Search

This article uses a comparison between Durham Cathedral and the Temple at Jerusalem to argue for the ability of sacred buildings to exercise a religious role in their own right. Although obviously initially dependent on human action for their existence, when built they can then, it is argued, take on a life of their own. While negative influences are frequently noted, here it is positive dimensions that are stressed: first, in respect of experiences of the divine; then, secondly, of their ability to encourage learning from outside the specific faith context; before, thirdly, note is taken of their potential to encourage appropriate moral and political action. Finally, a response is offered to the common objection to such positive evaluation based on the alleged indifference of the early church to sacred buildings. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]