Worship Arts?
Posted by Andrew Wencl in Church & Missions, News & Culture
Where do the arts fit in worship? More specifically, where do the arts fit in corporate worship? Perhaps you’ve never asked these questions or perhaps the questions seem inappropriate to you. Like it or not, there is an artistic element to our gatherings that ought not to be ignored if we are to approach these questions and others like it seriously.
Artistic Architecture
I was watching a video of R.C. Sproul discussing church buildings and the artistic themes of their architecture. One need not go house shopping or visit the downtown of a major metropolitan area for long before he will discover that all architecture says something. Tall marble columns have an air of stateliness, antiquity, power, and majesty. Wood, brick, and steel all communicate something different, as do colors, shapes, and sizes. There is no such thing as a purely utilitarian building.
Sproul asked his listeners if any of them had ever walked into a cathedral. There is usually some type of large outer door that leads to a small area that is between the sanctuary and the outside world. It almost plunges you into darkness, but when you step through the next door you have suddenly stepped into humongous chamber of light that can cut you off mid-sentence, forcing you to a whisper or to silence. Do you think that was unintentional?
Chances are your church isn’t quite like that. But when you walk in, does it look modern or traditional? Casual or formal? Open or cramped? Whether you agree with the message or not, your church building says something. Maybe it just says you can’t afford a better place to meet. But if your church has any age to it at all, it will say something, and chances are that statement was intentional.
Our buildings are a form of art. They may be modern, traditional, centered towards a pulpit or cross, with stadium seating, theater seating, or something else. Likewise, the clothes we wear express something about ourselves. The tie is the most useless piece of clothing anyone could have come up with, so we know its sole purpose is to express something. How many hats are purely functional?
I write this to make a point: art is accepted within our churches. It may not be an active part of our corporate worship gatherings, but it sets a mood. Perhaps it is the clothes we wear, or the direction the seating faces, what color the carpet is, or the wall hanging in the back. It is art. Many churches have a large cross centered behind the podium. Ours does. That is art. It doesn’t serve any other purpose than to make a statement and to bring to our minds the recollection of what that cross stands for. By itself the cross means nothing, but at the center of the church auditorium, ever in view, it makes a statement that practically shouts, “This is why we are here.”
Still Art
That cross in the center of the sanctuary is a piece of art. It is immobile and serves as a reminder. It has no other functional purpose. We didn’t put coat hooks on it; we don’t use it as a bulletin board. It is a graphic reminder of the most important six hours in history. And we’ve come to accept it. We’ve come to the point where we don’t really think of it as a piece of art. We don’t think of it as a worship aid or memory jogger. It is simply there. But it is art.
Many church nurseries have Bible stories displayed on the walls, perhaps Noah and an ark full of animals (with a giraffe head sticking over the top) or Jesus feeding the five thousand. We expect these things. We buy children’s Bibles based not on the translation, but on the quality of the pictures in it. I’m not saying this is bad. If little Susie is more likely to chew on the cover than to read through Leviticus, maybe a little visual stimulation is a good introduction.
However, the sanctuary has been an area we try to “protect” from artistic influence. Singing is fine, and large wooden crosses are nice, but any attempt to include drawings, paintings, or sculptures in the corporate gathering of believers is highly suspect. It’s not normal and it isn’t the way we’ve done church. Besides, isn’t it idolatrous to include pictures in the worship service? A Thomas Kinkade painting may make a nice background for the announcements, but what about displaying Christian art as a part of the service? Is it appropriate to use paintings or sculptures as worship aids?
Moving Art
If still art gets your heart pumping, what do skits, dramas, and movies do for you? Is there room for interpretive dance? How about a color guard? Does choreography glorify God? Does a robed choir count as visual stimulation?
All pastors are dramatic. They may move their arms or hands, point back at the cross on the wall, raise their voice, whisper. All for dramatic effect. And this can be done subconsciously. But it is still drama. The issue usually arises when people want to include drama apart from the sermon.
I’ve seen various skits and drama’s to present the gospel. Some were as short as a couple of minutes and tried to relate the whole biblical narrative. Others used non-biblical (not necessarily unbiblical) allegory to explain our sinfulness and need for a savior. They may be great for youth events and mission trips, but do they have a place in the service? How about comedies? If we allow dramas, should we allow standup comedians participate in the corporate gathering of the church to worship?
