What do you think?
Rate this book
When Church Became Theatre: The Transformation of Evangelical Architecture and Worship in Nineteenth-Century America
For nearly eighteen centuries, two fundamental spatial plans dominated Christian the basilica and the central plan. In the 1880s, however, profound socio-economic and technological changes in the United States contributed to the rejection of these traditions and the development of a radically new worship building, the auditorium church. When Church Became Theatre focuses on this radical shift in evangelical Protestant architecture and links it to changes in worship style and religious mission.
The auditorium style, featuring a prominent stage from which rows of pews radiated up a sloping floor, was derived directly from the theatre, an unusual source for religious architecture but one with a similar goal-to gather large groups within range of a speaker's voice. Theatrical elements were prominent; many featured proscenium arches, marquee lighting, theatre seats, and even opera boxes.
Examining these churches and the discussions surrounding their development, Jeanne Halgren Kilde focuses on how these buildings helped congregations negotiate supernatural, social, and personal power. These worship spaces underscored performative and entertainment aspects of the service and in so doing transformed relationships between clergy and audiences. In auditorium churches, the congregants' personal and social power derived as much from consumerism as from piety, and clerical power lay in dramatic expertise rather than connections to social institutions. By erecting these buildings, argues Kilde, middle class religious audiences demonstrated the move toward a consumer-oriented model of religious participation that gave them unprecedented influence over the worship experience and church mission.
The auditorium style, featuring a prominent stage from which rows of pews radiated up a sloping floor, was derived directly from the theatre, an unusual source for religious architecture but one with a similar goal-to gather large groups within range of a speaker's voice. Theatrical elements were prominent; many featured proscenium arches, marquee lighting, theatre seats, and even opera boxes.
Examining these churches and the discussions surrounding their development, Jeanne Halgren Kilde focuses on how these buildings helped congregations negotiate supernatural, social, and personal power. These worship spaces underscored performative and entertainment aspects of the service and in so doing transformed relationships between clergy and audiences. In auditorium churches, the congregants' personal and social power derived as much from consumerism as from piety, and clerical power lay in dramatic expertise rather than connections to social institutions. By erecting these buildings, argues Kilde, middle class religious audiences demonstrated the move toward a consumer-oriented model of religious participation that gave them unprecedented influence over the worship experience and church mission.
328 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2002
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
February 3, 2022
Super informative and well-documented. Quite an academic book, but very interesting. I'm going to post the long review I wrote for my church staff if you're interested in reading it:
When Church Became Theatre by Jeanne Halgren Kilde surveys changes in American Evangelical architecture, worship, and ministry during the 19th century, showing how the church quickly adopted new cultural approaches & practices, most notably, from the theater, which was the main entertainment medium of the day.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
Kilde begins with a historical rewind back to the Protestant Reformation when substantial changes were made to worship and architecture in the church. During that era, practical changes were the result of defined theological changes. Catholic theology didn’t prioritize the teaching of the laity, it was enough for them to be present while the mass and other ceremonies were taking place. It wasn’t very important for them to see or hear, especially since most couldn’t understand Latin. The Reformation changed all of this. Clearly hearing the Scripture and the sermon became central. In response, architecture was designed to get as much of the congregation closer to the preacher as possible. Cruciform (cross-shaped) floorplans were abandoned, stone and vaulted ceilings were moderated. Some aspects of architecture and worship that would change radically later were still in place, mainly the hierarchy between pastor and people maintained by stately pulpits that elevated the preacher.
The biggest non-theological changes to church worship & architecture came as a result of the First & Second Great Awakenings, especially the Second, which occurred from 1790 to 1840. These revival movements broke a lot of long-standing norms – The use of outside worship, increased congregational participation, anti-clericalism, anti-intellectualism, and anti-formalism characterized the Second Great Awakening. Revival leaders were self-appointed and previously unknown by those they spoke to. Their main qualification was the ability to gather, persuade, and maintain a crowd wherever they went. Charles Finney was the most influential of these. He used a theatrical approach to preaching and employed all kinds of “new measures” that were crafted to lead to the greatest number of public decisions as possible. These adaptations led many churches to adopt new practices to attract more people.
