Jeffrey Price HT506 – Church and the World 2

True Beauty

Jeffrey Brooks Price

December 30, 2009

Table of Contents

Introduction 3
Culture Defined 4
The People of Culture 5
The Mode of Culture 6
The Aesthetic of Culture 8
Conclusion 11

Introduction

Asking someone to describe culture, and more specifically, the current culture is a little like asking
someone to describe their own face. They look at it in the mirror every day and they look out upon the
world through it every moment. Culture cannot be escaped, ignored or retreated from – wherever one
is, there is culture right in front of them. It is in the air they breathe, and is so ingrained into the
atmosphere around them it is hard to imagine that anyone would have trouble describing it. But therein
lies the challenge. People are so close to culture, so intimate with culture that they often times lack
perspective in actually understanding culture. Like the description of their own faces, with all their
beauty and blemishes, the task of detailing every curve, line, or shade is not easy. Despite looking at it
every day, we all lack a sense of perspective that enables us to see the true beauty and blemish within
culture.
Our basic task now is to discover a working definition of culture so that it can be understood better
within the perspective of human history. Once we have reached a consensus on a definition we will
examine the people of culture, the modes of culture, and the aesthetic of culture. Each have a
significant influence over the way we each experience, understand, live through, and judge culture.
The basis for this excursion into culture is largely based upon an evaluation of Kenneth Myers’ book
All God's Children and Blue Suede Shoes: Christians and Popular Culture. Myers deals with many of
the same challenges we face in understanding culture, but brings with it a deep desire to root our
understanding in the wisdom of God’s glory in both his word and creation.[1] By applying God’s
wisdom to culture we gain the needed perspective on the people, mode, and aesthetic of culture to
ground ourselves in true reality rather than being swept away by the fabricated nature of reality TV.

Culture Defined

Our first task shall be to define culture, so that we have a basic framework and consensus from which
to evaluate it later. The earlier analogy of culture being breathed in helps to set the stage for the
intimacy that we all have with it. “Culture has very much to do with the human spirit. What we find
beautiful or entertaining or moving is rooted in our spiritual life.” [2] If culture is connected to the
human spirit than the importance of it cannot be stressed enough. In fact, T.S. Eliot went so far as to
say “simply [that culture is] that which makes life worth living.”[3] In both descriptions culture is
connected with the religious and spiritual perspectives, but it comes dangerously close to replacing
God. Therefore, we cannot divorce God or his revelatory word from our definition of culture.
“Culture, as we see it originate in Genesis, was intended by God to be a fulfillment of the image of
God, an imitation of God.” [4] Culture, therefore, originates with creation and as such is a part of
God’s created order and is a reflection of God’s image. Now it seems our task is even greater because
defining culture is entangled with our understanding of God and creation. It is no wonder the Church
and the world each struggle to plumb the depths of understanding when it comes to culture, God, and
humanity. Myers adds, “It is being human, not being saved – it is the image of God in us, not
regeneration – that establishes the capacity to recognize the distinctions between the beautiful and the
ugly between order and chaos, between the creative and the stultifying.” [5] While I agree that the
imprint of God on creation transcends God’s election, the result of the fall has tainted humanities
perspective on what is beautiful and ugly.
Our definition of culture then is rooted in the unfolding history of redemption or the history of
humanity. In perfection, man and culture are created in the Garden of Eden, but through the rebellion
and sin of man, all have been thrown into turmoil. Culture then exists in the tension of imperfection
and redemption, and “figuring out what to make of culture will involve determining how the experience
of God’s people in this distinctive time of redemptive history resembles and differs from that of other
periods.” [6] The world we live in, the communities we are a part of, and the people we interact with
are all a part of culture as they reflect the fallen and redeemed man. That is how we are to understand
culture, through the transcendent standards of God’s created order and the immanent interactions we
have with his image bearers.
The People of Culture

