If you are interested in how we as the church might faithfully incorporate visual elements into worship and teaching, then perhaps this article would be of interest to you. An exerpt of the opening paragraphs follow the link.
Building Church Leaders Newsletter:
"Visualcy."
No, it's not a real word. Not yet anyway. It was coined by author Andy Crouch to describe a new skill needed in our image-soaked society.
'Just as the shift to writing required the skills we call literacy,' writes Crouch, 'so visual culture requires its own skills—for lack of a better word, visualcy.'
What does visualcy have to do with ministry? Everything! Today people expect a church service to engage their ears and eyes. Even more traditional churches that shun technology can't avoid using visual media entirely. Remember when carousel slide projectors were a staple of missionary presentations?"
Isn't it too bad that so many churches that are now desperately in need of "visualcy" have spent so much time eliminating the visual elements that already existed? A lot of churches have gotten rid of their crucifixes, the stained glass that tells a story, the robe that sets the Pastor apart as the administrator of Christ's gifts, and the various rubrics in the liturgy meant to add visual clarity to what's taking place in the service.
ReplyDeleteAnd now they say you have to engage the eyes as well as the ears, and they pooh-pooh "traditional" churches for shunning technology. Well...traditional churches have been engaging the eyes AND ears (and in some cases, the nose with incense) this whole time.
It begs the question...is it truly about engaging the eyes in an appropriate manner, or just another opportunity to provide the church with software to buy, hardware to buy, consultants to pay, etc? I guess that's a question that everyone has to answer for themselves.
Eric
The Lutheran church has always done a good job of incorporating the visual--in fact, all of the senses. We "touch" in the waters of Baptism and "taste" the bread and wine of the Lord's Supper. We "hear" the Word read, preached, and sung. We "smell" the incense. We "see" the empty cross, the stained glass windows, the Baptismal font, the eternal flame, and list goes on and on.... We are very privileged in that Lutherans have retained all of the "good stuff" from the historical church. During the Reformation every little aspect of our worship underwent great scrutiny and we are left with a beautiful jewel that has stood the test of time and should not be treated lightly.
ReplyDeleteEvery element that is present in a sanctuary makes a statement about what the congregation believes. In fact, those who lead the services wear robes so as to show they are covered and not to draw attention to themselves, but rather point back to the true leader of the service--Christ. The center of our visual elements must always be to focus us back to Jesus Christ.
I wish that the church as a whole would take a step back and evaluate why we are making decisions. What does changing/adding/removing __ bring? Does it truly help people, or is it merely an attempt to make the church more like the outside world--and is that even a good thing? And should we be doing something just because the world expects it? And what are the ramifications if that is our only criteria?
We must be careful that the visual elements present in our church speak to our theology and not to add visual elements which are merely clutter and become distracting from what is truly important.
Eric and Lauren,
ReplyDeleteThanks for the comments. Sorry I didn't post them for a while. Been really busy. Just saw them today.
What you key in on was the real shame of parts of the Reformation. I once heard that when Luther came back to Wittenburg after his time in hiding, and observed how Carlstadt and others had stripped the church of its symbols, one of the first things he put back was the statues of Mary and other saints. That seems very UNLutheran to us, but it spoke to the point that while the Word saves, people use other media to help them process, utilize, and hold on to that word.
I think one reality that the article does not speak to, but only in a round about manner, is that for those who have been so far removed from the symbolic images of the church, they may have to be eased into them again. You both mentioned crucifixes and incense as traditional forms of those symbols. I agree that they could be reintroduced in many churches to great effect. However, these are both very very powerful--even for the initiated--and need to be implemented with care. I for one have never been in a service where insence was used and I'm a Pastor! I've only been associated with one Lutheran church in my life that used some form of a crucifix and I don't beleive it was in the sanctuary, but in a side chapel or classroom setting. The rest all had empty crosses or some form of a risen Savior image.
That's the challenge the church constantly faces...being "all things to all people" while telling timeless truths about our eternal Savior.