Ponder this- Freedom of choice was the alpha weopon of mass destruction- what will be the omega? Will our own creativity be our undoing? Will we choose to rise above, or fall below?
I believe there is an unbreakable link between the spirit and the arts. Part of that is unexplainable- some things just cannot be made tangible for painless digestion. So, I'm encouraging my email list and Facebook friends to respond to a series of questions I'm going to post here. Here is the first. Please leave me as detailed an answer as you feel, and know that I am very grateful to all who reply!
Probe 1:
"The church has found that condescension, irrelevancy, and a total lack of commitment to the Creative Vanguard has not only tarnished it’s heritage and legacy, but has, like a Great Flood, washed away it’s foothold in the hearts and minds of this world."
1.How true or false is this statement? Please explain how strongly you agree if it's true or false, in detail.
2. What is the first change the Church/Faiths must make to positively and permanently change this perception?
Faith/Church in this usage does not denote Christian faith/churches specifically- whether your faith is Jewish, Muslim, Atheist, etc... your feedback is important. My goal here is to contextualize the connection between the spirt and the arts. Please & Thank You.
Be blessed,
Deacon
3 comments:
First, forgive me if this doesn't make sense. I am feeling a bit loopy today.
1) I assume you are talking about th recent one or two hundred or so years?
I agree strongly.
I believe that when Christ talked about loving God with all our heart, soul, and mind - that He chose his words purposefully.
Our mind is very much the intellectual part of us. The 'knowledge' part, where we learn theology, grow in wisdom, preserve memories of experiences, etc. The church has generally done a good job with holding on to "information."
Our heart is our emotions, our passions...our desire to create and appreciate creation. And that stuff doesn't always make sense in our/peoples minds. It comes from somewhere deep inside of us,in the essence of our being.
And our soul or spirit is the part that connects us with God, or rather *is* God IN us. It is the breath that He breathed in us from the begging of time. This is something the 'church' has nothing to do with, and therefor hasn't been directly affected over the churches doings in the last couple hundred years.
The church has, whether intentionally or accidentally, walked away from the heart portion - and will continue to do so. I think that is in line with Revelation and the church forgetting its first love. It forgot, because it walked away from the desires, passions, and relational aspect that our heart pumps through our bodies.
So in a time where knowledge and information is free and easier to get a hold of than any other time in history, people have gained a real thirst for something more. They don't want their questions answered as much as they want to know the way they *feel* isn't weird, or that they aren't alone. They want to know that Christianity is something more than the regurgitation of information and rituals.
As for the second part of your question, I think the church needs to stop ordaining "pastors" and start ordaining "people." People need to know that those cravings, desires, and passions boiling inside of them were put there BY God, and that they are just as - if not more - important than all the preachers in the world. Preachers and Missionaries and all the like do an incredibly important work, but when we devalue the *endless* amount of other giftings and callings in the people around us, we - the church - shoot ourselves in the foot. (For lack of a better term.)
So...that's kinda my thoughts.
Your statement causes me to have more questions than answers. If by "church" you mean the powers that be and decide the big issues, then yes I think in general it's true, but..... I also think if you asked them if they were intentionally being non supportive of the arts, they would tell you that they are not. Additionally, I think they would admit to not being supportive of anything that they deem to be unacceptable from their own definition of a moral perspective, a "line in the sand" if you will.
My definition of church has always been been the people that are part of it. I, in general find those people to be very supportive of the arts. Music, theater, movies, etc are all attended and enjoyed regularly by people I know and attend church with. I also know families that home school who put an extremely high emphasis on the arts, especially music. I have friends in the Colorado Springs area, who home school and have a family band. They are so talented and supported by their parents, that the oldest son 16, has twice placed in the top 3 of the national Hammered Dulcimer contest. He competes against people who have been playing the instrument twice as long as he has been alive. His parents commitment to the arts(music to be specific) is unquestionable.
So, after having said those things, here's what I really think the issue is. Most church's congregation's are aging. They will gladly pay out money to go see, say, an Elvis impersonator, but maybe not so much for Snoop Dog(I know bad example), but you get my point.
The question then becomes, does the lack of support from the church for modern or younger forms of art and culture cause younger generations not to be supportive of the church, or is it that younger generations have never responded well to the whole "line in sand" philosophy, that the church must maintain.
My generation may well be to blame for a lot of this. The freedom that we fought so hard for in the 60's and 70's was passed on to our offspring, but with little or no consequences imposed for improper behavior, etc, thus the adversion to the "line in the sand", type of mentality.
To try and summarize, I think the church has tried to maintain that "line in the sand", with regards to morality, decency, and acceptance of responsibility for one's own actions. This in my opinion has turned off a lot of people, and caused more of the Great Flood that you speak of, than has lack of support for the arts.
The whole, "My God is better than your God" philosophy of the Pat Robertsons and Jerry Falwells of the world, is part of the problem as well. I mean, "Is Tinky-Winky gay because he carries a purse?", is a "line in the sand" issue to them. Whereas to most of us it seems completely silly to waste one's time on such trivial things.
You know after rereading my response, I guess I think that your statement is false for the most part, but on the surface it definitely has the appearance of being true.
There's how's that for being "loopy". If you understand what I was trying to say, explain it to me, will you. :-)
Brian Mc Namar
per your request mister findlay---it's awesome having a spouse who cares about these things...
yes i think the statement is true for many reasons, the possible core being in the Scripture from Proverbs: where there is no vision, the people perish. my paraphrase is the converse: where there is a vision, people are made alive! in this case, the church has proceeded with all kinds of "skewed" vision regarding this area, which has resulted in a shallow, consumeristic, isolationist, narcissistic, divisive approach to artistic expression, that is definitely kept subservient to the "more important" things like butts in the seats and money in the bank. my hero leonard sweet has said in the past that in the renaissance era, it was the church that saved the arts. now my love, it is time for the arts to save the church. if that's the case, i believe we are strategically positioned to be on the front lines of this effort, by lighting our candles rather than cursing the darkness, and by attending consistently to the logs in our own eyes, rather than obsessing on the specks of any faulty person or system. this is how we can keep our vision clear in order to, as gateway church would say, join God in the renewal of this and all areas, and to really truly at long last, be about a Truthful Vision, unskewed by our toxic preferences.
as janet jackson would say, get the point? good, now let's dance!
Post a Comment