The image bearers that we come in contact with on a daily basis are influenced in various ways by the
culture of the past and present. These immanent realities are affected by socio-economic factors,
regional influences, and of course, age. Generally, this means that older members of the community
have been influenced by a wider range of cultural changes throughout their personal history, and are
more likely to have an established aesthetic standard. By contrast, younger members of the community
are much more likely to be influenced by the present culture and therefore would have a more fluid
aesthetic standard. Myers contests, “In time, especially for the young, standards of dress, of manners,
of conversation, of friendship and love, and even of belief came to be shaped by popular culture more
than by family, church, or community.” [7] The problem here is the seeming discontinuity between
popular culture and community which in today’s society is woven more tightly together than in 1989
when All God’s Children and Blue Suede Shoes was published. In fact, it is impossible to divorce any
of these influences from the young or old as they have each contributed to the unique cultural
perspectives of both young and old today.
While the subjective reality of culture is obvious through the interactions and reactions of God’s image
bearers to one another, what is more often lost sight of is the timeless sense of generation. We often
associate generations with decades or periods of history, like World War II, Baby Boomers, or
Generation X. But a more helpful perspective on generation is to see the transcendent acts of God in
the history of redemption in the present generation that encompasses all ages. It is the present
generation that is affecting the culture of today, and it is the present generation that is being affected by
culture. Ultimately, it is God’s transcendent act of redemption that is being fulfilled by Jesus Christ in
the people of the present generation.

The Mode of Culture

Now we shall turn our attention to the mode of culture or how culture is being communicated in, by,
and through the present generation. Technology has played a major factor in influencing the modes of
culture by bringing more forms of media, transforming the arts and speeding up the process of cultural
communication. Myers was right in 1989 when he said that popular culture “specializes in instant
gratification,” [8] but I don’t think even he could imagine the speed at which culture can gratify itself
now. At that time; television was “not simply the dominate medium of popular culture, it [was] the
single most significant shared reality in our entire society…In television, we live[ed] and move[ed] and
[had] our being.” [9] There is still truth in Myers’ words, but television is quickly being replaced by
the new media of the internet and social media as those forms of cultural communication collapse into
one another.
The mode of culture has a tremendous effect on the present generation as Myers points out. “The
media, especially television [and now the internet], serve in our culture a role once reserved for God:
the role of defining reality.”[10] The present generation communicates culture and, therefore, defines
reality through the media, but “according to Biblical Christianity, it is God’s will and God’s word that
establishes the meaning and significance of all things.”[11] Since it is God who transcendently defines
reality, then it is clear that the media is also a mode by which God communicates and defines reality.
When the Church and Christians engage in the arts, music, and other forms of media, they
communicate culture as defined by God. In essence, we offer up the transcendent truth of God’s
created order to the culture around us, calling them to be true image bearers of God’s glory. The mode
of culture then exists to bring light to the truth and history of redemption for the present generation to
hear, to repent, and to believe in Jesus Christ.

The Aesthetic of Culture

Finally, the standards used by the people of culture to judge the mode of culture simultaneously
recognize and create the aesthetic of culture. The question we wrestle with here is whether or not that
aesthetic is normative or subjective – is it fixed or relative? The simple answer is yes and yes, but to
what extent normative standards and subjective standards play a role is a bit more complex. Myers
draws his reader’s attention to Paul’s conclusion of Philippians 4:8, “Finally, brothers, whatever is true,
whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is
commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these
things.” [12] But what are “these things” and how are we to accomplish this goal that Paul is setting out
before us? Myers makes an excellent observation when he says, “In order to recognize what is true,
noble, right, pure, lovely, and admirable, we need to be able to recognize what is false, ignoble, wrong,
impure, unlovely, and justly unadmired.” [13] This must be a standard by which we judge culture and,
therefore, define and separate what is beautiful from what is ugly.
It is interesting though to look at the context of Philippians 4:8 because in the verses right before it and
right after it Paul is encouraging the Philippians to trust the Lord for all their needs by not being
anxious and to be content in all circumstances. He calls them to rejoice in the Lord for he has rejoiced
in the Lord and both sections have their climax in Christ. Immediately before we are given the
standards by which to judge culture Paul says, “And the peace of God, which surpasses all
understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.”[14] The Christian mind finds
peace in Christ when it is guarded from the ignoble, but the point is that the mind and the heart are in
Christ. Being in Christ is the only way to understand the truth that is found in verse 8 and to
understand honor, beauty, and excellence. Furthermore, it is Christ himself who strengthens us for this
cultural endeavor because living life means living in culture and living in culture means we will have
times of plenty and times of hunger. Either way, the answer is found in Jesus Christ. Since Paul is
holding out Christ as the standard of excellence in verse 8 by which we are to judge culture and
immediately before and after we see that he is fixed upon Jesus, then the answer to whatever is true,
honorable, just, lovely, commendable and excellent will also be in Jesus Christ.
“Paul does not say that we should reflect on what we think is love, or whatever we feel is admirable.
We are to give sustained attention to whatever is objectively true and noble and right.” [15] We are to
give our sustained attention to a normative and fixed standard of cultural aesthetics in Christ alone.
There are normative standards in both the special revelation of Scripture and in the general revelation
of creation, but they all point to the Word of God found in Jesus himself. What does that mean for the
Church and for the people of the Church? It means that we are called to judge culture, not by our own
standards, but by the standards that God has given to us as objective truth. Therefore, we should see a
transcendent and cross-cultural thread spanning from the beginning of time to now by which culture is
judged by God’s standards.
In Myers’ critique of popular culture he points out the problems with subjectivity as it “renders null and
void any concept of propriety.” [16] While it is true that popular culture relies heavily upon the
subjective nature of standards, it is impossible for there not to be a subjective standard for the Church
as well. Just as the Holy Spirit personally applies God’s truth to the heart, so there is a subjective
application of that truth in determining what is beautiful and what is ugly. The steady march of time
shows the variety of culture found in God’s creation, and that variety is not inherently ignoble, but the
fruit of beauty as it reveals itself from generation to generation. The present generation, while holding
onto a fixed standard of excellence reveals that standard in unique and subjective ways in our present
culture. The point is that just as God cannot be pulled out of creation, neither can his standard – that of
Jesus Christ, be pulled out of the beauty found within culture. Throughout all generations culture will
show itself to be both ugly and beautiful, and the standards we use to judge will be both normative and
subjective.
Even Myers, in his attempt to hold out a normative standard subjects it to a personal aesthetic of “high
culture” as he laments “the eclipse of high culture by popular culture means, for our society, a loss of
cultural memory, a loss of commitment to the future and the past.” [17] It is true that our society has a
sense of immediacy, instant gratification and a focus on the now that overshadows the past and at
times, ignores the future. The problem with his view is that he is holding out a subjective standard of
“high culture” as though it were normative. God’s truth will always be God’s truth and, therefore, his
beauty cannot be overshadowed in creation, no matter how ignoble culture becomes. Ultimately, the
Church, as Paul reminded us in Philippians, can rest in Jesus Christ and rejoice that it is by his aesthetic
beauty, his excellence, and the light of his truth that we can see beauty in our present generation and
present culture.