Biblical Principles
I’d rather pose more questions than answers so as to not stifle conversation; I’ve tried to present questions and statements in a way that would give credence to more inclusive and exclusive positions on including the arts I didn’t have time to include other artistic expressions like poetry or to hit more specifically on dance and drama. I’d like to discuss what principles the Bible calls for; what’s required, what’s permissible, and how to use discernment. I’m also interested in your personal experience with the arts in corporate church worship and what your church has done to include/exclude the arts.



I believe art, like poetry, is an inner stimulation of a person expressed on canvas or in words. Dance, speech, architecture and color, to name a few, are expressions exhibited by men or women of what is inside their hearts. There must be a care taken when these things squeeze out kingdom and spiritual thinking and begin to form mental idols. My question is when should they be recognized as idols or any likeness that is in heaven?
I visited a church once and was dropping off my daughter in the nursery. There was a mural painted on the wall in the nursery hall way. A renovation project had been completed and the walls were freshly painted up to the mural and no further. It was obvious that the mural was old. We were told that there was a concern about covering it since sister so-and-so painted it many many years ago and she had passed away recently. Once some art is in place, it becomes a permanent fixture preventing any future progress.
I visited another church and every piece of furniture, stained glass, organ, pulpit, paintings and even an outside hand rail had a “dedicated to” bronze plaque on it with dates back to 1918 on them. It was like a grave yard made into a church building.
I have many more examples, too. Though we may see the positive in art, we must be extremely cautious when incorporating it into worship. Since God never duplicates His work in scripture; the flood, Daniel and the lion’s den, Samson, David and Goliath, etc., I think our artful worship should follow the same process in order not to get caught up in “needing” a visual to even worship. I’m for remodeling every so often just to start fresh. I also replace my bible every 7 years for the same reason.
I watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjVlmB2uPKU&feature=related and ask myself, “At what point do we start to trample on the Second Commandment?”
The posture at the end is what prompts that question.
Luke’s description of the penultimate corporate activity of the Spirit until the final coming of Christ expresses much more than Art. Art is a subjective approach to reality and truth, and caution must be administered as we include anything beyond what the Spirit has exposed …. In the occasion we give Art an opportunity to define worship.
What is clear from Luke’s depiction of Life in the church?
1. The Preaching of the Word
2. Repentence and Exhortation
3. Christ’s Supremacy
4. Forgiveness and the Receiving of the Spirit
5. The Promise Conceived
6. Salvation
7. Baptism
8. Devotion to One Another
9. Devotion to Teaching and to Fellowship
10. Knowing the Power of the Spirit
11. A Commonality of Belief
12. A Sharing of Goods with those in Need
13. A Continuance of Unity from Day to Day
14. Praising God with all the People
15. Understanding with Expectation as the Lord adds to their Number
Act 2:37-47 Now when they heard this, they were pierced to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brethren, what shall we do?” (38) Peter said to them, “Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. (39) “For the promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God will call to Himself.” (40) And with many other words he solemnly testified and kept on exhorting them, saying, “Be saved from this perverse generation!” (41) So then, those who had received his word were baptized; and that day there were added about three thousand souls. (42) They were continually devoting themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer. (43) Everyone kept feeling a sense of awe; and many wonders and signs were taking place through the apostles. (44) And all those who had believed were together and had all things in common; (45) and they began selling their property and possessions and were sharing them with all, as anyone might have need. (46) Day by day continuing with one mind in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they were taking their meals together with gladness and sincerity of heart, (47) praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord was adding to their number day by day those who were being saved.
There really is no mention of “Arts” in the mind of Luke at this point. Some may believe that the church has matured to be able to form the Art’s in worship. I believe it is a step away and back from the real work of the Spirit in the lives of those that Christ has brought to Himself …diminishing the Word of God, which ultimately leaves the church with well meaning Artist’s getting the glory…. with unfortunately a skewed and subjective sense of reality in the congregation concerning the real life of the church.
Blessings,
Chris
Chris,
You are absolutely true in every instance you list. However, not one of those expectations is exclusive of the arts as some of the available means to achieve those. Let me elaborate:
1. The Preaching of the Word – the arts of oratory, rhetoric, literary composition.
2. Repentence and Exhortation – supported by the art of persuasion, pathos, and expression of fine arts in music (invitation hymns) or painting or drama.
