don't have to like it or agree with it but there it is.

Monserrat said:

This thread has nothing to do with any injustices done by the "faithful" in the past, it's about beautiful churches which as I've shown has precedence in the bible. The decadence of Solomon's temple was done out of worship to God. Sure God doesn't need it but when you are sacrificing by giving up to God something of extreme value to you it is a show of his importance and worth in your heart. You don't have to like it or agree with it but there it is.

Click to expand...

i believe you have struck the crux of the matter
some of the faithful believe the use of limited resources - provided by those faithful - for other than good works is a poor stewardship of the church's financial assets
other faithful prefer those church assets to be spent acquiring fine things in G_d's name