Posted on 10/31/2025 10:59:01 AM PDT by CondoleezzaProtege
Leading 20th century Roman Catholic theologian Hans Urs von Balthasar contended that Protestantism had no place for beauty in its theology. “Contemporary Protestant theology nowhere deals with the beautiful as a theological category,” he wrote. “For the time being, the only question posed by Protestants is that concerning the relationship between revelation and this-worldly beauty—certainly a justified question, but not a sufficient one.”
Dutch Reformed theological heavyweight Herman Bavinck seems to provide evidence of von Balthasar’s charge. Bavinck wrote, “It is not advisable to speak—with the church fathers, scholastics, and Catholic theologians—of God’s beauty.” Bavinck beautifully summarizes Augustine’s view that God is the epitome of beauty, and that all created things have beauty by participation in him. But he dismisses this view as a bit of Neo-platonic corruption. “In this view of Augustine we encounter the undeniable influence of Neoplatonism….Protestant theologians, by contrast, preferred to speak of God’s majesty and glory.”
The only counter-example that comes immediately to mind is Jonathan Edwards. Of course, Edwards is a pretty substantial counter example, and perhaps he is why von Balthasar said “contemporary” Protestant theology. Yet there still seems to be some teeth to von Balthasar’s charge. The recent evangelical systematic theologies that I am aware of do not denigrate beauty, but it does appear that beauty is completely irrelevant to their task.
And so I ask, Do evangelical Protestants have a blind spot when it comes to beauty? Do we, in fact, treat beauty as interjecting a dangerous and foreign element into our theologizing? If so, does this inherited mindset shed light on why we simply don’t have the categories to cogently evaluate music?
Well, I wish the first image was an “average” Catholci Church. Unfortunately, modernist elements would forse us to describe that image as an ideal or archetype, rather than an average.
You can find old Protestant churches, especially in New England, that are stately, and still pointing to Heaven.
That is notwithstanding (likely lapsed) Lutheran Garrison Keillor’s juxtaposition of the Catholic Church as God’s House, and the Lutheran Church more like “God’s Potato Barn”.
Cathoholicism?
Tracks...
Showing a Protestant church in a shopping center as representative of Protestant conception of beauty is extremely deceptive and more accurately represents the embrace of deception of Jason Parker. Why did he not show the National Cathedral in Washington D C?
If he’s referring to church buildings, most protestant churches do not emphasize “glorious” decor because we don’t want to elevate buildings above the Gospel, and we certainly don’t want to have buildings full of graven images and icons. Having said that, it’s true that the temple that God instructed the Jews to build was ornate and rich to the nth degree. However, that was because the Spirit of the LORD dwelt there. After the Crucifixion, Resurrection and Ascension of Jesus, and the gift of the Holy Spirit upon mankind on the Day of Pentecost, this was no longer the case. Now, the Spirit of the LORD dwells within believers. Some people feel that magnificent architecture glorifies God. While it may be the architect’s expression of divinity, or even a form of worship, many believe God is not interested in such things, because He is interested in the heart of man, only.
Nah…we simply don’t like sodomites and Muslim sycophants.
It's especially scathing, as I've always thought that if we could define evil it would be a hatred for the true, the good, and the beautiful.
All of those can have beautiful, and less than beautiful, aspects.
Brutalism in architecture is a perfect example. I would never consider that beautiful yet others might.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, yet I doubt that anyone would deny that there is beauty in the world.
God doesn’t care about what a church looks like. You don’t even need a church.
In my not so humble opinion ;-D this also ties in with those who can’t look at those Sweeny photos without having to condemn their little head.
bttt
God, the devil knows, can use anything, even what a church looks like.
I suggest, that since we still live in "middle earth" everything physical can be made beautiful in an act of worship. I don't want to be the one to spit on Roger Scruton or John Rutter and say, "God doesn't care" about what you're doing.
Aren’t you mixing it up with a Christian view of property?
That is not the average church building for Protestant denominations. We certainly have plainer buildings, especially from the stricter denominations, but not because we don’t appreciate beauty as much as any other human being. That’s simply one of the most absurd suppositions I’ve ever heard. All you have to do is do a search for beautiful Protestant churches and you’ll see plenty of different styles from different ages to appreciate.
Very Platonic.
“Contemporary Protestant theology nowhere deals with the beautiful as a theological category,” he wrote.
Many consider the Bible, as a whole, to be a thing of beauty and wonder. I know I do.
The title is skewed to score in theological game. It is possible to see in general culture that evil embrace the dark side.
It is fitting and proper to appreciate a woman's beauty as long as one can maintain control over his tripod.
My Lord, the number of religious fools is incalculable.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.