Imagine
“…churches often appear imaginatively empty.”[i]
Such a statement breaks my heart. As Christians, we worship God the Creator of everything that ever was and ever will be. We worship the God who his greater than our imaginations and broader than we can understand. He is without limit. His creativity is without end. God, who created us in His image (Genesis 1:26-27), and breathed His very breath of life into us (Genesis 2:7), cannot be contained. We have been made in His image, meaning that we, too, are creative and industrious and intelligent. If we are to honor and glorify God in all that we do, how can we neglect our creativity and imagination?
It is this very quandary that William Dyrness addresses in Visual Faith.[ii] Dyrness argues that the church, particularly the Protestant church, has lost its sense of imagination and become entrenched in what some might consider petty disagreements about beauty, art and worship. Early in Christian history, art was often hidden and symbolic because public identification as a Christian could lead to persecution. But as Christianity grew, and Constantine adopted the Christian faith, religious/Christian art grew. It moved away from the folk/community based art that was familiar to the common man into mainstream, professional and “high” art forms. Art was used in the community and the cathedral to communicate God’s message. Gregory the Great, a sixth century pope, argued that art was the literature of the uneducated.[iii] Yet as the church moved through the Reformation and resultant cultural shifts, art was minimized. There was emphasis on the Word of God, which is invisible and unseen, versus the visible. Protestants moved toward simplicity, industry and labor in their expression of worship and a life honoring unto God. Investing significant time on the creation of art was viewed as less productive, and the use of visual art (and at times other forms of art) was limited or eliminated from the worship experience.
I confess that at times as I read Dyrness’ book, I was rolling my eyes, wondering why on earth this was even an issue. I tire of some Christian arguments, and struggle knowing that these types of arguments contribute to why people outside of the church think Christians are reactive and judgmental. At first I was just irritated. What could possibly be wrong with standing in awe of a piece of art, or in the presence of God’s creation, and seeing God in that work? Why would we not want to prompt others to consider God’s presence and glory through imagery?
And then I called myself out for being judgmental. I was judging my fellow believers, and not practicing what I say I’m trying to teach: the ability to empathize with the other; to understand not only the feeling but the thought process of another person. I was reminded of a family that went to my church when I was in high school. The parents were incredibly talented musicians. At one time they were professionals. But the parents began to realize that their own validation and recognition was becoming too important. Their public acclaim resulted in becoming self-focused and ultimately not honoring God – at all. For several years they neither played any music nor allowed any in their home. As a teen I thought this was a bit extreme. But I also came to value the sacrifice that they made. Here were Christians who wanted to make sure that nothing was more important than their relationship with God. Performance was a stumbling block for them so they removed the block. I can understand that – and honor it. But I also do not believe that this is true for most people.
I remember visiting the Norton Simon Museum of Art for the first time and sitting in awe at Rodin’s “The Thinker”. It was huge and real and inspiring. As I wandered through the museum I would pause in front of certain pieces that would simply touch me. Interestingly, my friends who I was with weren’t all inspired by the same pieces as I. But I think that’s how art works. It speaks to each of us differently, which makes it no less valid. In fact, I think that it is what makes it even more effective. We all respond to different mediums, even as we all respond to different forms of worship. While some are more inspired by “high worship”, others feel alienated by the formality and prefer a more casual approach. Is one better than the other? If the form causes the worshiper to honor, glorify and praise God, then it has done what it was intended to do. Art, and the format of worship, should prompt a response in the participant. But the beautiful thing is that our Creator was so imaginative that He gave us each unique personalities and preferences such that we see and appreciate beauty in different ways.
When I travel, I try to bring home something that will remind me of where I was. Of course I take pictures, but what I really want is art. The reality is, I am not well to do, so I buy folk art often made by “common” people, or replicas and prints of artists that I can’t afford. I look for something that reminds me of the people, the culture, or the experience. It prompts a response in me.
Dyrness argues that worship should prompt a response in people.[iv] We know that we all learn, perceive and experience life, worship and art in different ways. What then should the church do? Perhaps the church should throw open its doors and embrace the creativity and imagination that reflects our God. Our worship should include a variety of media that inspires us to joy, to passion, to pain and even grief. It should prompt a response in us, and perhaps we westerners should ease up a bit and not be so afraid of losing control. Isn’t that part of entering into relationship with God? We surrender ourselves to his Lordship. We submit all that we are to Him so that He may do what He will. It’s a wild adventure! Perhaps we should stop trying to make it so within our grasp and controllable. Perhaps we should allow God to be GOD.
[i] William A. Dyrness, Visual Faith, Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic. 2001, p. 22.
[ii] Ibid.
[iii] Ibid, 52.
[iv] Ibid, 84.
