Makoto Fujimura

Art In Action (Part V): Stand Together

Makoto Fujimura — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 10:04:43 -0700

IAM’s next Encounter will take place February 26-28, 2009, in lower Manhattan, and the theme of the Encounter will be “Art in Action.” When asked about the genesis of the next Encounter’s theme, Makoto Fujimura points to the 1982 book by Nicholas Wolterstorff of the same title. “Art in Action” has remained a staple on the bookshelf of artists and creative catalysts throughout the world who seek to dig deeper into the meaning and purpose for art.

Following is Part Five of Christy Tennant’s recent interview with Makoto Fujimura about the theme of the next IAM Encounter:

CT: You mentioned that merely reacting to things that happen in our society is a violation of Christian love. Can you elaborate on that a bit? What are some of the reactions you are referring to?

MF: Well, stereotyping and disengaging are two of the most dangerous reactions. Everyone is stereotyping one another. Recently, Tony Carnes gave a talk at IAM, and he referred to a NY Times editorial he read that suggested that what we need is for bleeding heart liberals and bleeding heart conservatives to come together – I thought that was great. Rather than taking a stand against sides within our culture, we need to find ways to stand together. Of course we will disagree, but ultimately, when we cling to our disagreements, no one wins. A house divided cannot stand, and as long as we are living side by side on this planet, we are living under the same roof. When it goes down, we all suffer.

I’m not saying there is never a time to “take a stand.” The civil rights movement depended on people taking a stand against racial injustices. But too often, we are pitted against one another rather than being for one another. When we take a stand, with our art or whatever, we need to be sure that what we are standing for benefits everyone. Christ took a stand for justice. Love for enemies benefits both the lover and the loved. Racial equality benefits all of society. And art that becomes language for reconciliation and redemption and justice benefits all of society.

Art In Action (Part IV): Loving Offensively

Makoto Fujimura — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 13:53:00 -0700

IAM’s next Encounter will take place February 26-28, 2009, in lower Manhattan, and the theme of the Encounter will be “Art in Action.” When asked about the genesis of the next Encounter’s theme, Makoto Fujimura points to the 1982 book by Nicholas Wolterstorff of the same title. “Art in Action” has remained a staple on the bookshelf of artists and creative catalysts throughout the world who seek to dig deeper into the meaning and purpose for art.

Following is Part Four of Christy Tennant’s recent interview with Makoto Fujimura about the theme of the next IAM Encounter:

CT: If art is supposed to be a means of repairing and rehumanizing the culture around us, what is the artist’s responsibility to that end? Does Nicholas Wolterstoff place the responsibility on artists themselves?

MF: Yes, and no.

Nick is one of the few people who talks about an artist’s responsibility as not the opposite of freedom, but rather that an artist’s freedom is connected to his responsibility in society. To Nick, they’re not disjointed.

This is another example of how Nick was prophetic, suggesting that freedom and responsibility have to overlap. If not, society will be broken by both outside forces (i.e. 9/11) and internal forces (i.e. gang violence).

Are we doing anything internally to address issues of societal injustice? Or are we just reacting to it when it happens? If we are just reacting, this is a violation of Christian love. Justice is not retaliation. It is dealing with internal injustices, and that is a responsibility of artists

The world is drawn to that work which seeks to transform culture. Even under attack, such as terrorism, we need to have language to address these issues – and create things not just because we hate our enemies, but because we love our neighbors. In one way, 9/11 exposed the fact that we don’t have this language.

IAM is not fighting a culture war, because in a culture war, no one wins. So many are driven by fear, and use fear to propagate their organizations and ideologies. If anything, we should LOVE offensively.

Art In Action (Part III)

Makoto Fujimura — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 13:08:05 -0700

Following is Part Three of Christy Tennant’s recent interview with Makoto Fujimura about the theme of the next IAM Encounter:

CT: You mentioned that Art in Action is a philosophical approach to the arts, especially for artists who are Christians. What is one ofthe philosophical insights you gleaned from Art in Action?

MF: I am deeply concerned with the issue ofjustice, and this book partly addresses the fact that Art and Beauty flow fromconcern for justice and the brokenness and how unjust the world is. Art is a medium for mediating that conversation.

We don’t usually think of art that way. Often, art is divorced from society – Art egotistical, and Society is common. But for Nick, art is based on this idea of justice within society. For him, art is a means for rehumanizing the world.

