By Dan Oliana
Over the last couple of years, I began to take notice of the churches in my home town of Sault Ste. Marie and admired their architectural design and details. My interest spread and I started looking for other churches and as is human nature, compared them, noticing the marked differences in their range of decorative detail and size. I realized I was looking at the church structures as they stand today but knew nothing of their origins. This architectural interest festered to the point where I ultimately took it on as a research topic.
Given the local nature of the project, I expected the collection of information on the various churches would be a simple task. Merely organizing their construction dates chronologically would probably explain the progression from simple church buildings to more ornate and larger structures. This was not the case for either documentation or explanation. The most surprising outcome of this project was how much of the community’s early development influenced church construction. Consequently, an understanding Sault Ste. Marie’s history was the key to my understanding of local building history.
Ultimately, the answer to the question of variations in church architecture had less to do with when the church was built but more to do with who was involved. I found that churches reflected the congregation at the time of construction. As institutions, churches are different by their very function. Their congregations, although sharing a common faith, represent cross-sections of the community. As members of both the community and the church, congregants were the link; thereby what affected one, influenced the other. Continue reading