About the Author
Julie Dodge
Julie loves coffee and warm summer days. She is an Assistant Professor of Social Work at Concordia University, Portland, a consultant for non-profit organizations, and a leader at The Trinity Project.8 responses to “Imagine”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Julie, your last statement, is really interesting. “Perhaps we should stop trying to make it so within our grasp and controllable. Perhaps we should allow God to be GOD.” The amazing thing about art is that it’s soo subjective, and beyond our control. The protestant church has done such a good job in controlling everything about the worship services… the time, the schedule, the outline, the reading… the 3 songs 🙂 HA! We cannot control what people think and feel when they look at art. We can’t control the emotion it might evoke, and if it can’t be controlled it shouldn’t be in our worship. Isn’t that what we do to people to? If we can’t control them or make them be the way we think they should be, we marginalize and eventually cause them to leave?
I think you are right, Stef. When we try to control people, we miss the point of God and worship and relationship and… well, a whole lot of stuff. I’m not certain a lot of people think about how we approach others. If we were to see God’s creation – his people – through His eyes, we might find more grace and more possibility instead of being dissatisfied because they don’t all think and feel the same way as we do.
Julie, you write the best posts and truly get to the heart of the matter.
Yes, we all worship differently, and thankfully, there are so many forms and medias available to allow every Christian to connect to God in their own ways. It is so easy to judge others, as you said, and too often am I guilty of doing just that. What matters is not the form which causes us to connect, but instead that we DO connect. … I need to write that down! 🙂
What I also loved about your post — your purchase of a piece of art from your journeys through life and travels around the world! I do the same! You and I may even pick up the same piece of art or trinket to remind us of the people, the culture, or the experience…and yet you and I may have a completely different story or response to tell! God, as the Creator, made us so intricately and so differently that we can look at the same thing, even be moved by the same piece, and yet have different responses. And that is reason #58403 that I am in awe of God.
I love reason 58403! Thanks for your comments and thoughtfulness. And encouragement.
Dear Julie, I felt you post and you immaculately scratched where it itches. I took struggled during the course of reading about how the ‘Christian religion’ has broken down and how it should be ‘repaired’. The reality is that there is not one type of ‘christian art tradition’ for everyone to fit in or submit to. As you put it through
Dyrness argument, “that worship should prompt a response in people.” Such responses are not monolithic but too often the christian traditionalism, is afraid of the response that worship unveils in God’s people. “We know that we all learn, perceive and experience life, worship and art in different ways. What then should the church do? Perhaps the church should throw open its doors and embrace the creativity and imagination that reflects our God.
Our worship should include a variety of media that inspires us to joy, to passion, to pain and even grief. It should prompt a response in us, and perhaps we westerners should ease up a bit and not be so afraid of losing control. Isn’t that part of entering into relationship with God? We surrender ourselves to his Lordship. We submit all that we are to Him so that He may do what He will. It’s a wild adventure! Perhaps we should stop trying to make it so within our grasp and controllable. Perhaps we should allow God to be GOD.”
Golden insights indeed. Thank you!!!
Thank YOU, Michael. I love reading your feedback as I appreciate your perspective and insight. There indeed is not one, single “appropriate” response to art, but rather a myriad. One piece may bring joy to one person and pain to another. Who’s response is “correct”? Perhaps both.
Julie,
Thanks for your post.
In reading through it all, I come back to the quote that you offer at the beginning and it reminds of a bit of an odd contrast to Dyrness overall orientation in his work.
“Churches often appear imaginatively empty.” Okay. No argument on my part. Many do seem to unfortunately exemplify this point.
However, this quote got me thinking about Quakers because we at least used to be (and still are in many ways) iconoclastic — yet there’s a surprising amount of engagement with, creation of and cooperation in the visual arts in Quakerism.
But, the point is, that ironically while this is the case about Friends, I see them as one denomination that is in many senses “imaginatively full.”
In this sense, in contradistinction to Dyrness, sometimes I think the whole thing has less to do with the art that hangs (or doesn’t hang) on the walls and more to do with the art that resides in the heart. I see Quakers hearts as often full of the beauty and possibility of what God’s earth offers and thus, their empty-walled meeting houses are filled with the artistic aesthetic of life itself. Other denominations at times have liturgically inspired forms of art hanging on the walls, but their lives are bereft of the creative spark which brings such canvases to life in our own lives.
Anyhow…just some thoughts related to promoting God-breathed artistic flourishing.
I don’t think I’ve ever been to a Quaker service, but the more I hear from those of you who follow that tradition, the more I want to drop in. That said, one of my struggles with Dyrness was his tendency to over-generalize or stereotype the Protestant church. My church is distinctly non traditional In some ways, and in others, very traditional. We use video, poetry, contemplation, music, and even create art as part of our worship. It’s never the same because we all take turns leading our worship portion of our gatherings, thus building on the strengths and gifts of our members. It allows us to all experience worship differently. I would bet that there are many other churches that try to incorporate beauty and art into their worship – some better than others. I guess the real point is whether, like you feel your Quaker brothers and sisters do, the church nurtures the beauty and possibilities of its members, inspiring them to draw close to God.