If the congregants of these churches are happy with them, who the hell cares what anybody else thinks?
Because they are ALSO works of art and as such can be criticized on that level just as secular structures can be. Think of it this way. Customers of a bank, say, may be perfectly content while the building which houses the bank can be considered either atrocious or beautiful. That evaluation does not affect the functioning of the bank anymore than evaluating the architectural style of a church is a comment on its teachings or the spiritual life it promotes, with one very important exception: church structures have always held a special niche in the history of Western art, banks not so much.
So for both you and Mountaineer I merely wish to point out I, and the person who put together that slide presentation, are talking solely about those churches as architectural phenomena, and there is nothing wrong nor insulting about that.