3. Christ’s Supremacy – Can be expressed any nearly any art form.
4. Forgiveness and the Receiving of the Spirit – Displayed most often in fine arts like sculpture and painting, but also depicted in the dramatic arts of theater, cinema, and even youth group skits and sketches.
5. The Promise Conceived – Celebrated in most of the arts
6. Salvation – Same as above.
7. Baptism – Portrayed in nearly every art form.
8. Devotion to One Another – Supported by artistic expressions from flower arranging and Precious Moments figurines to incredibly creative expressions of love and appreciation.
9. Devotion to Teaching and to Fellowship – Indigenous to the arts. I cannot imagine an artistic endeavor that does not incorporate these.
10. Knowing the Power of the Spirit – What do you think “inspiration” means in the arts?
11. A Commonality of Belief – Supported by common art forms, currently practiced in Baptist hymnody and the dramatic performance we call “preaching” which is a form of oratory.
12. A Sharing of Goods with those in Need – And why cannot many of these goods be pieces of art?
13. A Continuance of Unity from Day to Day – Once again, the fellowship around shared expressions of beauty found in art.
14. Praising God with all the People – This is the essence of Christian art.
15. Understanding with Expectation as the Lord adds to their Number – Including artists whose work should be celebrated just the same as any other disciple’s.
Suffice to say, this is not an either/or argument. We already have the arts in our churches and worship services. The question is to the extent, degree, and nature that the arts inform our spiritual conversations.
Personally, my theory as to why Evangelical churches lack deep expressions of the arts is because the mindset that makes for good Evangelical thinking is (for lack of a better term) a very left brain, analytical, rational type activity. We are opposed to deep, profound, right brain affective and emotional activities in our religious expressions. Dobson wrote a book, “Emotions: Can You Trust Them?” with the presumption that no, we can’t. This is the default setting for Evangelicals.
The arts are primarily an affective, emotional expression. If we hate emotional expressions, or at the very least, distrust them outside of clearly defined boundaries, (OK, you can raise your hand in church and even close your eyes, but we certainly don’t want to see tears streaming down your eyes and enraptured sobbing when contemplating the crucifixion of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ unless you are responding to an invitation, for example) is it any wonder that we have so little of the arts in our services?
The tug and pull of the full appreciation of ‘aesthetic expression’ and the desire to remain in simplicity and humility, is a theme for Christians.
Sometimes, you can use aesthetics to express what is ‘simple’,
and it can be done in the most profound ways:
Here is an example of the use of media aesthetics to go straight to the heart of Christian hope. It contains art, poetry, Scriptures, photography, paintings primitive and classic, music, stained glass representations, and natural vistas:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=POm7_WBMJTI
and yet, the theme of hope comes through all of this intact and magnified.
Brother Rick,
I see your point,…yet I believe that no matter the cultural themes and emotions, which are expressed in a variety of modes, the gospel or the work of the Spirit living in the church transcends these emotions and feelings in a distinctive way. What I mean by that,…is that we feel what we think and emote what we think. Sure,..I get teary and emotional when I hear a certain song, but why not all songs with the same message.
Couple of things to consider:
When the gospel was preached in Acts 2…. It was not by invitation. It was by conviction and the response was exclusively the work of the Spirit. The art of Peter’s tongue was not the effector, it was the Spirit taking the Word of God and piercing to the soul through the action of an obedient follower. Today, we have too much dependence on the orator, and not the message….. in fact there are seminary courses that stress the importance of the modality to emotionally accentuate the Word itself. The Apostle Paul was clear in his encouragement that the Word does not need such additives, … it is sharp and effective all its own.
I am actually not disagreeing with you, in that the Arts can and have been employed in the entire list that I have posed, ….but, it is secondary to the initial motive of the action that is inclined by the Spirit, not an action inclined by the Art. I like the Arts,…but would I give them up to be in the Word?…by all means! That’s not to say anyone, including myself, must give away the Arts…. I just believe the Arts are reactions to the intentions of the culture and emotional aspects of its members, not necessarily the truth and reality of their action in obedience to the Spirit.
Blessings,
Chris
Chris,
I think you’re making an artificial distinction that is neither necessary nor helpful.
