Apotheoun Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 Most modern Church buildings look like gymnasiums or airplane hangers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marielapin Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 [quote name='Apotheoun' date='16 October 2009 - 02:43 PM' timestamp='1255722228' post='1986551'] Most modern Church buildings look like gymnasiums or airplane hangers. [/quote] In the case of my church its an airplane hangar in the shape of a cross. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted October 16, 2009 Share Posted October 16, 2009 I especially dislike when parishes install industrial carpeting. It's just tacky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veridicus Posted October 16, 2009 Author Share Posted October 16, 2009 [quote name='Apotheoun' date='16 October 2009 - 02:43 PM' timestamp='1255722228' post='1986551'] Most modern Church buildings look like gymnasiums or airplane hangers. [/quote] [IMG]http://i573.photobucket.com/albums/ss172/Veridicus21/IMAG0169Crop.jpg[/IMG] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 [quote name='Veridicus' date='16 October 2009 - 05:59 PM' timestamp='1255737564' post='1986616'] [IMG]http://i573.photobucket.com/albums/ss172/Veridicus21/IMAG0169Crop.jpg[/IMG] [/quote] United Airlines flight 117 will be departing from Gate 12 at 920am. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norseman82 Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 [quote name='FutureNunJMJ' date='16 October 2009 - 08:51 AM' timestamp='1255697472' post='1986395'] [url="http://www.holyfamilyparish.org/left/cross.htm"]Holy Family, Inverness[/url]. [/quote] I was going to post about this, but you beat me to it..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OraProMe Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 (edited) [quote name='Apotheoun' date='16 October 2009 - 11:33 AM' timestamp='1255710826' post='1986465'] Subjective opinions about beauty and its relation to color are irrelevant. The colors used in icons have theological significance and are established by the Church's iconographic tradition. [/quote] Not talking about icons or theological significance. I think anyone would agree that physical beauty is a subjective concept. Some like 'dem skinny gals, some like 'dem round gals........ I think Rexi's favourite colours are black and white anyway. Edited October 17, 2009 by OraProMe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veridicus Posted October 17, 2009 Author Share Posted October 17, 2009 (edited) [quote name='OraProMe' date='16 October 2009 - 08:18 PM' timestamp='1255742281' post='1986652'] Not talking about icons or theological significance. I think anyone would agree that physical beauty is a subjective concept. Some like 'dem skinny gals, some like 'dem round gals........ I think Rexi's favourite colours are black and white anyway. [/quote] A person's individual response to something is a subjective experience. We are simply trying to state that within the Catholic Tradition there are artforms and architectural styles more accomodating and congruous with OBjective truths pertaining to theology and liturgy. Thus these things can be beautiful and true in a metaphysical sense, yet there may be people who personally find them [i]not [/i]beautiful and uninspiring; in this sense you are correct. Their subjective definition of beauty may limit their appreciation for what we would call art more in line with an objective traditional religious perspective. By modern relative standards I should not have made any references to 'objective standards' however, but I can assent that individual responses to 'beauty' are subjective. Still, I have a difficult time understanding how one can fail to be inspired when walking into Saint Peter's Basilica, Santa Maria sopra Minerva (with the exception of its facade), or Notre Dame in Paris. Edited October 17, 2009 by Veridicus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OraProMe Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 [quote name='Veridicus' date='16 October 2009 - 08:25 PM' timestamp='1255742720' post='1986657'] A person's individual response to something is a subjective experience. We are simply trying to state that within the Catholic Tradition there are artforms and architectural styles more accomodating and congruous with OBjective truths pertaining to theology and liturgy. Thus these things can be beautiful and true in a metaphysical sense, and many people may personally find them [i]not [/i]beautiful and uninspiring. In this sense you are correct; their subjective definition of beauty may limit their appreciation for what we would call art more in line with traditional religious perspective. I have a difficult time understanding how one can fail to be inspired when walking into Saint Peter's Basilica, Santa Maria sopra Minerva (with the exception of its facade), or Notre Dame in Paris. [/quote] Yeah, I kind of went off topic (hence "physical beauty" and Rex and I have discussed this before). For what it's worth I agree with you about churches, both subjectively and objectively Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 [quote name='OraProMe' date='16 October 2009 - 07:18 PM' timestamp='1255742281' post='1986652'] Not talking about icons or theological significance. I think anyone would agree that physical beauty is a subjective concept. Some like 'dem skinny gals, some like 'dem round gals........ I think Rexi's favourite colours are black and white anyway. [/quote] The whole Church is an icon, for it is the earthly manifestation of heavenly realities, and so it is not about a subjective notion of beauty, but about the Church's liturgical tradition, a tradition which sadly has been under attack in the Latin Church for more than a generation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OraProMe Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 We're talking about two completely different things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Innocent Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 (edited) [quote name='OraProMe' date='17 October 2009 - 07:48 AM' timestamp='1255742281' post='1986652']Not talking about icons or theological significance. I think anyone would agree that physical beauty is a subjective concept. [/quote] I'm not sure I understand you clearly. For instance, do you disagree with C.S. Lewis in [url="http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/lewis/abolition1.htm"][i]The Abolition of Man[/i][/url] when he says, [quote]Even if it were granted that such qualities as sublimity were simply and solely projected into things from our own emotions, yet the emotions which prompt the projection are the correlatives, and therefore almost the opposites, of the qualities projected. ... Until quite modern times all teachers and even all men believed the universe to be such that certain emotional reactions on our part could be either congruous or incongruous to it—believed, in fact, that objects did not merely receive, but could merit, our approval or disapproval, our reverence or our contempt. The reason why Coleridge agreed with the tourist who called the cataract sublime and disagreed with the one who called it pretty was of course that he believed inanimate nature to be such that certain responses could be more 'just' or 'ordinate' or 'appropriate' to it than others. And he believed (correctly) that the tourists thought the same. The man who called the cataract sublime was not intending simply to describe his own emotions about it: he was also claiming that the object was one which merited those emotions. But for this claim there would be nothing to agree or disagree about.[/quote] Of course, he's talking about a waterfall here, not about a church or a woman, but the principle being discussed is still physical beauty, isn't it? [quote name='OraProMe' date='17 October 2009 - 07:48 AM' timestamp='1255742281' post='1986652'] Some like 'dem skinny gals, some like 'dem round gals........ [/quote] All the same, I have read in several articles that symmetry of physical characteristics plays a major role in the perception of beauty across many cultures: [center][img]http://www.psychologytoday.com/files/u114/symmetry.jpg[/img] || [url="http://jorthod.maneyjournals.org/cgi/content/full/28/2/159"]0[/url] || [url="http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/05/080507083952.htm"]1[/url] || [url="http://www.perceptionweb.com/abstract.cgi?id=v050498"]2[/url] || [url="http://www.stuartwilde.com/articles/redeemers/perception_symmetry_beauty.html"]3[/url] || [url="http://www.oprah.com/article/oprahshow/20090304-tows-science-sex-appeal/3"]4[/url] || [url="http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/news/1536/do-hidden-facial-features-make-men-sexy"]5[/url] || [url="http://www.uic.edu/classes/orla/orla312/TeethBeautyBiologyHealth.htm"]6[/url] || [url="http://xenlogic.wordpress.com/2009/02/04/the-science-of-beauty/"]7[color="#FF0000"][b]*[/b][/color][/url] || [url="http://www.nhs.uk/news/2008/05May/Pages/Facialsymmetryandgenderperception.aspx"]8[/url] || [url="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/science-small-talk/200812/it-pays-be-pretty"]9[/url] || [url="http://www.smh.com.au/news/beauty/drawing-the-line-on-beauty/2007/10/15/1192300644078.html"]10[/url] ||[/center] Thus we also hear of computer programs that measure beauty: [url="http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-04/afot-tst040408.php"]Link[/url] [url="http://www.impactlab.com/2008/03/31/software-that-ranks-facial-attractiveness/"], Alt. link[/url] Can't we take that to indicate that there is some common foundation for the perception of beauty upon which one's personal preferences are added? [color="#FF0000"][b]*[/b][/color][size="1"]I'm not sure who the author of this particular article is, and it's only on a blog, not on a science website. Also, there are a couple of photos of beauty contestants in swimsuits in that article; just giving warning in case that would be a temptation to you. [/size] Edited October 17, 2009 by Innocent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veridicus Posted October 17, 2009 Author Share Posted October 17, 2009 [img]http://radgeek.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/gothmog.jpg[/img] Gothmog is both unsymmetrical and ugly. Coincidence?!!?!??!?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
picchick Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 [quote name='Veridicus' date='17 October 2009 - 12:42 AM' timestamp='1255754564' post='1986812'] [img]http://radgeek.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/gothmog.jpg[/img] Gothmog is both unsymmetrical and ugly. Coincidence?!!?!??!?! [/quote] I would like to ask you to refrain from posting pictures of my boyfriend. He is a very sensitive fellow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OraProMe Posted October 17, 2009 Share Posted October 17, 2009 [quote name='Veridicus' date='16 October 2009 - 11:42 PM' timestamp='1255754564' post='1986812'] [img]http://radgeek.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/gothmog.jpg[/img] Gothmog is both unsymmetrical and ugly. Coincidence?!!?!??!?! [/quote] He's really, really hot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now