Page 2 of 2
Re: Should the artwork of disgraced Priest be removed?
Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2024 6:46 pm
by Stella
Anyway I contend that beauty is largely in the eye of the beholder and don't believe that a Church would deliberately be built to be 'ugly' per se, outside of the medieval Gothic styles with their gargoyles and devils looming over us to remind people of Satan and the perils of sin.
Re: Should the artwork of disgraced Priest be removed?
Posted: Fri Apr 26, 2024 7:06 am
by peregrinator
I contend that some things are objectively beautiful while others are objectively not. Not everything can be quantified, of course, but things like symmetry and proportion definitely can. Harmony might be a bit more subjective.
Here's an example of a Rupnik work that lacks both symmetry and harmony. On its own it might be OK but it is definitely ugly in this context.
Lourdes_-_2014-09-14_-_img_2855.jpg
Re: Should the artwork of disgraced Priest be removed?
Posted: Fri Apr 26, 2024 7:29 am
by Doom
Stella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 25, 2024 6:46 pm
Anyway I contend that beauty is largely in the eye of the beholder and don't believe that a Church would deliberately be built to be 'ugly' per se, outside of the medieval Gothic styles with their gargoyles and devils looming over us to remind people of Satan and the perils of sin.
The idea that "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" is most certainly contrary to Catholic principles of art.
Re: Should the artwork of disgraced Priest be removed?
Posted: Fri Apr 26, 2024 10:19 am
by Kage_ar
I love modern architecture, to me it is soothing and clean. Were I a billionaire, I'd live in a modern home.
Re: Should the artwork of disgraced Priest be removed?
Posted: Fri Apr 26, 2024 11:52 am
by anawim
Kage_ar wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2024 10:19 am
I love modern architecture, to me it is soothing and clean. Were I a billionaire, I'd live in a modern home.
You and my mother both. She loved ultra modern. Growing up, I thought it felt like living in the Jetson's home (albeit without the futuristic conveniences).
Me, I love EA/Colonial.
When it comes to churches, I think Eastern architecture is best. There's very little in the West that I like.
Re: Should the artwork of disgraced Priest be removed?
Posted: Fri Apr 26, 2024 6:02 pm
by Stella
Kage_ar wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2024 10:19 am
I love modern architecture, to me it is soothing and clean. Were I a billionaire, I'd live in a modern home.
I agree with you. There's a new house on the hill in my neighbourhood and when my husband and I drive past we always pine over it. It's all cement and glass but deliberately so so as not to make some sort of statement of wealth but to be about the views and beauty on the inside. It's worth $7 mill but you can barely even see it from the road.
House.jpg
House1.jpg
House2.jpg
Re: Should the artwork of disgraced Priest be removed?
Posted: Fri Apr 26, 2024 6:22 pm
by Stella
Doom wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2024 7:29 am
Stella wrote: ↑Thu Apr 25, 2024 6:46 pm
Anyway I contend that beauty is largely in the eye of the beholder and don't believe that a Church would deliberately be built to be 'ugly' per se, outside of the medieval Gothic styles with their gargoyles and devils looming over us to remind people of Satan and the perils of sin.
The idea that "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" is most certainly contrary to Catholic principles of art.
Who says?
Re: Should the artwork of disgraced Priest be removed?
Posted: Fri Apr 26, 2024 6:41 pm
by Doom
2,000 of Catholic theology and tradition
Re: Should the artwork of disgraced Priest be removed?
Posted: Fri Apr 26, 2024 7:42 pm
by Stella
Doom wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2024 6:41 pm
2,000 of Catholic theology and tradition
.... in your opinion.
A church should not look like a wrecked spaceship.
.... in your opinion.
Lets be sure to distinguish between what is factually, objectively true and what amounts to personal opinion.
Re: Should the artwork of disgraced Priest be removed?
Posted: Fri Apr 26, 2024 8:12 pm
by zeno
Read the Catechism, Stella.
2502 Sacred art is true and beautiful when its form corresponds to its particular vocation: evoking and glorifying, in faith and adoration, the transcendent mystery of God - the surpassing invisible beauty of truth and love visible in Christ, who "reflects the glory of God and bears the very stamp of his nature," in whom "the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily."297 This spiritual beauty of God is reflected in the most holy Virgin Mother of God, the angels, and saints. Genuine sacred art draws man to adoration, to prayer, and to the love of God, Creator and Savior, the Holy One and Sanctifier
Re: Should the artwork of disgraced Priest be removed?
Posted: Sat Apr 27, 2024 5:51 am
by anawim
zeno wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2024 8:12 pm
Read the Catechism, Stella.
2502 Sacred art is true and beautiful when its form corresponds to its particular vocation: evoking and glorifying, in faith and adoration, the transcendent mystery of God - the surpassing invisible beauty of truth and love visible in Christ, who "reflects the glory of God and bears the very stamp of his nature," in whom "the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily."297 This spiritual beauty of God is reflected in the most holy Virgin Mother of God, the angels, and saints. Genuine sacred art draws man to adoration, to prayer, and to the love of God, Creator and Savior, the Holy One and Sanctifier
I still think it can be a matter of taste. I love Byzantine architecture. Things like Gothic or Baroque doesn't evoke anything like that. Don't like modern either.