Let me illustrate by recontextualizing your argument from the arts to intellectual pursuits and see if you would agree with your own reasoning:
No matter the intellectual themes and reason, … the gospel or the work of the Spirit living in the church transcends intellect and reason in a distinctive way…
Couple of things to consider:
When the gospel was preached in Acts 2…. It was not by intellect. It was by conviction and the response was exclusively the work of the Spirit. The reasoning of Peter’s argument was not the effector, it was the Spirit taking the Word of God and piercing to the soul through the action of an obedient follower. Today, we have too much dependence on the intellect, and not the message….. in fact there are seminary courses that stress the importance of the logic in order to rationally present the Word itself. The Apostle Paul was clear in his encouragement that the Word does not need such additives, … it is sharp and effective all its own.
I am actually not disagreeing with you, in that reason and intellect can and have been employed in the entire list that I have posed, ….but, it is secondary to the initial motive of the action that is inclined by the Spirit, not an action inclined by the intellect. I like the intellect and reason,…but would I give them up to be in the Word?…by all means! That’s not to say anyone, including myself, must give away intellect and reason…. I just believe they are reactions to the intentions of the culture and cognitive aspects of its members, not necessarily the truth and reality of their action in obedience to the Spirit.
Can you see why I call this an artificial distinction? I don’t believe the separation is neither healthy nor possible. Was it Peter’s oratory that persuaded 3,000 to believe? Not on its own. Did the Holy Spirit need Peter’s oratory? Even Jesus teaches us that God can raise children of Abraham out of rocks if He wanted to, so probably not. However, and this is the salient point, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save some. It pleased God to use Bezaleel and Aholiab to make the most beautiful tabernacle possible. It pleased Jesus to be anointed by an extravagant box of ointment in preparation for his death. God appears to be well pleased with our endeavors to express his Truth through Beauty. Like Andrew, I find is disappointing to be part of a faith tradition that places so little emphasis on this huge and significant aspect of human endeavor.
Brother Rick,
Not sure I follow the contextualization….. since the intellect is what is effected by the Spirit.
My simple observation is that there has always been a push for Artistic expression in the church throughout history. That is clearly recorded. What is not normal is to caste Artistic expression as the same as the renewing of the mind. That is why the expressions of those in Acts 2 were simple and profound.
In other words,…you can have profound, life effecting change without an artistic presentation, and as you have claimed above …. loving someone by providing them food, or unity …may somehow be described as artistic. It sounds like you may be defining all actions as some form of art?
-Chris
Chris, this just blows me away when you say this, “Not sure I follow the contextualization….. since the intellect is what is effected by the Spirit”
Was the intellect that burned within the travelers on the Emmaus road communing with Jesus?
Was it cognitive dissonance that resulted in Acts 2: 5Now there were dwelling in Jerusalem Jews, devout men from every nation under heaven. 6And at this sound the multitude came together, and they were bewildered, because each one was hearing them speak in his own language. 7And they were amazed and astonished…
Seems to be a significant emotional component there and if not, the response was couched in those terms, 37Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?”
And the chapter concludes with some stunning emotional language:
43And awe came upon every soul, and many wonders and signs were being done through the apostles. … 46And day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they received their food with glad and generous hearts, 47praising God and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to their number day by day those who were being saved.
Surely you do not mean to imply that it is only the intellect that is effected by the Spirit, do you?
Rick,
“Seems to be a significant emotional component there and if not, the response was couched in those terms, 37Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?”
Just to be clear,… I am not equating “emotion” with “Art” maybe in the same way you are. Certainly we respond or emote when we learn something. Feelings or emotions come out of knowing something, not the other way around. So, these guys that were hearing other languages …they were puzzled because of what they knew didn’t jive with what they were seeing. Same thing with the women on the road….
