PLGRM

Saying that when we talk about God we are making Art is absurd, I know.

The idea of “Art” raises a lot of complicated thoughts and emotions in us, not to mention trying to apply this idea to how we talk about God. So I think it’s worth pausing here to acknowledge that, and to explore our feelings about God and the things of God.

One reason we may feel our pulse quicken at the suggestion of Theology as Art is because our relationship with God is very, very important. It is something that deserves our full respect and attention. It is not a frivolous thing. It is not something we’re “playing at.”

We take our relationships to God seriously, and we should.

Also, when we think of “Art” we might be embarrassed to admit that a lot of times we just don’t understand it. We hear a song or see a play or a photograph and we’re told it’s an example of high-quality Art, and we just don’t get it.

To put it another way: sometimes Art makes us feel dumb.

If we can’t seem to “get it” when it comes to something much less important than God then why would we want to approach God — who is so very important — through the same lens? We wouldn’t. That sounds ridiculous.

For a lot of us, we don’t want to think about approaching God through the lens of Art, because, if we’re honest about it, we don’t think we’re good at it. We tried Art once or twice, and the results were…unflattering.

I think it’s accurate to say that we are not engaging in this life of faith in order to be bad at it. We want to be good and we want to be good at it. And if we’re not good at Art then that means we’re not good at theology. If we’re not good at Art then does that mean we won’t be good at being a Christians?

And, also, can anybody really define what we mean when we say “Art”? So many of the things we call “Art” these days are simply things we like and that entertain us. Doesn’t God deserve more and better than that? I think we all agree that God’s role is not to entertain us. God is not a dancing monkey, here for our pleasure. And this is why we tend to approach theology in more serious, studied ways.

Often, we think about theology the same way we think about law or history or science.

Law, history, and science are serious pursuits that we basically understand. They can be trusted. They can be relied on. We want our theology to be the same way. We want theology to be cool and objective, set apart. We want a lens through which we can judge and filter the rest of our lives with a little bit of indifference. We want it to be full of gravitas, and not even remotely suggesting whimsy or spontaneity.

We also want theology to be exhaustive. It functions as our rule and guide, so it should be able to cover the breadth and depth of whatever we might encounter. It needs to be, as it were, cross-referencable and applicable in many times and places.

Thinking of theology the same way we think of law, science, or history also allows for that kind of dependability and stability. There are facts, and we can know them. Knowing the facts will allow us to encounter any and all situations and make the right choices as we need to.

However, if we’re honest, that is quite the generous interpretation of what we think is happening in our interaction with theology. In truth, we just want theology to be stable and solid so we don’t have to adjust too much about our lives. I don’t mean to be pessimistic or rude, but it must be said that humans have a tendency to find a set of understandings they like, then we use them to lock in our behavior and thinking.

Boom. Done. Now we’re good Christians.

This is why many preachers are nervous to utter anything that might be considered contrary to the common, prevailing understanding of God. People do not like change, because change really feels like loss. And what people feel like they are losing is any kind of reliability about who we are, what the world is, and what God wants of us.

But if we step back and take a look at what we want from theology, we start to see a disturbing pattern:

• We want our theology to be indifferent and objective.
• We want theology to cover all possible bases.
• We do not want our theology to change.
• We want a prescribed, reliable interaction with our theology.

Uh-oh.

Our theologies have become idols. (Remember “Pooh Bear Jesus”?)

So if Art is the solution to the problem of how we talk of God, then we probably better get a good understanding of what we mean, right?

Right.

Until next time…