Virginia Conference on Sacred Space

The Virginia Society of the American Institute of Architect’s Interfaith Forum on Religion Art and Architecture will be offering a day-long conference called The Nature of Sacred Space: Context and Culture on November 6, 2009 in Richmond.  It’s part of the larger VSAIA annual meeting that concludes on the same day.  This is the second such opportunity organized by the group in as many years.

The program features a first-rate list of speakers: Paul Braoudokis (Willow Creek), Mel McGowan, AIA (Visioneering Studios), Mark Torgerson (Notre Dame), James Williamson, FAIA (Askew Nixon Ferguson) and Tom Findley, FAIA (Leo A. Daly Architects).  They will presumably duke it out over what the press release refers to as the “diametrically opposed” traditions of traditional architecture “that promote and inspire liturgical based worship” and “market driven designs” stripped (“in some cases”) of “any element that would distinguish them as a “place of worship.”

They go on to take this either/or approach, and will apparently focus on the differences between “performance type and spiritual type worship environments.”   It seems poised to take on the same flavor as other aspects of the worship wars, where personal and cultural preferences are given theological weight by their subscribers and the opposition is demonized, however graciously.  I hope not.

It’s too easy to chase caricatures, but given their fine work in the first such conference, Virginia’s IFRAA can be counted on to do it well, and offer some valuable discussion.

Download the IFRAA Press Release and a detailed Schedule (PDF)

Religious Architecture on ArchDaily

ArchDaily, a site that provides the “latest architectural news: projects, products, events, interviews and competitions” has republished images of newly completed religious architecture.  Projects featured in Part 1 are a monastery on Tautra island in Trondheimsfjorden (Norway), the city morgue in León, Spain; The Church of the Holy Cross in Jyllinge, Denmark; a temporary chapel for the Deaconesses of St-Loup (France), and the Prayer Pavilion of Light in Phoenix, Arizona.  My favorite, due in part to its elegant simplicity, is the Phoenix project, but the morgue is pretty powerful, too. Take a look.

New Buildings in Traditional Settings

What’s the proper architecture for a traditional campus or aesthetic?  There’s no clearcut answer, but the design your architect proposes for your next building will probably fall into one of just a few categories, any one of which may be appropriate for your organization.  Although, I’ve no doubt that architectural philosophers have outlined these options in excruciating detail, I recently found myself explaining them to a client in literary terms.

Quotation
Reproduce what you already have.  It’s unlikely that an existing building can, or should, be copied as is, but reusing the scale, materials and details is the most direct way to continue a satisfactory theme.  For leaders, this approach carries the least risk and will often have the broadest public support.  Detractors would call this plagiarism.

Allusion
Incorporate the best or most meaningful or most iconic elements of existing buildings into something new.  Referring to history without copying it requires a sharp eye and deft hand.  Done well, a new structure takes on a sense of place and “fit”; done poorly, a cheap imitation of the real thing.  Some would consider this a better description of “quotation” than the one I used above.

Contrast
Challenge what you find with something new.  Communicate clearly that a new day has dawned or that something unique is happening inside.  Such an approach need not be iconoclastic, it may simply use a different language to draw attention to itself or an important idea.  Some ask why this is necessary.  As one skeptical speaker put it, “everyone knows what a house looks like, but architects act like they’ve never seen one.”

In practice, most buildings fall into the middle category, sliding along the spectrum between new and old.

Lifeway Survey Skips Data

In another odd piece of research, LifeWay asked about 1,000 Protestant pastors whether, in their opinion, adding a worship service or expanding a building had positively affected attendance.  Many did, but it’s not apparent that any measures were taken to verify the numbers independently.   That’s like asking someone who just spent $300 on a gym membership if he’s lost weight – without putting him on the scales.

Respondents were asked to consider seven types of expansion: building new or additional ministry space on their present site (27% of those surveyed had done so) building at a new site (4%), adding services on or off site (28% and 10%), going online with streaming worship or teaching (14%), launching a new church (28%) or merging with another church (3%).

Researchers admit that pastors in churches that have implemented a particular type of expansion were “more likely to strongly agree that it leads to growth.”

Balcony Stairs

It’s a practice that’s at least 200 years old, but I don’t know if it really works.  Like many church practices, it may exist simply because it makes us feel better to know they’re there.  Balconies (or rather, galleries, existed in churches long before they were used for public seating.  Even so, I suspect it’s a relatively recent idea to place the stairs that serve them inside the nave, or main room, for the purpose of making it possible for persons seated there to respond to altar calls.

I don’t have any real objection to an open stair that decends directly to the main floor or altar platform, but these “Baptist balconies” (my term) bring to mind 18th Century evangelist Charles Finney’s “anxious bench,” a place down in the front where those considering becoming Christians could come to receive prayer.

Who uses them when a better means exists?  The common argument for including them is that they offer fewer obstacles for those in the balcony who wish to come forward.  My sense, though, is that balconies often provide a safe haven for those who aren’t sure they want to be noticed, either because they’re late or new or whatever.  They allow some to stick their toe in the water before they dive.  If that’s the case, who would wish to expose themselves to even greater view by hiking down what is usually a prominent structure.  Go ahead; I dare you!

This is not to say that there aren’t other reasons to consider a Baptist balcony.  First Baptist Church in Greenville, SC has a sweeping, assymetrical balcony that joins the balcony to the main floor with seating (and forms the ceiling of a chapel below).  Provisions in the International Building Code, most likely because of the popularity of open stairs in churches, allow them to escape demanding requirements that other stairs face.

Know why you build what you build, including stairs.  As they’re typically configured, balcony stairs set in the worship space occupy valuable floor space.  They steal seats, limit flexibility and complicate sightlines.  I also suspect that the cost of complex or decorative railings they require (or tempt you) to build exceeds the cost of enclosing simpler ones.