Luk 24:13-32 And behold, two of them were going that very day to a village named Emmaus, which was about seven miles from Jerusalem. (14) And they were talking with each other about all these things which had taken place. (15) While they were talking and discussing, Jesus Himself approached and began traveling with them. (16) But their eyes were prevented from recognizing Him. (17) And He said to them, “What are these words that you are exchanging with one another as you are walking?” And they stood still, looking sad. (18) One of them, named Cleopas, answered and said to Him, “Are You the only one visiting Jerusalem and unaware of the things which have happened here in these days?” (19) And He said to them, “What things?” And they said to Him, “The things about Jesus the Nazarene, who was a prophet mighty in deed and word in the sight of God and all the people, (20) and how the chief priests and our rulers delivered Him to the sentence of death, and crucified Him. (21) “But we were hoping that it was He who was going to redeem Israel. Indeed, besides all this, it is the third day since these things happened. (22) “But also some women among us amazed us. When they were at the tomb early in the morning, (23) and did not find His body, they came, saying that they had also seen a vision of angels who said that He was alive. (24) “Some of those who were with us went to the tomb and found it just exactly as the women also had said; but Him they did not see.” (25) And He said to them, “O foolish men and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! (26) “Was it not necessary for the Christ to suffer these things and to enter into His glory?” (27) Then beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures. (28) And they approached the village where they were going, and He acted as though He were going farther. (29) But they urged Him, saying, “Stay with us, for it is getting toward evening, and the day is now nearly over.” So He went in to stay with them. (30) When He had reclined at the table with them, He took the bread and blessed it, and breaking it, He began giving it to them. (31) Then their eyes were opened and they recognized Him; and He vanished from their sight. (32) They said to one another, “Were not our hearts burning within us while He was speaking to us on the road, while He was explaining the Scriptures to us?”
While Christ was explaining the scriptures, their heart was burning…that is how emotions work…we learn, we feel.
Feelings and emotions though are not in the same category as “Art” IMHO. Art is an expression that could possibly bring about some sort of emotion….. Yet not with the same clarity or first priority (preaching and teaching) as Christ illustrates while explaining the scriptures.
Where am I going wrong with this line of thinking? Am I trying to make a distinction that should not exist? I may not be convinced that Art is an enhancement to the Christian experience as of yet, but I am convinced that preaching and teaching is….
Sincerely,
Chris
I recently had a discussion with someone who argued that drama, that is, acting, is a legitimate form of preaching, citing the living examples of Ezekiel and Hosea (though, Hosea was a living drama), as well as the parables of Christ. He said that he would not have it replace the normal Sunday morning sermon, but a service every now and again that centers mostly on the medium of drama (with about 3 minutes of vocal preaching) would be valid for Christian worship.
Any thoughts on this? What is the Scriptural basis for your argument?
Worship is not something we ever conjure up through the Arts, like drama. That is to misunderstand worship. Worship is personal and kisses toward God with heart, soul and mind…all that we have. So, even as we meet in fellowship, our worship is singular kissing toward God. Preaching and teaching is not an Art, or something that someone has a “knack” for…. It is a command, based upon a real set of facts, and those facts always demand a resolution. The Word is powerful.
Paul illustrated this very well….
Acts 17:22-32 So Paul stood in the midst of the Areopagus and said, “Men of Athens, I observe that you are very religious in all respects. (23) “For while I was passing through and examining the objects of your worship, I also found an altar with this inscription, ‘TO AN UNKNOWN GOD.’ Therefore what you worship in ignorance, this I proclaim to you. (24) “The God who made the world and all things in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands; (25) nor is He served by human hands, as though He needed anything, since He Himself gives to all people life and breath and all things; (26) and He made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their habitation, (27) that they would seek God, if perhaps they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us; (28) for in Him we live and move and exist, as even some of your own poets have said, ‘For we also are His children.’ (29) “Being then the children of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and thought of man. (30) “Therefore having overlooked the times of ignorance, God is now declaring to men that all people everywhere should repent, (31) because He has fixed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness through a Man whom He has appointed, having furnished proof to all men by raising Him from the dead.” (32) Now when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some began to sneer, but others said, “We shall hear you again concerning this.”
It appears that the Apostle Paul knew of the motives of these religious men by way of their art. But as he explains “ “Being then the children of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and thought of man” clearly repudiates the common acts of men.
Then Matthew helps by expressing how we know God’s family from the mouth of Jesus…..Matthew 7:20-24 “So then, you will know them by their fruits. (21) “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. (22) “Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’ (23) “And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.’ (24) “Therefore everyone who hears these words of Mine and acts on them, may be compared to a wise man who built his house on the rock.”
