To many Churches and Religious locations?

Depends on the country or even city, that I'm in. In London or Paris, I will usually visit more museums than churches. In other places I might visit more palaces or castles. In still others (outside of Europe) it might be temples or other places of worship. What they tend to have in common is beautiful architecture and art, with centuries of history. One doesn't have to be religious to appreciate beauty and history.

Apologies I may be missing it in the text, but what is the question being asked? Are you looking for recommendations of interesting religious buildings to visit in Europe?

Yup, we're the same way. Art and architecture are my goals in the great European churches. We also gravitate to cemeteries, for the art and history. Have a wonderful trip!

Have you been to Hagia Sophia. Now that’s quite an interesting religious piece of architecture Stunned by it.

Visited St Paul’s in the Vatican for the art but was very impressed by the architecture.

Notre Dame for the history.

Saint - Chapelle for the stained glass windows.

In Florence entered a small church to find a priest sitting in the confessional booth smoking.

In London on an evening stroll heard a choir signing. Door was open, they were rehearsing. Sat and listened.

And as a lapsed Catholic any Catholic church anywhere in order to light a candle for my deceased parents. Also to sit in a pew for a respite.

So funny Douglas! Yes, Im an ambivalent believer raised as an Episcopalian. I can’t get enough of Gothic churches! I love the art, the symbolism, everything. I feel like generations of prayer has seeped into the walls! In England I go to Evensong at every opportunity.

I’m in Paris right now and an such a Museum hound! I often do 2 a day- 1 big , 1 small. I do like fine art.

Btw, they are doing some reno at Basilica of Saint-Denis. It’s pretty cool to look down in the excavation hole in the front area of the church! Not sure if that’s on your Paris list or not!

So yes, I seek out churches and museums!!

I agree that much of what we visit in Europe is churches and that results in seeing a lot of religious art. Since we are of that religion it seems normal to seek out churches. They are beautiful buildings with beautiful and/or ancient art. We see the art in the location it was created for which gives it more meaning. If you want to see history or architecture then you will visit churches regardless of your religion or non religion. But your comment about a religious pilgrimage was funny. It often does seem that way. We do visit museums but we have been to many more churches than museums.

The first few visits we made to any great European city involved a lot of churches and museums. We appreciate art but gravitiate more to the architecture and history.

These days, having been to places like London, Paris, Florence, Venice, Rome (lived there) several times each, as well as more rural locations/smaller towns in the UK, France, and Italy, we are more interested in the countryside/nature spaces, and very small towns. Still we wander into the odd church or obscure museum and we will return to old favorites (D'Orsay in Paris, Frari Church in Venice) but you won't find a lot of scheduled museum or church visits on our itineraries currently.

We recognize that European history, art, architecture, and culture are inextricably linked to religion, whether Protestant or Roman Catholic or Judaism. Who else could inspire and pay for such treasures? Who were the patrons or the arts?

The same could be said of much important classical music.

Church burnout is definitely a thing! One of the aspects through which I appreciate seeing the churches is as a part of a city's or country's history. There are lots of stories told beyond the religious.

Architecture, history, art-of course I'm going to a lot of churches when I'm in Europe. The advantage of seeing art in churches(and in San Marco in Florence) is being able to see the art in the location for which it was intended. Cathedrals have rarely been equalled for beauty and awe-think of the technology that didn't exist when these were built! Brunelleschi's dome in Florence-what an achievement!

EDITED: And churches are a great place to hear beautiful music for free-evensong in England, the Sunday service at the Augustiner church near the Hofburg Palace in Vienna.

On Fridays, when I leave work I like to visit some kind of historical thing before going home. (I am lucky because we have many things around here, mostly small and somewhat trivial, but I find them interesting). Well the other day my friend asked me why I am always visiting religious places (generally hermitages, but some monastaries). He knows that I am a practicing Catholic, but he was a bit surpised by answer. I said:

1) very few 12th century buildings still standing aren't religious and
2) many of them are in very beautiful locations in the countryside which are actually quite peaceful visit.

Of course not everything is religious, as there are castles, Roman villas and Roman villages, fossilized dinosaur tracks, etc. Yesterday I stopped at the place where Cesar Borgia was killed. Didn't know it, but drove past it every day. They have made it into a picnic area.

