Truth, Beauty, and Goodness are referred to as transcendentals. That is, they transcend the limitations of time and space, they are not affected by cultural diversity, doctrines or ideologies. They are objective features of all that is.
Whatever is True is also Good and Beautiful. Whatever is Good is likewise True and Beautiful. But when we get to Beauty we have a problem. Beauty doesn’t follow the rules. Beauty is the free-spirited aunt out there doing her own thing for better or for worse.
When something is Beautiful, it does not follow that it must also be Good and True. It might be, but we cannot take it as a given. This has led philosophers and theologians to debate the definition of Beauty for thousands of years. But perhaps we are asking the wrong question. At least in our daily lives of trying to get by, stay out of trouble, and do some good in the world, does it really matter if we can define what Beauty is? A much better and more helpful question would be how do we discern the Good Beauty from the Bad? How do we tell the difference between a beautiful moment that lifts us up and one that debases us?
Barbara Nicolosi touches on this in a terrific article titled “Why Should Christianity be ‘Patron of the Arts?'” over at her blog, Church of the Masses. Drawing on the Pope Benedict XVI’s writings as Cardinal Ratzinger, “The Beauty and Truth of Christ” Ms. Nicolosi distinguishes between Spiritual Beauty and Sensual Beauty very succinctly.
On Spiritual Beauty:
“It is a sign that something is beautiful that people are moved to share it.”
O Sensual Beauty:
“This sham, sensual attractiveness stimulates the desire to eat; to possess; to consume; to dominate; to collect; to have sex with; it is the opposite of the impulse to share that true beauty evokes.”
Lots more great stuff in the article, check it out.