Blessings,
Chris
Chris,
I am trying to wrap my head around your comments, and I am not at all sure I have done so. Still, I am compelled to ask, “Without the art of that altar to “An Unknown God,” what “in” would Paul have had with the people of Athens?” (Grecian altars were rarely just slabs of rock you know.) And how many times through the centuries have preachers–and Christians in general–found comfort through that? I might even bring up the “artistry” of Paul’s writings. They were not just words presenting some cold, mathematical formula, they were words put together in such a way that they communicated truth in so artistic a way that they touched people. I say this respectfully: you seem to have much too narrow an understanding of art, its interaction with human senses, and its ability to communicate a powerful message to human beings. Perhaps you live too much in your head and not enough in your heart–an overemphasis on left-brain to the neglect of the right-brain functions. Both can be part of and contribute to worship. And I know about this, because for years I struggled with living just in my head to exclusion of my heart.
In her middle school and early high school years, my daughter suffered somewhat from depression. She came out of it when she formed a personal, saving relationship with Christ Jesus. At least I thought she had; I knew that she was going to be OK when she brought home a project from her first year at art school: a life sized portrait. In it, she was “stepping out” of the charcoal drawing, breaking the “fourth wall” I think they call it, as when a writer pauses some dramatic or tragic scene to address the reader (the novels of Anthony Trollope come to mind), or paintings done in the trompe l’oeil style. She didn’t have to tell me what her sketch meant, for she was obviously “shaking off the darkness” and coming into the world. For her mother and I, and I think for her also, it was an expression of worship. Art can be for many people. Art can preach and teach. That, by the way, was the original purpose in stained glass windows. They were meant to teach Scripture to illiterate people, unable to read; but who would deny their art?
John
Chris,
Some of what you are saying just continues to stun me.
“Just to be clear,… I am not equating “emotion” with “Art” maybe in the same way you are. Certainly we respond or emote when we learn something. Feelings or emotions come out of knowing something, not the other way around.”
This is just plain nonsense. And I mean this respectfully. I can give you thousands of examples of Feelings or emotions leading to knowing something. Ever have a sense of dread or fear but you don’t know what it was? On investigation, it led to learning something. Ever have a “funny feeling” about something that made you want to investigate and see what was up? Ever have stage fright? Anxiety? Depression? I could go on and on, but there are so many instances where emotions come first and intellect comes after that I can’t see how you would even begin to arrive at this conclusion.
Within the context of the arts, you yourself cited music that elicited an emotional response – did that not then inform your intellect? Tell me what the difference is between http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQTfK3ugs0Q and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4skT9ndv6ng and let me know if it’s the emotional or the intellectual component? Do the emotions that come out of those two songs come first and the knowledge later or do you have to know something before responding to identical words set in very different musical contexts?
Then you say this:
“Feelings and emotions though are not in the same category as “Art” IMHO. Art is an expression that could possibly bring about some sort of emotion….. Yet not with the same clarity or first priority (preaching and teaching) as Christ illustrates while explaining the scriptures.”
As an opinion, I would say this is valid. I’m sure you do have this opinion. And this is the opinion I would expect of someone who makes his living and has found his life’s calling in the preaching and teaching of the word. However to say, “Art is an expression that could possibly bring about some sort of emotion…” represents a view of art that isn’t really shared by the art world. If I might be so bold, can you give me an example of art that is NOT designed to elicit an emotional response? I’m at a loss to think of any. Art’s (and this includes the dramatic arts and literature as well) primary language is that of emotion and it is that emotion that informs the intellectual appreciation of the piece. Art is meant to make you feel something. If it doesn’t, it’s not art – it’s just junk, whether it be on a canvas, a sculpture, a film, a piece of writing, or music.
And this was the final blow, “I may not be convinced that Art is an enhancement to the Christian experience as of yet, but I am convinced that preaching and teaching is…”
You are saying that these are not an enhancement to the Christian experience:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HvT03pxhe58 as background for nearly any painting or sculpture of the crucifixion, the pieta, or the descent from the cross.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iPeVIuRjUi4
or even contemporary musicians like Stewart Townsend.
None of the Renaissance artists or sculptors move you to worship? None of the great cathedrals provide a sense of the transcendant as you sit in them, a sense of the Holiness of God’s presence? You are not moved by the lyric prose of Christian poets? Really?
