theholtsite

Art, Church, and Latin Phrases

Normally I’m not really into art. Actually, I’m not that into music either, ironically. I rarely take the time to just appreciate the arts. I don’t like concerts or shows unless I’m performing. I don’t even listen to music as often as others. I like to make music sometimes, but my appreciation is far less than others I’ve met.

That said, I’ve been thinking about art’s place in church. We recently put up some really tacky, generic art in the social area. Yeah, it’s a bunch of crosses and other decor, but it’s just so bleh. It’s like stuff from Linens ‘n Things. I think it’s a waste of an opportunity. Why is music so prevalent in churches, but good art is overlooked? Once in church we did a huge mural that everyone could draw on. That was cool. Even though I don’t know how to express myself well through art, some people thrive on it.

Perhaps church people are afraid to offend with art, and want to create a “comfortable” atmosphere. If I had my way there would be walls full of murals, kids’ art, famous paintings, and modern art – such that you could just gaze on it for hours. Some would be shocking, some would be reverent, some full of meaning, some with hidden meaning. It might be tacky to an interior designer, but I bet artists would get a lot out of it.

Here’s a sculpture my buddy Brandon did when we were roommates in college:

The bible had blood spattered on it, and the verse in Romans about dying to yourself and living for Christ was circled. Now, I’m no artist, but I have always remembered this piece of art and its meaning. It’s beautiful! This is applicable to the Christian life – killing the bad parts of yourself – and this is a great way to remember it. This is the kind of art I would love to see in church. Some people might complain about kids seeing it, but they see stuff worse than that on TV every day.

One of my quotes here (the ones at the bottom) is “Memento Mori” – which was a popular theme in ancient Rome and all throughout history – meaning “Remember that you will die.” The idea was similiar to “Carpe Diem” which most people have heard of. This idea made its way into a lot of Christian art. “To the Christian, the prospect of death serves to emphasize of the emptiness and fleetingness of earthly pleasures, luxuries, and achievements, and thus also as an invitation to focus one’s thoughts on the prospect of the afterlife.” You can read more about this here.

On that page was a link to a work by Hans Memling in 1485, shown below:

This facinated me with its symbolism and captures the idea quite well. You can read more about the painting here. This would be another of the sort of picture I would love to see in church! It’s meaningful even 500 years after it was done.

Anyway, that’s my rant about art. Something like that would require putting aside our comfortable “Linens ‘n Things” style, but one of the values of our chuch is reaching people with the good news, even if it is outside our normal style. What a unique way to do this!

  1. WOWZA

    “It is only in creative activity that we externalize the idenity we have as men made in the image of God. this then is the true basis for work.”
    Udo Middleman

  2. Brandon

    I think art is a funny thing. The fact that our Creator was creative says to me that there’s something inside of us that desire’s to emanate that. Whether it be creating by art, music or just loving our brother.

    As the person who made the scuplture up there, I’m not sure what I think about it looking back. I did that about, yeesh, like five or six years ago and I was in a completely different state of mind. Were I to do it today there would have been something redeeming as part of the work as well as the idea that we do need to remove our sin. But there’s certainly something to be said about something that will slap the viewer in the face and make them think. Because there’s never anything wrong with thinking, and typically the vessel that is used to kick off that thinking is broken, being that it was a human or was created by a human. I’m thinking about televangelists for some reason, they certainly slap me in the face and make me reconsider what my faith really is in comparison to the faith that they’re selling.

    So maybe it’s a question of what the end result would be. I mean what I was trying to do at the time with that piece of work was to take the image of the cross and the horror and violence that come along with that and translate that into something that wouldn’t be cliche. Since you see crosses every where you look.

    Also I suppose makes me think of the Passion movie. I haven’t seen it, since I’m not real big on snuff films, but i’ve seen some clips from it and I would have to say that it sure as hell isn’t the ‘whatever is lovely’ type of art, but the end result was that people saw for real the hell that our God put himself through for us. And I suppose that’s not all that bad…

    So anyway, these are my early morning ramblings…

  3. Ben

    Perhaps you are right about that. Maybe it should not be in church because it’s not “mutually edifying”. Some people wouldn’t like it at all. Sigh… I really like it, it’s my favorite piece of art.