We limit the number of any one type location to about five per trip, whether they are castles, churches, monasteries, etc., so we don’t get burned out seeing them. As dlindstrom stated, some places are small and don’t take long to see, but their locations are great. The link is to a photo of the Knights Templar Ermita de San Bartolomé in Cañon Río de Los Lobos. The church is equidistant between the eastern and western most points in Spain. Small church, great views, few foreign tourists, and you can’t get there by train and probably not even by bus. History, religion, and beautiful countryside all in one stop.

Way back in the day (the 1970s) Kenneth Clark and BBC did a book and series called 'Civilization". It was essentially history through art. Art including architecture. It was a wonderful series that was actually a grade 12 credit course at my high school. If you cN get hold of it, you may enjoyment.
This leads up to the key point of the tale...for centuries, the movers and shakers and the people with money was the Church. So many historical art, architecture and social influence is still housed in these buildings. They still endure as they had the continuity and money to do so. You may not be into 'fine arts, but perhaps seeing it in the context it was meant to be displayed resonates more. Moving them to a museum may reduce the impact. Once I learned the impact of the Church on art, then I could understand them betterm
My last European visit was Spain...
Mostly Andalucia...so that is even more complicated as buildings may have been a mosque, synagogue and a church at some time of its history. But I found that even more fascinating. I think that trip was still more museums and historic sites that religious ones, however.

Interesting. I think you are drawn to whatever interests you. For some it’s art, food, museums, etc. My husband loves farmers markets.

For us, traveling with teens, we actively try to limit the number of church’s and museums we visit. We’ve discovered that they start looking the same. That said, we will go out of our way to see the spectacular ones (Sainte Chapelle, St. Mark’s, St. Peter’s, Louvre, etc) if we are there. But I’m not filling our day with 4 or 5 churches or museums each day.

I agree that many of the ancient sights still standing are religious or royal in nature. That’s where the money was to preserve those places through history.

Mostly Andalucia...so that is even more complicated as buildings may have been a mosque, synagogue and a church at some time of its history.

That's a great point Maria, if religious buildings are your thing I think Spain is second to none for that in Europe, over the centuries our holy places have been home to several different cultures, each contributing to their mystical aura and historical architecture of the building in question. The Mezquita in Cordoba went from Ancient Roman Temple to Visigothic Church to Moorish Mosque to Spanish Cathedral all within 1000 years!

Douglas, I am not religious at all - in fact, bordering on agnostic - but I love going through cathedrals. They are probably one of my favorite places to visit when I travel. But I do think that is partly because there is so much history and art in the cathedrals, and I adore both. The religious context can always be taken out and you can then look at the structure in its purest form (well, at least I do). :)

You're going to Italy. Surely you can fit in a few Roman sites to balance out all that religious architecture.

I limit the number of castles I see during a trip, so I don’t get “castle fatigue”.

I love going to cathedrals and spending quality time in them! I prefer the ones that aren’t covered in gold decor. Since you’re going to Italy, my absolute favorite is the interior of the Parma Cathedral - the gorgeous warm tones in the frescoes lining the main aisle! And the block chair has verses from the book of John embossed on it in multiple languages, including English. I’ve returned to that area just to spend more time in it. The cathedral in Cremona also has some of the same look.

My top three special Christian-centered days on solo trips were at:
1. Parma Cathedral
2. Chartres Cathedral
3. Angers Fortress with the Apocalypse tapestries made in the 1300’s.

I also like to enjoy museums, but I limit myself to one a day, so they stay special and I’m giving myself time to enjoy the city atmosphere, too.

You will definitely enjoy Italy since you’re interests are history & architecture!

Mostly I was just kind of surprised by how many Churches/Cathedrals/ religious locations we will be visiting and even more surprised by how many we will see.
I suppose it is just that I never really thought about it before. And as a result I got to wondering if this was typical or not.
Then I remembered my first trip to Europe in the 70s as a child with my older brother and sister and my folks and that my Brother and sister got tiered of visiting churches and refused to go into one, one day.

So I was wondering if other had ever thought about this or if you went to less of them or whatever.

And yes it is understandable why there are so many of these locations and why they are so significant of locations. On the other hand I am not a big fan of fine art museums, so I have a definite limit on how many museums I see in any given number of days.
But as a fan of history and architecture I can visit castles and Cathedrals almost daily. But that is just me, So anyway this was/is just me wondering about how others travel.

I drop a coin. They were made by men (people). Many lost their lives in construction. I keep it in that context.

I'm certain and clear in my atheism, and love visiting churches in Europe. So many spectacular achievements, so much interesting history and culture.

