ARTISTS; RESIDENT IN THE CHURCH?

The Artist-in-Residence program at Durham Cathedral is a testimony to the enduring legacy of the need for artists in the church. You can observe their program at their website, and get a sense of its history as well as its contemporary relevance. http://www.artschaplaincy.org.uk/projects/air.html

The works of these artists transcend a merely self-centered notion of person creativity; these artists are producing works that are connected to a centuries old tradition that ministers to others and glorifies God.

Their work becomes timeless, because they are joining their lives and their labors to something bigger than themselves. They are, in a sense, hitching their wagon to a star, and because of this their works will remain a testimony of their own creative spirit as it is joined to the work of countless others through the life of the Church.

In these works one sees a continuity with the artists of the past, energetic contemporary expressions of living creativity, and fellowship in an artistic tradition that will stand the test of time. Would to God, more churches employed the arts in their worship, in their sacred spaces, and in their plans for the future.

It would be wonderful if more "artist in residence" programs were established. If you love the arts, talk to your church leaders about including them more integrally into your regular worship. If you are really bold, encourage your church and its leaders to look into creating an "artist in residence" program. It need not be grandiose. You can begin simply. Any enrichment of the worship experience is better than none. Begin where you can, and see the wonderful places that journey will take you.

Look for more information about this subject in coming blogs. Creating such programs is possible, and well worth our time, resources and energy to investigate. Imagine the rich possibilities and the diversity of advantages for humankind if churches returned to the arts, and art was once more created for the glory of God. There is not a single facet of the Church that would not directly benefit. There is not a single area of culture that would not be greatly enriched.

(Painting above: The Annunciation by: Edward Burne-Jones, a Pre-Raphaelite)

ANCIENT - COMPELLING - RELATIVE

There is a kind of mania in the churches today about being relevant to the culture. Frequently that means being new, fresh, trendy, culturally hip, faddish, or edgy. Relevance is rarely that in any case except for those contexts where trendiness is the over-arching paradigm.

Who today would think of St. Augustine as being relevant to the current and prevailing cultures of the west? Probably not many, but a closer look will find this man someone not merely to venerate as a saint, but one who ought to be considered as truly relevant for believers today. His works transcend time and culture, remaining a great source of inspiration and wisdom.

Augustine was, in his early years, a profligate and an intellectual. He was formally trained as an orator and became a teacher, but his personal life was a moral mess. One of his most famous statements often quoted was, "God, make me chaste, but not yet." We smile at the honest foolishness of that request, and see our own desire for God as it is often eclipsed by our reluctance to fully follow Christ.

Augustine is one of those saints who has caused more soul-searching and controversy than most others. That alone qualifies him for examination. Any religious person who wants to fit in and make nice will not like what Augustine has to say. Those who want to be thought spiritual while living like hell will out and out despise what he has to say. But, those who have an open heart, unafraid of the mystical vision he preaches will find in Augustine a fountain of refreshment and inspiration. Read Augustine. He is not just ancient, he is also relevant and compelling for our own day.

Here is a link to a teaching by John Piper about the life of St. Augustine and what it might mean to us today. Piper is speaking to a group of ministers, and he refers to numerous early church controversies with heretics as well as references to the "Reform" churches and Reform theology, but never mind all that . . . those are references intended for that particular audience. Just ignore that, but listen closely to the things he has to say about Augustine himself. I think you might find it a bit more than interesting. I hope you find it compelling as well. http://www.danielriceart.net/AUGUSTINE/

When you get to the folder you will see a single file. Just click on the MP3 file to download or open the subject matter. Note, this is a 40 meg file, so it may take a minute (or four) to download it if you have a cable connection. Piper's entire message is over an hour, but listen to what you can. You will get the feel of it pretty quickly. This is superb content on Augustine, delivered by a passionate and intelligent contemporary public speaker.

PATRON SAINTS OF ARTISTS

There are a number of patron saints of artists. They are St. Catherine of Bologna, St. Bernward, Fra Angelico, Michael the Archangel, and St. Luke, the writer of the gospel of Luke, the book of The Acts of the Apostles, and traveling companion of St. Paul on his missionary journeys.

In Renaissance Florence, St. Luke was a favored patron saint for the painters, goldsmiths, gold workers, stained glass workers, lacemakers, brewers and sculptors.

