Elaborate Churches

[jesus=my_homeboy]

Here's something that's kinda always been on my mind that I'd just like to throw out there...
Why is it acceptable that we go all out with elaborate riches to decorate so many of our churches and cathedrals? It must be so expensive to buy so much of the stuff that is in our churches. I know many would probably say, "to glorify God" or something related to that, but I really don't think expensive decorations (I don't mean to use the term decorations, but can't think of another word...I'm talking about anything elaborate in a church) is the best way to go about that. I think God would be much happier if we used the money for the poor or other ministries to build the Kingdom of God. My church is very simple. It used to be a CVS pharmacy! Almost all the decorations are hand-made. We have some of the most beautiful and spirit-filled Masses around and none of the regalia. I truly miss it while I'm at college in my giant chapel on campus (although it is rather simply decorated as well). Look at the Missionaries of Charity. They use simplicity to glorify God. I'm sure God smiles on them always, and they have nothing elaborate or expensive in their convents. Everything they have is very simple and used for their mission. Why did so much money need to be spent on the new hotel for the Cardinals for the conclave? I bet the Pope is living much larger than most people in the world. It just seems a little hypocritical to me. Anyone else feel this way?

[Ash Wednesday]

No.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='jesus=my_homeboy' date='May 4 2005, 06:01 PM'] Here's something that's kinda always been on my mind that I'd just like to throw out there...
Why is it acceptable that we go all out with elaborate riches to decorate so many of our churches and cathedrals? It must be so expensive to buy so much of the stuff that is in our churches. I know many would probably say, "to glorify God" or something related to that, but I really don't think expensive decorations (I don't mean to use the term decorations, but can't think of another word...I'm talking about anything elaborate in a church) is the best way to go about that. I think God would be much happier if we used the money for the poor or other ministries to build the Kingdom of God. My church is very simple. It used to be a CVS pharmacy! Almost all the decorations are hand-made. We have some of the most beautiful and spirit-filled Masses around and none of the regalia. I truly miss it while I'm at college in my giant chapel on campus (although it is rather simply decorated as well). Look at the Missionaries of Charity. They use simplicity to glorify God. I'm sure God smiles on them always, and they have nothing elaborate or expensive in their convents. Everything they have is very simple and used for their mission. Why did so much money need to be spent on the new hotel for the Cardinals for the conclave? I bet the Pope is living much larger than most people in the world. It just seems a little hypocritical to me. Anyone else feel this way? [/quote]
Read Exodus 25:1 thru 28:43.

Notice the standards God demanded for His own house.
Are we supposed to do less?

Rich and poor alike give money to build beautiful houses of worship for the Lord of the Universe. They are supposed to raise your heart, mind and soul to God.

The cardinals did not live in a "hotel". They were in a new building with beds and private baths. Up til now the cardinals in conclave slept on cots in the Sistine Chapel.

Living large? Your bet on the Popes living quarters are way off.

If you want living large check out the Televangelists, or your local Senator.

[RemnantRules]

Blessed Be God!!!

sorry double reply read the bottom one



God Bless
Jason Gregory

[RemnantRules]

Blessed Be God!!!

First of all...I would have to agree with Ash and say no sorry.


Churches can be whatever. However, the reason for such a "grand" scale of beauty and money put into these is b/c Jesus is there in the Holy Eucharist. When you look at the White House, The Queens Royal buildings, or other distinguished people they have great beautiful buildings. So why can't our Lord and Savior have the same if not greater.

But more importantly, I have been around many places in this world, I have friends who have been around MUCH MUCH greater than me and the one thing that is evident in the poorest of the poor places in the world is The Catholic Church. Demographics don't lie when you see the strongest majority of Catholics are in Third World Countries. Everything has to go through the Vatican. The Vatican is doing something b/c of this very reason. The Mission of Charities has to go through the Vatican just like all the rest of the missions and orders.

I hope this makes any sense and I hope you do realize that the Church is the #1 giver in the entire world. I am very happy that you do realize though that the heart of the church is Jesus in the Eucharist AND that even when you don't have a glamorous church it doesn't matter when you have Jesus present in the Holy Eucharist.