Nick doesn’t talk about “excellence” the way we so often do. Instead, he talks about art’s “fittingness.” One of his criteria for beauty is Does this expression properly fit this broken reality? Something beautiful and lofty might not be good if it doesn’t fit. Should we have an absolute standard of excellence for beauty that does not take into account the circumstances of the broken world? How does that fit?

The Greek philosophers tried to define happiness and goodness by sets of ideals determined by your status and the accomplishments you work toward. Their conclusions were that beauty and happiness could be achieved if all of the circumstances were in place to make one happy and beautiful. But Augustine of Hippo was one of the first Christian philosophers to say no, it’s not like that, because God doesn’t work that way. God wants us to be aware of brokenness, as a precondition of “loving our neighbor.” It is only possible to have godly happiness if you are aware of sorrow and brokenness. The Christian definition of love requires an identifying with suffering, rather than divorcing yourself from suffering.

So art divorced from love is like the Greeks ignoring the plights of the broken and obtaining a form of happiness that is removed from cruelty. Plato would have an absolute standard but on a practical level didn’t want to be connected to reality, while Augustine connected reality and brokenness. Love is the object – this is what Christ has shown to be immovable.

Nick’s new book on Justice (Justice: Rights and Wrongs, published 2007) is much clearer about this article and deals with it in more depth.

For the artist, Artin Action speaks on many levels, and poses both Christians and non-Christians with conceptual issues and questions that people would not normally ask in art school. It gives post-modernist philosophers language to not just divide, but connect. If we believe in a standard of love, everything changes.

Art In Action (Part II)

Makoto Fujimura — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 14:35:12 -0700

IAM’s next Encounter will take place February 26-28, 2009, in lower Manhattan, and the theme of the Encounter will be “Art in Action.” When asked about the genesis of the next Encounter’s theme, Makoto Fujimura points to the 1982 book by Nicholas Wolterstorff of the same title. “Art in Action” has remained a staple on the bookshelf of artists and creative catalysts throughout the world who seek to dig deeper into the meaning and purpose for art.

Following is Part Two of Christy Tennant’s recent interview with Makoto Fujimura about the theme of the next IAM Encounter (February 26-28,2009):

CT: I heard you say once that Art in Action was very prophetic. How so?

MF: Art in Action first came out about thirty-six years ago. Nick (the author) was pointing out the problem of art being disconnected from society, where there is almost a movement away from wanting to communicate to the audience. He hit on something that we are seeing realized today – where the arts are on the fringe and not really impacting the whole of society. So in that regard, it was very insightful and prophetic.

In the early 1980’s, truth, beauty and goodness were taboo subjects. You couldn’t talk about those things without being laughed at in academia. To be at Yale (as Nick was at that time) and talking about these things was pretty radical, especially in philosophy circles.

Nowadays, there is a renaissance of Christian philosophers, but at that time, there were few known Christians in philosophy. Back then, Christians were often exiled from their field as artists. But to use the Generative Creativity metaphor, philosophy is upstream from culture; philosophy is a source for the cultural river. And a lot of what Nick talks about in this book has not been actualized yet. It’s been nearly forty years, but the book is not outdated, and it is very important for today’s generation of artists to connect with that material. Some of the examples could be updated, but besides that, it is very timely. The ideas and analyses are as relevant today as they were in 1980 – perhaps even more so. Philosophical discussions tend to have a longer shelf life than most, and IAM hopes to help keep this discussion going.

Charis Exhibit to Open at Dillon Gallery

Makoto Fujimura — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 16:00:42 -0700

Fujimura Studio announces:

Charis Exhibit to open at Dillon Gallery in New York (555.W.25th Street, between 10th and 11th Ave.) July 2nd (opening from 6-8:30pm) to August 2nd (closed on Mondays). Charis exhibit is comprised of three large gold paintings that Makoto Fujimura has completed in the last decade in New York. Here's a note Makoto wrote about the exhibit.

I began to use gold, in the leaf form as well as in the powder form, very early on in my studies of Nihonga (literally "Japan-painting"). I was taught as a student that I must use the best materials in order to truly get to know the ancient craft. So, despite the cost involved, my MFA thesis painting used the best gold and minerals that I could purchase. I wrote in River Grace about the experience of encountering the extravagance of beauty leading to a profound wrestling of faith and art. The three major pieces that I've done in the last ten years in New York reveal the consistency (or stubbornness) of my insistence on continuing to use these materials, but with diverse results.

In painting the December Hour, I navigated between thoughts of life and death. Dedicating the piece to a dying friend, I prayed desperately as I layered gold over gold, struggling to understand God's wisdom in taking someone so young. In the medieval Book of Hours, December connotes death, but as I worked to complete it, and as I see it now, the painting speaks back to me as an emblem for the resurrection reality, that which theologian N.T. Wright has recently called "Life after Life after Death."

