>Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 14:06:20 EDT
>X-Mailer: AOL 3.0 for Windows 95 sub 18
>Subject: Re: Neo-gothic architecture
>From: [log in to unmask]
>To: [log in to unmask], [log in to unmask]
>X-Unsub: To leave, send text 'leave liturgy' to [log in to unmask]
>Reply-To: [log in to unmask]
>Sender: [log in to unmask]
>
>I've been following this thread with great interest. I guess this shoots the
>old "Church form follows eclesiology" theory in the foot, at least until
>recent years.
>
Well, actually, not entirely. The early house-churches certianly were
developed based on convience, etc. and not structured around a specific
ecclesiology, but the liturgical activity which took place within those
structures was expressing increasingly specific ecclesiology already in the
first century (although I hesitate to branch off into that area).
Matthew's Gospel, for instance, is very ecclesiological, what with its
emphasis on paralleling Christ with Moses, the Christian testament with
Torah, and the Church with the People of God.
The Basilica plan was chosen as has been stated, because it was more suited
for Christian Liturgy, which, I would argue, was the locus of early Church
ecclesiology. Thus, since Christianity at that time lacked a monumental
architectural tradition upon which to draw, it adopted one already in place
which was discovered to be suited to liturgical ecclesiology.
Several things about the basilica plan recommended itself to the existing
ecclesiology: First, the heirarchical nature of the Church was easily seen
in the sequence of nave and apse. The emperor (or his enthroned image)
presided in the apse, while the people congregated in the nave petitioning
and recieving gifts from the emperor's benefice (a ritual imperial act
which also took place in the market). Even as early as Didache and Justin
Martyr the Church's liturgy clearly emphasised God as beneficent Lord
(Kyrios/Dominus) who bestowed a gift (Christ/redemption) for which the
people (Ka'hal/Ekklesia) expressed thanks (Eucharist).
Second, as a legal court, documents/contracts/judgements, etc. were
rendered valid simply by being contracted in the presence of the emperor's
image. Thus, the enourmous enthroned image of Constantine in his vast,
vaulted construction in Rome was an extension of the emperor's power and
authority. In Christian use, the apse became quickly the locus of images
of the enthroned Christ (Old St. Peter's, et al) which paralleled the
bishop "enthroned" on his cathedra directly below this imposing image.
Thus, the bishop was a type of image of Christ (alter Christus) who held
the authority/power of Christ extended through apostolic succession
(Ignatius of Antioch, Irenaeus, etc.).
Courtyards, fountians, baptistries, martyria, etc, all were added/developed
in accordance with liturgical ecclesiology, even when their original
function was mostly practical. The same could be argued for today's church
architecture - modernism and post-modernism have been adopted as
expressions of the Church's increasing emphasis on its communal/egalitarian
aspects (without necessarily denying its heirarchical elements). An
existing, non-Christian, philosophical system which dovetails with
Christian belief is adopted and adapted to ecclesiology. One can easily
see examples of differing denominations adopting and adapting these
architectural philosophies to their specific ecclesiology in often
radically different manners. The Baptist or Congregationalist design for a
Modernist or Post-Modernist church would have a completely different form
than, say, a Catholic or Anglican design on the same priciples due to its
differing ecclesiological function.
Basically, we paint our portriats the way we see ourselves, regardless
where we get the paint.
In nomine Domine
George R. Hoelzeman
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