TRANSITION FROM REVIVALS TO THEATRIC CHURCH SERVICES
When the traveling revival movement came to an end in the 1840’s, Charles Finney realized that a church building was necessary to continue his ministry. Due to space limitations, the only location that would accommodate them was the Chatham theater in New York city. What began as a decision of practical necessity sparked a transformation in church practice and architecture for the next 60 years. The decision to use a theater was heavily criticized due to its sinful reputation, but Finney decided to use it as a revivalist feature rather than a flaw, spiritually converting a den of iniquity into a house of God. The theater also had populist appeal.
The function of a theater’s architectural arrangement was to draw an audience and meet their felt needs, along with drawing their attention, as much as possible, to what was happening on stage. In the 19th century theater, everything was oriented around pleasing the paying customer (comfortable seats, sloped floors for improved line of sight, more comfortable chairs, heating/cooling, etc). This fit well with Finney’s style of ministry. For the first time, the preacher was released from the “cage” of the elevated pulpit and given performance space. “This unusual worship space redefined clerical authority in terms of personality and charisma.” Finney was already appealing to the social, political, and cultural sensibilities of his time. Revivalist ministry philosophy change came first, then architecture changed in response.
Theaters also developed a philosophy they called “realism,” which meant using techniques to captivate the audience with the performance so that it was their only perceived reality while the performance was happening. To accentuate this, theater stages created ornate prosceniums (frames around the stage), used lighting, etc. To accentuate the “performance” of their ministers, many churches did the same. The use of dark rooms and stage lighting continues this idea today.
SOCIAL CHANGES
The mid 19th century was marked by the rise of the middle class, politics emphasizing the democratic sovereignty of the individual, and culture moving away from traditional authority and social hierarchy. The architecture of the secular theater responded quickly by improving the “cheap seats,” seeing an opportunity to capitalize on a new, more affluent middle class. Up to that point, there was great effort put into attracting the wealthy, while little or no attention was paid to the lower classes’ experience. The church quickly followed suit. Up to this point, pew rentals were fairly universally used to support the church financially. Wealthier families could afford better seats. Poorer families sat further away where they often couldn’t hear, or had obstructed views. The “free church” movement began as an experiment to draw in the middle class and see if the church could survive on voluntary donations alone. The church also began to adjust seating to improve line of sight, slope floors so everyone had a better view, build sanctuaries with better acoustics to accommodate everyone, not just those in the best seats. Churches also moved out of urban centers closer to suburban neighborhoods to accommodate travel distance. This became a matter of competition; churches followed their wealthiest members toward their new neighborhoods.
Church music also began to grow in importance, and churches began to adapt their buildings, hire professional musicians, purchase extravagant pipe organs, and add performance music to their services as the expectations of church attenders grew. In the most prominent churches, elaborate orchestra and choir performances mostly replaced simple hymn signing.
Revivalism waned and for many churches, political activism began to take its place. Churches “struggled to refashion a role for organized religion within a society more interested in material gain, outspoken politics, and civil disruptions than eternal salvation.” (pg. 64) In the next step of appealing to where the culture was going, churches began to adopt the social causes of the day, mainly combatting the moral degradation of American culture. The church desired to reclaim a historical identity, which led to elaborate, historical church buildings that looked like “spiritual armories.” This created an odd dichotomy of a hard, militant exterior with a theater-like, seeker-sensitive interior.
The rise of the middle class also led to a new prominence of the family home, and with it, Christian domesticism became a huge trend. While the world marketed to a new group of consumers of appliances, decorative styles, furniture, etc., the church began to view the home as the true center of religious observance, not the church. Homes were decorated with all kinds of religious symbols and stained glass. Going along with the trend, the church became more domestic, incorporating kitchens, dining rooms, parlors, storage closets, and many of the comforts of home. Mothers were especially viewed as the moral lights of society, and women’s ministry began to grow at the same time. Church services became more down-to-earth. One minister “expressed astonishment that before the service congregants socialized in the pews, that during the service the minister read announcements… the whole service was devoid of any reverential spirit.. the old idea of a church being sacred to the public worship of God has passed away.” (pg. 146) The church became the “house of God” or the “church home.” Some said the church must yield to the superior influence of the private home. One author predicted the day when families would stay home and have church at home by way of some kind of radio/TV type of invention.
This 19th century “focus on the family” also led to concerns about the spiritual direction of the next generations. This led to the Sunday School movement, which started as a parachurch movement, then was brought into the church. Church buildings were adapted, new education buildings were built, curricula were written. Flexible multipurpose spaces were invented. Adjustable room partitions started to be used.
