I read a lot of blogs. I even visit blogs from people who have a different view on the Christian faith than I do. It is part of my morning blog routine, Oiler’s blogs, theology blogs, and then a glance over to see what book deals are on for that day. Sometimes when looking for the deals, I even read the links or the articles. Yesterday, I decided to scroll through the links and their summaries-this was a mistake. One of the links was a photo essay in preparation for the Pope’s arrival in Washington. There were beautiful photos from some of the churches in Washington. I enjoyed looking at the photos, but what frustrated me was the original write up.
It read:
ICONS AND SYMBOLS OF CATHOLICISM
This photo essay about the icons and symbols of Catholicism will remind you why the Reformers were so set on the simplicity of worship.
I can accept and understand that there is going to be a different viewpoint on things and that not everyone is going to agree with me. What I cannot accept is intentional anachronism (and many other things). You might have noticed this, but Washington DID not exist at the time of the Reformation. Luther. Calvin, Zwingli, and all the rest could not have said we don’t want our churches to be like those damn American ones. Specifically, since they only started building this church in 1893 about 370 years post 95 theses.
To make this claim you have to show continuity between this church and the reformation. You have to show that this cathedral with its pomp and extravagance followed the same ideology as the 1300-1500 churches and cathedrals. Anything else is terrible and lazy logic. There are deeper discussions that could be had on this, namely the iconoclastic controversy of the 8th and 9th centuries or is the magnificence of the cathedral presuppositionally bad. I don’t want to have these discussions currently; I just want to do justice to the facts.