Conclusion

The normative and the subjective are always present, just as the transcendence of God and the immance
of his Spirit are inescapable. Our present generation, along with previous generations, has both
recognized the cultural standards of beauty found in the order of creation, and created an aesthetic that
is unique and praiseworthy in this epoch of human history. After all, human history is played out in the
history of redemption as God reconciles his people to himself through Jesus Christ and brings his Holy
Spirit to live amongst them. God’s fingerprint cannot be erased from culture, and his standards of
beauty are both normative and subjective.
In conclusion, as the Church of the living God, we should be the most equipped to live life enjoying the
beauty around us and pointing out the true standards of beauty in Christ. This requires that we not only
understand and seek God’s normative wisdom and truth, but that we also subjectively apply that to our
culture of today. This means that our minds and our hearts are transformed by the grace of God, and
that we hold out Christ as our standard of beauty. In him, we are equipped to not fear the present
generation, but to redeem the culture and to redeem our generation. Christ’s redemption of us compels
us to “go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the
Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them,”[18] to see what is truly beautiful, noble and excellent. Jesus
Christ himself.

Bibliography

Barth, Karl. Church Dogmatics. Louisville: Westminister John Knox Press, 1961.
—. The Humanity of God. Louisville: Westminister John Knox Press, 1960.
Clements, Keith. Friedrich Schleiermacher Pioneer of Modern Theology (Kindle Edition).
Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1991.
Heron, Alasdair I. C. A Century of Protestant Theology. Cambridge: The Lutterworth Press, 1993.
Myers, Kenneth A. All God's Children and Blue Suede Shoes: Christians and Popular Culture (Kindle
Edition). Wheaton: Crossway Books, 1989.
Nash, Ronald H. The Word of God and The Mind of Man. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1982.
Niebuhr, H. Richard. Christ & Culture. New York: HarperCollins, 1951.
Wells, David F. No Place for Truth or Whatever Happened to Evangelical Theology? Grand Rapids:
Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co, 1993.

[1] Myers 1989, section 494-515

[2] Ibid, section 362
[3] Ibid, section 379
[4] Ibid, section 551
[5] Ibid, section 756
[6] Ibid, section 537
[7] Ibid, section 1045
[8] Ibid, section 179
[9] Ibid, section 2491
[10] Ibid, section 2502
[11] Ibid, section 2502
[12] Phi 4:8 ESV
[13] Myers 1989, section 1499
[14] Phi 4:7 ESV
[15] Myers 1989, section 1496
[16] Ibid, section 1515
[17] Ibid, section 2038
[18] Mat 28:19-20 ESV