I can eventually get a little jaded to Gothic and especially Protestant churches, but never tire of Baroque religious sites. Particularly in the Southern Teutonic areas where most of my ethnic heritage comes from. I'm regularly blown away for instance by how rich and beautiful unassuming Baroque churches tend to be even in modest Austrian villages. Many of my ancestors were musicians and some scholars and poets, so no doubt they were deeply involved with their churches.

So anyway, for me churches in Europe are both wonderful and divorced (har har) from contemporary religiosity.

I've experienced church and museum burnout before. I find one of each in one day is plenty. So many little signs to read and that's great, but it loses its appeal after repetition.

We were in Germany several years ago and our English tour director told us we were going on an ABC tour; we all looked confused until she told us what it meant....Another Bloody Church! (I can still hear that English accent as she said it!!)

Of course there is church and museum burnout. But in Europe, how do you separate religion, history, culture, architecture, music, art and politics into neat little categories anyway?

We don't typically seek out cathedrals, churches, etc. but we do drop by if we see one because of the significant role they played in history. Last year at the Canterbury Cathedral, the docent pointed out that the cathedral was so much more than a place of worship back in its day, it was also a community gathering place. For me it's not usually the beauty of the structure, but the the historical significance of the structure.

To me it is typically the Architecture. I once spent a couple hours in the then new Gallery in Westminster just looking at the construction of the place,

Yes, church burnout is a thing. So is castle burnout, museum burnout and even cute village burnout. We try to limit ourselves to one church, museum or archeological site per day.

Having a faith tradition isn't needed to appreciate the art and architecture of churches and religious locations, but it can help. My wife was inducted into the Florence Nightingale Society in a ceremony held at Westminster Abbey. In addition to the ceremony, we attended evening prayer there, as well as at St. Paul's Cathedral. It was especially meaningful since we are Episcopalian, the red headed stepchildren of the English Anglican church.

While in Italy we visited the Abbey of Monte Oliveto Maggiore. We attended compline that evening, which was celebrated with Gregorian chant. It was the monks, a lady from a nearby village and us. The monks encouraged us to participate by joining in the responses. It was incredibly peaceful and meaningful.

To me churches/cathedrals are museums, especially if they have a gift shop in them. They hold no religious meaning to me and they are just another building to be explored, but for instance, the St. Peter in Chains Church in Rome has the Moses Sculpture by Michelangelo so we wanted to see that. We also love the architecture, the art such as the mosaics in Vatican and St Peter's Basilica, all the symbolism etc. Also most churches are in the middle of the city or the largest building in a small town, so naturally there is going to be more going on around there to see/explore so why not pop in and see what it is all about. One church that stood out to me was in Bath, England where the outside had a depiction on Jacobs ladder, with the sculpture of the angels going up and down it. I do read the bible so I knew what it was and can usually place what is trying to be depicted when I do go into cathedrals/churches. Another plus is they are usually very cool in temperature and have seating to rest tired feet and sometimes it is just better to sit, let your eyes roam around and take it all in.

Has anyone ever visited all the churches that hold parts of the cross or body parts of the saints? Is it possible to do a tour of all the churches with body parts of one saint until you have assembled his whole body in visitations?

Ha, Treemoss, wouldn't that be awkward if someone tried, and said Saint ended up with two left hands?

Your topic suggests TOO many ... but IMHO, I would say, Yes TO many.

There is a lot of pretty incredible art in many of those churches, particularly in Italy. As statuary and as frescoes, such art is only visible in situ. In Italy, there is so much by early lights of the Renaissance and even the late middle ages before the Renaissance. Pisano sculptures in Pisa and Lucca; Fra Angelico frescoes in Florence; Michelangelo sculptures and frescoes in Florence, Siena and Rome; Masaccio fescoes in Florence; Ghirlandaio frescoes in Florence, as well as in Rome (Michalengelo apprenticed with Ghirlandaio's workshop in Florence); and Titian in Venice. That is just to name a few.

Others have mentioned great architecture - Brunelleschi in Florence and Michelangelo in Rome.

In Spain, there is the history, art and culture of Moorish/Islamic Spain, as well as a few vestiges of Jewish Spain. Of course, Ferdinand and Isabella, like earlier Reconquista monarchs, did what they could to eradicate mosques and synagogues by transforming them into churches. But the art and the history remain visible.

The Renaissance artists were not simply artists. Many were indeed Renaissance men (and a few women, hidden in there as well). A number learned to paint and sculpt by going against religion and dissecting (the Church would have said desecrating) bodies and helped give a foundation to the study of anatomy. As architects and as engineers, they built churches and fortifications and transportation systems and water works not possible during the middle ages.

