Yes, it should. When the temple was built to hold the Ark of the Covenant, it was made ornate with beautiful statues and paintings. It was grand and beautiful so that all would know that what was in there was the most holy.
Within the Catholic Church, we also find the Most Holy in the Eucharist. Christ himself present. Yes, there should be no doubt that what exists within the church is God himself and those who enter should show reverence.
Yes, this is done for man's eyes. This is how we associate something as grand. Celebrities live in mansions and ornate homes to show their grandness...this is our human understanding of grandeur. So, in that understanding, we show the most grand thing in the world...the Eucharist...within the beautiful building fitting to house our Lord.
2007-10-02 12:51:06
·
answer #1
·
answered by Misty 7
·
2⤊
2⤋
Yes,churches should be beautiful. Ugliness is not next to godliness
There are many beautiful Protestant churches and not just those that were built in the Middle Ages as Catholic Churches. Unfortunately,not all Catholic or Orthodox churches are beautiful,but they should be according to our incarnational,resurrectional and liturgy-as-foretaste-of-heaven theology and worship.
When Judas complained about the waste of expensive perfume on the Lord,Jesus rebuked Him.
The Catholic Church outdoes any church or any private organization in its help of the poor. The churches that are least into beauty are not the first in helping the poor,sick and needy.
God in the Torah demanded beautiful furniture and lots of gold and statues for the Temple and the Tabernacle(that forshadows the real presence of Christ ,God With Us).
The Heavenly Jerusalem in Revelation is most bejeweled and splendid. If one wants to be biblical one should have beautiful,incense-burning,musical,image-filled Houses of Divine Worship.
2007-10-02 12:58:26
·
answer #2
·
answered by James O 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
While Scripture is evidence enough for the marks of Christ's Church, we can see in the writings of Ignatius -- written in the first century, within 67 years of Christ's resurrection, by a close friend and appointee of the Apostle Peter and friend of Polycarp -- that the early Church had a very Catholic interpretation of Scripture:
the Church was Divinely established as a visible society, the salvation of souls is its end, and those who separate themselves from it cut themselves off from God (Epistle to the Philadelphians)
the hierarchy of the Church was instituted by Christ (Epistles to the Philadelphians and the Ephesians)
the threefold character of the hierarchy (Epistle to the Magnesians)
the order of the episcopacy superior by Divine authority to that of the priesthood (Epistles to the Magnesians, Smyraenians, and the Trallians)
the importance of unity of the Church (Epistles to the Trallians, Philadelphians, and the Magnesians)
emphasis on the holiness of the Church (Epistles to the Smyraeans, Ephesians, Magnesians, Trallians, and Romans)
the catholicity of the Church (Letter to the Smyraeans)
the infallibility of the Church (Epistles to the Philadelphians and the Ephesians)
the doctrine of the Eucharist -- i.e., belief in Transsubstantiation or the Real Presence of Christ in Communion (Epistle to the Smyraeans)
the Incarnation (Epistle to the Ephesians)
the supernatural virtue of virgnity (Epistle to Polycarp)
the religious character of matrimony (Epistle to Polycarp)
the value of united prayer (Epistle to the Ephesians)
the primacy of the Chair of Peter (Epistle to the Romans, introduction)
a dencouncing of the (later Protestant) doctrine of private judgement in matters of religion (Epistle to the Philadelphians)1
2007-10-02 14:59:24
