At various moments in the history of Western art, churches have taken the risk of installing art of the time in their liturgical space and the result has been a rich, abundant tradition of art which not only complements but is also vital to the life of the church. The Church's invitation to artists has always been to create artworks that engage with the liturgy, sacred space and life of the church while formally remaining free to be informed by the impulses and shifts in the languages and modes of less religious art. The separation between the religious institution and the institution of art has however somehow liberated the genre of religious art from the repetition of nostalgic and overly sentimental kitsch. The split from the church has forged space for a rediscovery of the potential for art to speak more truthfully in its avoidance of imitation and repetition. Art that is truthful gives expression to the profound mysteries of life and can lead people to an encounter with God. My hope is that churches of the third millenium will take a more active role in encouraging and supporting the installation of contemporary art in their sacred spaces. The arts must be allowed to serve their highest purpose; to manifest transcendence. Throughout the centuries, art and theology have striven to move beyond the boundaries of human experience and to penetrate into that which Karl Rahner termed 'the expanse of the unperceived perceivable.'
Proposing to permanently install contemporary art in the sacred space and gathering areas of a church will usually prompt at least three different reactions. One of these will undoubtedly be supportive but the other two will range from indifferent to hostile. All reactions will need to be handled with patience and perserverence. The parishioners and parish council might be initially excited by the idea but then become suspicious of the motives of contemporary art and eventually reject the idea in preference of a more reliably pious and perhaps more easily interpretable art of the past. They may even consider the option of "making do with what we've got" for if 'good' worship has taken place within the buildings in the absence of art, then "why do we need to change the space." For artists encouraged to be involved, the suspicion might fall on the church and the motives of the art program; why would a church which has so actively scorned and censored contemporary art be interested in taking such a risk? The final reaction might be one of excitement and enthusiasm; seeing the process as a sign of hope for a future where faith once again plays a vital role in shaping culture.
Proposing to permanently install contemporary art in the sacred space and gathering areas of a church will usually prompt at least three different reactions. One of these will undoubtedly be supportive but the other two will range from indifferent to hostile. All reactions will need to be handled with patience and perserverence. The parishioners and parish council might be initially excited by the idea but then become suspicious of the motives of contemporary art and eventually reject the idea in preference of a more reliably pious and perhaps more easily interpretable art of the past. They may even consider the option of "making do with what we've got" for if 'good' worship has taken place within the buildings in the absence of art, then "why do we need to change the space." For artists encouraged to be involved, the suspicion might fall on the church and the motives of the art program; why would a church which has so actively scorned and censored contemporary art be interested in taking such a risk? The final reaction might be one of excitement and enthusiasm; seeing the process as a sign of hope for a future where faith once again plays a vital role in shaping culture.