Golden Fire develops this theme further. Taking cues from Dante's Divine Comedy, this piece focuses on the theme of fire, particularly significant in our post 9-11 reality. I wanted to depict gold rising in the fire of destruction, and, at the same time, letting the surface also speak of the purifying power of fire.

My latest painting, Charis, further emphasizes the Golden Fire language. In homage to de Kooning, gold moves in a dispersed, gestured movement. Critic Clement Greenberg did not approve of De Kooning's paintings as pure abstraction since de Kooning did not deny the "essential flatness of a painted space." I am interested in the de Kooning that failed to fulfill Greenbergian definition of abstraction. My interest in abstraction is in the essentiation of reality, which, I believe, de Kooning was interested in as well. In that search, I became interested in creating space that is both flat and spatial at the same time. Gold is that paradox: it creates space (by being semi-transparent) and remains flat (by being mirror-like) at the same time. Perhaps the only way that an "essential flatness" can be full of created space is by using gold.

Takashi Murakami, in Super Flat, states: "The world of the future might be like what Japan is today - super flat." Murakami desires to merge the layers of high and low art, visually achieving flatness via Pop use of acrylic colors. His plastic images seem divorced from tradition, but his colors are a faithful remnant of his training in Nihonga tradition. While the flatness of imagery is an important legacy of Japanese tradition (and perhaps in a twisted way true to Greenberg), the superficiality and the virtuality of flat imagery can detach us from the greater Reality and the metaphysical. We may live in Flatland, but God does not.

Gold, in all civilizations, symbolizes divinity. The act of layering gold, to me, is to pray for the divine New Reality (multi-dimensionality) to break into our broken (flat) reality. Charis, the Greek word that St. Paul used for "grace," is shorthand for the word "charisma," which means gift. Art is a gift, and essentially, art is grace. A "grace arena" is created in the layered gold and minerals. The more I journey deeply into the effects of gold and mineral pigments, the more I am taken by the refractive possibilities of the materials, while at the same time unable to contain, and control, the glory built into them. Glory spills out, like the golden aura we stand under - a tabernacle of hope.

Art in Action (Part 1)

Makoto Fujimura — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 13:33:26 -0700

In 1991, Makoto Fujimura began a small gathering of artists and creative catalysts interested in wrestling with the many questions of art, faith and humanity. This group became known as International Arts Movement (IAM), and today, IAM is constantly breaking ground as a non-profit arts organization that stands not cleanly within religious or secular arena, but rather in a third arena that intersects the two. Because of its strong emphasis on matters of faith, especially the mission of seeking to rehumanize modern culture through the arts, the IAM community attracts many men and women of faith, eager to incorporate their beliefs into their creativity. Likewise, because of it’s strong emphasis on artistic excellence and generative creativity, many artists with no particular faith commitments seek to join the discussions that take place at IAM’s gatherings.

Each year in February, IAM holds an annual event known as the IAM Encounter. Part conference, part festival, part workshop, the IAM Encounter draws artists and creative catalysts from all over the globe. In 2008, over 37 states and 8 nations were represented at the three-day event based around the theme of “Transforming the Cultural River.”

IAM’s next Encounter will take place February 26-28, 2009, in lower Manhattan, and the theme of the Encounter will be “Art in Action.” When asked about the genesis of the next Encounter’s theme, Makoto Fujimura points to the 1980 book by Nicholas Wolterstorff of the same title. “Art in Action” has remained a staple on the bookshelf of artists and creative catalysts throughout the world who seek to dig deeper into the meaning and purpose for art.

Christy Tennant recently interviewed Makoto Fujimura about the 2009 Encounter, and particularly the theme of “Art in Action.” Here’s what he had to say:

CT: Mako, I was at the Calvin College Worship Symposium in January of this year, and I saw you interviewed by Dr. Wolterstorff there. How did you and he initially connect?

MF: My relationship with Nicholas Wolterstorff began years ago, through a colleague at the University of Virginia. Dr. Hunter introduced us at a conference there. I had read Art in Action and really appreciated it. I think very philosophically about issues, so for me, it was very good to have a philosopher who was also a theologian. I had known theologians who delved into art and philosophy – for example, Francis Shaffer. But he was a theologian and pastor. Nicholas Wolterstorff is a philosopher who is recognized in his field, and he writes philosophically about the very things that I am most passionate about. So his book, and the insights I gleaned from it, were very helpful to me.

