Unchurched Church Architecture
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
UNCHURCHED CHURCH ARCHITECTURE: An examination of the relationship between exterior Protestant Church design and the conceptualizations of the churched and unchurched by Matthew William Niermann A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Architecture) in The University of Michigan 2016 Doctoral Committee: Professor Linda N. Groat, Chair Professor Gerald Moran Associate Professor Daniel Ramirez, Claremont Graduate University Professor Jean D. Wineman © Matthew Niermann 2016 DEDICATION I dedicate this dissertation to the men and women of the church who have diligently sought the faithful navigation of this ordained institution embedded in an ever changing world. May they always remember Proverbs 19:2. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my special gratitude to Dr. Linda Groat who has provided the opportunity, guidance, and inspiration to pursue a rigorous examination of a rarely considered topic. Special appreciation is owed to each of the other committee members, Jean Wineman, Daniel Ramirez, and Gerald Moran for their willingness to provide specific and specialized guidance to this multi-disciplinary research. Without these varied perspectives, the success of the dissertation would have been limited. I would like to acknowledge the essential contribution of the hundreds of individuals who offered critical hours of their time to be a part of the data collection. Finally, and perhaps foremost, I would like to acknowledge my family for their decade of support during my graduate studies. My wife, Crystal, and children, Alana and Graham, were unwavering support throughout numerous relocations, graduate degrees, and periods of intense study. My parents, Tom and Patrice, provided both tangible help and emotional encouragement throughout the years of work. Without this support structure, the luxury of pursuing deep research into an important topic would have never begun. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS DEDICATION ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS iii LIST OF FIGURES viii LIST OF TABLES xii LIST OF APPENDICIES xvi Chapter I. Introduction 1 Architectural Evangelism and the Unchurched 1 The Influence of Architectural Evangelism 3 Research Objectives 5 Overview of the Chapters 8 Chapter II. Historical Development of Architectural Evangelism 10 American Protestant Architecture and Missionary Efforts 10 Historic Development of Church Growth Theory 12 Americanization of Church Growth Theory 15 iv Americanized Church Growth and Architecture 18 Architectural Evangelism’s Missiological Logic 21 Chapter III. Theoretical Basis for Research 23 Introduction: Finding Empirical Groundings for an Empirically Inspired Theory 23 Contemporary Research of Efficacy of Unchurched Church Architecture 24 Limitations of Current Studies 27 Theoretical Foundations 28 Place Theory 31 Environmental Aesthetics 34 Environmental Aesthetics: Judgements and Preferences 35 Environmental Aesthetics: Proto-typicality 39 Environmental Aesthetics: Effects of environmental roles 42 Summary 46 Chapter IV. Research Methods 47 Research Design Overview 47 Case Study Design 48 Case Study Selection 51 Case Study Church Descriptions 54 Image-based Sorting Task Interview 64 Image Selection 69 v Research Participant Selection 72 Analysis Approach 76 Chapter V. Place Construct Analysis 78 Introduction - Free Sort Task 78 Content Analysis of Free Sorting Task Results 79 Frequency of Construct Use Analysis 85 Place Construct - MDS Analysis 92 A Distinctive Unchurched Understanding of Church Architecture 97 Chapter VI. Judgements of Comfort 98 The Effect of Design Profile Characteristics on Judgements of Comfort 98 Judgements of Comfort - Visual Analysis 111 Judgements of Comfort - MDS Analysis 117 Inconsistency between ML and Patterns of Unchurched Comfort Judgments 123 Chapter VII. Judgements of Emphasis 125 The Perceived Importance of the Church’s Emphasis 125 Judgements of Emphasis - Visual Analysis 132 Judgements of Emphasis - MDS Analysis 138 A Consistent Importance of Perceived Worship Emphasis for Unchurched 144 Chapter VIII. Judgements of Aesthetic Quality 147 The Effect of Design Profile Characteristics on Aesthetic Judgements 148 vi Aesthetic Judgements - Visual Analysis 158 Aesthetic Judgements - MDS Analysis 163 Unchurched Description of Beauty in Church Architecture 170 Chapter IX. Preference Judgments and Prototypicality 171 The Effect of Design Profile Characteristics on Preference Judgements 172 Preference Judgments – MDS Analysis 182 The Effect of Prototypicality on Preference Judgements 189 Correlated Judgements to Preference 203 Characteristics of Unchurched Preference Judgements 206 Chapter X. Conclusions 208 The aptness and efficacy of Architectural Evangelism: Conclusions 208 Implications for Design of Protestant Churches 218 Limitations of the Study 222 Areas of Future Research 224 Contributions of the Study 226 APPENDICIES 227 BIBLIOGRAPHY 322 vii LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE Figure I- 1: Auburn United Methodist Church, Auburn, IL 1 Figure I- 2: A visual metaphor for the nature of places 6 Figure III- 1: Research test images 25 Figure III- 2: Millennial Selection of Most Appealing Sanctuary Images 26 Figure III- 3 A visual metaphor for the nature of place 33 Figure IV- 1 Mixed Methods: Two Nested Arrangements 49 Figure IV- 2 Proposed Nested Comparative Case Studies 50 Figure IV- 3 Case-Study Replication Design 51 Figure IV- 4: 2|42 Community Church Exterior Facade 56 Figure IV- 5: 2|42 Church Building 56 Figure IV- 6: Dexter United Methodist Church Building 58 Figure IV- 7: East Hills Community Church 60 Figure IV- 8: Riverside Baptist Church 61 Figure IV- 9: Case-Study Church Selection Replication Design 62 Figure V- 1: 242 MDS Analysis, Use of construct groups 95 Figure V- 2: DUMC MDS Analysis, Use of construct groups 95 Figure V- 3: EHC MDS Analysis, Use of construct groups 96 viii Figure V- 4: RBC MDS Analysis, Use of construct groups 96 Figure VI- 1: 242- Boxplots representing effect of ECC on comfort: 102 Figure VI- 2: 242- Boxplots representing effect of HIST on comfort 102 Figure VI- 3: 242-Boxplots representing effect of ROOF on comfort 102 Figure VI- 4: 242-Boxplots representing effect of FAC on comfort 102 Figure VI- 5: DUMC- Boxplots representing effect of ECC on comfort 103 Figure VI- 6: DUMC- Boxplots representing effect of HIST on comfort 103 Figure VI- 7: DUMC-Boxplots representing effect of ROOF on comfort 103 Figure VI- 8: DUMC-Boxplots representing effect of FAC on comfort 103 Figure VI- 9: EHC- Boxplots representing effect of ECC on comfort 104 Figure VI- 10: EHC- Boxplots representing effect of HIST on comfort 104 Figure VI- 11: EHC-Boxplots representing effect of ROOF on comfort 104 Figure VI- 12: EHC-Boxplots representing effect of FAC on comfort 104 Figure VI- 13: RBC- Boxplots representing effect of ECC on comfort 105 Figure VI- 14: RBC- Boxplots representing effect of HIST on comfort 105 Figure VI- 15: RBC-Boxplots representing effect of ROOF on comfort 105 Figure VI- 16: RBC-Boxplots representing effect of FAC on comfort 105 Figure VI- 17: 242 MDS Analysis of Comfort Judgements 118 Figure VI- 18: DUMC MDS Analysis of Comfort Judgements 119 Figure VI- 19: EHC MDS Analysis of Comfort Judgements 120 Figure VI- 20: RBC MDS Analysis of Comfort Judgements 121 Figure VII- 1: 242 Ranked Importance of Ecclesiological Emphasis 127 Figure VII- 2: DUMC Ranked Importance of Ecclesiological Emphasis 127 ix Figure VII- 3: EHC Ranked Importance of Ecclesiological Emphasis 128 Figure VII- 4: RBC Ranked Importance of Ecclesiological Emphasis 128 Figure VII- 5: 242 MDS Analysis of Emphasis Judgements 139 Figure VII- 6: DUMC MDS Analysis of Emphasis Judgements 140 Figure VII- 7: EHC MDS Analysis of Emphasis Judgements 141 Figure VII- 8: RBC MDS Analysis of Emphasis Judgements 142 Figure VIII- 1: 242- Boxplots representing effect of ECC on aesthetic judgment 151 Figure VIII- 2: 242- Boxplots representing effect of HIST on aesthetic judgment 151 Figure VIII- 3: 242- Boxplots representing effect of ROOF on aesthetic judgment 151 Figure VIII- 4: 242- Boxplots representing effect of FAC on aesthetic judgment 151 Figure VIII- 5: DUMC- Boxplots representing effect of ECC on aesthetic judgment 152 Figure VIII- 6: DUMC- Boxplots representing effect of HIST on aesthetic judgment 152 Figure VIII- 7: DUMC- Boxplots representing effect of ROOF on aesthetic judgment 152 Figure VIII- 8: DUMC- Boxplots representing effect of FAC on aesthetic judgment 152 Figure VIII- 9: EHC- Boxplots representing effect of ECC on aesthetic judgment 153 Figure VIII- 10: EHC- Boxplots representing effect of HIST on aesthetic judgment 153 Figure VIII- 11: EHC- Boxplots representing effect of ROOF on aesthetic judgment 153 Figure VIII- 12: EHC- Boxplots representing effect of FAC on aesthetic judgment 153 Figure VIII- 13: RBC- Boxplots representing effect of ECC on aesthetic judgment 154 Figure VIII- 14: RBC- Boxplots representing effect of HIST on aesthetic judgment 154 Figure VIII- 15: RBC- Boxplots representing effect of ROOF on aesthetic judgment 154 Figure VIII- 16: RBC- Boxplots representing effect of FAC on aesthetic judgment 154 Figure VIII- 17: 242 MDS Analysis of Aesthetic Quality Judgements 164 x Figure VIII- 18: DUMC MDS Analysis of Aesthetic Quality Judgements 165 Figure VIII- 19: EHC MDS Analysis of Aesthetic Quality Judgements 166 Figure VIII- 20: RBC MDS Analysis of Aesthetic Quality Judgements 167 Figure IX- 1: 242- Boxplots representing effect of ECC on preference 174 Figure IX- 2: 242- Boxplots representing effect of HIST on