Here’s my “off the top of my head” list of a variety of material items and objects of art that are often used as personal devotional aids. Can anyone think of any others?

1. Home altar
2. Kneeler/prie dieu/prayer bench
3. Prayer beads/rosary
4. Painting or artwork for wall, desk, altar, etc.
5. Icon
6. Crucifix/statuary
7. Stations of the cross
8. Candles
9. Incense
10. Retablo/nicho/shrine/shadowbox
11. Pocket cards
12. Labyrinth/Prayer garden
13. Judaica (i.e. menorah)
14. Christmas/Easter decorations
15. Scrapbooking
16. Advent calendar

I think that personally I’ve either made, used, or been privy to just about everything on this list, with a couple of exceptions.

Labyrinths still strike me as kind of creepy and I’m not particularly fond of them. I can see the potential value and biblical association of having a special garden area for prayer and contemplation, though it might be hard for me to mentally separate it from the too-romantic “In the Garden” mode.

Incense and oils I have in abundance, but I don’t think I’ve ever used my own incense in a devotional context.

I’d never heard of Lutherans having home altars until I read The Hammer of God. Is anyone familiar with this practice?

In some objects of Judaica I’ve found a handy visual in terms of tying the Old Testament together with its fulfillment in Christ. I.e., lighting a menorah while reading John 8-10, maybe some Maccabees, and Hebrews 11:32-40. I don’t know that I’d carry on all of these practices at such a point as we have a family, however, because in such a pluralistic society as ours today I wouldn’t want to give a wrong impression about Christianity being the same as Judaism, or risk confusing someone. As I mentioned in last post, most of these kinds of private devotional practices really are better off being practiced privately. What’s fine for one person may baffle someone else.

The beautiful kneeler that Alex’s dad made for us can be seen here.

Shadowboxes and scrapbooking tend to have a magpie-like quality and also often are designed to be centered on the uniqueness of the individual who made them. When I refer to scrapbooking in a devotional context, I’m not really thinking of recording our own personal memories so much as making a page of writing more beautiful. I’ve got a scrapbook full of some favorite psalms embellished with beautiful papers and whatnot. I was surprised to learn that scrapbooking is considered a very spiritual activity by Mormons because their heritage and family history is of course so very important, and that many major scrapbooking suppliers are in fact Mormons themselves. But that’s a rather different concept of using scrapbooking, related to the celebration of the individual rather than actual devotional use.

Anything else people want to comment on, chat about, relay their experiences with? This is a highly random and far-reaching post, no doubt to be narrowed down in the future…

I’d assume that most confessional Lutherans acknowledge the benefits of a certain degree of uniformity in our corporate worship settings, as the Augsburg Confession points out: “Of Usages in the Church they teach that those ought to be observed which may be observed without sin, and which are profitable unto tranquillity and good order in the Church, as particular holy days, festivals, and the like. Nevertheless, concerning such things men are admonished that consciences are not to be burdened, as though such observance was necessary to salvation.”

And: “..Even the Canons are not so severe as to demand the same rites everywhere, neither, at any time, have the rites of all churches been the same; although, among us, in large part, the ancient rites are diligently observed. For it is a false and malicious charge that all the ceremonies, all the things instituted of old, are abolished in our churches. But it has been a common complaint that some abuses were connected with the ordinary rites. These, inasmuch as they could not be approved with a good conscience, have been to some extent corrected.”

And again: “To the true unity of the Church it is enough to agree concerning the doctrine of the Gospel and the administration of the Sacraments. Nor is it necessary that human traditions, that is, rites or ceremonies, instituted by men, should be everywhere alike.”

So today’s musing is… What shall we say about private devotional aids, used perhaps in a family setting or by an individual? Are there things that are stylistically less appropriate for the Lutheran conscience, due to their theological or historical underpinnings, as is the case in the Divine Service?

I’m inclined to think that, provided that private devotional aids do not contradict or fly in the face of the reverence expressed in the Divine Service (but rather express continuity), or implant notions of false doctrine in the user, the object in question will be largely a matter of adiaphora and personal discernment. I’ll go another step and say that if someone has such a favorite devotional practice, they should not go crusading to try and get everyone on board with them to all do it, because what is understood and beneficial to one person can be a stumbling block to another. Unless you’re prepared to carefully explain yourself and not press it on another, let this practice be between you and God.

Being an artistic type and loving liturgical settings causes one to think of liturgical art in the home and the purposes it serves. Some practices would certainly be less good, such as using physical means to work one’s self into a hazy, mystical stupor with some hazy, mystical, experiential and emotional encounter as the goal. It’s clear that this is out of step with God’s Word as well as the nature of worship as we see it so well expressed in the Divine Service. Another practice to be discouraged might be the reading of romantic Christian literature or listening to romantic Christian music as a “devotional” exercise, for the same reason. (By the way, the very word “devotional” has probably caused a number of problems in this way, because we commonly use the word “devotion” in a very romantic, emotional, subjective context.)