CT: Your past Encounter themes have included “Artists as Reconcilers” and “Generative Creativity.” How did you decide, all these years after first being introduced to Dr. Wolterstorff’s book, to base the next Encounter on its theme of “Art in Action?”

MF: I had invited Nick to speak at an IAM event soon after 9/11 – at Kristen Frederickson Gallery (birthed after our Tribeca Temporary project ended) – which was a gallery that emerged, literally, from the ashes of Ground Zero, when artists exhibited their work as a response to that tragedy, just a few blocks away from the smoldering ruins. Later, I asked him to write an essay for my catalogue Splendor of the Medium, and it was one of the best essays ever written about my work. Nick and I connect on a philosophical level in a way I have rarely experienced with anyone else. At that time, we had a very rigorous discussion on how what Nick wrote in 1980 can apply to us today, especially in a post-9/11 world. I think this is a very important issue for IAM to be thinking about: the whole idea of art as action. To see art actualized in the world.

It’s a radical idea, when you think about it, because often, artists are seen as outsiders from culture. So, despite the mid-20th Century ideas of bringing social change to the forefront of everyday culture, in fact, change and transformation through the arts are not talked about that much. But I think that art itself calls us to return to that language of being engaged with culture, and a leading catalyst for cultural change.

Hungering For a Mediated Conversation

Makoto Fujimura — Wed, 21 May 2008 15:20:45 -0700

Recently my wife, Judy, and I attended a wedding officiated by Tim Keller, pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian in New York City. His wedding message was, as usual, succinct and powerfully resonant.

Tim began with Kierkegaard, who stated that at the end of history, we will have to take our masks off, as in the midnight hour of the masquerade, and reveal who we really are. "Marriage," Tim reminded us, "is a radical endeavor. It is radically discomforting and radically comforting at the same time. And the Christian gospel is the only paradigm that can bring these opposites together."

Unlike the Kierkegaard metaphor, Tim continued, a marriage forces us to take our masks off; we are completely vulnerable. Marriage, therefore, can give us strength and confidence to move into the world, or it can devastate us from within.

In his new book, The Reason for God, Tim writes:

"God did not create us to get the cosmic, infinite joy of mutual love and glorification, but to share it. We were made to join in the dance. We were designed, then not just for belief in God in some general way, nor for a vague kind of inspiration or spirituality. We were made to center our lives upon him, to make the purpose and passion of our lives knowing, serving, delighting, and resembling him. This growth in happiness will go on eternally, increasing unimaginably (p. 219, The Reason for God, Dutton)

The cosmic dance is also a nuptial dance. The Church, as the Bride of Christ, is invited to a Feast. But in order to fully respond to this invitation, we have to get beyond the general sense of "faith" and move into God's banquet hall, a center room of his mansion. The Bible makes it abundantly clear that that mansion is in a city: The City of God. "The Bible begins at a Garden," Tim noted often, "and ends in a City.
Judy and I had the privilege of sitting with Tim at the banquet following the wedding.

As we ate our splendid meal, I asked Tim about his new book and the response he was getting. Tim has been on a book tour of sorts, speaking at various universities in Veritas Forums and debating atheist professors. I told him that I participated in one at Columbia University, being pitted against feminist artist Coco Fusco.

"So what was that like?" He asked.

"Well, it really never went anywhere," I said as I licked my sorbet, "because she kept on wanting to go back to the culture war days. I wanted to talk about being stewards of culture and creating a new language for culture, but she wanted to talk about governmental censoring of art. I told the organizers, that these debates may no longer serve us well anymore. We need a tri-alogue, not a dialogue, a mediated conversation that can create a third language to speak about an issue."

Tim asked me what I meant by a "third language." I explained that there is a huge gap in culture where the split between rational and emotive, between reason and the intuitive, has caused dialectical opposition. But now, because of the dehumanization this has caused, people are hungering for mediated conversation. "Obama is speaking that type of language, and that's why he is gaining ground," I pontificated.

Of course, it was only after I got home and began to read Tim's book that I saw his section on the "third way." In the introduction chapter, he notes that the entire book makes the case that authentic Christianity is "a spiritual third way" to mediate the current divides in culture. So at the wedding banquet table, a student was telling the master what the master already knows. I suppose the greatest reward of a teacher is when a student reshapes the thoughts being taught and thinks they are his own.

The World That Ought to Be

Makoto Fujimura — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 15:29:43 -0700

Christy Tennant and Makoto Fujimura continue their conversation about the evolving “third language…” Here, they discuss five specific terms in the third language: rehumanize, creative catalyst, generative creativity, the world that ought to be and mediate.

