Why not steps?

The mark of older chancels was often steps.  The altar was raised, the pulpit was raised, and the whole chancel was raised.  Sometimes there were a plenty of steps.  Some might suggest that this was due to the need to be seen but I wonder if it wasn't something else.  The God who is wholly other is accessible by steps.  The steps are not simply architectural but theological.  We must ascend to Him or He must descend to us or we have no communion.  The ancient Church more likely reflected this truth in architectural terms than the present and future Church does.  

Especially medieval buildings reflect this symbolic language within the floor plan. Every aspect of the medieval structures we do admire seems to echo or communicate theological truths. The churches built of stone and wood reflected a worldview that understands reality itself in hierarchical terms, the God who is wholly other and who is inaccessible until and unless He reveals Himself to us and makes Himself available to us and their sanctuaries reflect this very literally.  Indeed, from at least to the 8th century, the church buildings were designed in vertical layers, lifting the ministers as well as the vision of the worshipers to the God on high.  The entire building was intentionally designed to be a vertical map of this theological reality, a very expression of medieval Christian cosmology.  

Our present views on the subject of the buildings in which we worship are probably not as organized but they also reflect our cosmology.  Though we are more likely to be concerned about ease of access, to be sure, we are also driven by the idea that we are on His plane -- an egalitarian idea of our relationship with the mighty and eternal God.   It is not by accident that modern day liturgical churches construct buildings in which the altar and pulpit are often on the very same plane as the folks in the pew.  This might be something we do in the name of disability and ease of access but it is more likely a reflection of our desire to bring God down to us on our terms -- something not so foreign to the problem of Eden.

Medieval Christians and those who went before them could have certainly placed the altar at the same level as the congregation -- it would have been much easier on the task of constructing the building. They could have arranged the “worship space” in the manner that we do today -- so the congregation surrounded the sanctuary on most or all sides and in which the chancel is center but not above us. The reality is that generation after generation followed the early lead until the present day.  We forget that what we are doing is so out of sync with our own Christian past.  They have continued to construct churches whose architectural plan was intent upon proclaiming ascent, descent, hierarchy, sacrifice and the kingship of Christ.  At least until the past 70 years or more when we made a break with our own history.

We need to relearn how to read that symbolic language the architectural plans hide.  We need to learn how to be more intent upon faithful structures which visually reflect the Biblical image of God and how He interacts with us.  Without this, our buildings will continue to be living rooms or warehouses which do not look like our theology or at least like the Biblical reality which is supposed to inform our theology.