As liberal churches adopted the social gospel, they refashioned their ministry to meet the social needs in their communities. Giving young adults a positive place to spend free time led to churches building gymnasiums, starting sewing classes, cooking classes, housekeeping classes, classes in business arithmetic, language classes, penmanship classes, kitchen & garden classes, opening libraries, social rooms, reading rooms, starting bicycle clubs, travel clubs, fine arts clubs, history clubs, camera clubs, hosting concerts, etc. They called this the “institutional church.” “The church must serve as a counterattraction to saloons and other improper places frequented by young men.” (pg 191).
The movement went so far, that eventually there was a counterreaction against all of this in favor of a scaled back, liturgical, austere Christianity among mostly liberal churches. Architecture went back in the direction of Gothicism. Fundamentalists/conservatives held on longer to the revivalist/seeker-sensitive approach before turning to a drastically more plain, unornamented approach to worship and architecture. The theatrical approach to church mostly left the American evangelical scene until the advent of the megachurch, seeker-sensitive movement in the 1970’s and on. When that movement got going, it resurrected most of the practices that made the late 19th century church movement what it was.
CONCLUSIONS
Rather than mimicking the secular theater, the late 19th century church adopted its underlying pragmatic, audience-drawing approach.
There’s nothing new under the sun, the desire to appeal to and draw people into churches using current cultural means has always been there. It’s just the culture that has changed.
Many of these changes were intentional, philosophy of ministry changes. Others were simply the church adapting with the times and with what people began to expect of any public place they went.
A lot of what we just accept as a necessary part of church (good music, comfortable surroundings and temperature, a church kitchen, accommodations for children, moving sermons, etc.) were once innovative and even controversial changes.
CRITICISM
The good: The book is extremely informative, researched, and well-documented. The author really knows her content and interprets it effectively.
The not so good: The author tends to view everything the church does in a pragmatic/sociological lens – i.e. the change from revival meetings to church services as an adaptation of style to suit the new audience rather than shepherding believers instead of converting the lost.
Author occasionally demonstrates some liberal/slanted ideas like the prominence of the home being a new thing in Christianity. “The family had emerged as the foundation of Christian life by midcentury. The quintessential symbol for Christian piety was the nuclear family, guided by caring parents, worshiping within the home.” (pg. 147)
The author occasionally refers to the Bible in some critical ways: “As theological debates raged, congregations also turned to other sources of religious authority, primarily the Bible, and there they found justification for secluding themselves within their homes.”
When Church Became Theatre by Jeanne Halgren Kilde surveys changes in American Evangelical architecture, worship, and ministry during the 19th century, showing how the church quickly adopted new cultural approaches & practices, most notably, from the theater, which was the main entertainment medium of the day.
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
Kilde begins with a historical rewind back to the Protestant Reformation when substantial changes were made to worship and architecture in the church. During that era, practical changes were the result of defined theological changes. Catholic theology didn’t prioritize the teaching of the laity, it was enough for them to be present while the mass and other ceremonies were taking place. It wasn’t very important for them to see or hear, especially since most couldn’t understand Latin. The Reformation changed all of this. Clearly hearing the Scripture and the sermon became central. In response, architecture was designed to get as much of the congregation closer to the preacher as possible. Cruciform (cross-shaped) floorplans were abandoned, stone and vaulted ceilings were moderated. Some aspects of architecture and worship that would change radically later were still in place, mainly the hierarchy between pastor and people maintained by stately pulpits that elevated the preacher.
The biggest non-theological changes to church worship & architecture came as a result of the First & Second Great Awakenings, especially the Second, which occurred from 1790 to 1840. These revival movements broke a lot of long-standing norms – The use of outside worship, increased congregational participation, anti-clericalism, anti-intellectualism, and anti-formalism characterized the Second Great Awakening. Revival leaders were self-appointed and previously unknown by those they spoke to. Their main qualification was the ability to gather, persuade, and maintain a crowd wherever they went. Charles Finney was the most influential of these. He used a theatrical approach to preaching and employed all kinds of “new measures” that were crafted to lead to the greatest number of public decisions as possible. These adaptations led many churches to adopt new practices to attract more people.
