Christian. Worldview. Thinking.
Tim Lambesis was the frontman and leader of a Christian metal band called As I Lay Dying… until he was arrested for trying to hire a hit man to kill his wife.
The case garnered a lot of headlines. Shortly before he was sentenced, Lambesis participated in the first, and maybe the last, interview about what happened.
It’s a tale of hypocrisy, drug use, and infidelity, with possible hints of redemption. And there are a few things here worth considering: [Read more…]
I once wrote a 25-page doctoral research paper in which I defended the idea that there is a normative, objective standards of beauty just as there is a normative, objective standard of truth. Unfortunately (though some might say fortunately), that tome seems to have been lost to the great hard drive crash circa 2005.
I’ve also written on beauty here several times in the past (like this and this). The point of these writings was to make the case that beauty is an objective reality that is based in the nature and character of God.
In that vein, I came across an interview with a pastor named Brian Zahnd in which the subject was addressed in a really thoughtful, helpful way:
I talk about beauty being an interpretive lens for Christianity. The Greek philosophers spoke of the prime virtues of the true, the good, and the beautiful. Later, the church fathers identified these with attributes of God. But during late modernity, these prime virtues have been under pressure—modern man is skeptical about absolute claims pertaining to truth, goodness, and beauty.
In defending truth, the church has created Christian apologetics, and in defending the good, the church has created Christian ethics. But by and large, we have ignored the virtue of beauty, relegating it to the demoted status of mere adornment. Yet the recovery of beauty as a way of interpreting and expressing the Christian faith may be just what we need at this time.
Along with Christian apologetics and ethics, we need some Christian aesthetics. In a culture that is suspicious of our truth claims and less than impressed with our claim to a superior ethic, beauty may be a fresh way to communicate our message. Beauty has a way of sneaking past defenses.
I know very little about Brian Zahnd, but I really like what he says here about the need for the Church to become champions of beauty.
Creation in 3 minutes, and 33 seconds.
If you didn’t see Darren Aronofsky’s Noah film, you missed a remarkable and imaginative depiction of creation. It’s narrated by Russell Crowe in the title role, and told to his family as they lurch and bob in the darkness of the ark, not long after the waters have covered the earth.
Check it out:
Interestingly, some people hear in this account a literal six-day interpretation of Genesis 1. Others see in it an old-earth view that traces the path of theistic evolution (although Adam and Eve seem to enter the scene suddenly). Personally, I love the fact that it can be interpreted both ways!
The Genesis account portrayed here also tells us that God made man in his own image, and charges him to exercise dominion over the earth (Genesis 1:26-28). Part of what it means to bear God’s image is the power and ability to create. Part of what it means to subdue the earth and exercise dominion over it is the call to build a civilization and harness the earth’s resources for the greater good. So a digitally rich and visually imaginative depiction of creation seems to be quite appropriate to me.
For what it’s worth, I saw the movie and thought it was pretty interesting. There were some parts of the movie I really liked, and several things that I would have done differently. Just don’t approach it with any idea that they are trying to be faithful to the biblical text!
The early chapters of Genesis are really fascinating to me because we really don’t know what the world was like before the flood. That’s why they are fertile soil for the imagination.
If you found the movie interesting (even if you found it unsatisfactory, as I did), you might enjoy Brian Godawa’s novel Noah Primeval. His is an equally imaginative telling of the Noah story, but one that strives to stay faithful to what Scripture has revealed. It’s an entertaining book.
In a 2004 cover story in Spin magazine, U2 frontman Bono (note: I’m a huge U2 fan) says something profound:
“The job of art is to chase away ugliness.”
(You can read the article here). It seems to me that such a view certainly comports with Scripture.
God is a creative God and one who loves beauty – He didn’t have to make the sky turn glorious hues of orange and purple when the sun sets, for example. His creation was good. By contrast, sin brings ugliness – none worse than the ugliness inside the human heart.
The goal of good art should be, as Bono says, to chase away ugliness, to show us beauty. There is a transcendent quality to art that does this, something that ought to remind us that True Beauty exists, and that ugliness will ultimately vanish in Christ’s kingdom.
Marchel Duchamp’s masterpiece
Of course, many in the arts celebrate ugliness. Think of the compositions of John Cage, think of infamous art exhibits that draw publicity by shocking ugliness. A poll of 500 influential arts figures, released in 2004, declared that the most influential work of modern art is Marchel Duchamp’s “Urinal.” And yes, it is a white porcelain urinal. This is what the cultural elites of our day think is good art.
