Recovering the First Reformation - Toward a Proto-Protestant Narrative of Church History (XXII/Final)
We ought to understand that technology and art are not easily
separated and both are to some extent inseparable from questions of
epistemology and morality. Additionally, if we grasp that socially conservative
attitudes toward the arts and culture (while inconsistent) cannot be divorced from
their larger cultural narratives surrounding epistemology and previous
generational progress and values, it behooves us (lest we be swept away by
these powerful cultural forces and heavily promoted arguments) to apply the otherworldly
and non-conformist ethos of the First Reformation to the present day. Our
culture is in crisis and thus to many, the arguments made by conservatives seem
very persuasive and grounding but from a New Testament perspective they are flawed
at almost every level.
An otherworldly and non-conformist ethos leads us to a
cultural posture and interaction that embraces neither the Classic nor the
Enlightened. In fact in many ways we are better able to resonate with the postmodern
critique and even the cynical. We benefit from critiques that expose the world
system's inherent flaws and contradictions, that reveal it to be an idolatrous
fraud and resting on transient and degenerating foundations – as Paul teaches
in 1 Corinthians 7.29-31 and Romans 8.19-23. This should not upset us but
rather drives us all the more toward the inescapable choice between dependence
upon revelation and the hope it grants or a collapse into nihilism.
While man's imagination and predication can soar into the heights
of wonder and metaphysical splendour, such quests face the doom of Icarus and
share in his hubris and naiveté. The visions conceived are at best castles made
of mist and vapour, idolatrous dreams – seeing but not seeing, grasping but not
holding, mere reiterations of Babel, whether of stone, steel or merely
constructed in the mind.
On the one hand a New Testament mindset understands that this
world is passing away, it is a world in groaning pain, born of the curse, a
world always and ever overshadowed by the malice of death. The light we bear is
not of this world and so in that sense our aesthetic vis-à-vis this world is
one of indifference, a reflection of the transient nature of this present evil
age, an acknowledgement of man's limited non-revelatory knowledge and failings,
a realisation that our greatest achievements are but pale shadows which are in
fact monuments to our failings. This is not nihilism but an acknowledgement
that this world is given over to vanity and decay. Our home and hope is in
heaven and this world and all its works are doomed to perish in the flames of
divine wrath.
That said, in this life we can still find great beauty and
yet if we understand that the real is the eternal, then realism in art is
necessarily flawed and at best incomplete, to the point of misrepresentation –
a kind of settling for something defective, an out-of-focus enshrinement of the
temporal. This is not gnostic. This is not a rejection of the material but
rather an acknowledgement that the material order of this age is cursed (no
longer the 'good' proclaimed in the Garden) and as such is divorced from its
larger metaphysical or spiritual context. Like Elisha's servant at Dothan,
apart from revelation we cannot see the world as it truly is, and therefore we
cannot contextualise things as they truly are – not in this age anyway.*
This is not meant to be a critique of realism. Realist art
can be splendid and quite moving. It can engender reflection. And yet I do
criticise those who have sought to make it the ideal or even the Christian ideal.
There is no basis for this or the interpretations that believe such art is able
to enshrine (by means of capturing and beautifying the profane) the values of
Christian vocation – itself a flawed and unbiblical doctrine.
Just as we benefit from man's philosophical failings which
expose the world's Fall-induced inherent flaws and inability, we can appreciate
and benefit from non-realist art that drives toward transcendence, art that
breaks and even shatters the boundaries of reality. This doesn't mean that the actual
visions of the artist are real – nor does it mean they're entirely fanciful.
They may merely represent the confused, delusional, and asymmetrical visions of
a fallen mind (which can nevertheless possess a hint of reality) but as
perception is so tied to the individual perceiving it, we as Christians can see
things in ways that others will not. This can be for our enjoyment and
reflection or it can be used to drive others toward transcendent truths.**
It would be an error to equate such transcendence with actual
reality. These attempts are at best shadows of what is beyond. Though this may
sound like Platonism to some, it's not. We are not seeking forms by means of
transcendent philosophy or anamnesian recollection. That would only result in
reductionism and idolatry. Rather we can benefit by being driven to think and
reflect in terms that are achronological, atemporal, and even acultural. In
other words we can benefit if we're driven to contemplate transcendence and as
Christians such transcendence will always be eschatological.
There are dangers in such flirtations and one can lose their
way. I do not mean to suggest that we need to give a great deal of time to this
– or any at all for that matter. Those that are not interested in art and would
give all their time and energies to other pursuits may be better off – or not.
Take it or leave it. It can be wasteful and yet I know some that turn their
noses up at it and yet give their time and energies to truly wasteful things
like sport or frivolous hobbies. For my part I am too enthralled with art and
history to easily walk away. When I meet Christians who have no interest in
these things, on one level I envy them and on another I don't. We're all in
different places and though we're being sanctified we have a range of different
experiences that play out in these equations. God may use them or not as He
sees fit.
All that said, there is a usefulness and utility to these
questions in terms of cultural contextualisation and social critique. While
purveyors of these kinds of non-realist art were and often are
anti-establishment, it must be pointed out that as Christians we are too. Our
goals are entirely different but we should never find ourselves at home in the
culture that supports the world's status quo and its paradigms of power. We
have to be careful here as it would be very easy to lose our way. The point in
this discourse is not to create Christian Bohemians or some kind of sacral (or
anti-sacral) avant-garde but rather to challenge the anti-biblical orthodoxy
which dominates in our day, which claims to possess and promote a Christian
Worldview in the realms of art and aesthetics but in reality does anything but.
Anti-Enlightenment thinking pushed lost man and his art to
seek transcendence and break with materialism. This can be viewed as a positive
development. Scientific materialism has no capacity for art and that's
something we can use as a wedge to break through to people, to point out that
to them that reality is spiritual. I do not mean to suggest that we use art as
a segue to the gospel but as a means to demonstrate that even modern man knows
(deep down) that there is more to reality than mere matter and that the
materialist project (itself a kind of fundamentalist religion) is an empty and
literally soulless lie that reflects neither reality or what lies innately within
men's hearts. And it certainly cannot be lived out.
We ought not to shirk from the rejection of classical norms
and this larger discussion regarding art, culture, and technology has a role to
play in our further interactions contra Christendom. We live in the world they
have made but we reject it. It's not
Zion. It's not even close and even if they had all the political and
technological power in the world they would still never be able to bring it
about. At best, they can only create a Pseudo-Zion which spiritually speaking is
far more subversive and dangerous to the true Church than any bestial creation
of man. We accept the world as it is, understanding it has been Providentially brought
to this place. But that doesn't mean it is Providence- endorsed. And this being
the case, we categorically reject the goals of lost and sometimes heretical men
along with their hopes and celebrations – and to a certain extent the aesthetic
and idea-driven machines they would create to forge this new reality that they
hope to master.
We are pilgrims and we need to understand this and even feel
it in an acute sense. The First Reformation lived this and while our world is
more complicated and in some sense more entrapping – there's something to be
learned from that mindset and how we then interact with art, culture,
technology and the ideas which drive these things.
Like our First Reformation forebears, on the basis of
Biblicist epistemology we reject the Renaissance but acknowledging that the
term is a canopy which envelops a host of diverse movements and ideas, we can
also benefit from some of its streams that were a reaction to the cold
philosophical calculations of medieval scholasticism. This reaction was echoed
in the reactions to the Enlightenment and in Romanticism which sought to
counter the mechanical dehumanising systems-oriented approach to knowledge and
life. We do not endorse these movements which (like us today) also repudiated
this impulse but we can find some value in them – when viewed through Christian
eyes. As agents of negation, they are of greater value than the Christian-endorsed
forms of art which sought to merely ratify and reinforce the space-time order
while failing to properly acknowledge its fallenness, art which in some cases
sought to buttress the regime or the values of the bourgeoisie – notions which
have no place in Christian thought. But even then we can still admit that such
art can still have value, but for different reasons than perhaps were intended
or for reasons other than what the guardians of said culture would have us
understand.
We are in the midst of a great struggle. The First
Reformation principles outlined in these essays have implications which are
wide ranging and pervasive. There are dangerous elements at work within the
Church that will not only hinder attempts to steer a course back to the
Biblicism of the First Reformation but are (despite all their efforts to the
contrary) setting the stage for the collapse of the existing conservative
Evangelical and Confessionalist order. Some issues such as the New Testament text
are fairly tangible. Others such as the place and role of psychology are less
so. This question of art, aesthetics, and technology are also less so and yet
in terms of day to day life they have a fairly profound effect upon us and
given that the narratives flowing from Christian academies, think-tanks, and
pulpits are (as argued here) in grave error – then reflecting on these
questions and seeking to apply Kingdom principles and pilgrim ethics to them is
of value. Not all will see this and will view much of the discussion here as a
diversion or waste of time. Indeed it can be and not all will benefit from it.
This is easily and readily acknowledged. But there are those who are ready for
such discussions and will benefit from the inquiry.
If we're going to embrace the fight, we need to understand
just what it is we're fighting and what we hope to achieve. It's a multi-front
war to be sure but always remember the world is already given over to darkness.
It already serves the Lord of Death. The Adversary doesn't need to confuse and
confound them. He doesn't need to infiltrate their fellowships and
institutions. He doesn't need to corrupt their consciences and distract them
with idols. No, the primary theatre of war is in the spiritual realm – in the
heavenlies and within the Church itself. As in any great conflict (and one
characterised by great longevity) there are many sides and many who fight for
very different motives. Some are friends, some only seem to be. Traitors abound
and though sometimes the enemy of my enemy may seem to be my friend – we must remember
that such 'friends' are false and fleeting and we should never form alliances
with them.
The path is narrow and the distractions are many. The battle
is fierce and it's easy to lose sight of the goal. And we are called to a high
and seemingly impossible ethic – we are called to fight the good fight and yet
as we engage the servants of the enemy, we are also called to love and often we
are called to gain victory by the laying down of our very lives. God be
praised.
fin
----
*Scepticism has value in deconstruction and in driving us to
the cross. For too long Protestantism has shared in the Enlightenment view that
philosophical inquiry could foster objective knowledge. A proper understanding
of epistemology read through the lens of what God has revealed to us demonstrates
otherwise and calls for us to depend wholly on what God has revealed for even a
hope of knowledge. At best we apprehend, we cannot comprehend and thus to a
certain extent objective knowledge apart from revelation is a fool's errand, a
pipe dream. Modernity has sought to capture it only by reducing and shrinking
the parameters of reality. And thus we do not share in their goals nor their
optimism. We are cynics, but not in the absolute sense. In terms of eschatology
we are filled with optimism and are driven by the Blessed Hope. But in terms of
this age, we are cynics, pessimists, and part of our task is that of negation –
casting down their strongholds and every Babel-attempt fallen man (and the
false church) makes at restoring Eden or creating the Kingdom of Heaven on
Earth. At best they can only produce counterfeits, a point that is particularly
striking when one considers what the false church is engaged in and what it
produces. We negate, we cancel out and expose their false systems and call them
to repentance.
** The hostility toward subjectivism in the arts is too often
rooted in attempts to forge a unified order or social consensus. From that
vantage point even art and its concepts of aesthetics and beauty need to be
understood in objective terms. Otherwise art has the risk of becoming
subversive and since art is tied to epistemology and ethics, subjectivity risks
bringing the whole Babel-edifice down. Every authoritarian regime has
understood this and thus has sought to control art. From the medieval Catholic
Church to the Soviet Union this has been the case.
While some think such objectivity in the realm of aesthetics
is a worthwhile Christian endeavour, we can safely say it was not a concern of
the apostles or the Early Church – which largely eschewed art or at least the
high arts.
This is why the advocates of so-called Christian Worldview in
order to fight their culture war turn to Scholasticism for answers to such
questions - which itself largely rested on a synthesis with a classical
tradition. It's a philosophical exercise, not one based on Scripture or
exegesis. The arguments are compelling to many because they are caught up and
entangled in cultural concerns and yet those grounded and rooted in the doctrine
and ethos of the New Testament are not easily led down those paths.
Enjoy art but when it comes to interpretation, I classify
academic and socially conservative 'Christian' art criticism in the same
category as I would Scholastic theology, philosophy, and the like. While some
interesting comments are sure to be found, the premise is flawed and thus I
would rather criticise them for possessing and utilising a flawed prolegomena
than embrace (let alone apply) their thought.
And since their thoughts are in the end sub-Biblical anyway, I often find their commentary insular, self-serving, and myopic. A good lettered art scholar, one deeply invested in the field (even if an unbeliever) might actually offer more in the way of helpful commentary. If such commentary seeks to derive or impose moral standards and ideals, they will surely be flawed but that doesn't mean all their observations are without value or merit or are unworthy of reflection. But I would never confuse them or the art they are critiquing with some kind of Christian aesthetic or cultural order.