TRANSITION FROM REVIVALS TO THEATRIC CHURCH SERVICES
When the traveling revival movement came to an end in the 1840’s, Charles Finney realized that a church building was necessary to continue his ministry. Due to space limitations, the only location that would accommodate them was the Chatham theater in New York city. What began as a decision of practical necessity sparked a transformation in church practice and architecture for the next 60 years. The decision to use a theater was heavily criticized due to its sinful reputation, but Finney decided to use it as a revivalist feature rather than a flaw, spiritually converting a den of iniquity into a house of God. The theater also had populist appeal.
The function of a theater’s architectural arrangement was to draw an audience and meet their felt needs, along with drawing their attention, as much as possible, to what was happening on stage. In the 19th century theater, everything was oriented around pleasing the paying customer (comfortable seats, sloped floors for improved line of sight, more comfortable chairs, heating/cooling, etc). This fit well with Finney’s style of ministry. For the first time, the preacher was released from the “cage” of the elevated pulpit and given performance space. “This unusual worship space redefined clerical authority in terms of personality and charisma.” Finney was already appealing to the social, political, and cultural sensibilities of his time. Revivalist ministry philosophy change came first, then architecture changed in response.
Theaters also developed a philosophy they called “realism,” which meant using techniques to captivate the audience with the performance so that it was their only perceived reality while the performance was happening. To accentuate this, theater stages created ornate prosceniums (frames around the stage), used lighting, etc. To accentuate the “performance” of their ministers, many churches did the same. The use of dark rooms and stage lighting continues this idea today.
SOCIAL CHANGES
The mid 19th century was marked by the rise of the middle class, politics emphasizing the democratic sovereignty of the individual, and culture moving away from traditional authority and social hierarchy. The architecture of the secular theater responded quickly by improving the “cheap seats,” seeing an opportunity to capitalize on a new, more affluent middle class. Up to that point, there was great effort put into attracting the wealthy, while little or no attention was paid to the lower classes’ experience. The church quickly followed suit. Up to this point, pew rentals were fairly universally used to support the church financially. Wealthier families could afford better seats. Poorer families sat further away where they often couldn’t hear, or had obstructed views. The “free church” movement began as an experiment to draw in the middle class and see if the church could survive on voluntary donations alone. The church also began to adjust seating to improve line of sight, slope floors so everyone had a better view, build sanctuaries with better acoustics to accommodate everyone, not just those in the best seats. Churches also moved out of urban centers closer to suburban neighborhoods to accommodate travel distance. This became a matter of competition; churches followed their wealthiest members toward their new neighborhoods.
Church music also began to grow in importance, and churches began to adapt their buildings, hire professional musicians, purchase extravagant pipe organs, and add performance music to their services as the expectations of church attenders grew. In the most prominent churches, elaborate orchestra and choir performances mostly replaced simple hymn signing.
Revivalism waned and for many churches, political activism began to take its place. Churches “struggled to refashion a role for organized religion within a society more interested in material gain, outspoken politics, and civil disruptions than eternal salvation.” (pg. 64) In the next step of appealing to where the culture was going, churches began to adopt the social causes of the day, mainly combatting the moral degradation of American culture. The church desired to reclaim a historical identity, which led to elaborate, historical church buildings that looked like “spiritual armories.” This created an odd dichotomy of a hard, militant exterior with a theater-like, seeker-sensitive interior.
The rise of the middle class also led to a new prominence of the family home, and with it, Christian domesticism became a huge trend. While the world marketed to a new group of consumers of appliances, decorative styles, furniture, etc., the church began to view the home as the true center of religious observance, not the church. Homes were decorated with all kinds of religious symbols and stained glass. Going along with the trend, the church became more domestic, incorporating kitchens, dining rooms, parlors, storage closets, and many of the comforts of home. Mothers were especially viewed as the moral lights of society, and women’s ministry began to grow at the same time. Church services became more down-to-earth. One minister “expressed astonishment that before the service congregants socialized in the pews, that during the service the minister read announcements… the whole service was devoid of any reverential spirit.. the old idea of a church being sacred to the public worship of God has passed away.” (pg. 146) The church became the “house of God” or the “church home.” Some said the church must yield to the superior influence of the private home. One author predicted the day when families would stay home and have church at home by way of some kind of radio/TV type of invention.
This 19th century “focus on the family” also led to concerns about the spiritual direction of the next generations. This led to the Sunday School movement, which started as a parachurch movement, then was brought into the church. Church buildings were adapted, new education buildings were built, curricula were written. Flexible multipurpose spaces were invented. Adjustable room partitions started to be used.
