Everything
Last Sunday morning, one of my friends told me to look-up a video she’d seen on GodTube, which I got around to doing.
As an ex-theater major (turned chemical engineer - go figure), I have always been wary of the use of drama in corporate worship settings. In some ways, I think it has been the quality of thought, writing and production often absent - and the feeling of being ‘tacked on’ or ‘disconnected’ from the service, as a whole - that has led to this apprehension.
However, I found myself surprised and moved by this one:
As I hear more and more in my workplace about the power of images over words in current culture, I wonder if well-done elements like this one might have more of a place for effective outreach – when combined with sound teaching, of course – as we look to teach and evangelize, particularly youth…
The important thing, I think, though is to be wary of what we lose in visual presentation, aware of what we gain by it, and that we supplement the visual/experiential with, at least, the bare minimum of exposition to interpret the visual ‘narrative’…
In my time as a Training & Development professional, I learned that one of the ‘rules of thumb’ in the trade is called the “70-20-10 rule”. Teens and adults tend to learn and retain based upon: 70% experience, 20% relationships and 10% expositional/didactic teaching. So, the key to training people is to leverage the 90% that is not in the ‘classroom’ or reading - the use of music and art taps into the 70%…
When you look back at the church, prior to the invention of the printing press and prior to the ability to easily duplicate images, the use of imagery within the architecture and traditions of the church was much more prevalent than the past several hundred years. The use of illumination, as in the Book of Kells, and the use of iconography were ways in which the church used images to convey the truths of the Bible. Because most of the people could not read nor understand Latin, these methods of teaching, learning and experience were effective. However, when worshipers started behaving in ways that worshiped the icons and venerated the images, their usefulness was outstripped. The icons, in and of themselves, were not evil, but for some, they were being used in a way that was so.
In the same way, I see churches who use artistic expressions, displaying truths of Christ, as something that can be very helpful - particularly in light of the ways adults, especially, learn.
The danger lies in idolizing the methods and missing the message.
To demonize the method or to insist the message be expressed in a singular manner is not the proper response. Instead, it takes the involvement of the local shepherd to gauge the pulse of his sheep, and to make adjustments accordingly…
June 12th, 2008 at 1:07 pm
good article!
This is why we use so much art at Mosaic to communicate the message. People always criticize us for “watering down the message” or just being an entertainment venue. But, people walk away with a deeper retention level when we pair a 30 minute talk with 10 minutes worth of art. Not only is it functional, but creates such moments of beauty and truth.
Also… might want to know that “experience design” is one of the fastest growing industries! People are craving it.
June 12th, 2008 at 1:10 pm
Agreed, Nathan - I would still note the caution about idolization of methods - no matter whether they are “you can only evangelize using the Law to convict first” or “you can only teach if you incorporate ‘experience design’ into the teaching”.
I love what I see some of the churches doing in this space, but (as a skeptic) I know my own heart and want to guard it against putting method above message (which I am vulnerable to).
June 12th, 2008 at 1:29 pm
I love most of those things, having Godspell being instrumental in my salvation. I was struck by the paradox of Jesus holding BACK the forces of darkness as opposed to some believers drawing those dark forces TO unbelievers by uncovering their sin.
June 12th, 2008 at 1:46 pm
I honestly thought that was very well done and it was very moving as it does a good job of depicting the downward spiral and battle with strongholds many face behind the scenes - in and out of the church. As well as the ability of Jesus to save.
I would consider myself very conservative though. Drama, which was so prevalent in the 1st century, especially in places Paul travelled to, was never used or considered a tool. It was the power of the Holy Spirit that the early church relied on and nothing more (I know the argument is coming: can’t these elements co-exist).
I also remember the verse in Corinthians where Paul was dealing with “professional” preachers who were coming into the church and luring people away through the excellency of speech. He preferred to rest on the power of the God-touched word.
I would conclude that drama is like miracles: they draw a crowd and make a great impression to be sure… not saying it can’t be used (to each his own) but I think it becomes a slippery slope.
What’s next week’s drama event going to be?
June 12th, 2008 at 1:51 pm
Our drama team did this skit a few months ago…very powerful.
I was not the only one crying.
The part where he shields her from the attacks of the evil was the point where I broke down.
I grew up in a church where anything that looked like a performance was forbidden.
Dramas were right out!
But they can be a powerful tool, as you said, Chris, if joined with solid teaching.
Good thoughts in your article.
Shalom
June 12th, 2008 at 1:53 pm
“professional” preachers
Yes, like the preachers that compile a series of sermons, put them into book form, and make millions. They get paid by the church to deliver those sermons, and then they parlay them into personal wealth.