God Bless
Jason Gregory

[Mickey's_Girl]

I think that there are at least two sides to this argument (perhaps more). One is the one you just presented. The other is that we should give our very best to God...meaning, our best artwork, our best architecture, our best "clothes" (vestments, etc.). This is to show our respect and love for Him.

It is one thing if the Pope, when doing official "popely" activities (which is pretty much all the time) is wearing special vestments that are fancy and costly. It is another if he has a Rolex and smokes Cuban cigars.

Most people, when they do something special, get "fancy". For instance, a wedding. Even people who live simply and charitably usually dress up and have a nice reception. So if we are meeting the King of Kings, the God of the Universe, every time we have Mass, that really warrants something rather special, no?

Or think of this: God made the world quite beautiful. When we make beautiful churches, we are imitating Him in his creative glory.

Of course, all things can be done with the wrong attitude. Pride and show-off-ness in one's beautiful church or vestments is wrong. But that doesn't mean the church or vestments themselves are wrong.

MG

[dUSt]

There are poor people who are glad that they have such a beautiful cathedral to worship in. The beauty is that a person making minimum wage can feel at home in a cathedral just as much as a billionaire can.

Here's a question: Who is profiting from beautiful churches?

[Q the Ninja]

Elaborate churches reach out to many more people than a few dollars ever could.

A study was done in Los Angelos and most people would rather have the Cathedral (I'm very suprised by this!!!!!) than a few dollars.

[jesus=my_homeboy]

[quote]Read Exodus 25:1 thru 28:43.

Notice the standards God demanded for His own house.
Are we supposed to do less?

Rich and poor alike give money to build beautiful houses of worship for the Lord of the Universe. They are supposed to raise your heart, mind and soul to God.[/quote]

Didn't the Old Testament also say "an eye for an eye?" I think Jesus taught us to turn the other cheek. I'm not saying everything in the OT is untrue, or any of it for that matter, but Jesus came and changed our way of thinking about a lot of things. I don't remember Jesus telling us we should first build elaborate churches to glorify God, then give to the poor.

Churches may raise our hearts, minds, and souls to God. But when I do something good for someone else, my heart is raised to God. When I am in conversation with God through prayer (anywhere), my mind is raised to God. When I commit my life to God, my soul is raised to God. None of those things require a church. Now, don't get me wrong. I am NOT saying that we should do away with churches. I'm just saying I don't think God would mind if we used the money to help others and further God's Kingdom.

[sweetpea316]

Exactly... Story: A while ago when Jason took me to see his church, I was blown away by how beautiful it was. Now, I'm a sucker for pretty churches in the first place, but wow...being in a place with such beauty just shows how important and special it is. It made me wish I had somewhere as awesome to worship in (yes yes, granted that anywhere you worship is awesome)...but I think there is nothing wrong with elaborate churches.

[Mickey's_Girl]

[quote name='jesus=my_homeboy' date='May 4 2005, 04:44 PM'] Churches may raise our hearts, minds, and souls to God.  But when I do something good for someone else, my heart is raised to God.  When I am in conversation with God through prayer (anywhere), my mind is raised to God.  When I commit my life to God, my soul is raised to God.  None of those things require a church.  Now, don't get me wrong.  I am NOT saying that we should do away with churches.  I'm just saying I don't think God would mind if we used the money to help others and further God's Kingdom. [/quote]
First of all, one should not neglect the poor just to build a church. One should do both (charity and church-building). A church is a moderately permanent edifice, though (once built, it only requires maintenance), while the poor, as Jesus said, will always be with us. Having a church is important, and it can be done *at the same time* as giving to the poor.

That said, you seem to be raising a different philosophical question: does art matter? Meaning, is non-utilitarian beauty worthy of existence? If something is beautiful, is it immoral, because the money spent on beauty could have been put to "better" use?

Philosophy aside, let's go back to the Bible for a moment. (I'm away from a Bible, so if someone wants to post the reference, I'd be grateful.) When Jesus gets his feet anointed with expensive oil, Judas raises the objection. "Why waste it? That could have been sold, and the money given to the poor." This is true, of course, but Jesus seems to be saying that (extravagantly) honoring him is a worthy way to spend one's money.

