Why Christian Art is Often MishMash

[worshiptrench]

First, might I suggest a great book on the topic of Christian arts that is actually a fun read...

Imagine: A View for Christians in the Arts (http://www.amazon.com/o/ASIN/0830822917/177-5279431-1351422?SubscriptionId=1N9AHEAQ2F6SVD97BE02)

Many times Christian art fails because unlike the classic Moll Flanders, modern artists are afraid to show sin's full effect. Defoe, the Puritan criticized for being quite frank about his character's sin said,


To give the history of a wicked life repented of, necessarily requires the wicked part should be be made as wicked as the real history of it will bear, to illustrate and give beauty to the penitent part, which is certainly the best and brightest, if related with equal spirit and life.

While we are not to use vileness for entertainment, the deeds of darkness and their resultant misery are to be told by the songwriter/storyteller/film maker/etc.This scares off "religious right" viewers. The plot of such movies are darker initially, yet more glorious in the end than soft peddling us mishmash.

[jbsandifer]

interesting...the arts have been so 'under-used'. And yes, our fear of man seems to have really watered down the power of our heritage as 'creationists'. If you'd like, check out the practicality of the worship arts (http://www.squidoo.com/Worship-Arts)

[Rahel]

I think, I need to think a bit about this...

[russhutto]

If Christians art isn't a springboard to serving people it's useless.

[Mike Darley]

I don't know, Russ. I'm not sure I can go with you there. What is the end of all things? If it's primarily about people, then serving them is the noblest of goals. But we as Christians know that the end of all things, that which is ultimate, is glorifying/serving God. To that end, art/beauty/aesthetics serves God in that is says something about Him. We know beauty because He is beautiful (I'm using that in the theological sense). We follow God in creating because He is the Creator of all. When you look at the ornateness of the various buildings and rebuildings of the temple, the beauty found in nature, and so on, this all points to the idea that God values the beautiful.

[russhutto]

But the very essence of God isn't beauty is it, though He is beautiful. IF you look at God front to back through the lens of scripture it seems things created were created with purpose.

Not saying that God doesn't value beauty. But in Christ we see that God is the servant of all. So serving seems to be godly. Which of course is ultimately glorifying to God. So I guess we're both right.

My point I guess wasn't necessarily that art has to serve people while not bringing Glory to God. That doesn't make any sense.

But I do feel the same way about people who just glorify God all day but don't love their neighbor. It's not biblical. And technically is it really glorifying God?

To me Christian art isn't "christian" because of the content contained. It's Christian because of the Christ-like character of the person who created it.

Jesus said love God (your point) and love your neighbor (my point) so like I said if you cram those two together we're both right.

[russhutto]

after thinking about this a bit more. I'm thinking my last response didn't come out very clear at all.

I could easily come back and delete it, but I'd rather just leave my nonsensical ramblings out in the open for the world to see.

For me, Christian art IS about beauty. It really is. But it is beauty that moves you towards God. It reaffirms the Believers convictions and redirects their affections towards God again and again and again.

I guess where I was coming from with my "art is useless" statement is more about how Christian art affects or doesn't affect the nonbeliever. To me if it doesn't stir something deep within them, if it doesn't paint some kind of engaging picture of who God is, then it's useless.

Christian art just for the "christian" seems to me consumer minded and not reflective of the outward focused heart of God.

So, while I will TOTALLY agree that christian art can and should reflect the glorious beauty and wonder of God, I don't think art that ONLY engages the Believer is very Christ-like.

That's what I was trying to say.

I think if Christian art causes us to get in a holy huddle and build a fortress around a concept, leaving behind the lost and hurting, then it's useless.

I thnik if Christian art somehow motivates us, the believer, into some form of interaction with the unbeliever, then that is better. Does that make any sense?

I guess what I'm trying to say is that there are times when we are totally captivated by some form of art that really does convey the wonder of God, but I can't come to grips with that moment just ending there. It seems to me that there is a next logical step...and that is to share it with someone else who hasn't experienced it yet (unbelievers).

[Mike Darley]

Nope, only I'm right......just kidding. :D

I'm not saying that beauty is the "essence" of God, and so I wouldn't say that beauty is His most important attribute. It is, however, one attribute and it does say something about what He values. That which He values we ought to value.