Next post will include a large list of such aids for contemplation, meditation, and private worship that I’ve encountered from a number of liturgical settings and artisans across the board. Many of them intrigue me; a few rub me the wrong way for reasons that I hope to work out a little more as I type and wrangle with the issues.

Are we having fun yet? 

All Christian confessions and traditions believe in the power (good or ill) of images. The strictest sects view images with suspicion and strong fear of idolatry for this reason, and their places of worship are bare. A large portion of Protestants have iconoclastic roots in their past, but accept a variety of art forms in their churches (some less beautiful), as long as things like crucifixes are left out of the equation. The “Willow Creek type” segment of evangelicalism simply views things like the cross bad for business and marketing purposes, and use images, music, and other media the way that an advertiser or commercial designer might, hoping that such manipulation of means will help alter someone psychologically into good decision-making and inspirational feeling. And the Catholic and Orthodox, by the authority of their church or its fathers, often employ arts and human creations (i.e., specially cast medals, icons) as sacramentals, real portals and deliverers of divine grace and perhaps worthy of veneration. How is the Lutheran approach to the sacred arts different?

The first point is that Lutherans are not iconoclasts– we affirm and extol the benefits of the arts in worship settings, and the reverence and dignity that they lend to the Divine Service. We may partake of these things in Christian freedom as an aid to focus our thoughts in devotional settings. We believe that all such things, be they visual, audible, even olfactory, serve to point us to Christ and his holy Word.  In fact, the sarcastic skeptic and the sincere speaker both might say that Lutherans are so giddy with the Gospel, they’ll take anything they can see, hear, smell, feel, or taste that reverently directs them back to Christ and his holy Word.

It would be mistaken idolatry to attribute saving power to a mere human object. Nor do we view the arts as sacraments. Rather, devotional arts point us back to the Gospel. Things that put us in mind of God’s Word and especially of the Gospel of Christ, through visual communication, are worth keeping around. To quote Luther in an example of this: “The custom of holding a crucifix before a dying person has kept many in the Christian faith and has enabled them to die with a confident faith in the crucified Christ.” The power is not in the object itself, but in that referenced cross of Christ, which is delivered to us in God’s Word and his true, Scriptural means of grace.

And these are the only means of grace, as they are tied to God’s Word and promise. We dare not imagine that our very ”relevant” typesetting skills or PowerPoint production is the Holy Spirit’s personal vehicle, as though our design savvy gets people into God’s kingdom. Lutherans, though they may appear “Catholic” to many in their approval of statuary or saints’ images, do not find themselves especially intrigued by the purported transformative powers from a weeping Madonna or special graces received from wearing a saint medallion, for there is no Word of promise attached to these things. Therefore, such things cannot be of faith.

In short, the arts that Lutherans include in their devotional settings are designed to point, in perhaps an incessant and overwhelming fashion, to Christ crucified for us, the Word made flesh. How this specifically plays out will no doubt be explored further as this site blogs on.

Thoughts, anyone?

I admit to having a bit of a love-hate relationship with church banners. I have seen some truly beautiful ones, clearly assembled by creative people who have a talent for such creations in fabric. Now, I believe that most banners probably come about by the work of church ladies’ groups. Sometimes when there are no artists and craftspeople around, the resulting banner is a felt-and-paste, often designed from a book of vaguely Pentecostalish- or 1970s-looking designs. One can hardly disparage a hard-working and well-meaning ladies’ group for their effort, but what we are considering here is both artistic excellence and, especially in the case of art in a liturgical setting, what a banner communicates to the viewer theologically.

Banners are designed to be simple, 2-dimensional, and with a striking design to get the idea across– not unlike the flag of a country, or heraldry. The apparent simplicity of this craft is no doubt what makes it a popular choice for in-house creations and projects, but care still needs to be taken with the arrangement of visual elements and the message it conveys. Even a simple banner can be well done, if someone is employed to work on it who has an eye for such design elements. I was really pleased to hear that, when considering the creation of a new set of banners for our church in Winkler, one of our members was approached who is a professional artist and incidentally designed the church’s stained glass windows as well. There’s the recognition and proper use of vocation!

Here’s an example of one such simple banner that I find effective (though I’m not so crazy about the font).

Personally, I would love to see a church banner tried on a piece of black fabric, with beautiful Batik cotton used to simulate stained glass. How about you? Have you see any good (or bad) church banners lately?