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, the Catholic Church isn't the sole church that believes this. The Catholic Church must be the sole significant church that believes extremely in transubstantiation, yet even the Catholic Church would not require this particular concept, for it to contemplate a church's Eucharist valid (the jap Orthodox do no longer have confidence in transubstantiation yet are seen valid by ability of Catholics). The jap Orthodox, Assyrian, and varnish national Catholic church homes all have confidence that Jesus is incredibly present, and the Catholic Church recognizes their apostolic succession as valid. some Anglicans have confidence that Jesus is incredibly present, however the Catholic Church would not know their apostolic succession. regardless of if their succession have been many times valid, super numbers of Anglican monks have been "ordained" by ability of woman "bishops," so there are enormous issues for apostolic succession in Anglicanism. Lutherans have confidence that Jesus is incredibly present; yet in assessment to Catholics, we have confidence that the authority to have fun the Eucharist is contained interior the words of Jesus Himself and such authority exists anyplace His be conscious is validly taught. Apostolic succession, for Lutherans, is a human enterprise which will arguably be of value. It has has been retained interior the Swedish church, yet in accordance to Catholics, the Council of Trent invalidated this succession (and the Swedish church additionally has the female ordination concern). one extra word: somebody pronounced Lutherans have confidence in consubstantiation. it particularly isn't authentic. Consubstantiation is the thought the bread and wine are mixed alongside with Jesus' physique and blood; and that i do no longer know of any cutting-edge church that believes this. there's a brilliant sort of misunderstanding approximately this: some non-Lutherans accused us of believing it, and a few unwell-cautioned Lutherans heard the accusation and concept it to be authentic. now you will locate poorly researched Lutheran cyber web web content and literature that use this be conscious, however the authors would not use it in the event that they knew what it incredibly meant.
2016-10-06 00:05:03
·
answer #4
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Tabernacle, in Jerusalem. It would be a Jewish Tabernacle. In Ps. 122:1 It says: I was glad when they said: Let us go into the House of the Lord. In Luke 4:16 "He entered as His custom was, into the Synagog on the Sabbath day. Every building on earth that is known as a church or the House of the Lord, is a wonderful place and we need to Respect all the different houses of Worship. Some worship in different ways. Depending on the Culture and we all need to Respect that.
2007-10-02 12:47:19
·
answer #5
·
answered by Norskeyenta 6
·
0⤊
2⤋
The appearance of a church has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not it is "Holy". This is done for man's eyes only. God cares not whether you worship in a vacant building, a school or an "elegant" church. His only concern is that you worship God in truth and believe The doctrine of Christ.
2007-10-02 12:47:19
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
Our church building doesn't look like the inside of a fridge. It's not elaborate but not plain either. We built, what I consider, an attractive building. But not because Jesus lives there...He doesn't. Jesus, according to the Bible, lives in the hearts of those who allow Him to. We have a nice, attractive building for people who want to worship in a nice, attractive building. It's also something non-members are interested in when they visit.
2007-10-02 12:53:03
·
answer #7
·
answered by starfishltd 5
·
1⤊
2⤋
Yes, I agree with you. The temple was elegant too because it housed the Ark of the Covenant where God sat. For the same reason Jesus is present in the Blessed Sacrament.
Edit: To the guy above me. Where does your authority to interpret Scripture come from? Why don't you post your allegation so we can answer it? Why do you always have to resort to black propaganda? Are you a mentally challenged person?
2007-10-02 12:46:15
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
4⤋
I DON'T THINK JESUS WAS ANYTHING ABOUT ELEGANCE AND HAVING THE RICHEST THIS OR THAT. HE WAS ABOUT CHARITY AND COMPASSION AND LOVE. THE CATHOLIC CHRUCH NEEDS TO STOP WITH ALL THE SPLENDOR AND CONCENTRATE ON ACTUALLY HELPING PEOPLE, NOT IMPRESSING THEM. REMEBER THE PARABLE OF THE OLD BENT WOMAN AND THE RICH MAN. IT'S EASIER FOR A CAMEL TO PASS THROUGH THE EYE OF THE NEEDLE, THEN A RICH MAN ENTER HEAVEN.
2007-10-02 12:47:29
·
answer #9
·
answered by ina_nutshell 2
·
3⤊
2⤋
Jesus said the Pharisees looked more elegant than everyone else. He also said they're unsaved. The catholics are the modern day Pharisees.
2007-10-02 12:55:00
·
answer #10
·
answered by CJ 6
·
2⤊
3⤋