“If we are to produce a new generation of Christian artists, we must stop stabbing young artists in the back. We must stop accusing them of being “worldly” and “unspiritual.” We must encourage Christian art–good art. Art is a form of communication. God Himself is a communicating God. He communicates to us both verbally and nonverbally. Our church services are marked by Word and sacrament. The sacrament contains forms of a nonverbal sort that communicate profoundly of God’s redemption. If we cut off the aesthetic element from our triad of virtues we are left with a truncated Christianity and a God who at best is dull, and at worst, is ugly.”
“The Christian and Art” by R.C. Sproul. Here.
Thanks for posting this. I am a designer and musician, and have struggled from the day I became a Christian (1987) to understand my place in the church. It has been a long haul. Thankfully, I have had help, from men like Herman Dooyeweerd.
Although there is a move to accept “art” by the church, I find it interesting that Sproul still talks about the “church” when talking about art. I do not want to be too quick to speak ill about what he is saying, but why the mention in this context?
Is he assuming that theology is the basis for art? rather than redemptive foundations, why not creational, THEN redemptive?
Why do we need to “justify” artists’ work,, when no one sees the need to justify a doctor’s or a lawyer’s? There are still deep rooted Thomistic ground motives that underlie even the positive discussions about this subject.