CHU

151

CHU

or ° le a kar: in large churches, there are generally two8i° n f e ran ges of such stalls rising a step or two in succes-°f the 7.each other. When there are aisles at the sidesth e m Cho ! r > which is generally the case in cathedrals andeither l^ lm P orta nt churches, they are separated from itUp t 0 ^ a scr een of open work, or by the stalls being carriedUsu a i in Consi< ^ era hle elevation; the latter method is moreeuricho 1 ca (h e< lrals, where the higher stalls are canopied, andis sitn at ta bernacle work. In our cathedrals, the choirs° meti m e more generally to the east of the tower, but isThe T 3een un< ier the tower, as at York and Winchester.elev ate( j ! 0lr Was originally separated from the altar, anda baln st 1 ^ t ^ le form of a theatre, enclosed all round withe Pistle 3 a< ^ e ' on eac ^ side was a pulpit) from which thein th e S°spel were sung; as may still be seen, at Rome ,hv Q rem ar phes of St. Clement and St. Pancratius, the onlythe nave 1 - 1 ' 11 ® * n ^ le original form. It was separated from^alustrad 111 t * le t ™ e Constantine, and enclosed with aopened* *•« cov ored with curtains, which were not to bethe choii. 1 a ^ ter the consecration. In the twelfth century,In nn n Wa ! surr °unded with walls.

°f the ner ’ es > the choir is a large hall, adjoining the bodyohant Urc h, but separated by a grate, where the devotees

service.

See Un!! AGlC MONUMENT of Lysicrates, at Athens .CUoriT 1 0f Lysicrates .

arch. > the extent between the two extremities of an

V ARCHITECTURE, a designation applied

lln rea8on a t 1 i 0 ^thic art exclusively, but in our opinion,^fe C ti 0n ? ’ because, although G-otliic is doubtless thePurposes n° aChristian art, and the best adapted for religiousi/ atl any nt ) ’ n that respect more fairly entitled to the namej> 6 ex clud st ^ e > st hl we think all others ought not to-i? Zai Uin e e L’orn the title, since some of them, such as

Ch]

the title, since some of them, such as

Pur

’Pose;

Ch :

. r ' 8 tianit v an ^ Lombardic , owe their origin entirely to° P a gan u an< ^ were never profaned by being applied' * n g inv^ 68 ' The term ought to include all styles ofnso~ ,. en ted by the Christians , and adapted to religious; essentially from pagan architecture.

^ fICAL COLUMN. See Column.

8 e r '. s han e j-J (Creek, Kuptou oncoe, the Lord’s house,) ar j)ce. 1 ce set apart for the public celebration of divine

fe ^^ Urc hes

^ at Ure S) acc Ta jy in size, magnificence, and architecturalp ^u^inated Gr h* n S to their rank and situation ; and areH r ' ar chal ac o°rdingly : thus we have metropolitan,Vy e nas tic, and° at laC * ra ^ cardinal, conventual, collegiate,(> 11:1 Ust re f e P aris h churches ; for a description of which,ana*^ 6ac ^ se P arate title, more especially toPar' i 16 °urselv Monastery. Under this article we shalltUfal c ' u " r che more particularly to the consideration ofc °Unt ( leca liarif ’ as ’ however, the distribution and architec-pnri ^ es > We tr .' e3 °P churches vary considerably in differentgr esa (: hureh eg US P P rem ' se further, that we include only theap ( j °f Chureh° A° Ut ' - 0wn countr y- The history and pro-t'tlg p 0m Parisn Architecture in this and other countries,a ° ,P-cclp„t? °* t * le w hole, will be treated of under thetpent t lfi re j s a Stical Architecture.

>t rtla °P Parts i^ e ( l , era * similarity in the division and arrange-

^ ^ ^ ChurollPO fif* lirlidtoTror ilntfl Ar cifnafion

e - ue o churches of whatever date or situation,^latgt’ *° say So a , 0 / place at the commencement of thisP°r t(j e *° th eae °f the primitive churches, as far

Whj " ’

th —ooe . _ r ___,__

P'-"'p 0se ^ a p'5 u .^ a ^ s - The earliest buildings erected

as

oi ' V llioV | use of PL ■ . uunmugo cicuicu

'“‘'fist; 11 ' v e j la wnristian worship, or at least the earliestatls hafi _ e an y account, as also the first in which°Pportunity of following their own mode

of construction, are those which owe their existence to thezeal of Constantine the Great ; and the most ancient andmost perfect model of these now remaining, is that of SaintClement at Rome . From this and some few other structuresat Rome , we are enabled to determine, to a certain extent,the form of the churches of that period ; and our conclusionsderived from this source, are confirmed by Eusebius , whohas left us a description of a Greek church of his own time.From these combined authorities, we learn that the plans ofsuch buildings were either oblong or cruciform, and weredivided into distinct portions as follows :—At the entranceto the church was the vestibule or narthex, in which werestationed the catechumens and penitents of various stages,and which was frequently divided into two or more parts,each of which was destined for a difierent class of penitents,the outermost for those who were under the more severe icensures of the church, and the innermost for the catechumens; jthis last division was termed vap0jj£, ferula, because those |who were admitted into it, began to be subject to the disci-pline pf the church. These vestibules or porticos led to thenave properly so called, in which were assembled the bodyof the faithful; and which was divided in its width intothree or more parts—a central one, with an aisle on each sideof it. In the central avenue or body of the building, andat the remote end of the nave, was the choir, shut off fromthe other parts of the church by a rail or otherwise ; in thiswere the ambones or pulpits for reading, as also the seats forthe choristers, and here was the greater portion of the serviceperformed. From the choir was an ascent of steps to thesanctuary, which was of an apsidal form, having seats allround for the priests, and a more elevated one in the centreof them for the bishop, immediately in front of which stoodthe altar. Attached to the church, but forming a distincterection, was the baptistery, in which persons were admittedinto fellowship with the body of believers. Having thusgiven a rapid sketch of a primitive church, we shall pass tothe consideration of our more immediate subject, begging ourreaders to bear in mind the preceding observations, while wedescribe the form and arrangement of our English churches.

In speaking of our parochial churches, we would be under-stood to refer solely to those erected before the Reformation,in the styles usually denominated Gothic. This is not theplace, even were argument necessary, to discuss the com-parative merits of the Italian and Gothic styles, or theiradaptation to sacred purposes. The improved taste of theage has led to the preference of the latter, and there are fewof the present day who would be found to question its cor-rectness. Gothic is the prevailing fashion now, as wasItalian in the preceding generations ; apart from this, how-ever, we think there can be no man of correct taste andunbiassed judgment, but would prefer the quiet unobtrusivesimplicity of our old parish churches, to the more pompousgrandeur of those of the last two centuries. Nothing canbe more diverse than the impressions conveyed by the two—the one, solemn, subdued, and peaceful; the other, secular,showy, and luxurious : it is astonishing how completely theapplication of the two styles to the same general form, willchange the features and general appearance of an edifice.

Our parish churches are perfectly unique ; different fromwhat we find elsewhere, they form quite a national charac-teristic, of which an Englishman may indeed be proud.Their origin is attributed to Archbishop Theodore, whonoting the inconvenience which arose from the previouspractice of sending priests from the cathedral into the neigh-bouring hamlets, adopted the plan of distributing each dioceseinto manageable districts or parishes, with a resident pastorto take charge of each ; he carried out his idea by instigating