Among many others would be John MacArthur. This industry includes conferences, cruises, book tours, and generally advertising your merchandise around both the evangelical world and the secular world. Rick Warren comes to mind as well. Rick Warren and John MacArthur - two peas in a wealth creating pod!
June 12th, 2008 at 2:00 pm
Chris,
I agree. however, so many times we fight against how culture learns and communicates. Paul understood this beautifully. Buy quoting Greek philosophers and poets, he was able to connect in such a deeper way. Sometimes a picture really is worth a thousand words.
I am reading a book right now called “This is Your Brain on Music”. It is amazing what happens in our brains when we listen to music vs. hearing a monologue.
Should we do away with preaching via sermons? No. Should we begin to look at other methods to communicate the important message of Jesus Christ with sermons? Yes.
June 12th, 2008 at 2:01 pm
I would note that:
a) In that world, drama was, in and of itself, considered an act of worship to Dionysus, with every performance (by law) opening with “may everything we do, in word or deed, be done in the name of our lord, Dionysus”. (Interestingly reworked by Paul in Colossians)
b) Most of it was performed in the nude
c) Public orgies were commonplace as part of Dionysus worship after public performances
Which is slightly different than how drama is currently in use…
Thus, my stated cautions. At my own church, we use dramatic elements sparingly (every few months), and they are always directly integrated into the message, not for entertainment’s sake.
The slippery slope argument is a dangerous one, as pretty much any practice can be considered a “slippery slope”, and the argument ends up being a way of sounding prudent while enforcing one’s own preference. Thus, I think the better approach is to enter into any new ‘method’ with both eyes open - the skeptic and the enthusiast - to weigh the potential uses/abuses, and to then act accordingly…
June 12th, 2008 at 2:03 pm
I would also note that, aside from Paul’s borrowing and changing of the Dionysus rhetoric, that Jesus also appears to borrow his comments about “Jerusalem, Jerusalem - how I wish I could gather you as a hen…” from The Trojan Women by Euripides, with only minor textual change in the Greek from one to the other…
June 12th, 2008 at 2:10 pm
I agree with your caution here Chris. I don’t think the slippery slope argument is all that dangerous. I would say that the highway is littered with the carcasses of many churches who have gone overboard in an effort to connect. We should pay attention to these and drive carefully.
We must always remember that though the world has mastered the art of the multisensory experience, it is the word of God that quickens the heart.
I know people advocate using these elements in conjunction, but I would argue that the word - when inspired by God - is sufficient. If it’s not, no amount of drama will fill in the cracks.
June 12th, 2008 at 2:20 pm
If the sufficiency of the Word of God is at issue here, what is the difference between a preacher adding 2,500 words on top of cited Scripture and the addition of music/art/drama/etc?
I would note that from about 450 - 1500, most individuals in church could not speak the language in which the Word was written. Expositional preaching - in its current form and method - was not predominant in Scripture. Whenever we read the scripture outside of the original documents, we are contextualizing it in some form. We fool ourselves when we think that one form (exposition on top of Scripture) is ‘more biblical’ than other forms (singing a song on top of Scripture, for example). Any method can be idolized, some are just more obvious than others…
June 12th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
Actually, preaching, as we know it, probably has it roots with the Greek Sophists - a group of men who traveled around using rhetoric to argue various philosophical positions. It was most likely these men that Paul was talking about.
To the sophists, the delivery became more important than the content of a speech. It didn’t take long for the church to adopt this same philosophy. In fact, we still offer classes that teach people how to do it at Bible college.
June 12th, 2008 at 7:09 pm
What if that multisensory experience communicated the word of God.
June 12th, 2008 at 7:41 pm
Truth can be communicated by hand signals (deaf), brail, flannel boards, song, literature, testimonies, and drama. Although the written Scriptures are the anchor that guides us into truth, that truth can be shared by many means, especially the truth of the gospel.
Many people have been save through drama or movies. The Jesus film has been used of God to bring mant souls around the world to Christ. Read the book “Through Gates of Splendor” and some of the following testimony of how the natives came to Christ, there was much creative communication used.
Truth is not exculsive property of words.
June 12th, 2008 at 11:30 pm
I’m not an artist. I don’t usually like drama. I was bored at the Nutcracker (performed by proffesionals). But some of these dramas set to music (especially the ones at mosaic) are fantastic. They have moved my heart more than anything I’ve seen/participated in in church. I wish our church could do some of that stuff.
I understand the cautions, but the cautions seem to be distracting from the impact. Just use it.
June 13th, 2008 at 7:53 am
The world has also mastered the medical sciences. Should we reject the use of medicine?