Letter 34
To my dear colleague,
You have raised the question of whether the resources spent on beautiful churches and liturgical vessels are truly justified when there are so many poor people in need. It is a question that has been raised since the woman anointed Jesus's feet with expensive ointment, and the answer he gave is still the answer.
Beauty in worship is not opposed to care for the poor. It is part of the same vision of what human life is for. Human beings are not merely material; they are made for beauty, for transcendence, for encounter with something beyond the ordinary. The church that is beautiful — that uses the best art and the best music and the most skillful craftsmanship it can afford in the service of worship — is not squandering resources that should have gone to the poor. It is investing in the formation of human beings who will be more, not less, capable of genuine charity toward the poor because they have been shaped by encounter with beauty.
There is, of course, excess — churches that are extravagant while the poor starve, clergy whose vestments are more expensive than their holiness warrants. This must be guarded against. But the principle that beauty in worship is a legitimate use of the church's resources is sound.
The cathedral I am building is beautiful. I make no apology for this.
Desiderius
Modern English rendering for readability. See the 19th-century translation or original Latin/Greek for scholarly use.