Chris, I really am curious to see what you understand the arts to be. You said:
“Worship is not something we ever conjure up through the Arts, like drama. That is to misunderstand worship. Worship is personal and kisses toward God with heart, soul and mind…all that we have. So, even as we meet in fellowship, our worship is singular kissing toward God. Preaching and teaching is not an Art, or something that someone has a “knack” for…. It is a command, based upon a real set of facts, and those facts always demand a resolution. The Word is powerful.”
I am really baffled as to why you set these in opposition to one another and in exclusive categories. While I agree that we don’t “conjure up” worship through the arts, the arts can be both an expression of worship on the part of the artist and a participation in worship as we partake of the art. Don’t you have song services in your church? Don’t you express your worship in psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs as Paul commanded us in Ephesians and Colossians? How then do you find the arts to be uninvolved in the kissing toward God with all that we have?
You say preaching and teaching are not arts. No, they are not fine arts, nor are they required to be part of the performing arts. However, I can tell you that there is an art to both and wise practitioners of both speak of them, at least in part, in artistic terms.
You go on to say that preaching and teaching are a command based on a real set of facts (would love to hear you parse this out a little more as you make make these sound like a purely intellectual activity with no emotional component) that always demand a resolution. What does this mean? And why is this set in opposition to artistic expression? We have the apostle Paul describing music as a means of teaching (Ephesians 5, Colossians 3), yet you deny its efficacy in this regard. How do you reconcile your opinion with the Word of God?
Rick and John,
It is pretty obvious that I am doing a lousy job of communicating a simple, yet profound distinction; at least as I see it.
Please don’t think that I am some spock-like ogre that views the world from an emotionless state. Quite the opposite in fact….. as I have written songs and poetry since the age of twelve, produced albums, married a woman that is a graphics artist (working for the BSSB for 20+ years and redesign LifeWay’s HomeLife magazine from a tabloid to its current production), design and built my own home (with my own hands-and it is still standing
), get goose bumps and teary eyed every time I hear Jackie Evancho sing with such precision and passion, etc., etc. So emotions to me at least …are a normal and common result of living.
I’m not trying to debate the obvious. What I am trying to do is yield a look at how when “Art” becomes the mover of emotions, we as Christians most often lose the obedience to worship…..since worship (whether on one’s own, or corporately) is a singular event between God’s child and Himself….so that we worship Him in spirit and in truth.
A couple of examples might help you understand the argument I am trying to make.
1. The “strong man” evangelistic team uses the “Art” (how they have homed their program) of strength to presumably capture the attention of the marketplace and lure people into a building to hear the gospel. This is where Art is grossest of all IMHO. But, it illustrates the rise of human flesh over the preaching and teaching of the gospel. (Of course, some always will use the excuse of the “ends justifies the means”….but I am not here to debate that fallacy).
2. Another example, of all things is baptism. Many churches tend to look at baptism as an “Art” (and science) or tradition, instead of an obedient act. An illustration of this is what has been developed through history with regard to this baptismal Art. The scriptures, in all instances, reflect baptism as immediate and natural (for lack of a better term) for those that have identified with Christ being obedient to his command concerning the coming of the Spirit. Yet today, we have erected glorious , ornate structures perched high above the lectern in glorious buildings to frame this act, and have confused the meaning for many along the way. So that, in some instances churches have built a toy train baptismal in the children’s area to warm the kids up to the idea. So you go from the toy train, to the highly decorated system in the sky above the pulpit. What could be any better than that (sarcastic sigh)? What Art was Philip dreaming about when he was baptized,….how about the guy in the prison, or the folks in the homes,…or those in Jerusalem….or the men realizing their baptism with John wasn’t on the same terms as Christ had commanded.
If we allow art to move us away from the scriptures….we have fallen in love with Art, and selfish ambitions, and have consequently moved further away from Christ. For me…this is a daily struggle, because we live in an age of Art and self absorption…the system of America is all about emotion. Even our news (so called) is a production of editorials instead of a statement of fact these days. I tend to want to guard my heart from those tendencies to follow my emotion, while at the same time enjoying the Art produced by others….. and as an overseer, it is my responsibility to make it clear to the flock concerning the perils of self absorption and the pretense of masking Art as some sort of worship enhancer,…when most often it proves otherwise. I will admit though,…that “the Arts” is a very broad subject that must be carefully examined.
Blessings,
Chris
Thanks for clarifying, Chris. I think I understand your argument now. It boils down to “I’ve seen it done wrong in at least one instance, so we need to eschew it altogether.”