As liberal churches adopted the social gospel, they refashioned their ministry to meet the social needs in their communities. Giving young adults a positive place to spend free time led to churches building gymnasiums, starting sewing classes, cooking classes, housekeeping classes, classes in business arithmetic, language classes, penmanship classes, kitchen & garden classes, opening libraries, social rooms, reading rooms, starting bicycle clubs, travel clubs, fine arts clubs, history clubs, camera clubs, hosting concerts, etc. They called this the “institutional church.” “The church must serve as a counterattraction to saloons and other improper places frequented by young men.” (pg 191).
The movement went so far, that eventually there was a counterreaction against all of this in favor of a scaled back, liturgical, austere Christianity among mostly liberal churches. Architecture went back in the direction of Gothicism. Fundamentalists/conservatives held on longer to the revivalist/seeker-sensitive approach before turning to a drastically more plain, unornamented approach to worship and architecture. The theatrical approach to church mostly left the American evangelical scene until the advent of the megachurch, seeker-sensitive movement in the 1970’s and on. When that movement got going, it resurrected most of the practices that made the late 19th century church movement what it was.
CONCLUSIONS
Rather than mimicking the secular theater, the late 19th century church adopted its underlying pragmatic, audience-drawing approach.
There’s nothing new under the sun, the desire to appeal to and draw people into churches using current cultural means has always been there. It’s just the culture that has changed.
Many of these changes were intentional, philosophy of ministry changes. Others were simply the church adapting with the times and with what people began to expect of any public place they went.
A lot of what we just accept as a necessary part of church (good music, comfortable surroundings and temperature, a church kitchen, accommodations for children, moving sermons, etc.) were once innovative and even controversial changes.
CRITICISM
The good: The book is extremely informative, researched, and well-documented. The author really knows her content and interprets it effectively.
The not so good: The author tends to view everything the church does in a pragmatic/sociological lens – i.e. the change from revival meetings to church services as an adaptation of style to suit the new audience rather than shepherding believers instead of converting the lost.
Author occasionally demonstrates some liberal/slanted ideas like the prominence of the home being a new thing in Christianity. “The family had emerged as the foundation of Christian life by midcentury. The quintessential symbol for Christian piety was the nuclear family, guided by caring parents, worshiping within the home.” (pg. 147)
The author occasionally refers to the Bible in some critical ways: “As theological debates raged, congregations also turned to other sources of religious authority, primarily the Bible, and there they found justification for secluding themselves within their homes.”
August 15, 2021
This is a fascinating look at 19th century American Protestantism through the lens of architecture: how changes in the latter help describe and explain changes in the former. In short, the shift among Protestants, especially evangelicals, from prioritizing more formalized worship spaces to emphasizing auditoriums and theaters reflects their shift away from liturgy and more toward preaching and other forms of congregational, theatrical worship.
I learned a lot reading , not just about architecture, but also about various events and trends among Christians in the 19th century. Anyone interested in that time period, or in the history of evangelicalism as a whole – especially how the socially active 19th century evangelicalism turned into the isolated fundamentalism and neofundamentalism of the 20th century – should give this book a read.
That said, it is a work of scholarship and quite dense; it's not written for a mass audience. Some parts of it are quite skimmable, especially in the later chapters as information starts to feel redundant. The chapter on the Akron Plan for Sunday schools feels like it could easily have been reduced to a couple of pages within a previous chapter. Finally, a glossary of architectural terms would have been very helpful; context clues only go so far when discussing the various unique attributes of Gothic versus neomedieval versus other forms of architectural design.
But overall, Jeanne Halgren Kilde provides a truly unique way of looking afresh at a well trodden aspect of American church history. The spaces in which that history plays out – the churches themselves – often get taken for granted, and Halgren Kilde really opens up a whole new way of studying them.
I learned a lot reading , not just about architecture, but also about various events and trends among Christians in the 19th century. Anyone interested in that time period, or in the history of evangelicalism as a whole – especially how the socially active 19th century evangelicalism turned into the isolated fundamentalism and neofundamentalism of the 20th century – should give this book a read.