I guess we might agree that it is influential, and certainly says something about the culture that produced and celebrates it. “Ugly” art attempts to subvert (or “deconstruct”) the norm, what most of us would consider beauty. The purported aim is usually to “push the envelope,” which they would have us believe is a high calling of art. Yet these things are subversive and destructive.
True Beauty exists, and it ought to be the goal of art to celebrate it and draw us to it, to remind us of the beauty of our Creator. The Church should celebrate such art and this high calling.
Most evangelicals understand the importance of absolutes in the realm of morality and would agree that sin is certainly not in the eye of the beholder. Despite the protestations to the contrary emanating from American culture, Christians have by and large stood firm in their conviction, rooted in the immutability of God and His Word, that moral goodness and moral evil are indeed fixed concepts.
Similarly, thinking evangelicals recognize the importance of normative standards in the realm of epistemology. There is such a thing as Absolute Truth, likewise rooted in the fundamental character of God and His Word, and evidenced throughout creation. Human beings, in their own approach to life and interactions with each other, implicitly acknowledge the existence of epistemological absolutes – that the creators of the “X Files” were correct when they proclaimed “The Truth is out there.” Thus belief in normative standards of truth and morality are rooted and anchored in a biblical view of God, and their existence is validated by His creation and the human experience in it.
What, then, of beauty? Christians who correctly stand against relativism in these other crucial areas nevertheless tend to assume a relativistic stance towards beauty…
(An excerpt from the introduction to a doctoral paper in progress in which I am attempting to make a positive case for normative standards of beauty. I thought I’d see if it would generate any discussion. Any thoughts?)
Merging two of my recent blog topics here: Art in the Church, and U2.
In Spin Magazine’s cover story on U2, Bono says, “The job of art is to chase away ugliness.” (By the way, you can read the full article here). It seems to me that such a view certainly comports with Scripture. God is a creative God and one who loves beauty – He didn’t have to make the sky turn glorious hues of orange and purple when the sun sets, for example. His creation was good. By contrast, sin brings ugliness – none worse than the ugliness inside the human heart. The goal of good art should be, as Bono says, to chase away ugliness, to remind show us beauty. There is a transcendent quality to art that does this, something that ought to remind us that True Beauty exists, and that ugliness will ultimately vanish in Christ’s kingdom.
Of course, many in the arts celebrate ugliness. Think of the compositions of John Cage, think of infamous art exhibits that drew publicity by shocking ugliness (urine, etc.). Such art attempts to subvert (or “deconstruct”) the norm, what most of us would consider beauty. They purportedly do so to “push the envelope,” which they would have us believe is a high calling of art. Yet these things are subversive and destructive.
True Beauty exists, and it ought to be the goal of art to celebrate it and draw us to it, to remind us of the beauty of our Creator. The Church should celebrate such art and this high calling.
——-
Update: A poll of 500 arts figures, released today, declared that the most influential work of modern art is Marchel Duchamp’s “Urinal.” And yes, it is basically a white porcelain urinal like you would find at your favorite rest stop. Don’t believe it – look at it here. This is what the cultural elites of our day think is good art. I guess we might agree that it is influential, and certainly says something about the culture that produced and celebrates it. Beauty, it appears, may be a lost art.
Mike Cosper is the worship arts pastor at Sojourn. He’s at once a brilliant musician and a great Christian thinker. Recently a website called Somewhere Cold reviewed Sojourn’s original CD, “Songs for the Advent.” (The review was really good! It is seriously a very good CD.) They then interviewed Mike. I thought the excerpt below was very thought provoking and worth reproducing here. The full interview is here.
Question: “How do you see ART in the life of the church? What role should the arts play in church life?”
Mike: “That’s a huge question. I think I would start by encouraging anyone who wants to engage the arts to read “Unceasing Worship” by Harold Best. He makes a good case that the arts have an important role to play in the life of the church, but that we sell it out for cute kitsch experiences and petty emotionalism. We show up to church and say “Here we are now, entertain us.” I just think a lot is done in the name of “art” in the church that isn’t much in the way of art, and may not belong in the church. We want to package the arts and put it in a worship service, so we can say “we’re artsy.” The church should be the first to appreciate great art and the last to cheapen it and market it. I’m afraid that’s not the case. Best’s book deals with that and a lot more. It’s really inspiring. Our community has made efforts to engage the arts, including this record. I’d encourage you as well to check out our online art gallery at www.sojourncommunity.com The artists’ statements are definitely worth reading.”