Switching

I see I have a follower! This post is notify all my readers that I will be switching this blog to a different one: Poynting Heavenward at http://poyntingheavenward.blogspot.com/

Hope to see you there!

Life Hacking

My new life-hack philosophy is "purge, purge, purge, and when you're done with that, purge some more." This is partially because I'm just about the laziest person I know, and throwing the stuff out (or recycling it, or donating it) is much easier than organizing it. Once it's in the bin, I'll never have to sort it again. I've also been recently inspired by Fr. Dubay's book Happy Are You Poor. It's amazing, even if it does point out blatant weaknesses.

Another reading that's inspired me to make do with less is G.K. Chesterton's essay "To Frances..." These readings, together with a general outcry to "live simply" make me want to rid the house of more and more and write maxims on the few things I keep to make them all the more beautiful, if they are also ugly.

Form Follows Function

Father Longnecker has a great, funny blog, which I frequent infrequently--perhaps too infrequently. Anyway, I know this old news, but he had a post in the voice of his alter-ego "Mantilla the Hon" back in September in which he criticizes the architectural concept that "form follows function." He mentions how the architecture students are very new-agey, and follows it up, saying,

"Then they are always talking about 'form follows function' and 'Bauhaus' and all this, and making nasty buildings out of concrete that look like that bunker that Adolph Hitler shot himself in. You know?"

Now, I have no problem with a good, hard critique of modern church architecture. However, I can't help but think that someone in this situation--Fr. Longnecker or the architects--is missing something. More specifically, someone is missing the connection between "function" and what a holy place, a church, is. Isn't the function of a church a place to worship God? That is enough, but a church is even more than that; it is a place to house the Lord. Is it a great stretch of the mind to see that such a function requires a beautiful form? I should think not. If the form follows the function, then a church will be much grander than minimalistic.

So who's missing the point? I think it most likely that the architects Fr. Longnecker is talking about missed the point. They missed it again and again. If the function of the building is to focus the visitors' minds on God and on Christ's sacrifice, then surely the form wouldn't necessitate musicians front and center, but that's how churches are built. If the function of the building is worshiping Christ, then the form would not place the tabernacle in unexpected side rooms, but that's how churches are built. And if the function of the building is to raise men and women's spirits in awe, the form would not be quaint or cute or ugly, but that's how churches are built. Is it any wonder that Father would find fault with the teaching when the students misuse it time and time again? No, it is no surprise. However, as far as I can tell, this is another case where the teaching is good and correct, but there are those who misinterpret it to the detriment of many.

Kinda like heretics.

Introduction and Explanation

...because, if we're being honest, who wouldn't?