Again: one should also care for the poor. Always. But beautiful churches are not immoral.

Does beauty matter? Emphatically, yes. What "use" is the beauty of the mountains? The ocean? The woods? Natural resources could be just as "useful" as they are now, without being beautiful. But God made them beautiful, on purpose. Because He is beautiful. When we make beauty, we honor, glorify, and imitate him.

We are supposed to become conformed to Jesus in every way possible. Jesus allowed "useless" beauty, while not neglecting the poor. We can, too.

MG

[Lil Red]

if you are a visitor to a "elaborate" church, you may not know all they do to support the poor. we just built a new church (about 6 or so years ago) because we outgrew our old church. is it elaborate? yes. but we do so much to support the poor, not just in our community, but in 3rd world communities as well. by assuming that just because a church is elaborate that it does nothing to support the poor is an insult to that church's community and to Christ.

[philothea]

Generally, it's up to the people of the parish how much they want to (or can) spend to build a church. It's not like there's a construction tax imposed by Rome. By building a nice structure the parishoners create something durable which anyone can enjoy and that will last for generations.

I have great admiration for communities who sacrifice to build a gorgeous church. I also respect parishes that are small, or poor, and still make the best church that they can.

Though, I have seen at least one parish where building a new church seemed to be all the pastor's idea, and every homily was about raising money. :angry:

Even worse, the gorgeous old church I was married in is in a [i]very[/i] wealthy community, and though the church is packed at every mass I've seen, the offerings aren't enough to even pay to fix the roof. :angry: :angry:

[Ash Wednesday]

Anybody read "Ugly as Sin" by Michael S. Rose? He points out that the way a church looks and is built DOES impact one's spiritual state of mind.

I don't have a problem with simplicity as long as it is elegant, and not sterile. But I agree with what has been said -- the living quarters of the pope or the cardinals is not theirs to own. It belongs to the entire church. The most beautiful cathedrals in Europe were built by rich and poor alike, all for the glory of God, and to be shared by all.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='jesus=my_homeboy' date='May 4 2005, 05:44 PM'] Didn't the Old Testament also say "an eye for an eye?"  I think Jesus taught us to turn the other cheek.  I'm not saying everything in the OT is untrue, or any of it for that matter, but Jesus came and changed our way of thinking about a lot of things.  I don't remember Jesus telling us we should first build elaborate churches to glorify God, then give to the poor.[/quote]

An Eye for an Eye is not in conflict with Turn the Other Cheek. Jesus did not change the law, He fulfilled it. Incarnational theology is a beautiful thing.

[quote]I don't remember Jesus telling us we should first build elaborate churches to glorify God, then give to the poor.[/quote]

I don't remember Jesus repealing the commands for grand structures for worship. In fact, I seem to recall that He placed quite a great deal of emphasis on the holiness and presentation of the temple. "Zeal for your house will consume me..."

Simplicity is a beautiful thing, even in churches, but not in every instance. We build grand cathedrals to remind us why we're there...for the grandest beauty of them all, God Himself, in the Eucharist. When churches are simple, great devotion often follows...this is because of authentic simplicity, which still points to God, but by way of austerity, whereas a false simplicity, such as cheesy ornamentation and cheap structures, does not.

[quote]Churches may raise our hearts, minds, and souls to God.  But when I do something good for someone else, my heart is raised to God.  When I am in conversation with God through prayer (anywhere), my mind is raised to God.  When I commit my life to God, my soul is raised to God.  None of those things require a church.[/quote]

It is not an "either or" situation where we have to choose between building a grand church and having true worship on the inside.

The ideal, in fact, and the way old churches and cathedrals were made, was by the involvement of all the talents of the local community in building it together. This greatly raised their hearts and minds to God.

[quote]Now, don't get me wrong.  I am NOT saying that we should do away with churches.  I'm just saying I don't think God would mind if we used the money to help others and further God's Kingdom.[/quote]

You are thinking like Judas. He wondered why perfumes were used to anoint Jesus when the money could have been given to the poor.

The money does go to help others. It helps others to worship, which is our primary purpose on earth. I can see no better use for the money.