Now, obviously God also values service. When Jesus came it was to serve and not to be served. I will say, though, I'm not sure it's the "essence" of who He is. If we had to decide between serving people or creating I think we'd all agree that serving comes first, but I can't see where they're mutually exclusive.

[Mike Darley]

Russ,

I posted that last post before you posted your second post. I appreciate your clarification, though. I'm at work so I can't really respond now. I'll probably get on when I get home.

[Rahel]

I do not think that the one has to be against the other either.

When I do creative things in our church, it is not an idea that I have out of my own brain and where I need to decide if I want to glorify God with it or if I want to serve the people. It is not something where I try to express myself.
It is rather an idea that is born out of God. Suddenly I see something of God and how we could express this and I believe it is God himself who gives it and who wants to reveal himself to people through it.
I do not believe that art stands for its own. Many people create to express themselves, and if it is out of our own we need to decide what the purpose is. But where it is born out of God it will automatically serve the people.
And sometimes it must not be the big things that can serve. Sometimes a little decoration on the tables for coffee is enough to touch the heart of people with love.

[worshiptrench]

Read the Steve Turner book Imagine
or grab this http://www.rabbitroom.com/?p=1258.

He argues that if we "use" art only as a platform for propaganda, it damages the art form which exists for God's glory as well.

Ex. Your pastor hires a crummy rap artist to do a "Gospel rap" that stinks. It is ineffective and doesn't leave the artform better than when you arrived at it.

Perhaps someone understanding art is Tavener, whose work (Lamentations and Praises, etc) is respected by believing and unbelieving artists alike.

[MarkSooy]

Beauty and artistic creativity are rooted in the original creation. Not only are we reflecting the image of God as we create, but we are also in the process of discovering the beauty He infused into creation at the beginning. It is not a matter of one's opinion, but of discovery.

Chuck Colson has a good summary:

“Very few people today understand beauty as an extension of the creation. Many people say that ‘beauty is in the eye of the beholder’ or ‘beauty is a matter of taste.’ To declare something beautiful means only that it pleases them. Such value judgments are always merely one person’s opinion.

To the Christian and the classical mind (i.e., not the style, but the system of thought), however, beauty is not a subjective value judgment, and art is not merely the expression of an artist’s inner world. Beauty, like goodness and truth, is part of reality; beauty is essential to the created order, part and parcel of the world in which we live.” – Charles Colson in The Good Life (p. 266)

Beyond this, we also show man's corruption (the Fall) through the arts, as well as describing and facilitating a glimpse into the reality of redemption and restoration -- as found through Jesus Christ. These things are not just limited, however, to the Christian artist. The artist with no faith or other faith can discover these truths of God through observation (read Romans 1:18ff), though we must admit that their salvation still depends on giving their lives to Christ.

In addition to Steve Turner's book, a must-read is Francis Schaeffer's short book titled: Art and the Bible.

[yod1948]

As long as art is both authentic and honest it provokes the imagination. If the artist is communicating a redeeming idea it will serve the purposes of the Lord

[windbag]

Two thoughts from the conversation thus far:

God wants us to appreciate beauty. Afterall, He made our eyes to see colors. He could have created us to be color-blind.

The world used to copy the church's art. We had the cool music and paintings and pageantry. Now the church tries to copy the world's art. It'd be great for the church to recapture the cutting edge of art again.

[worshiptrench]

So someone paints a poorly expressive and executed painting and says, "God gave it to them so you need to hang it in the foyer" or even closer to home....someone stands up and says, "God gave me this song...." and as I hear it I think, "Wow, you are ascribing THAT song God's creative efforts...hmmm?"

I never use the "God gave me" line. I don't want to implicate God for what might be my bad art...hahaha.

[yod1948]

whenever I hear "God gave me this song..." my first thought is "because He didn't want it"

I think people of faith are still leading and setting the pace. POD, U2, lifesong, Matisyahu for example are writing songs about their faith and doing well. True, it isn't controlled by a religious organization and that's probably why their music is more honest.

[MarkSooy]

As long as art is both authentic and honest it provokes the imagination. If the artist is communicating a redeeming idea it will serve the purposes of the Lord

Yet, there are many artists that are both authentic and honest in the context of their own non-Christian worldviews...and this may also serve the purposes of the Lord!