The Influence of Art in Christianity
William Dyrness’s book, Visual Faith: Art, Theology, and Worship in Dialogue[1], provides historical context to how art and Christianity have impacted one another over time. The early Catholic Church (before the Reformation) incorporated elaborate art and architecture into their places of worship and services. It was used to draw people into the worship experience. During the reformation, the Protestants rejected incorporation of visual images and elaborate architecture in attempts to simplify worship and to direct people to the Scriptures versus symbolism. Even today the Protestant church seems hesitant to incorporate visual elements into worship, while the Catholic Church uses art heavily. However, today the Protestant Church seems to embrace the use of technology and digital forms of art. Although, there are varying levels of acceptance, depending on the denomination.
The development of technology and digital forms of art has heavily influenced worship in most churches today. It is more widely accepted and utilized in the Protestant church, and it is changing the landscape of how we worship. Dyrness provides a quote by German artist Gerhard Richter, who says that “art is not a substitute for religion: it is a religion. The Church is no longer adequate as a means of affording the experience of the transcendental, and of making religion real – and so art has been transformed from a means into the sole provider of religion. Today, people interact with digital technology and art outside of worship and religion daily. Art is used in the media, on the Internet, and people are constantly exposed and influenced by its presence. Richter’s comment made me consider just how much art is used to present the Gospel and to influence Christians both within the church and outside. Even the image of the Anglo-Saxon Jesus paints a portrait in one’s mind as to who Jesus is. The manner in which the artist presents Christ leaves an impression on a person about His character. These images leave an imprint in our minds, whether we choose to allow their influence or not.
As artists seek to portray “who is Jesus”, they have a heavy responsibility to accurately portray His Character and Nature. People could easily look to art as His representation and to be influence by what they see and hear. We see a similar behavior today as people listen to preachers, and take their word as the Gospel truth. Often, they don’t take the time to read Scripture and to find out what it really says.
Recently, the movie Noah caused much controversy, as it did not follow the Biblical Account accurately. Coming in the near future, the movie Exodus: Gods and Kings, has already made the news. “Director Ridley Scott casted actors Christian Bale, Aaron Paul, Sigourney Weaver, and other white actors in the lead roles and relegated black actors to play slaves and thieves.”[2] These are great examples of how artists can have both positive and negative influence within the culture. The positive side to art is that it allows people to connect on a spiritual and emotional level, and engages their senses. For the Christian artist, God can utilize their gifts and talents to connect with people in a meaningful way. Art appeals to the human emotion and can reach depths that many times other humans cannot. As Dyrness states, “What is special is God’s revelation of himself and the call of creation to praise him in response.”[3] Art can be a powerful medium to present Christ to the world, if artists respond to their calling and praise Him through their work.
[1] Dyrness, William A. (2001-11-01). Visual Faith (Engaging Culture): Art, Theology, and Worship in Dialogue. (Baker Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.
[2] “’Exodus’ Movie Director Talks Casting Amid Backlash for Whitewashing.” The Christian Post, last modified September 2, 2014. Accessed September 4, 2014. http://www.christianpost.com/news/exodus-movie-director-talks-casting-amid-backlash-for-whitewashing-125744/
[3] Dyrness, William A. (2001-11-01). Visual Faith (Engaging Culture): Art, Theology, and Worship in Dialogue (Kindle Locations 1936-1937). Baker Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.
About the Author
Richard Volzke
6 responses to “The Influence of Art in Christianity”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Good thoughts Richard! I look forward to seeing the new Exodus movie 🙂 HA!
You say, “art can be a powerful medium to present Christ to the world, if artists respond to their calling and praise Him through their work.”- I wonder, is the artist responsible for the way that I interpret the art that she has produced? How much responsibility falls or should fall on the shoulders of the consumer?
Stefania,
No, I do not believe that the artists are responsible for the way that we interpret their work. We are responsible for how we perceive things in our surroundings. I do acknowledge that culture, lifestyle, upbringing, etc. can influence how we view the world around us, but ultimately each individual must form their own understanding of life.
Richard
Richard, great post and really important issues you bring up. I am coming the conclusion (especially after working through the next book for this class) that there really is no neutral art. As you suggest, that so often we bringing our ideas and especially our culture into our representations of Jesus and Scripture. I appreciate your tying this into even how modern media portrays Bible stories. As others have suggested, our attempts to relay the Gospel in any art form will always carry the danger of cultural subversion, and has the possibility to either strongly teach or greatly distract from the truth. As much as we would like to say our attempts at expressing our faith through music, paintings and (as you suggest) sermons, we will always fall short. They will only be shadows of the truth…and maybe that is what we have to keep in mind! Pictures are never the person or thing itself! There is a lot on this topic to think about! Thanks for your thoughts!
John, Thanks for the reply. I agree that, as humans, we will always fall short of expressing the Gospel message in its fullness. However, through our shortcomings God can also display His power and glory by using our imperfectness to further His plan for mankind. I believe this is God’s plan for fallen man, in that no matter how hard we try, nothing we do will be holy or good enough. If we are truly studying His Word and being diligent to portray Him accurately then I believe God will speak through the art. But, we must also remember Satan will use this medium just as he uses false teachers.
Richard,
Thanks – I enjoyed reading your comments…
I, also, was interested and intrigued by Dyrness’ historical context of the visual art in the early church – particularity following the conversion of Constantine and Christianity becoming the state religion of the Roman empire. He notes that “buildings were built specifically as churches, and they were adorned with mosaics. Moreover, artist were employed to shape furnishings for religious uses, both private and public. Again, artists make use of Greek and Roman imagery that was common to secular art …” (Kindle 471). It occurs to me that this is similar to how the visual image in current culture has a huge impact on the image in our places of worship. Pop-culture as demonstrated in advertising, TV programming, movies, and even design trends in website development to building architecture has influenced visual imagery in worship. In terms of being relevant and allowing Jesus to the subject in twenty-first century culture, it seems to me this is not inherently a bad thing – so long as our use of contemporary imagery is designed to and in fact does “lift the soul toward the contemplation of God” (604). Do you agree?
What are the dangers or the downside potential? Dyrness does present several stages in the transition from the early use of images to the medieval period when the image was not an aid in worship but,m especially through veneration, the image, icon, relic, became the object of worship.
Do you think
Hey Richard,
What a statement you brought out Richard: “The Church is no longer adequate as a means of affording the experience of the transcendental, and of making religion real – and so art has been transformed from a means into the sole provider of religion.” Wow, what an indictment on the church. At one time the visual art was the center of the church and used the art to the glory of God, thus being the center for the transcendental. Today, as you bring out, we have so much moving pictures but can this be as useful as the classical/historical art to bring about the transcendental-ness that the modern church needs?