Cathedral <3

[Ed Normile]

[quote name='Veridicus' date='01 February 2010 - 01:11 PM' timestamp='1265047890' post='2048972']
I get your point. God can see beauty in the poverty and simple offerings. Like the widow who gave her last pence to the Temple. I agree with you in this regard; however I disagree in the extension of this logic that conversely God must find huge cathedrals decadent. The architectural and monetary excesses we lavish upon a beautiful church are no less important than feeding and clothing the poor. There is a balance to be sure, but it is not an 'either or' phenomenon.
[/quote]

Also where did I post anything to the effect that "God must find huge cathedrals decadent" I simply posted I wonder how he sees them. In my heart of hearts I would think God would be pleased with any cathedral, as long as the needs of his creation, his children which he created in his image, were addressed first.

ed

[Ed Normile]

[quote name='Ed Normile' date='01 February 2010 - 10:56 AM' timestamp='1265039784' post='2048875']
These are all beautiful examples of the excesses of man. I wonder if God finds these any more pleasing a site for worship than he found the catacombs in which the early christians had to hide in to celebrate the mass for fear of being persecuted?

ed
[/quote]

On a side not I got a red minus one thing for this post, I assume that is no good? Are we not allowed to post questions that are in opposition to the thread we are viewing, and is this the mods here scoring me for being too inquisitive.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Ed Normile' date='01 February 2010 - 02:25 PM' timestamp='1265055957' post='2049035']
On a side not I got a red minus one thing for this post, I assume that is no good? Are we not allowed to post questions that are in opposition to the thread we are viewing, and is this the mods here scoring me for being too inquisitive.
[/quote]
It probably wasn't given by a mod, and if it was it certainly wasn't given in conjunction with moderating duties.

Apparently someone thought that your question was worded disrespectfully. You'd have to ask them yourself to know.

[Winchester]

I gave it to you. Plenty of people worked hard to produce those cathedrals and your comment pissed me off. I've already wasted my pluses on apparently because his avatar is awesome.

[tinytherese]

Monuments of men? How do you know that? For all you know they could just be using their talents as God wants us to and doing this all for the honor of God. Meaning no disrespect to you Ed, this strikes me as being scrupulous and even puritanical. God doesn't hate exterior beauty, neither does He think that exterior beauty is superior to interior beauty. I don't have the book at the moment, but I do know that in the book Captivating, it discusses the topic of beauty. There's this one part that I'd like to cite as soon as I get it back. Beauty isn't vanity. It only becomes vain when it is done only for oneself. Let us not forget that Our Lady was, is, and always will be the most beautiful woman in all of creation, not just interiorly, but exteriorly as well. As I've heard it put before, Jesus could have designed His mother any way He wanted and since He was given that option, He made her perfect. If you were to design your own mother, wouldn't you want her to be perfect?

Besides, places of worship can be places where people can become inspired and pray.

Edited February 1, 2010 by tinytherese

[Ed Normile]

[quote name='tinytherese' date='01 February 2010 - 04:13 PM' timestamp='1265058836' post='2049071']
Monuments of men? How do you know that? For all you know they could just be using their talents as God wants us to and doing this all for the honor of God. Meaning no disrespect to you Ed, this strikes me as being scrupulous and even puritanical. God doesn't hate exterior beauty, neither does He think that exterior beauty is superior to interior beauty. I don't have the book at the moment, but I do know that in the book Captivating, it discusses the topic of beauty. There's this one part that I'd like to cite as soon as I get it back. Beauty isn't vanity. It only becomes vain when it is done only for oneself. Let us not forget that Our Lady was, is, and always will be the most beautiful woman in all of creation, not just interiorly, but exteriorly as well. As I've heard it put before, Jesus could have designed His mother any way He wanted and since He was given that option, He made her perfect. If you were to design your own mother, wouldn't you want her to be perfect?

Besides, places of worship can be places where people can become inspired and pray.
[/quote]

Calm down now, first off no disrespect taken, this afterall is a place of dialogue. Secondly if you feel God wants us to use our talents this way, I wonder where he directed us to do so? I know he said to care for the sick and poor and to worship God, and to work on our salvation among other things. Third point, where did you leap to the judgement that I feel God hates exterior beauty? , I know God hates nothing. The book Captivating by John Eldredge really has no weight in this discussion, he would not comment much on Our Lady as he is a portestant. His only mention of her in his mission is the statement he believes in the virgin birth. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, to borrow a well used quote, I would assume that is why the Blessed Virgin Mary appears in many likenesses to the ethnicity of those she comes to. As far as scrupulous goes I can agree with that as I try to have sruples and do indeed take care in whatever I do to try and do it right. Now with puritanical, you lost me, does this mean I am too strict, I hope you do not think I am a memebr of the puritans. I posted here at least twice I see no wrong in these cathedrals, I also added I wonder how God sees them. My statement "monuments of men" why would I have to qualify this, it is true on many levels, they are constructed by and of men. They are not following some plan set forth by God, they are however a tradition in the church, I can not condemn them and as such I have not, not here , nor at any other time. I was however asking if the monies used this way would be more pleasing to God if they were used first and foremost for the aid of his creation, especially those most unfortunate. Mother Theresa, a saint by any measure, raised not one spectacular monument to God of brick and mortar, the monuments she raised were of flesh, the discarded , those of ill health, the untouchables, much like Jesus did.

ed

[Ephrem Augustine]

I think that the disparity between the rich and poor has never been so great as it is today, that to ask the question today would be a whole different thing.
for many of these Churches, constructed before the industrial revolution, the disparity was not nearly so extreme.

When it came to people taking care of their own, it would not have been a contradiction.

I think it may be a whole different thing entirely when you see ambitious men in the Church who love the lavish decorations and their names to be engraved on these monuments, that is entirely different discussion entirely. (Of course most people that do this nowadays tend to become Gangster Rappers instead of Bishops) God knows the motives of the heart, and I don't even feel qualified to find examples of decadent men throughout the history of the Church who have done such a thing, that might be where the problem does lie. And it is a problem at all when Jesus himself spent very little time decorating Churches, and more time with the broken and despondent sinners... (But even for his context Jesus kept the Jewish Law).

Anyways, if we start debating on some kind of "immorality" of building "grandoise structures" i think we can really instead talk only about people who can worship, but not let the worship of God, and the veneration of the Gospel, and the participation in the Communion of the Body and Blood of Christ, not effect/affect their life when they are sent forth. Some artists might be effected to making great art, some prophets might be effected to challenge injustice. For those who are not affected, that is where the problem is.

Edited February 1, 2010 by Ephrem Augustine

[Veridicus]

[quote name='Ed Normile' date='01 February 2010 - 02:25 PM' timestamp='1265055957' post='2049035']
On a side not I got a red minus one thing for this post, I assume that is no good? Are we not allowed to post questions that are in opposition to the thread we are viewing, and is this the mods here scoring me for being too inquisitive.
[/quote]

You did not deserve a -1 for that. You posited an opinion which had an appropriate historical correlation to position against the debatable excesses involved in creating cathedrals. I disagree with you in terms of whether such excesses are okay or not, but it is a legitimate position to hold.

[KeenanParkerII]

Must everything turn into a debate on this forum? I agree with your posts most of the time Ed, so I don't mean anything hard by this, but could you please start another thread on the topic if you feel so inclined. Whether or not you agree or disagree with the time and effort and money put into these structures or not, many of us consider them beautiful monuments of the past and a glory to God.

[img]http://blog.hotelclub.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/las-lajas.jpg[/img]

Here is the Notre Dame of Quebec. C'est beautiful, n'est-ce pas?
[img]http://www.timeidol.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/Notre-Dame-1.jpg[/img]

Washington DC, there's something nice and clean about this Cathedral:
[img]http://www.timeidol.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/san-franciso-catedral-1.jpg[/img]

[Veridicus]

I mean we could use disposable wax-paper sippy cups for distribution of the Precious Blood and a cardboard box for a tabernacle. We however use precious metals as the Church instructs because these items are commissioned to demonstrate the sacredness of the contents contained. It is clear in the Old Testament that God specified precious metals, etc. be used for his Ark which would the place of his Presence. Similarly, I never remember Jesus complaining about the size or decorations of the Temple...rather he drove out the riffraff who were ripping people off inside of the Temple.

[Veridicus]

Covington Cathedral/Basilica of the Assumption, Kentucky
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/St._Mary%27s_Cathedral_Basilica_of_the_Assumption_in_Covington,_KY.JPG[/img]

Interior
[img]http://www.haskelltech.com/images/cathpan500.jpg[/img]

Edited February 2, 2010 by Veridicus

[Ed Normile]

KeenanParkerII I also agree these are beautiful momuments and a glory to God. I am not saying they are somehow unworthy? Also, I assumed this was a conversation.

Ephram, I disagree with the disparity between rich and poor, when you do not have enough to eat or shelter from the weather all you are interested in is those needs. I am sure there was equally as vast a difference between the enslaved jews building the temples for the romans , and the caesers who ordered them built.

Winchester, sorry for pissing you off ! Anger is a strong emotion, not the best tool in conversation.

Veridicus, I agree with the contents of your sippy cup post, I also never said we should not have built these, I guess you can reread the posts I placed here, but I did ask how God sees them. One of God's most relevant commandmnets to this discussion was Love thy neighbor as thy self. I can not assume at the time of any of these marvelous buildings were erected in reverance to God there were not some who did not feel this love, some who were not hungry, or cold, or lost, or ill.

