We noticed that you're using an unsupported browser. The TripAdvisor website may not display properly.We support the following browsers:
Windows: Internet Explorer, Mozilla Firefox, Google Chrome. Mac: Safari.

Westminster or St Paul's

Troy, Michigan
3 posts
Save Topic
Westminster or St Paul's

Hi all, if you could only visit one church on your only visit to London, which church should we visit? Westminster Abbey or St Paul's Cathedral? Thanks for your help.

Wayne, Pennsylvania
Level Contributor
2,045 posts
31 reviews
Save Reply
1. Re: Westminster or St Paul's

I would say St.Paul's and I have no specific reason. I have lived in London in the past and somehow St. Paul's seems to strike a chord. You cannot go wrong visiting either.

U.S. expats
Destination Expert
for Windsor, London, Dry Tortugas National Park
Level Contributor
20,174 posts
208 reviews
Save Reply
2. Re: Westminster or St Paul's

Well, they are very different places, but I think I,too, would lean towards St. Paul's.

But is there a reason you cannot do both?

London, United...
Level Contributor
540 posts
210 reviews
Save Reply
3. Re: Westminster or St Paul's

St Pauls without a doubt. Stacked in history and I dare you to take the climb to the top of the dome. Great view once you get there.

London, United...
Level Contributor
8,023 posts
524 reviews
Save Reply
4. Re: Westminster or St Paul's

Another vote for St Pauls and if you do get the time then also go to the Westminster Abbey.

Level Contributor
2,630 posts
Save Reply
5. Re: Westminster or St Paul's

Certainly not St Paul's.

No history worth a damn, except for a photograph of it looking pretty while not being bombed. Architecturally boring (an own-label copy of St Peter's Rome), and London's got dozens of other Wren churches anyway. Practically empty inside.

An out and out parvenue among Europe's cathedrals: even the United States has churches built earlier and England's got nearly 8,000 twice its age.

Worst of all, by being built all at once and scarcely changed since, it's deeply unEnglish. Proper English churches - from the one next door to my house to the Abbey - are all about a thousand years of continuously being messed about. They reflect their community's life over the past millennium. St Paul's is just one architect's bright idea.

Stanley, Falkland...
Level Contributor
32,979 posts
75 reviews
Save Reply
6. Re: Westminster or St Paul's

Where are kings and queens of England buried? Where are geniuses and heroes (scientists, poets, artists, etc) of the country buried?

Where are royal weddings (bar one or two) held?

No contest.

Level Contributor
104 posts
21 reviews
Save Reply
7. Re: Westminster or St Paul's

Another vote for the Abbey:


London, United...
Level Contributor
122 posts
4 reviews
Save Reply
8. Re: Westminster or St Paul's

Westminster !!!!!

St Paul's is grand to look at, but if you are interested in History, Westminster Abbey anytime of the day.

So if all you want is a few photo opportunities, St Paul's possibly your choice, but is it worth climbing to the top, I am not sure.

BTW, I assume you will also see all the other sight in London, which basiclly mean you will walk pass/nearby the Abbey anyway, more logical choice.

Level Contributor
2,214 posts
47 reviews
Save Reply
9. Re: Westminster or St Paul's

Well personally I would say Westminster Abbey as well, over 900 years of history to take in, though to fully appreciate all it's nook and crannies you should take the verger tour.

10. Re: Westminster or St Paul's

-:- Message from TripAdvisor staff -:-

This topic has been closed to new posts due to inactivity. We hope you'll join the conversation by posting to an open topic or starting a new one.

To review the TripAdvisor Forums Posting Guidelines, please follow this link: http://www.tripadvisor.com/pages/forums_posting_guidelines.html

We remove posts that do not follow our posting guidelines, and we reserve the right to remove any post for any reason.

Removed on: 06 October 2012, 23:18