Beauty in the Eye
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/12f2a/12f2abb15a2d322463a5cb69eeba10d72d1b8fdc" alt=""
Had God decreed a history without free will in the Garden of Eden, where no Fall occurred and sin never entered the world, God would still have been glorious and worthy of endless praise. That is the science. But what makes God, specifically Christ, beautiful to us is enhanced by the revelation of mercy and grace in our lives. That is the art.
It has become a repeated theme among Christians, particularly those bent toward philosophical constructs, that beauty is not subjective, but objective. The reasoning behind this is that God is the supreme object of beauty, as He is also the supremacy of being, love, grace, justice, righteousness, and all other virtues. So if God is the ultimate origin and manifestation of beauty, then levels of beauty can be defined by their adherence to or parallel to God Himself. Makes sense, right?
This provides a very useful argument against the unrelenting march of post-modern thought into realms of art. A piece of obscene “art” can be denied as beautiful because it runs contrary to God and His design in creation. A stark example would be the work of Andres Serrano, where he photographed a crucifix submerged in urine. This cannot be defined as “beautiful” because it is defying the God who is the definition of beauty.
To be clear, there are certainly objective elements to beauty, like symmetry. The ability to accurately represent God’s creation in an art form is truly the science behind the art. Yet if we only define the beauty of an artwork in terms of symmetry, order, proportions, and harmony, then it could be posited that Piet Mondrian’s paintings (the ones with black lines and squares of white and primary colors) exceed the beauty of Michelangelo’s David. No one in their right mind would actually claim that, though.
The whole discussion of beauty in art was much simpler before technology. A painter or sculptor was largely valued by their ability to recreate what occurred in nature. Picasso’s work would have stood no chance in the 1600’s amid portrait painters (though Picasso actually had the skill to paint realistically).
You Might also like
-
SJC Announces Verdict in Metro New York Case
The Standing Judicial Commission has published its decision along with concurring and dissenting opinions in a matter referred to it by the 50th General Assembly.
The PCA Standing Judicial Commission has released its decision in Case 2023-13, BCO 40-5 Matter re: Metropolitan New York Presbytery. The case came to the SJC by action of the 50th General Assembly which approved the recommendation of its Committee on Review of Presbytery Records that Metro New York Presbytery be cited to appear before the SJC for failing to redress an unconstitutional proceeding by one of its sessions. The RPR reported to the GA that Metropolitan New York had not redressed one of their sessions for permitting a woman to expound the Scriptures during a Lord’s Day worship service, and for holding services without preaching and serving the Lord’s Supper without a preceding sermon on multiple occasions; nor had Metropolitan New York corrected the church’s pastor who stated his approval of these actions.
The citation was issued by the GA under the provisions of BCO 40-5 which states that when a “credible report” of “an important delinquency or grossly unconstitutional proceedings” of a church court comes to the attention of the next highest court, the lower court should be cited to appear to show what they had done or failed to do in the matter. The GA, as the next highest court, cited Metropolitan New York to appear before the SJC, their Commission to adjudicate such matters.
In response to the citation, Metropolitan New York appeared before the SJC and produced the minutes of two meetings held subsequent to the citation in which they affirmed that an “exposition of the Word” by a woman shall not take the place of the ordinary sermon in public worship services in the churches within its bounds, that only qualified men should preach to God’s people during public worship services, and that it is permissible for unordained and unlicensed men to occasionally preach but not a woman.
They also adopted this statement: “Though allowing this woman to teach in place of a sermon only happened once, Metropolitan New York Presbytery has informed the church’s Senior Pastor and the Session that this practice is unconstitutional, and they are not to repeat it in the future. The Senior Pastor and Session agreed to submit to the will of the presbytery on this matter.” Metropolitan New York argued they did not err in taking no further action with regard to the allegation that many worship services were held without preaching and that the church in question celebrated the Lord’s Supper without a preceding sermon, having concluded that an exposition of the Word had always taken place though when delivered by a man who was not ordained or licensed, it was referred to as a “message” rather than a “sermon.”
Read More
Related Posts: -
Drag Queens and the Queering of the Church
Written by M.D. Perkins |
Wednesday, November 9, 2022
Whether it be drag performances in a church, bookstore, public school, or civic event—the normalization of drag is grievous and the Lord will not be mocked, even as femininity is mocked by these performers. The wrath of God is coming. And woe to those churches who call what is evil, good.It’s Sunday morning at a progressive church. The pastor introduces himself, states his preferred pronouns, welcomes the congregants, and then announces the arrival of the guest preacher—the drag queen performing under the name of “Ms. Penny Cost.” It is explained that Isaac Simmons (the man in drag) is a first-year seminary student and candidate for ordination in the United Methodist Church. Simmons will explain why he “gets dolled up” during the children’s sermon, before delivering a message to the whole congregation denouncing capitalism.
This is not the beginning of some pretentious short story from freshman English class. It is, in fact, a real event with real people taking place in a real United Methodist church. And things like this will continue to happen in the days, weeks, and years ahead.
Drag Queens in Public Life
Once an obscure part of the gay subculture, men dressing up as drag queens have now become a common feature of pop culture. They are, of course, featured prominently in Pride parades and other LGBTQ+ celebrations. There are a number of current TV shows focused on drag, like RuPaul’s Drag Race (VH1), We’re Here (HBO), Call Me Mother (OutTV in Canada), Queen of the Universe (Paramount+), and Legendary (HBO Max). Drag queens have also found their way into elementary education, with book readings and other “family-friendly” drag events offering ways that children can interact with these performers. With this comes the inevitable controversy and backlash, fueling news stories across the media landscape.
