Wednesday, January 19, 2011

Why I Believe in Icons and Chants

I am reading a book called The Living God, a catechism for the Orthodox church. While doing so, I hope to post various thoughts, questions, and quotes which arise from it.

The Preface first stresses that Orthodoxy is concerned with the "ontological content" of Christianity. In other words, "It insists upon the life in Christ as a true participation in divine energies." Similarly, it discusses how the Byzantine rite is "a theology transfigured into doxology". Both of these points have the same heart, as far as I see it. Orthodoxy is about the active life of a Christian who is undergoing the process of deification we call theosis. I have recently discovered that for many Christians, theology means intellectualism and Christian life means the right emotions or good deeds. I appreciate that Orthodoxy does not condone this view.

I also loved the authors' explanation of why we quote the saints. "Our purpose," they say, "is not merely to repeat what the Fathers said, but to rediscover in union with them, inspired by them, the capacity for creating a synthesis of theological thought." Chew on that one for a while. There's a lot of meat.

They then point out that a fundamental point of Orthodoxy is that it "resound[s] in an atmosphere of beauty". They give markers of this beauty: music and iconography.

And I'm not exactly sure whence it came, but I had a bit of a revelation. I believe that chanting in Divine Liturgy and having icons is appropriate. But a mere explanation that "they are beautiful" doesn't appeal to me. Mendelssohn and Bach are beautiful. Michelangelo and Rembrandt are beautiful. But I can't really see those works of art being done in the midst of Divine Liturgy.

Nor do I particularly believe that chanting and iconography are more beautiful than such works as these. I've just seen too many inspiring paintings and heard too many gorgeous masses to believe that they are lesser. But I now have a reason for believing that those works are not appropriate in the setting of the Liturgy.

They're simple.

And let's be honest, Bach, Mendelssohn, Michelangelo, and Rembrandt are so ornate and complex that they can be downright distracting. Far too often, we scan Michelangelo's ceiling so hard to find its meaning that we forget to worship the God it was painted for. These works are complex, and can lead to either a simple or complex truth. But the fact remains: their complexity often distracts us.

But the music of chanting is not complex. Once you get the tune, it's incredibly easy to follow. And icons, at least as I see them, aren't incredibly hard to understand. Sure, they have many different parts, just as chanting choirs have all four choir parts. But they are at heart simple in nature. Icons and chanting don't ask too much of their audience. And thus their beauty is by far the most effective in its environment. When I'm in Divine Liturgy, I don't want paintings so ornately realistic that my mind wanders. I want basic shapes, following specific patterns, which ingrain the true Christian mythology into my nous and at the same time move me outside my own complex and realistic life into a reality beyond myself. When I'm singing, I don't want to be distracted by complex tunes, or by thoughts of what a "cool song" something is. I want something simple, basic to the human anatomy. Something so natural that when I'm singing it, it feels like a natural outpouring, not a special effort.

This is why I believe in icons and chanting. Because their simplicity 1) is a better environment for the Liturgy and 2) encourages Christians to have the simplicity of mind necessary for true theosis.

1 comment:

  1. Excellent post! That's absolutely the point of all Orthodox music and art. It's supposed to be beautiful enough not to distract with its ugliness. But it's also not supposed to draw attention to itself. In that sense, a good analogy would be to how women dress in church. They should dress nicely, but not try to draw attention to themselves. At a ball, a woman is the center of attention; at church, she is not. She should dress modestly -- which means no ball gowns. But at a ball, a ball gown is perfectly appropriate. :-)

    I'm so glad to hear about everything you are learning.

    ReplyDelete