pedersen@cartan.berkeley.edu (Sharon L. Pedersen) (10/23/90)
The Church could use some feminist architects as well as theologians. It's soul-sapping to worship in a building with a large stained glass window of God the Father on His Heavenly Throne up front--drags me straight back into thinking, "Aha, I'll come here and ask this man to take care of me." Yuck. --Sharon Pedersen pedersen@cartan.berkeley.edu OR ucbvax!cartan!pedersen
greg@uts.amdahl.com (Greg Bullough) (10/25/90)
[I set followups to talk.religion.misc since this seems to be digressing from the charter of this group. - MHN] In article <1990Oct23.011951.22041@agate.berkeley.edu> pedersen@cartan.berkeley.edu (Sharon L. Pedersen) writes: >The Church could use some feminist architects as well as theologians. I think that, as a feminist issue, church architecture is a false one. Church architecture is a reflection of theology; as theology changes, so shall the architecture. Also, architecture is distinct from the imagery presented by that architecture. The paintings and windows are not, strictly speaking, part of the architecture. On the surface, the latter tend to represent quasi-historical episodes; theology, if present, is fairly well-buried. Make no mistake though; until theology changes, the Christian pantheon will be represented as male. The old architecture itself knows very little sexual distinction. The whole purpose of the soaring rooflines and the vertical open spaces is to, by defining the space, draw the individual upwards. This is a phenomenon which is neither male nor female. Put a human in a tall, narrow space, and that human will feel an upwards tug. >It's soul-sapping to worship in a building with a large stained glass >window of God the Father on His Heavenly Throne up front In fact, such buildings are mostly antiques by now. Even the National Cathedral, which is notable for being a throwback to the gothic, was designed some eighty years ago. It has come in for some revision, of course. If you look carefully, you'll find Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs among its pantheon :-) New churches and cathedrals are generally built to a more modern profile, and to serve a more democratic audience. In reality, "a large stained glass window of God the Father... ...up front" is an remarkably rare occurance. I would venture that, more often, you'll see the Virgin Mary (or Isis, if you prefer) in such a position. The reason for this is that, most often, great churches are named for some patron saint, who will then occupy the position of honor. Images of God the Father are rare, because artists and theologians alike have been somewhat uncomfortable with the implications of the portrayal. However, "St. Mary" or "Notre Dame" or however they may call her, being queen of the saints and of the angels, has the honor of being patroness of more edifices than any being, human or otherwise. Of course, the most abiding and focal image in the Christian churches is one of a man. But that man is most often shown as beaten, broken, and tortured to death. Any power in that image is strictly in the spiritual eye of the beholder. > --drags me >straight back into thinking, "Aha, I'll come here and ask this man to >take care of me." Yuck. I would suggest that you, perhaps, drag yourself in that direction. If that's the solution you are still looking for, then you will see it there. If, however, your image of the Christian god is so tied up in the traditional ways in which that god has been portrayed by artists, then you may have some way to go in developing your own internal image of that deity. And it is distinctly possible that you may have to get away from that which you find interferes with the process. However, I believe rather firmly that blaming architecture or dead theology, or whatever, for being unable to work out ones own spirituality is just another way of avoiding the very real and sometimes difficult and painful work involved in making ones separate peace.