Since drag queens have been mainstreamed, is it any surprise that there would be churches wanting to feature them in worship services? Is it any surprise that a seminary student would want to dress up in drag to present his screeds against capitalism and “queerphobia” to the church? Certainly not. “In the last time there will be scoffers, following their own ungodly passions” (Jude 1:18).
What may be surprising for Christians, is that this is not accidental. The normalization of homosexuality leads to greater degrees of decadence and debauchery—not simply by laws of entropy but by concerted efforts on the part of activists to attack the image of God in man. The rise of drag queens in public life is a defiant attempt to queer our children and the church of Jesus Christ.
What is Queering?
Some readers may remember a time when the word queer simply meant odd or strange. Most may still remember when queer was considered a pejorative slur for a homosexual. However, nowadays, queer has become an identity label as well as a point of pride and celebration. Hence the Q in the LGBTQ+ acronym. Queer can be a collective label for anything within the LGBTQ+ spectrum—that is, any person or thing that falls outside heterosexual or stereotypical gender norms.
As academic scholars began using the word queer to define their radical social theories, the word gained additional power. These theories were aimed at elevating non-traditional sexuality and fighting ways that heterosexuality is normalized or considered good in society. One way of combating what these scholars labeled heteronormativity was by a specific disruptive process of queering. Through this use, queer had become a verb, an action.
Queering is intended to complicate and disrupt what is perceived to be normal. As an action, it is the use of words, actions, or representatives to directly challenge heterosexuality, traditional gender roles, or the male/female binary. What is normal is sometimes described as binary—such as identifying as a man or a woman or even presenting yourself as a man or woman.
Here is how queering is defined in the Encyclopedia of Diversity and Social Justice (Rowman & Littlefield, 2015):
Queering is one strategy for queer activists who want to unsettle or complicate normative practices, spaces, or discourses. Introducing queer bodies into normative spaces, for instance, changes the dynamics of that space by unsettling the taken-for-granted characteristics of that space. Drag queens might “take over” a “straight bar” in order to queer the space, or complicate what that space means to the people inhabiting it.
The purpose is to disrupt foundational assumptions about sex and gender and, thereby, transform social norms by offering new possibilities. These possibilities do not have to be the new normal in themselves, but they work to move people’s sensibility toward accepting queerness as normal by offering a counterpoint to it. This can even be seen in the rise of the terms nonbinary and genderqueer, used to express a person’s inner feeling of gender identity. Whether discussing gender or sexuality, the binary is rejected in favor of a spectrum. Queering is intended to help people see the various colors of this spectrum.
This may sound very abstract, so an illustration is in order.
Drag Performance as an Act of Queering
Drag performance itself is an act of queering because of its attempt to complicate and unsettle binary depictions of sex and gender. This can be seen even with the complicated use of pronouns which dismantles order and clarity. As in the case of Isaac Simmons/”Ms. Penny Cost,” Isaac has one set of pronouns (they/them) and a different set when dressed in drag (she/her). The drag persona is singular while the real person underneath is plural. The fact that the pronoun protocol is outlined at the beginning of each presentation only adds to the chaos.
Read More
Related Posts: -
William Perkins has Entered the Chat
To know God’s nature and His works are essential to a blessed and full life. As we peer into simplicity and inseparable operations, our creaturely mind collides with divine truth that is so grand that we, like Job, must place our hands over our mouth as we see this simple and magnificent God who is three persons working to glorify His name to bring a wicked people like us to glory.
It seems like everyone is talking about the doctrine of God these days. Debates surrounding theology proper continue raging on with no end in sight. Overall, I believe this is a good thing. For many in the church, these discussions promote sharper doctrinal formulation, greater awareness of creedal and confessional statements, and clarity in teaching.
Thankfully, these discussions have also revealed the immense value of theological retrieval. As we seek to retrieve the doctrine and teachings of those eminent saints of the past and bring them into current conversation, we find that these issues were already debated and clearly defined. Those things that may seem new to us are not so new after all. Faithful theologians have set the course for us to follow, allowing for a true catholicity as the Holy Spirit continues to work in the school of Christ.
For that reason, I again suggest that we let William Perkins enter the chat, if you will, to briefly comment on two issues currently being hotly debated: Divine Simplicity and Inseparable Operations.
Divine Simplicity
Confessional theologians, both Reformed and Baptist alike, confess the doctrine of divine simplicity. Both the The Westminster Confession and the London Baptist Confession in 2.1 teaches that God is “without body, parts, or passions” and “most absolute.” Similarly, the first article of the Belgic Confession says that “We all believe in our hearts and confess with our mouths that there is a single and simple spiritual being, whom we call God.” To say that God is simple in being is not a controversial statement for confessional Protestants. The question of late though, if I can put it simply, is whether each of the attributes of God are ontologically identical with his essence and with every other one of his attributes.[1] Some critics argue that this view is inconsistent with Scripture, and that it comes exclusively from a Thomistic metaphysic that wasn’t articulated as such until Thomas “baptized Aristotle.”
William Perkins, who no doubt cited Thomas favorably at different times, affirms this classical definition of simplicity. Drawing upon various texts, such as Exodus 3:14, Acts 17:24-25, and several in John, he writes “Hence it is manifest that to have life and to be life, to be in light and to be light in God are all one…Therefore, whatever is in God is His essence; and all that He is, He is by essence.”[2] Perkins first and foremost viewed the doctrine of simplicity as chiefly a biblical doctrine.
After giving a handful of scriptural references, the reformed catholic theologian then cites a major theologian of church history, showing that this doctrine is truly catholic and to be accepted. Yet he doesn’t quote Thomas, but one who precedes Thomas by several centuries.
Read More
Related Posts: