Welcome to a semi-regular part of the blog where I throw up a random question and ask for your thoughts (for those not used to blogs, you simply need to click on the word 'comments' at the end of this article to add your thoughts to the mix).
So last weekend I went in to Dhaka and visited a different church to the one I normally attend. It was a fairly high/traditional Anglican service, quite unlike the more charismatic one I've been going to. Although I've been a member of this kind of church in the past, the visit this time got me thinking about symbols. The priest had the full robes on, made the sign of the cross repeatedly and paused in the middle of the service to 'Bless the Palms' by sprinking them with holy water.
A lot of people really relish this kind of rich symbolism. They find it helps them understand or experience God in a new and deeper way. I can appreciate this point of view, but I've always been much more comfortable without too much of this kind of symbolism in church. God from my experience and what I see in the Bible is much more interested in what's happening inside you than in external show. The whole point of what Jesus did was to remove the barrier between us and God, so we could go to him directly. It seems counterproductive to put a whole lot of symbolism back between you and God. The upshot is, I feel a bit uncomfortable around lots of religious pomp and obscure symbols. This is an exception for me, because I like my literature, art, music, architecture etc to be packed with rich symbolism. Previously, I would have described myself as someone who didn't like many symbols in my faith.
I say 'previously' because all this anthropology has got me rethinking things. Anthropology used to be only about studying 'savages' in grass huts with funny rituals and illogical customs. Then someone embarrassed us all by pointing out that in fact, 'Western' rituals and customs are no less funny or illogical - in fact, sometimes more so, but because they were part of the home culture of the anthropologists nobody noticed how strange they were.
To return to the point, I've often noticed how much more symbolism there is in other people's churches or services (and indeed in other faiths) and smugly thought there wasn't much of it in mine, but now I find in fact there's just as much symbolism, but it's just more cunningly hidden. In many of the churches I've been to, for instance, the very absence of symbols such as the traditional church layout, stained glass windows, big wooden cross etc was in itself a symbol of those churches' historical/theological beliefs. Look at the massive bouts of iconoclasm and church redecoration that took place during the Reformation. The translation of the Bible you read has become an important symbol of all sorts of beliefs and affiliations in many churches. The tendency of churches today to be built wide and shallow is a very definite statement about inclusiveness and the importance of the congregation. In these churches the minister is often lower down and the congregation looks down to him; in others, the minister (and band) are elevated on a stage. None of these things are accidents - they're symbols of assumptions and beliefs so visceral we often don't perceive or voice them.
So, given that every sphere of human life is inherently full of symbols, my question to you is:
What place does symbolism have in your faith or faith generally? What place do you think it should have?
Thoughts please, and for goodness' sake don't be all worried about breaking Western taboos. I'm in a country where you start a conversation by bringing up religion or politics.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Dear Dr. Polkinghorne-Smythe
ReplyDeleteAs I read your thought regarding the symbolisms which still exist today in some churches, I share your feel of discomfort and somewhat eerie feeling everytime I share such experiences in the past.
But, true as you mentioned that these symbols are important, and even to some help them grow near to God. In fact, some of these symbols are necessary to define Christianity and our relationship to Christ. It was some few years ago now when my home church in Sydney was planning to buy a new church and rebuilt it. A discussion come with regard the size of the "cross" that should be placed, and even whether we should have a "cross" at all. Truly, a church must have a "cross" to symbolise our Lord's sacrifice and his triumph over death. Yet, some churches have decided to do away with symbols, even the cross. Personally, I believe that the "cross" is a symbol important to Christian faith; it conveys a message of sacrifice, triumph and hope. Even more importantly its an "EMPTY" cross- for our Lord has risen and no longer in it. We celebrate His resurrection and not just his death - as some others may.
Then there's the symbol of the communion, which I believe should be celebrated regularly by all christians. It was as our Lord commanded that we should carry-on this tradition so as to remember His body as a sacrifice and His blood an offering of peace for our sins.
Yet despite these, we are humans are often, no very-often, and even ALWAYS- fall into worshipping the symbols rather than what the symbols symbolises.
How many christians do you know pray to the cross rather than He who has risen from the cross. How many christians worships the bread and the wine rather than He who broke that first bread and pour that cup of wine, so we would remember that Friday noon when a sinless man died for all the sins of his own creation.
How many christians today worships the messengers- the saints of the past- rather than He who the saints proclaims to bring salvation and hope.
One friend of mine of a coptic-orthodox believe asked me a question once: "how do you receive grace, without eating the bread and drinking the wine?" It was unfortunate that I was too young to give an answer, but surely Dr. Polkinghorne, you would know the folly of such question. For grace was given by Christ through faith, and not some bread or wine...
Many have asked the question- where are those original documents, original gospels by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, the letters of Paul and Peter? surely at least a piece of papyrus, or whatever it was written on, should survive through the ages for us to see to show that these men are not myths? Yet our Lord knows best, for surely if these documents were to be preserved, even a shred of papyrus in a British museum, pilgrims from all corners of the world would come and worship it! -just look at "the shroud of turin"- and it may not even be true...
