Thursday Theological Thinking

Some friends of mine (well, technically they were friends of Tim's first, though I now consider them my own friends in my own right) from college have a blog where they basically just share their thoughts du jour - sort of a way to keep in touch (and thus why I'm not going to link to it, I don't have their permission - nor do I have their permission to lift the pieces that are following, I figure they can complain if they mind.) Anyway, periodically their discussions travel down into deep thoughts and, since I'm running a bit low on something worth posting that doesn't travel down into "Woe is me" land right now, I thought I would share some of their thoughts and my thoughts on their thoughts. And then see if you had any thoughts on their thoughts or my thoughts. (Lost yet?) These conversations took place a few weeks ago.

"Do any of you remember a photograph from the late 80s where the photographerhad taken a crucifix and submerged it into a jar full of urine. I remember people at Wheaton chattering away about this in a rather offended tone, wondering how an artist could dare to represent Christ in this fashion.

The reason I ask is because I was down last night, listening to a friend preach to a cowd of 200 or so. The stench in this room was nothing short of horrific. Most of these guys hadn't bathed in a month (if even that recently) and to be honest, I really didn't know what to do with that. It was that overpowering. Anyway, as I sat there listening to my friend, I couldn't help but think back upon that painting, and I started to wonder whether we missed the point entirely. We (being conservative evangelical Christians) were so worried about protecting the dignity of Christ, that we tended to forget that He sacrificed His dignity of His own accord. ...Kind of makes me wonder: was it Christ's dignity that we were trying to protect, or was it the illusion of our own dignity?"

Basically the responses from two other friends expressed a bit of confusion, so the original author clarified:

If the three of you are anything like me, you probably tend to live with the mistaken belief that, generally speaking, you have it together. You have wives, you have a house, maybe you have a kid, you got jobs that you like ... In that kind of environment, its sometimes tempting to live as if God doesn't exist. And no, we would never say this out loud, becasue that is offensive to Christian ears. But if we're being honest, we sometimes get so caught up in the journey of our daily lives that we lose sight of the fact that God has a vested interest in what we are doing and why. What I failed to mention in my last post is this: while sitting listening to my friend, I was also staring at a new pair of shoes I was wearing. It sounds dumb, but I really like these shoes. These are probably some of the best shoes I've ever owned. They feel good, they look good, and for whatever reason, I couldn't stop admiring them. So I'm sitting there in this stench, and I'm thinking about Jude and how he says that our rotted flesh is so nasty that it even stains our clothing (including my fine new pair of shoes), and I'm thinking about that photograph of Christ, and I get this flash that I am still a very long way away from being perfected. I'm sitting with all these desperately impoverished people - any by impoverished, I'm not just talking about material wealth -- and all I can think about is the fact that I look good in my new pair of shoes. And that's when it strikes me. Maybe that photograph (regardless of the artist's second-rate intentions) is really, REALLY accurate. In response to your post, dude, I would say two things. One, when it comes to visual art, that is one of the few arenas where I believe the postmodernists are right. Visual art is not propositional. It is an attempt to capture a moment or an idea, but because there is no written or verbal explanation, it leaves itself open to all manner of interpretations. So regardless of the artist's intentions, he put something out there and asked people to think about. This is where I landed.

My thoughts were the following:

While I would agree that I'm also guilty of the living-as-if-God-doesn't-exist thing, and I see the point, I have to wonder if there isn't a point where one has taken "art" too far.

First, I've yet to meet an artist who didn't have an underlying point to their art - wasn't trying to make a statement of some type. Very few artists create art for art's sake. Especially not art that is going to be controversial. When you submerge a crucifix into a jar of urine, you have a reason for doing so.

Very likely, the reason is not to get Christians to examine their lives and realize that they have a tendency to live as if God doesn't exist. But rather to make a slightly more simplistic - visceral, if you will - statement about the artist's feelings about Christianity.

To take a symbol that a particular group respects and submerge it into human waste conveys a disrespect for that symbol. Just as PETA throwing animal blood on wearers of fur conveys their disrespect for those who wear fur. You don't create "art" like that without wanting to also create a stir.

Now - that aside, it's entirely possible for God to redeem that art and give it significance for individuals. And this is what it seems has been the case with you, Scott. God spoke to you as you stood, thinking about your shoes in the midst of depravity and convicted you with an image designed to convey disrespect and negate the significance to the sacrifice that Christ made for us. It plunged you into further thought and will most likely, at some point, draw you to the conclusion that God has for you.

But does that mean the art had a bigger, better purpose of reminding Christians that we're no better than those who have nothing - that in fact we need to remember that this is where we would be without Christ? I would say no. The art still was designed to serve the artist's purpose - just like we are to serve our Artist's purpose, even though very often it's unclear to others what that purpose is and therefore we can go on to be misunderstood and used for purposes other than what was originally intended.