Let me say first of all, yes, I know it has been done wrong and yes there are excesses. In fact my first post included this link http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjVlmB2uPKU with the question of how this relates to the second commandment. That being said, however, abuses by others don’t excuse us from disengaging with the subject altogether or dismissing it wholesale as “from the devil.” I thought we as Baptists had outgrown that mindset a little. After all, our young people do attend movies nowadays unlike my youth and most churches allow more than the piano and organ to furnish instrumentation for the praise portion of the worship hour.
I think we need to engage the question of HOW we incorporate art in a God-honoring way, not whether to incorporate it.
rick
Oops. The gravatar-enabled website removed the “sarcasm” tags for the quote. Please understand that I believe your argument is more nuanced than my summary and is worthy of exploring. It’s just that your earlier posts seem to favor the abbreviated summary I provided.
I’ve enjoyed reading most of your comments on Art. I always learn something from each of you. It would be good to hear fresh comments on music sometime. What created my interest was an article about Michael W. Smith and a comment he made on “cross over” music and how the media welcomes “Christian” music now because of that. Hopefully, one of you have a better understanding of music that would enlighten some of us.
Thanks
Thanks Rick,
I agree with you that we must be careful and wise to “how” art is used. And,…I do believe that is would be impossible and not wise at all to spend gross amounts of time boiling the ocean for those things that would be deemed “legal art” from a religious perspective.
Blessings,
Chris
Isn’t the creation itself a reflection of the arts? The beauty, majesty of nature? I think we can worship God through the arts. Music is art.
Dance is art. Psalm 149:3.
The Bible is written in a artistic, beautiful way. Poetry in scripture is one of the most beautiful forms of art. Song of Solomon, Psalms.
Debbie,
I think it is the other way around, that the arts are a reflection of God’s creative act.
“. . . where do the arts fit in corporate worship?”
If the ‘media’ (the art form) is the ‘message’, then there is no separation of the two. Take a look at these hymns, which are prayers set to music, and this is what you have going on:
visual, auditory, aesthetic, spiritual, and meditative, as well as some of the most ancient prayers known to Christianity being sung. The impact is a magnification of worship, not a distraction from worship.
The hymns themselves are a form of liturgical worship, and can easily be recognized as worship at its most reverent:
http://wn.com/Vydubychi_Monastery
Along the lines of what I think you guys have discussed very thoroughly, I’d like to ask: Why do we pay a minister of music, usually as our second or third salary person in a church? Even small churches usually go that route before they hire on anyone else. I don’t see that gift or office listed in any of the popular passages relating to spiritual gifts. 1 Corinthians 12:28 seems pretty cut and dried to me. Even for the people who perceive some sort of “expiration date” on certain gifts (prophets, healers, and apostles usually…) I think they all agree that teachers are still present and very necessary as a part of the church. Yet we do not usually employ one. Unless you also begin hyphenating spiritual gifts (pastor/teacher), a practice which I also do not see in those passages.
My point isn’t to sidetrack the discussion, but to illustrate that I think the Spirit gifts many people in various areas of the arts, and yet we give music a false biblical precedence over all other forms of art (except for the fact that I agree with the gentleman who noted that public speaking is a art, as are nearly all the church practices–they aren’t “sciences” in college, that’s for sure!).
I say that music is given a false precedence because if you went back and asked a Jew what the supreme form of worship was to God, they’d probably mention their glorious temple in Jerusalem, and not some poem with a tune behind it. Since we don’t practice temple worship (in the traditional sense, although Paul did redefine it in 1 Cor 3:16-17 and similar passages), we sort of defer to “number 2″ which we perceive to be music, which is an art form.
However in Romans 12:1, Paul describes “intelligent acts of worship” as the complete surrender of oneself to God as a living sacrifice (read the Greek if your Bible says otherwise). Certainly, the concept of dying to oneself is discussed far more often than singing is in the New Testament.
I think all the arts are acceptable acts of worship, and that we have an unbiblical preference for one form over the others, which is based more on our tradition than anything else. My understanding of choirs and church music is that a choir preceded the Roman emperor (aka “god”) wherever he went, and once the emperor became a Christian, his choir followed him to church.
I do not think music and singing as worship are unbiblical, please don’t misunderstand that. I think saying that they are the only acceptable art form is.