( http://www.catholic-forum.com/saints/saintl06.htm)

In the 11th century, St. Bernward was a remarkable artist and churchman who accomplished amazing things in the creation of sacred spaces and for the beautification of the worship of God. His story is truly impressive. (http://www.catholic-forum.com/saints/saintb44.htm)

I love the idea of having patron saints of the arts, because the arts should be thought of as sacred in nature, and blessed by heaven. This may not seem true in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries in the general public - not yet anyway, but it will - especially as common artists like myself and my friends have anything to say about it . . . and we do.

Many believers working in the arts today are beginning to make a difference in the art world. New York City now has the Museum of Biblical Art (http://www.mobia.org/about/), of which I hear some good things - and Gordon College houses the CIVA organization. CIVA stands for Christians in the Visual Arts (http://www.civa.org/), a worthy effort for the arts among believers. Publications like IMAGE Magazine and Relevant Magazine (two very different kinds of publications) are raising the consciousness about excellence in the arts.

There is so much going on that churches too reluctant or too afraid to patronize the arts; or unwilling to become supporters of artists in their midst, and patrons of their works may discover that they missed a great opportunity to be in the middle of what God is doing in this generation. They missed their best opportunity to connect to the culture, to bless their world.

Shortly, I will be sharing more with you about the patron saints of the arts and what that might mean for us today, regardless of one's spiritual affiliations.

REPRODUCTIONS OF THE MASTERS

These reproductions of Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel ceiling are charcoal on toned board, dimensions: 5.75" x 6.75"; perfect for classical decorative elements in your home or office, and delightfully unique gifts for your cultured friends and family members. Do you have a favorite artist? Daniel can reproduce their work in a variety of ways, from large wall murals to cameo-sized accents like these unique handcrafted translations of great masterpieces.

To see more of Daniel's work, visit http://www.danielriceart.net/

EMBARRASSING AS HELL

Hell isn't what it use to be . . . at least in its place within society. People seem to be embarrassed to talk about hell, and preachers rarely discuss it or talk about it. When asked about one's belief in hell, many people hesitate and blush. It is an embarrassing question, especially for people who think of themselves as intellectually enlightened.

This painting is from an amazing fresco called "The Triumph of the Name of Jesus," by an artist named Gaulli. This is just the lower corner of the enormous ceiling painting. I saw this fresco in 2006, on my last visit to Rome. This portion of the painting depicts devils and the wicked being cast down to their condemnation.

It seems curious that the topic of hell, once so common in churches and theological discussions, has become an almost forbidden topic. It is hard to talk about hell without people expressing their strong emotions, or energetic objections to the subject. Why is this?

Even Evangelicals' ideas and belief in hell has slipped from what it once was. Where once most of Evangelicals believed in hell, now most are conflicted by the subject. There are some very strong feelings about this subject, and it makes me wonder why there is such a strong reaction . . . and reaction it is.

Not all beliefs in hell are identical. There is the eternal conscious punishment version. There is the nihilistic version of it. There is the idea that hell, and/or Purgatory, can be redemptive rather than entirely punitive. Then there is the view that no such place exists at all.

Ask almost any Christian these days, regardless of the denom, and you will find a generally uncomfortable response to the question of one's belief in the existence of hell.

Of course, a belief in the existence of hell is not a requirement for entry into heaven, or at least I don't see it listed as such anywhere in the Bible, but there are, nonetheless, quite energetic feelings about this subject.

Strangely, the subject of hell is one of those topics that can provide one comfort as well as a sense of dread. If one has suffered injustices, or if one has intractable enemies, it is oddly comforting to think that perhaps your enemies will end up in hell.

There are clever statements in films where someone will tell their enemy, "I'll see you in hell!" and there are those witty retorts when told to go to hell, the response is, "You first." Which is usually followed by someone killing the one who insulted them.

Hell can be a convenient doctrine to bandy about. Infidels always end up in hell. Ask any faithful Muslim. Jews, however, have very different views on the subject. Christians have mixed feelings, and various views, and the general population has reached no consensus on the subject at all -- yet people remain very emotional about the subject.

The notion of hell, however, is not relegated to the three Middle-Eastern religions, other cultures and various religions have their own idea of hell. It could even be said that Buddhistic concept of reincarnation is not a happy idea, but is their idea of hell. One really does not want to come back. One is trying to break the cycle and to get out of the endless repetition of life and death. That to the Buddhist is Nirvana . . . which is more about release into nothingness than it is fulfillment of personalty.

I'd love to do a painting about hell, but it is difficult to conceive of an idea of hell that would be meaningful for this generation. The subject matter, as an artist, fascinates me.

I am interested in people's emotions about this topic almost as much as I am in the subject of hell itself.

Why do you think people get so worked up about the idea of hell?

What is it that lies beneath the emotions that provokes such strong responses?

Does the subject bother you?

Have you ever argued one side or the other? If so, why?

What is to be gained by such discussions on the existence of hell?

Why do you think we all feel that this subject is an important subject?

I'd like to know your thoughts on this.

FIFTEEN "NANOSECONDS" OF FAME?

In the later part of the last century, Andy Worhol coined the phrase, "Fifteen-minutes of fame." He was pointing out that media was such a strong force in the world, that everyone on the planet would have fifteen-minutes of notoriety . . . that would be all.

The media is powerful enough to reach everyone on the planet, but it will not provide any single individual with lasting fame. That was then, when the world was slower and less media-intense.

Andy died before the Internet was a available to the masses. I am sure he would have something clever to say about the proliferation of new forms of media these days. Perhaps he would think there would only be fifteen nanoseconds of fame. Fifteen minutes is an eternity by comparison. I mean, just think of how many Youtube spots there are to view. How does any single video rise to the top of that dog-pile? And, who in the world has the time or the opportunity to view them all?

In conversations about the arts and entertainment, I have often heard people comment about how nearly impossible it is to make anything that is meaningful to the masses, in any long-term sense. Ours is a throw-away society that tastes everything and digests nothing. All it seems to produce is massive amounts of waste. I wonder, are we receiving any nutrition from our gluttonous consumption of everything new?

My son-in-law, at lunch today, quoted someone who had said that there use to be one-hundred great bands, each with ten-thousand fans. Now we see ten-thousand bands, each with one-hundred fans. It is true. How can fame find anyone in a world such as this, yet our culture continues to morph in this fashion.

So, is any form of longevity possible . . . for art, for knowledge, for culture, for society, for religion, for individuals? Is it possible to leave a legacy for the generations that will follow us? Or, does this contemporary pastiche mean that all that which was classical and time-honored is no longer relevant? Does relevance exist for anything that is not part of the wave of the nuevo-culture?

If only that which is new and novel is valued, what hope is there for cultural continuity through time? Is cultural continuity even a value in this nation anymore? What will the perpetual-change-machinery of pop-culture, technology, and media produce for our world in the next fifty years? Will this tsunami of the "new" wash away earlier cultures and replace them with anything worthy to be called culture . . . in the old sense of that term? Is history relevant?

I'm reminded of the words of Jeremiah, the Jewish prophet, who said, "This is what the LORD says: Stand at the crossroads and look; ask for the ancient paths, ask where the good way is, and walk in it, and you will find rest for your souls. But you said, 'We will not walk in it.' Jer 6:16 NIV

What does it mean to be out-of-date, old-fashioned, antiquated? Is there such a thing as "going-back" in order to go forward? If one misses one's intended off-ramp on the freeway, is it "progress" to keep going? Is it enlightened to think that all off-ramps lead to the same destination? If you were going to keep something from the past in such a world of change as ours what kind of thing(s) would you keep. What ancient things might one always consider to be contemporary?

Any nanothoughts?

THE ILLUMINATRIUM ART EXPERIENCE

FREEDOM FEST went well, except for the few hours the rain nearly washed us all away . . . BUT, the Illuminatrium Art Experience went pretty well.

I imagine there were probably 300 or more people who went through the Illuminatrium, many of whom stopped long enough to make some pretty cool art.

Between painting, drawing, face-painting, origami, clay and coloring books, there was a ton of art produced in those 50 or so hours. It was inspiring. By the end of Freedom Fest, there was over 120 works hanging on the gallery walls . . . a tribute to the creative spirit of children of all ages.

This is just one of the many cool works produced.

To see more, visit http://www.danielriceart.net/ILLUMINATRIUM/Illuminatrium.html