That said, it is a work of scholarship and quite dense; it's not written for a mass audience. Some parts of it are quite skimmable, especially in the later chapters as information starts to feel redundant. The chapter on the Akron Plan for Sunday schools feels like it could easily have been reduced to a couple of pages within a previous chapter. Finally, a glossary of architectural terms would have been very helpful; context clues only go so far when discussing the various unique attributes of Gothic versus neomedieval versus other forms of architectural design.
But overall, Jeanne Halgren Kilde provides a truly unique way of looking afresh at a well trodden aspect of American church history. The spaces in which that history plays out – the churches themselves – often get taken for granted, and Halgren Kilde really opens up a whole new way of studying them.
September 12, 2023
A fascinating read, weaving together architecture, (American) history, and theology. I would have preferred it if Kilde had developed the latter strand more, but I suppose that is my bias coming from my background.
I found it especially fascinating how Kilde brings out the various paradoxes that come with evangelical architecture - the "amphitheatre" sanctuary was meant to emphasise a "corporate body of equals", yet focus on the few on stage eventually led to the minister being in a position where he was "like a king on [his] throne". Theatrical spaces "equated services with entertainment", but yet "congregations maintained a strong level of participation in worship". The mid-twentieth century brought with it a significant pushback and an emphasis during services to be "on worship, on higher thoughts of the sacred", but yet this paved the way for megachurches (by way of contrast and pushback), with spaces that are simultaneously "firmly rooted in the history of evangelical spaces" and "grew from a negative model", intentionally avoiding what the churches that came before were like.
Kilde has given me a lot to think about, and for that I am immensely grateful for this read.
I found it especially fascinating how Kilde brings out the various paradoxes that come with evangelical architecture - the "amphitheatre" sanctuary was meant to emphasise a "corporate body of equals", yet focus on the few on stage eventually led to the minister being in a position where he was "like a king on [his] throne". Theatrical spaces "equated services with entertainment", but yet "congregations maintained a strong level of participation in worship". The mid-twentieth century brought with it a significant pushback and an emphasis during services to be "on worship, on higher thoughts of the sacred", but yet this paved the way for megachurches (by way of contrast and pushback), with spaces that are simultaneously "firmly rooted in the history of evangelical spaces" and "grew from a negative model", intentionally avoiding what the churches that came before were like.
Kilde has given me a lot to think about, and for that I am immensely grateful for this read.
March 7, 2017
This is a very thorough and well written account of the changes in church architecture from about 1830 to 1900 with some tracing of those themes into the 20th and 21st century. It's not an especially exciting story but Kilde does a great job with the material and there are plenty of pictures to help with the architectural terms and ideas.
The main overarching change was from a meeting house Puritan church layout with an elevated pulpit to a curved auditorium/theatrical layout with a stage pulpit and Kilde shows how theology and practice is implicated in that change. There is also pretty thorough discussion of Sunday school layout and the meaning behind different classroom layouts. A couple more diagrams or definitions would be helpful for an architecture novice like me.
The main overarching change was from a meeting house Puritan church layout with an elevated pulpit to a curved auditorium/theatrical layout with a stage pulpit and Kilde shows how theology and practice is implicated in that change. There is also pretty thorough discussion of Sunday school layout and the meaning behind different classroom layouts. A couple more diagrams or definitions would be helpful for an architecture novice like me.
Read
January 6, 2022An amazing look at the change in church architecture. Does not make any theological assumptions but they are easily seen...
June 18, 2017
What does the architectural form of a church building say about the theology, politics, and socio-economic makeup of its congregation? This is the question Jeanne Kilde raises in her study of church architecture among evangelical protestants in 19th century America. It’s a fascinating history of the rise of the theatrical auditorium style interior, the influence of revivalism (especially Charles Finney), and various fads in outer form, from colonial to Gothic to neo-medieval and beyond. Sadly, it is clear that church design was influence far more by socio-economic pressures and stylistic fads than by any conscious choice based on the biblical purpose of the church (as a body, not a building). Especially interesting was the virtual tug of war in design philosophy between the desire for a space most conducive to evangelizing the community and the congregation’s needs for a space for family ministry to keep its young people from abandoning the faith. Not much has changed in the last 100 years.
November 18, 2015
Ever wondered why American churches look the way they do? Check this book out. Not only are there numerous wonderful illustrations and descriptions of 19th century places of worship, Kilde carefully traces the way church architecture (and the theology that accompanied it) evolved over time.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews