Las fases de la narrativa pre-indigenista

This research has shown both from the wide reflection on aesthetics and through the particular works of art, that images can be relevant and challenging sources in and of theology and worship. For that reason, the question of theological engagement with art, the role and importance of and the convergences between the artistic and the religious imagination, and a deepened reflection on the emerging theological aspects in the works of art, have been explored as principal concerns in this study. What is fundamental to a liturgical theology of and through art, just as to other theological approaches, is the conviction that theology must also be radically based in and draw its inspiration from life, from the experience of people. During the course of this study, images have been not only discovered as such sources of theology, but moreover, parallels, convergences and mutual illumination between the image and the word have been discussed. Art, unlike traditional theological writing and explanation, may be less defined, unsystematic, more visionary, imaginative and metaphorical in character. Yet, the image can be intensely direct, shocking, and even confrontational as a result of its visual immediacy, the freedom of the artist’s imagination and expression. As significant correspondences between worship and art have been revealed, some final remarks are appropriate as follows.

6.2.1. Worship as an art

An encounter with God indeed can be a breathtaking and ineffable experience. Then, in such, it is through images and symbols that we reach the depths of communion with the mysterious God and give expression to it. Even though language is a powerful mode of human communication and a highly useful tool, there are certain areas and moments in which words fail to express. For example, how can we speak of the joy of salvation, one’s gratitude for grace, a sense of wonder at the incarnation,

one’s guilt over being sinful, the shame of the crucifixion, or the peace that passes all understanding? How can we speak of life’s circumstances as they are experienced within and addressed by faith in Christ – the death of a parent, the birth of a child, the dawning of spring, the discovery of an illness, or the association of friends? Further, how can we speak to God in public prayer of a worshipping assembly’s heartfelt needs? How can we put into words their fears, longings, gladness, remorse, pain, or praise? In those times words fail us and we are left in a state beyond words (Schmit 2002:6-7).

If worship is truly successful at engendering the divine encounter, then worship, as it consists of various symbols and forms of expression, is an art – a performative artful symbolic action (Saliers 1999:15). Here one (possibly a Protestant) might argue that worship has to be a place for nothing other than proclaiming the plain and simple truth received from the Bible and it has nothing to do with art. Yet, as Brown (1989:40) has reported, artistic symbolism is already incorporated in much of Protestant liturgy and many of Protestant worship spaces. Aesthetic factors are involved even in Free Church Protestantism where the relatively unceremonious style of worship with pulpit rhetoric has an aesthetic rhythm and impact of its own.

Worship needs to be artful and beautiful in order to enable the dialogue between God and believers.83 Because worship as a form of art has the power to give expression to the ineffable elements of subjective experience and to deal with the profound matters of faith and life, preachers and worship leaders need to be aware of the artistic responsibility that is associated with their roles. Worship failing beauty and art runs the risk of an impoverishment in individual, communal and churchly life – alienation from nature, bodily asceticism, legalism and literalism (Cf. Farley 2001:108-110). Conversely, when worship is performed artistically and beautifully, it effectively amplifies people’s perceptions to God, others and the community, reaching their beings and experiences. Therefore, the sense of artistic responsibility that accrues to worship leaders and preachers is suggested forcefully by Kavanagh

83 _{Here it does not mean a ‘tamed and innocuous’ beauty. Note again what I have discussed about} the concepts and features of art/beauty in this study.

(1990:54-55):

As does any art form, the liturgy gives enlarged room for imagination, for investment in and appropriation of values and for freedom. The difference between a liturgy which does this and one which does not is the difference between art and propaganda, between creation and exploitation.

Artistically responsible worship is not merely for aesthetic pleasure. It is for the sake of God’s people. It is to open their hearts as well as their minds; to touch them deeply, to strengthen their faith, and to evoke a transformation in their lives.

6.2.2. Image and word

In all our efforts to truly see and to treat and acknowledge the work of art as a liturgical theological locus, it is vital to be aware of the mutual dependence of verbal and visual modes of religious expression. Word cannot be disengaged from image, or should not be valued as a better or clearer communicative device than image. Both word and image are partners in the meaning-making in a culture or in a religious faith (Cf. Jensen 2000:6).

Word and image are not necessarily in conflict, but the Korean Presbyterian churches in general (or the Reformed churches, to speak broadly) are suspicious of visual art and imagery on account of the probable risk of idolatry, or in extreme, label them as idols. Hence, it is true that they feel uneasy about the crucifix hung in the worship space. Nevertheless, on the other hand, we can easily find the counter-fact that images of the crucifix are being used in other forms in the Korean Presbyterian churches – in banners, bulletins, handouts and the like. For practical reasons and cases, images are being utilized in contradiction to the stand of the churches. Images are truly insuppressible, indestructible human activity.

According to the traditional interpretation of the second commandment, it is supposed, in order to obey the spirit of this commandment, that the faithful must be on guard against the misuse of images for evil purposes. Unfortunately, however,

this negative emphasis has given rise to the preclusion of images from being a communicative means of truth and goodness of God (especially in the Protestant group); and instead, the power of the word has often been exaggerated (Brown 1999:329). Then again, in response to the suspicion and objection to images, it should be highlighted that anything can be idolized and possibly employed for similarly sinful purposes. The danger of idolatry applies to word and concept (including those used in the Scriptures) as much as it does to other forms of representation. Simply consider an instance that conceptualization or verbalization of God’s truth and revelation in rigid dogmatism has straight-jacketed and fossilized the faith and estranged us from the vivid encounter with God. As Miles (1985:5) observes, the scriptural texts that caution against illegitimate attachment to images does not urge the rejection of all images. “Rather, the texts indicate an awareness that a powerful tool is always double-edged, capable equally of providing valuable help and of promoting addiction to the tool itself”.

The work of our eyes, biblically speaking, is a serious business because of its power. As shown in the account at the very beginning of Genesis that the Lord God made to grow every tree that is pleasant (hamad) to the sight and good for food (Gen. 2:9), and in the third chapter when a parallel phrase appears in the temptation narrative: “So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes … she took of its fruit” (Gen. 3:6), the power, or charm of the visual, and its influence, either eliciting praise to God or leading one away from God is acknowledged implicitly, but evidently. Therefore, to see art and the experience of beauty (or ugliness) as incidental to life is to ignore the power that the visual exerts on people. If we trivialize art, then it is a failure in appreciating the power that our exposure to art inevitably wields, and as a result, we overlook a vital area of potential Christian growth and witness (Dyrness 2001:140-141).

A fruitful relationship between image and word, or seeing and listening is possibly conceived from the fact that the Bible is both a book of words and a book of images. The Bible is God’s Word obviously, but along with this dimension: The scriptures consist of narratives and signs, parables and metaphors, symbolic languages, which God uses to communicate with the people in human categories. The Scripture is

very much a composite of many imaginative languages, and these images are the Word of God. Therefore, on the premise of this comprehensive understanding of the Word of God, listening to the Word and the viewing of images are claimed to be one and the same. The believer sees God in listening to his Word, and he/she hears God while looking at the world through the glasses of the Word of God, as Calvin claimed.

Images and words are closely connected anthropologically, given that the human perception or experience consists in its entirety. Art, imagery and symbolism carry great weight because they contribute substantially to the corporate experience by virtue of their aesthetic strengths. Because of its sensuous nature, its color and lines and especially because of its immediacy, art brings about a corporate experience arising from the depths of the human being, i.e. one’s emotion and intellect as well as the body and senses. Art can, indeed, creatively transcend dualisms through its power to connect, to juxtapose and hold in creative unity the body and mind, nature and grace, immanence and transcendence, the sacred and the secular, bringing together what otherwise may be regarded as disjointed or irreconcilable.

Yet, in spite of all our undertakings to integrate images and words into a comprehensive whole, we need to be attentive to the tension that exists between the artistic image and the written word. The tension lies in the very fact that a work of art cannot be translated entirely into words. If one was to try such a translation, the unique aspect of the work of art would be lost. However, it is precisely this tension that provides the ground for and gives life to art/images. Despite the uniqueness of visual art, interpretation of works of art is necessary in order to bring out the message contained in the works more clearly (Thiessen 2003:858). The tension in this sense, then, is not negative, and distinction does not mean separation. “As long as the written word and the visual work of art can be distinguished, and as long as they both express reality and ultimate reality, intimate relations and infinite bridges between the two can be discovered, built and enlarged” (Thiessen 1999:283). It is in this way that a theology based on images takes its place in our reflection on the divine, in our search for meaning, in our worship seeking to see God.

Therefore, in advocating a theology of art, I claim that we need to do theology and therewith worship, trying out new media, images and metaphors, though there might be a risk, namely the risk of abuse of images. Theology/worship, which risks trying out new and challenging artworks, images and symbols, is naturally less prone to ending up in abuses or non-sense because sincerity and responsibility prevails in such tries. It is here that glimpses of the beauty, goodness and truth of God emerge, that the rational and the sentient are integrated in the search for God who is mystery. In this adventure, our theology/worship can become exciting and remain relevant to peoples’ lives, as it is inclusive, open to transformation, to alternative possibility – the possibility to imagine in new ways the present future.