So Dr. Polkinghorne-Symthe, I return to my response, I believe that the Cross and the communion are two symbols I believe are important to our faith. And I believe that many of our colleagues would be able to give much more important symbolisms that has and will continue to help christians draw near to our Lord. Yet, we should always be aware of our sinful nature, our folly to worship these symbols rather than our creator, saviour and friend.
In Christ
Dr. Liu
At last! A comment from a brave reader - thankyou Dr Liuwantara. I agree that Christianity has some inherent, inescapable symbols. How they are used can be a different kettle of fish-shaped symbols. Shortly after writing this apparently unprovocative article I saw a couple of men in church on Sunday who were planning to drag a 15 foot wooden cross from Dhaka to Chittagong to demonstrate God's love for the Bangladeshis. My personal opinion is that it was more likely to symbolise the Crusades (still a prominent influence on Muslim/Christian relations), and that things were likely to end in much the same grisly way for these two men as for the chevaliers of old. I guess the problem with symbols is that they can mean anything to anyone, so without defining the abstract meaning as well as the concrete expression they may not be helpful.
ReplyDeleteBut if we define the abstract meaning of a symbol, don't we destroy its beauty and mystery? Surely communion is more than a reminder to remember the crucifixion? And surely the symbols of bread and wine can convey far more emotionally and intellectually than could be covered by a half-hour sermon on the topic? Isn't a picture worth a thousand words?
Over Easter I visited a number of churches, including a small Orthodox church in inner-city Melbourne. The building's interior was brightly decorated, with large icons of the saints painted across all four walls, a number of shrines to saints, and various other symbolic decorations. On entering the church congregants would kiss the icons. During the service - which was two hours of liturgy, with a short address of perhaps 6-8 mins - we were encouraged to come up and kiss an icon of Jesus' Entrance to Jerusalem (it was Palm Sunday on the Orthodox calendar) and at the conclusion of the service we walked in a procession around the block with the icon held in the air.
ReplyDeleteAlike you, I felt uncomfortable amidst all this symbolic ritual. To me it seemed that the symbols had become the object of worship and were distractions from rather than directions towards the gospel. I also feel as though benefiting from this symbolism required much specific knowledge that I did not possess. I imagine that an unchurched person would feel even more isolated by the foreign symbolism. So, in the interests of outreach, I would say extensive symbolism should be discouraged.
Symbols endorsed by Jesus - such as Communion and Baptism - should, of course, not be forsaken, but there must be clear explanations of their symbolic significance so that they do not lose their meaning, or obtain significance beyond that which is biblically grounded.
Symbols not instituted in Scripture certainly have their place as they can conveys truths in culturally relevant ways, which may be particularly important if language/literacy barriers reduce the effectiveness of straight teaching. I am not sure what kind of checks can be put in place to prevent such expressions of faith from taking priority over objects of faith, perhaps just good teaching.
I don't think symbols used in worship should be abstract to the extent that 'they can mean anything to anyone', but should reflect a particular truth, or else you open the faith up to mean whatever the individual desires and cause confusion over what is true.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete"At the very least, they can be persuaded that the bodily position makes no difference to their prayers; for they constantly forget, what you must always remember, that they are animals and that whatever their bodies do affects their souls."
ReplyDelete-Screwtape (or more acurately C.S Lewis in The Screwtape Letters)
I thought I might avoid going out on a limb and offering an actual opinion by giving an obscure quote (something I learnt in my five years working for a church). But hey, if an anglo-catholic can't shed some light on symbolism who can!
I remember going to a high Anglican service with my parents in early high school and feeling extremely uncomfortable with chanting the liturgy from the prayer book, incense waving around and the ceremoniousness of it all. My parents loved it, being similar to services they had grown up with. Not having grown up with it, it particularly grated me. But thinking more on it, I've realised my uncomfortable-ness comes from the fact that it's different from what I'm used to. I have been equally uncomfortable in a charismatic church. There are different ways of worshipping, i.e. different cultures praise the same God in different ways(imagine a joyful African woman in traditional dress dancing and clapping next to an old Englishman singing from a dusty hymn book)and much damage comes from missionaries imposing their Western way of worship on a different culture, dictating the 'right' way to praise our God. (Revelation 7)How do you take that fact together with the point that it's dangerous to say each should worship in his own way or that the Bible is open to each individual's interpretation?
ReplyDeleteSo, there is a place for symbolism, its a reminder, but we need to remind ourselves that its a reminder and not a) focus on the object itself or b)cease to realize its meaning. An example is the cross that is so commonly worn or erected that I often don't think of what is behind it, the incredible gift of Jesus to us, it's almost just a shape. I remember hearing a sermon about how each time we see the cross we should think of its sacrifice and meaning of salvation for us. Or the other extreme of worshipping the object and not the reason behind it.
Seeing another's way of worshipping helps us realise that the way we do things is not necessarily the right or best way and should help us to examine the meaning behind why we do things the way we do. Like communion, that's already been mentioned, helps us participate with what Jesus did in a tactile, visual way that may have more meaning for some people than others. Being a tactile learner, communion helps me feel close to God more than someone telling me something about God might. Jesus knows we operate differently and is not constrained by our traditions. We need to prayerfully consider that we do things with no other reason than to glorify and honour Him.