    I guess I see things in the Bible that are radical ideas and forcefully put and so I appreciate when people express the same ideas differently, memorably, even shockingly. Like Jesus telling people to put out their own eyes or cut off their foot if these body parts cause them to sin. A gruesome thought, but I think he was serious. Sin is sort of like an appendage that must be amputated. I picture the scene in “The Great Divorce” where the lizard is amputated forcefully from the ghost. It’s painful and in a way it’s killing part of yourself.

    “In the same way, count yourselves dead to sin but alive to God in Christ Jesus.”

    “Put to death, therefore, whatever belongs to your earthly nature…”

    That’s what the sculpture makes me think of – for me it passes the Phillippians test. But I haven’t known anyone who died this way, so I can see how it could be offensive that way.

    Thanks for commenting 🙂

  4. Dennis

    I’m sure you predicted my response. Not everything, because it might have a scripture verse attached to it in some way, is necessarily edifying and glorifying of God. Brandon’s work, for example, may be a work of art, may be very creative and even thought provoking. Is it pure and lovely and admirable? Does it really have the ‘Philippian’ qualities? Because it might have been created with a mind toward God, does that necessarily mean the artist got it right? Does it really capture the glory of God. Does it bring everyone’s mind to God? Most people’s mind to God?

    Romans is about justification — Paul’s analogy to the legal system whereby the penalty of our transgressions has been paid and we are hence declared ‘not guilty’! Therefore, Romans 6 is able to state that we should consider ourselves dead to sin. Sorry. As well intentioned as it might have been, a hangman’s noose isn’t the message of the scripture. Read on in Romans. Chapter 14. Consider art, especially art you’d propose that go in a church, in the same light as food. My first thought at looking at Brandon’s piece sculpture was not “praise God for my justification”. Rather, the act of suicide. Incidently, your grandmother, my mother, died by suicide. I thought of that before I thought of Romans, before Philippians came to mind. But I digress. See Romans 14:19,20 — is this pleasing to all? Does it not destroy the work of God for the sake of …. “art”? For the sake of someone’s desire to be provocative? If this style is pleasing and meaningful to you, there’s nothing wrong with that. Place that art in your home if you desire and appreciate it. Personally I find it offensive and I suspect I would be very far from alone. So should it be in a church???

  5. Renee

    I love art. I love Monet-pretty art, and Thomas Kinkade-well-lit art, and Van Gogh-disturbing art. Monet reminds me of the world that God’s given us. The world that some Pat Robertson type Christians don’t appreciate, and that ALL Christians should take a look at and count as an aesthetic blessing. Thomas Kinkade reminds me of that verse in Phillipians. Kinkade does think about lovely and pure things, and then he paints them. And Van Gogh reminds me of struggles, and of how disturbed we are in our human condition, and how God is bigger than even THAT. (I think that’s what Starry Starry Night is about. The nearness and watchfulness of God despite the darkness and shadowy-ness of the town.)
    Art is an expression of what’s inside of the artist… I think you’re right- visual art should be utilized a LOT more in churches. While some people have a hard time with musical worship, the visual kind or written kind or spoken kind of art might be more up their alley.

  6. Ben

    I like that point about Phillippians – I think that art sometimes has a way of focusing our thoughts, like music. What do you think “works” better:

    a) A Thomas Kinkade pastoral painting with cute little animals running around and a verse on it

    b) A morbid sculpture like the one above (also with a verse on it)

    I don’t know, but I might answer BOTH, depending on the person? I cringe when I see TK art, but some people really like it. B has more effect on me, I still remember the theme and think about it. What do you think?

    Not sure about the culture differences, what do you think?

  7. Eric Stoltzfus

    The first thing I thought of was the verse in Philippians…Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things.
    Also, you might want to ask the question, how did the Jews differ from the Greeks in their use of images and art? Why did the Jews not use art and images as the Greeks did? I think these are good questions to ask of history.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *