Can you envision Trinitarian Personhood? |
Randy Elrod |
Randy Elrod[1]
writes, “If you are an artist who also happens to be a Christian, expect to be
judged and misunderstood.” In his experience, that misunderstanding and
judgment is most likely to come from Christians who require any artistic
expression to be “neatly wrapped up with a ‘happy ending,’” creating “art that
is propaganda, and art that is shallow and without layers of meaning.”
Given the layers of meaning some assign to my art, even my
preaching, I’m apparently doing something right. For example, I’m very fond of
an image that intended to depict ecstatic abandon in worship. A friend of the
model referred to it instead as “that one where you’re ‘possessed.’” It’s not
just my photography, either.
"Jesus, lift me up..." |
After a sermon that had been clearly and
repeatedly announced in advance, including the subject being “PG-13” in nature,
the critique was initially that “we’re not used to hearing those words in
church.” When I explained that I had very carefully selected accurate and
inoffensive terminology, the clarification was that “we’re not used to that topic being discussed in church.” Being
an expository preacher, covering whole books of the Bible section-by-section, I
could not resist asking whether they saw any other topic being covered in the
scheduled passage.
That conversation ended well. Others have not. And so, I
still face the temptation to skip over or allegorize those passages where God
chooses to deal with areas that “we” would prefer to ignore. Most usually, it
is death and dying, or sexuality and marriage that provokes such a reaction.
But in an independent, non-denominational community church that seeks to
practice theology-in-community, and where our backgrounds and traditions vary
widely, the landmines can be all but invisible until you step on them.
"It was right here a moment ago." |
As a photographer, too, I find that there are times when an
image just needs to be created or,
when less premeditated, captured in
the moment. Those images to be created often involve human persons, themselves created
to bear the image and likeness of the one God eternally existing in three
persons. In those instances, I feel compelled to negotiate carefully with my
collaborators. I try to be clear about their sensibilities and boundaries, and
ensure that their comfort levels are honored. Why? Imagine seeing an image of you
being portrayed either as dead or as death itself. That experience could provoke
an even stronger reaction than when the homecoming princess finally sees why
her mother doesn’t agree with her fashion decisions. It’s best to be warned and
prepared in advance.
"Sleeping Beauty in Black" |
The results of our collaboration, though, occasionally inspire
wrath from friends and family. How severely? According one model’s boyfriend, we
were “gonna burn in hell cause he is a pastor and believes in taking risqué photos.”
(I did withhold my response of “wait ‘til he sees the morbid ones!” but I did
allow myself to visit his Facebook page. His own photographic artistry includes
obscene gestures, misogynistic intimidation, drug use, and a particularly
interesting nude of himself reclining on an American flag. But there I go,
criticizing the critic. Back to the subject at hand.)
"See who He is; see who you are." |
Most of my readers and hearers know that I prefer the
question “What would Jesus have me do?”
But it does have its foundation in emulating “What would Jesus do?” So, does
the Artist who created the universe as an expression of His character and
attributes understand these misunderstandings? Absolutely. The Apostle Paul
writes, “For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His
eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood
through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. For even though
they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became
futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened.”[2]
So, dare we risk misunderstanding? The only alternative is
to deny the creativity in us as part of God’s image and likeness. Instead, I believe,
we should ask “is there place for art that provokes a reaction, while
maintaining a boundary this side of impropriety or indecency?” (That is the definition of risqué.) For all
the passages in which God includes explicit depictions of sex and death, those
topics actually combine as the central theme of the books of Esther and Ruth in
particular, and figure heavily in the narratives of Samuel and Kings. Where it
is most difficult to focus attention away from the physical nature of romantic
relationships is in the marital ode that is The
Song of Songs.
Josh McFarland Hardin, Montana |
Do some of my images make you think about sex and/or death?
Yes, or at least I hope so. But more importantly, I hope they make you think about what you think about sex
and/or death. Why? Because the damage our silence is doing to subsequent
generations[5] especially
by our silence on sexuality, but equally so regarding death and dying, continues
to spread throughout the church and the communities we are called to serve. If
we do not consider these subjects (sexuality and marriage, and/or death and
dying) within the Church, then we have little standing from which to criticize the
conclusions being reached about them in our surrounding communities and
culture.
What happens when we decide to ignore these subjects?
Roger Ebert More than just a movie critic. |
The late film critic Roger Ebert is, in my opinion,
underestimated as both an exegete of culture and a religious philosopher. I am
often inspired by his reflections on the messages being preached by plot,
dialogue, imagery, structure, and other elements of films throughout history. Here
is his observation of the effects risqué and morbid art can and should have on
us: “Of course the movie is rated NC-17. I believe more horror films should be
made for adults, so that they are free to deal with true malevolence in the
world, instead of retailing the pornography of violence without consequences. A
generation is growing up that equates violence with action, instead of with
harm. Not long ago The Exorcist was
re-released and some young moviegoers laughed all the way through it. A society
that laughs at evil eventually laughs at good, and then loses its way.”[6]
"Sincerely Skeptical" |
For Christians to restrain their own artistic expression, or
to refrain from addressing certain topics, is to tear down the clearest
signposts pointing to The Way we hope that more in our society will find. The
arts provide us with the most direct conduit into our hearts and thus our
culture. If my art gives us a reason to discuss these indispensably important
issues, then I’ll gladly weather the critiques, and the criticism. I hope you
choose to do so, too.
[2]
Romans 1:20-21, New American Standard Bible, 1995 revision.
[3]
Josh serves a Christian and Missionary Alliance congregation in Hardin, Montana
and holds a Master’s of Divinity from A.W. Tozer Theological Seminary.
[4]
Josh McFarland, Pieces of Eden:
Reflections on Romance and the Love of God from the Song of Songs
(Bloomington, Indiana: Westbow Press, 2015), xi.
[5]
Josh McDowell and Dick Day, Why Wait?
What you need to know about the Teen Sexuality Crisis (Nashville: Thomas
Nelson, 1994).
[6]
Roger Ebert, “Santa Sangre,” The Great
Movies III (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2010), 346.
3 comments:
I would hate to think that I would be in the camp with those who criticized your sermon, but I do think that there are some (just a few) passages in the Bible that really do not belong being fully preached/taught in public. They certainly should be presented, but perhaps a public service is not the best place. I would say the same about normal, ordinary and proper activities of human life; the whole Bible should be taught, but some things need not be spoken of in detail in public. The same point could be made about a children’s Sunday school class. Not all topics should be gone through in detail. For example, it is wholly appropriate to tell kids about married couples who love each other and give good examples from the Scripture. It is entirely a different matter to describe to them all the details in the Song of Solomon. The time, the place and the audience is intrinsically tied to the content of the message.
Of course I don’t know what the passage was or what you said, and I am certainly inclined to trust your judgment on this over those of your critics (since I know you and do not know them).
Will, thanks so much for your thoughtful comment. It raises the question for me about the counter-cultural nature of our ministries. With the 21st Century North American Church bearing the influence of Puritan, Victorian, Fundamentalist, and other behavioralist movements, it seems to me that we have adopted a code of propriety that often prevents us from speaking openly and effectively to many of the needs (indeed crises) being experienced in the culture that has reacted against what they perceive as the repressive effects of these influences.
Looking well beyond our recent Western European mindset, however, I'm wondering if part of the blessings and relational health experienced by God's people B.C. might have had something to do with the pattern of reading the Wisdom Literature of the Bible as part of their annual cycle of festivals in front of the entire community of all ages. (At Passover: Song of Solomon; Pentecost: Ruth; Temple Fast: Lamentations; Tabernacles: Ecclesiastes; and Purim: Esther.)
The other cultural distinction, though, would be the variance from congregation to congregation. Where there are multiple levels of communication in which the majority of a congregation participates, some passage are more suited to discussion than proclamation, of course. But most congregations, even in North America, are centered around a single gathering in which the congregation…well, congregates. Perhaps that ministry pattern in our remote rural area has influenced my decisions as well.
Again, thanks for the thoughtful and, as you can see, thought-provoking comment!
I like this blog; it was not what I expected. You have really hit the nail on the head in regards to Art and the Church. For that matter, there is not a need for more room, there is a room period. Based on your posting, we are missing direction for the lack of our embrace of arts as a device for God's present message. Also, by denying the arts, we may be missing a point of connection with the world. In Reno, we have an event called "Reno Art Town," Many ministries in the area get involved which has been very effective and inspiring. I like what you wrote regarding art as a direct conduit we should employ this, often.
Post a Comment