235 - Theological Table-Talk

Theological Table-Talk
By Hugh T. Kerr

CHURCH ARCHITECTURAL GUILD

The architectural awards program of the 1962 Cleveland conference on church architecture, sponsored jointly by the Church Architectural Guild of America (CAGA) and the National Council of Churches (NCC), was a departure from the usual type of awards program. An attempt was made to define some of the special problems confronting church builders and architects as well as some of the means by which solutions might be achieved. Toward this end, the conference sought to focus everything toward a definition and interpretation of church architecture in terms of "contemporary religious affirmation."

Though many churchmen are not aware of the fact, these architectural conferences and associations have been in existence in one form or another for twenty-five years. Only recently, however, have CAGA and the corresponding office of NCC gotten together for ambitious programs of competitive designs for buildings, exhibitions of ecclesiastical arts and crafts, and retreats and research projects of interest to both architects and churchmen. The office of the NCC is called The Department of Church Building and Architecture; its Executive Director is Scott Turner Ritenour (475 Riverside Drive, New York 27, N. Y.). Headquarters for CAGA: Suite 1123, 1346 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Washington 6, D. C. (Both offices welcome inquiries about their work and have available pamphlets and mimeographed releases on church architecture.)

For the Cleveland conference 152 church designs were submitted. The jury whose job it was to select award winners was composed of: Professor Robert Iglehart, Chairman of the Department of Art, University of Michigan, Paul Hayden Kirk, FAIA, architect, Seattle, Washington, and Hugh T. Kerr, Professor of Theology, Princeton Theological Seminary and Editor of THEOLOGY TODAY. The following items of this Table-Talk section contain: the instructions to the jury regarding the conference theme, the Jury's Report, photos and sketches of the award winners (in no order or rank of judgment), and brief statements prepared by the jury for each merit award.

236 - Theological Table-Talk

237 - Theological Table-Talk

University Reformed Church, Ann Arbor, Michigan. A simply organized solution to a difficult site problem. An interesting use of baffled light and a good unity of plan. Birkets and Straub, architects., Birmingham, Michigan.

238 - Theological Table-Talk

239 - Theological Table-Talk

Westminster Presbyterian Church Eugene, Oregon. A fine simplicity of regional materials achieving both dignity and quiet. Excellent use of the site, preserving an existing walnut orchard. Stewart and Richardson, architects, Portland, Oregon.

240 - Theological Table-Talk

Contemporary Religious Affirmation

The primary objective of the awards program is a broadly based appraisal of recent religious architectural works as represented by the entries from the standpoint of their success in creating a "contemporary religious affirmation," Such appraisal might result in a statement from the jury devoted largely to a critique of all entries as a group with certain individuals being singled out to emphasize specific observations of the jury. Or the process might be reversed, with detailed comments upon the most notable entries used to point out trends observed by the jury in the whole group.

The jury is asked to make comments upon trends it might observe which it believes detrimental to creation of outstanding religious architecture, basing its remarks upon the religious and philosophical implications as well as architectural ones.

There is only one classification of work and only one criterion of quality, namely, that the buildings be an inspired expression looking toward a realistic contemporary religious affirmation. This will require the jury to agree upon a definition of such "affirmation." A maximum of ten awards of merit will be made by the jury for those entries which in their opinion achieve the greatest degree of success toward the above-mentioned goal.

It is intended that these awards programs become a source of inspiration to all who are involved in creating religious buildings, not alone because of their calling attention to well-designed structures, but also because of deep-running constructive criticism by the juries of such programs relating to the broad aspects of the contemporary religious scene.

Jury Report

For a church building to express "contemporary religious affirmation" at least three requirements must be met: (1) authentic and meaningful symbolism as to what a church is and what it has to say in and to our culture; (2) functional, economical, and imaginative use of materials and technical skill; and (3) manifestation of a living tradition in forms that speak in a positive way to today.

(1)Symbolism: It would be foolish to look for or expect a single over-arching unity in our religious pluralism today which could be made the basis for general or universal religious affirmation. Clearly there is no one answer to the question about what is most authentic or meaningful about religion today. This is due partly to the reli-

241 - Theological Table-Talk

St. Anselm Roman Catholic Church, Chesterland, Ohio. A quiet and dignified plan which echoes certain past forms without archaism. Good use of generous site with a clear and simple relationship of parts. Dalton, Dalton Associates, architects, Cleveland, Ohio.

242 - Theological Table-Talk

Immaculate Conception Church, Marrero Louisiana. A structural expression providing dramatic and functional space. A quiet and well-integrated chancel-sanctuary, and a general absence of obtrusive fixtures for lighting and other purposes. Curtis and Davis, architects, New Orleans, Louisiana.

243 - Theological Table-Talk

244 - Theological Table-Talk

Congregational Church (United Church of Christ), Scottsdale, Arizona. An instance of integrated regional expression which meets the symbolic requirements well. A pleasant human scale and a good organization. The necessary complex structure. Weaver and Drake, architects, Phoenix. Arizona. (Artists sketch on follow-at-hand page.)

245 - Theological Table-Talk

246 - Theological Table-Talk

gious pluralism of our time and partly to the obscuring of traditional distinctions between sacred and profane, religious and secular. The older symbols no longer speak with authority, and triangles, circles, squares, spires, bells, and sheer spatial bigness cannot, by themselves, automatically reclaim what was once meaningful and purposeful. The church building today cannot compete with the office skyscraper, the factory, or the high-rise apartment building. Denominational symbolism has also tended to disappear so that it is not always easy to distinguish an Episcopal church from a Baptist church, or even a Roman Catholic church from a Protestant church-and this, we think, is at it should be.

Both architect, then, and churchman are confronted with staggering problems of definition which cannot be easily decided as they cannot be avoided or evaded. Here surely simplicity and integrity of design are demanded; resistance to flamboyant loudness must be encouraged; and determination to let the church express its faith in the reality of the Almighty be the primal conviction.

In many areas besides religion and the church, the problem of contemporary life is to know how to affirm positively and definitely what is most surely believed. Religion and the church partake of our contemporary confusion and tend frequently to add to our perplexity instead of acting as a beacon of light and clarity in the midst of so much anguish and darkness.

Here is the staggering assignment for the church architect and the building committee; here also is their evident responsibility and the possibility of their religious affirmation in the world of today.

(2)Structures and Techniques: The majority of the entries suffered from both the indecision of the statement of the problem and the lack of an honest interpretation and use of forms and materials by the architects. The complete disregard for simplicity and an obvious quest for the sensational were most apparent.

The jury felt the need for solutions of more intimate scale and the relationship of them to the religious needs of individuals.

In the majority of submissions the church did not present the unified architectural picture to the community that its religious, social, and educational programs would indicate. The recurring theme was the overly-emphasized and overly-dramatic nave, with social and educational spaces tacked on and poorly integrated with the whole.

The lack of proper regionalism reflecting climate and orientation control was also evidenced.

247 - Theological Table-Talk

248 - Theological Table-Talk

249 - Theological Table-Talk

250 - Theological Table-Talk

Community Church, Chesterland Ohio, A particularly fine exterior, fitting well into its rural setting and echoing without copying traditional rural forms. Herk Visnapuu and Robert C. Gaede, architects, Cleveland, Ohio.

251 - Theological Table-Talk

252 - Theological Table-Talk

St Francis Cabrini Roman Catholic Church, New Orleans, Louisiana. An inventive roof structure resulting in interesting interior forms and lighting. Aneffective integration of spire roof and altar. Curtis and Davis, architects, New Orleans, Louisiana.

253 - Theological Table-Talk

254 - Theological Table-Talk

The big problem as yet unsolved in an enlightened and economical manner is the two-to-four-hundred student educational unit whose average occupancy is for one hour one day a week. The resulting cost and confusion of this part of the program might well indicate the necessity of a complete architectural re-analysis of religious education by our churches.

(3) The Tradition: The weight and influence of tradition-not always well understood-remain important elements in the problem of modern church architecture. The congregation is likely to expect that there shall be a bell tower, a high roof over the nave, tall windows and bench pews. There may even be an insistence on the reproduction of Gothic or Georgian churches, or of Greek temples,

Certainly the problem of church building is part of a long and noble tradition. But the life of a tradition is in the spirit of the forms and not in the particular forms of any past period. The Gothic or Georgian forms were beautiful solutions to the problems of their own time. But we must find our own forms out of our own spirit; the church should not, by implication, abandon the present and retreat into solutions no longer pertinent.

Nor are we likely to find single solutions as could be done in periods when whole communities and nations held common-and dogmatic- assumptions. It seems proper to expect and to encourage a diversity of expression reflecting the rich pluralism of contemporary faith. The church, the congregation, the region, should each seek its own expression of its faith and purpose and function. The unity of -religious architecture lies in its spirit rather than in its forms.

In this exhibition, the jury noted with favor the architects' concern with the varying problems and activities of the urban church as against the suburban, and the suburban as against the rural.

Among the familiar traditions of the church is the symbolic and decorative function of the artist, painter, sculptor, metal smith, and weaver. We note with pleasure the frequency with which artists are engaged to enrich the church, but it seems clear that the problem of integration is not typically well-solved. The finest artists have not been drawn to ecclesiastical work and will perhaps not be so drawn until religious expression is more clearly a matter of the spirit rather than of the sect. The greatest moments in the great tradition have been those when the spirit gave a pervasive unity to life. The building of churches is part of our search for such unity today.