Jul 14 2008
theological architecture?
I don’t think about this issue very often, but I am today. I was discussing an upcoming program with colleague and I mentioned that I wanted it to be around tables because I wanted the conversation to be psychologically more important than the lecture components. That got me thinking about what our architecture says about our theology. Do we meet in spaces that imply with value relationships of listening? Do our spaces communicate value of song, or speech, or service?
These thoughts were reinforced by the thoughts of DAn Kimball reflecting on the new building they are using that has pews. For him that is a new reality. He comments a it ont eh histroy of pews but mainly he notices that pews say something about what we believe about worship about God and about the purpose of gathering each week. Whether you agree with his conclusions or not it is probably worth asking. Does my architecture says what I want it to say?
Here is Dan Kimball reflecting on pews.
on the walk
-Ethan
The comments section addressed some of the reactions I had (E Orthordox worship practices, Jewish synagogue layout, Jesus teaching settings, etc.). Life changing community does not happen in 75 minutes on Sunday AM, so building architecture & furniture are relatively small factors in community. Cramped uncomfortable pews in African American churches or rural frontier churches were not an obstacle to fellowship, because people interacted outside the church building. The uncomfortable reality might be the people attending your upcoming program are there for what the Spirit is able to say through you (your scholarship), NOT conversation w/ each other. There will be other settings for the “round table” (small group?) discussion.
I think that I am with you on the specifics, but I am not sure I want to totally move toward value neutral architecture.
While some of his historical details may be wrong, it is tru that the early leaders of the protestant reformation designed churches with small communion tables and bigger lecterns for preaching. That was accidental. Likewise, I have been is some worship settings without rows of chairs or pews where the nature of the worship was changed by the architecture itself.
A related issue is multi use space or single use space. I now serve in a church that is committed in principle that most space should be multi-use. This includes most obviously the main worship space. However in my last church I served on the building committee during the building of a new sanctuary. One of the values expressed by the leadership was that the sanctuary be flexible for a variety of worship styles and events, but intentionally not multi-use for any other kinds of purposes. This was not made as a rule, it was designed into the architecture.
I actually don’t have strong feelings between these values. But they are good examples of how values can be expressed through architecture.
A friend directed me to this article.
http://www.lifeway.com/lwc/article_main_page/0,1703,A%253D167438%2526M%253D200906,00.html