We could long debate religion and what European culture means in terms of our modern world and relationships, but I will spare the digression and avoid a likely violation of forum guidelines. I will simply continue to visit the churches, sometimes awestruck by all that is there, for better and for worse. And then, go out for a cappuccino, food, wine and more.

Ha, Treemoss, wouldn't that be awkward if someone tried, and said Saint ended up with two left hands?

No, Allan. That would be ANOTHER MIRACLE! 😟

I've begun to feel a same sense of moral ambiguity, while visiting palaces in France, Italy and England. We go there because they are spectacular. But the underlaying reasons of why they are so extravagant, often turns out to be very ugly social class divisions that lasted for hundreds of years. Like, lets go see, and pay an entry fee to see, Chambord. It is magnificent, but it was also just a hunting lodge, a play thing, for the 1% royalty at the time, and everyone else were surfs. Am I a SURF, to pay for the entrance fee to maintain it? I don't know anymore. These places, in some sense, still glorify monarchy and hegemony through family lines.

Visiting a place is not an endorsement of the actions of those who were there

"Visiting a place is not an endorsement of the actions of those who were there"

I respectfully disagree. Why do tourists crowd in to London Tower, to see the Crown Jewels?

Crowns and Jewels, that still have, State Functions. I understand that it is mostly ceremonial today: As is the current UK monarchy. But, I did pay $25 to get in and see all these things. And some sites are hybrid in the sense that the owners opened up the Palace/Castle for visitation after putting a bit of it, in to the National Trust for taxation reasons.

I can't say this is good or bad, I can say sometimes, I'm a little conflicted. Cause after 6PM, and until 6AM the family still has full use of a property now maintained by tourism and National Trust Funds. Look into that family's accumulation of wealth, and the skeletons all fall out: Slave trade, Ground Rents, drugs, royal monopolies an arm sales. This is how they got so much power, to build this magnificent thing, like Versailles, that you are paying for, to see, and with your entrance fee, to maintain, for future tourism.

Reflecting on all of those negative things that we can associate with history and past social values, and your feelings about them, is in itself a valid reason for going to see them. It's not worship or support, its understanding that art and architecture did not get created without a purpose, or just for our entertainment.

Cause after 6PM, and until 6AM the family still has full use of a property now maintained by tourism and National Trust Funds.

I am not sure the royals sneak in after hours to try on the jewellery. What's displayed is only a very, very small part of the Crown jewellery collection.

There are many reasons to criticise the British royal family but I am not sure that playing dress up with the Crown Jewels in the evenings is one of them.

The Royals do not "sneak-in.," after 6pm. It is still THEIR place to use, by way of the contract, that they have made with
the National Trust. They drive in with the driven Rolls, and it is theirs again for 12 hours to have hunting parties.

The King of England, now Charles, gets 24 million dollars a year: As a stipend that comes from tax payers in the UK. British Kings and Queens are except from paying property taxes. If travel is truly a political experience, I think about these things: Divine assentation is myth.

Am I supporting a constitutional monarchy by gong to Windsor Castle and paying an entrance fee? In a way, I am. I'm continuing the myth,...... with my entrance fee.

,

The Great Cathedrals, I've come to terms with. An entrance fee, on many, isn't required, it is suggested, in a true Christian Way. I will pay that, and a bit more, to maintain the site, just because it is a spectacular human achievement of engineering, and really for no other reason. I'm not endorsing the religion. But it gives me good feelings to support such things that still has local benefits to the local people. And being in these spaces, gives one a sense of wonder, even if we are Atheistic, or Agnostic. The art is still the best ever created.

My priorities are the museums, chateaux (Schloesser), and certain churches. These all are part and parcel to the political and cultural history of the place you're focused on. As part of one's trip to France and Germany, I recommend churches and cathedrals, regardless of one's view of religion.

In Potsdam the controversy surrounds the rebuilding of the Garnisonskirche after much debate pertaining to its particular history continues. If you're focused on churches and cathedrals in Germany which is differentiated by " Münster" and "Dom" there are numerous important ones...Naumburg, Speyer, Worms, Cologne, Ulm, Magdeburg, Dresden. Berlin, Erfurt, etc.

The first church that impressed me was on my first trip to Germany when I saw the St. Johanniskirche in Lüneburg.

Going after museums is another thing, a more personal matter, especially those esoteric history museums, such as museums on WW1 or WW2, Napoleon, warfare history, or regional museums.

I never tire of Gothic architecture.