In case I am not somehow making myself clear here in this thread, cathedrals are , beautiful, awe inspiring, a fitting tribute to God given our limited abilities to fathom His preferences. All I asked was if any thought this is what God really wants, or would he rather we minister to the needy among his most loved creation ? after all we could use a "stone" altar to celebrate his mass.

ed

[Servus_Mariae]

...as a side note...I am not sure if this has been said yet; but these structures are [i]for[/i] the poor in a special way. These structures (especially the older ones) were constructed with grandiose architecture and embellished with sacred art worthy of tears to behold; first to give glory to God with the very best we can with the materials we have but also for the poor. The poor are welcome to behold the beauty for themselves (again this is applicable to the older churches especially when such magnificent art was reserved for the higher class).

Further, the Church is a place for the poor as the church is a place of security, peace, and awe inspiring beauty for their edification. If I were poor or homeless and I looked to this structure, I would see a place that I am welcome, and in being welcomed I realize that this place of majesty is special:[i] because God resides here[/i], and to know that I am welcome in this place is the Church's reminder of my dignity as a child of this indwelling God.

Also..if we as the faithful do not know how to reverence[i]God[/i] with the best we have, how are we to expect people to know how to properly reverence the poor?

Edited February 2, 2010 by Servus_Mariae

[KeenanParkerII]

[quote]KeenanParkerII I also agree these are beautiful momuments and a glory to God. I am not saying they are somehow unworthy? Also, I assumed this was a conversation.[/quote]

Yeah it is man, but who want's to come into a thread about Cathedrals and see a debate about them? It takes two to tango, but I just want people to chillax before it turns into 5 pages of debate and no Cathedral pics, which is why I made the thread. ^__^

[quote]In case I am not somehow making myself clear here in this thread, cathedrals are , beautiful, awe inspiring, a fitting tribute to God given our limited abilities to fathom His preferences. All I asked was if any thought this is what God really wants, or would he rather we minister to the needy among his most loved creation ? after all we could use a "stone" altar to celebrate his mass.

ed[/quote]

True enough, but it's not like we build them anymore. I think there are two classic cathedrals under construction, and the Church is the most charitable organization on Earth as it is. But hey, I do get what you're saying. And I thought we did use a stone altar at mass?? Isn't it like a tradition maintained since the time of the catacombs?

[Veridicus]

I should be studying right now but I am uploading pics into my photobucket for this thread.

I've been to Rome twice in two diff. years so it's really difficult finding the best pic to upload of a given thing.

Edited February 2, 2010 by Veridicus

[Ed Normile]

Okay, sorry about derailing your thread, I put "stone" in quotations as somebody referenced it earlier.

ed

[Ed Normile]

This rather smallish looking structure is the Basilica of the National Shrine of Mary Queen of the Universe in Orlando Florida. It has daily masses, as well as daily confessions, plus a great gift shop, many works of art as well as a beautiful rosary garden!

[img]http://www.maryqueenoftheuniverse.org/images/index/shrineexterior.gif[/img]

ed

[KeenanParkerII]

[quote]I should be studying right now but I am uploading pics into my photobucket for this thread.

I've been to Rome twice in two diff. years so it's really difficult finding the best pic to upload of a given thing.[/quote]

Sigh, me too. As soon as my sister shows up with coffee I have to run. x.x
You're so lucky to have gone to Rome, TWICE! I hear there's a little Catholic shop on top of St.Peter's Basilica.

[quote]Okay, sorry about derailing your thread, I put "stone" in quotations as somebody referenced it earlier.

ed[/quote]

Make no mention of it good sir. That's a beautiful Church. It kind of looks like a Catholic retreat.

[Winchester]

[quote name='Veridicus' date='01 February 2010 - 06:54 PM' timestamp='1265068454' post='2049232']
You did not deserve a -1 for that. You posited an opinion which had an appropriate historical correlation to position against the debatable excesses involved in creating cathedrals. I disagree with you in terms of whether such excesses are okay or not, but it is a legitimate position to hold.
[/quote]
Bullcrap. Ordinary people spent years building cathedrals, and it was a snotty and baseless thing to say. It is not legitimate as it disregards history and the multitudinous reasons people participated in the building of cathedrals. Tomorrow he'll say something funny and he'll be back where he was.

[KeenanParkerII]

[quote]Bullcrap. Ordinary people spent years building cathedrals, and it was a snotty and baseless thing to say. It is not legitimate as it disregards history and the multitudinous reasons people participated in the building of cathedrals. Tomorrow he'll say something funny and he'll be back where he was.[/quote]

WWJD.

If you intend to debate, can you please make another thread. Thanks dude.