CT: Let’s talk about the language itself. One of my favorite words in the third language is “rehumanize.” I find it really insightful that the word “dehumanize” is recognized by SpellCheck, but rehumanize is not. When I type “rehumanize” into Dictionary.com, I am told, “No results found for ‘rehumanize.’” So clearly, this concept is not common. How would you define “rehumanize?”

MF: “Re-humanize,” which I took from Jane Eyre, is, to me, rooted in the biblical theology of shalom found in Isaiah 61, which is also what Jesus quoted when began his public ministry. This passage is God’s re-humanizing vision for the world. It’s also in Romans 8. Creation itself is waiting for the re-humanization of humanity. God has frustrated creation so that it won’t be satisfied until humanity has been restored. I love the way Hans Rookmaaker put it – “Christ did not come to make us Christians; He came to make us fully human.”

CT: Another term we’ve used is “creative catalyst.” I wrote a piece for Comment exploring this idea a bit, but there is so much more we could say…

MF: Being a creative catalyst is like being leaven – yeast, rather than a violent tool. Creative catalysts create a context for the gospel, serving people whether they are Christians or not. Creative catalysts are entrepreneurial and creative with few resources.

CT: The title of the 2008 Encounter was “Generative Creativity.” What is that?

MF: Generative creativity is always creating new language, like a poet who gives others a way to express themselves. Irish poet Michael O’Siadhail recited his work at our ’08 Encounter, and he referred to “the irreversible tragedy of our time,” creating an expression of Ground Zero language, to talk about suffering in a new way. Not just in anger, but a thoughtful discussion. Not just criticism, but useful, constructive language, so you and I can talk.

An image we use for generative creativity is a river, full of pollution. You can stand downstream and try to pull the garbage and pollutants from the water. Or, you can go all the way upstream, to the river’s source, and transform it. That is what generative creativity is about.

CT: Part of IAM’s mission statement refers to “the world that ought to be…”

MF: Yes, this is third language. It’s not new… really, none of the language is new, but the application of the language is what makes it useful as a third language. The Quakers have been talking about the world that ought to be for ages. It’s a way to deal with the brokenness, while recognizing the hope that is there.

Another word in the third language is “mediate.” Ironically, “media” as we commonly know it does not mediate, so we need to find art – media – that can mediate.

The Holy Spirit is the “medium” of God – the presence of God for us. Like the glue in my paintings… the medium that makes the pigments stick to the paper or canvas. Media typically uses sensationalism to sell – it uses the language of fear. But true mediation uses language of love. Standing between two different, opposing sides, as a bridge in the conflicting world.

In the world that ought to be, God’s image-bearers stand apart as reconcilers – peacemakers – “media” for a broken, divided culture.

Wresting With Evil and Hope

Makoto Fujimura — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 09:40:54 -0700

Christy Tennant continues her conversation with Makoto Fujimura about the third language…

CT: Tim Keller’s latest book, Reason For God, deals with addressing hard questions that all people grapple with. For example, he delves into the theology of suffering, and all the hard questions that arise simply because “good people” suffer tremendous evil, while “evil people” seem to get off scot free. How does the issue of suffering inform your art?

MF: Tim’s book is apologetical – it’s a resource aimed at defending our faith. But he’s been doing this since the ‘90’s – this book is not just because of “new atheism;” it’s not a response, as much as it is an addressing of genuine questions bubbling in culture for a long time.

Suffering is difficult topic to wrestle with.

CT: Was the issue of suffering a hindrance in your own journey to faith?

MF: No – the biggest hindrance for me was the hypocrisy I saw in the church. I have been spared from deep trauma, so that was not a hard issue for me. But I find that the theological answer for suffering is not really an answer at all. Rather, the Bible is about looking at evil square in the face and calling it “evil.”

CT: Do any of your paintings reflect this confrontation with evil?

MF: All of my work inevitably comes to the questions of wrestling with the question of evil and hope. Of the different ways to address the problem, I think the most effective approach is through the arts, because the question itself is not, fundamentally, a rational question. You need the world of imagination – the language of art – in order to be convincing in wrestling with it.

Lamentations is a path to understanding this issue. We in the West don’t know how to lament.

Theologian Calvin Seerveld posed this issue to my friend Michael Card after 9/11. He said, “see Michael, we don’t have songs to sing now.” So Michael began writing lamentations, which he became his album “Life Under the Sun” (2006).

In a sense, I’m doing the same thing with my art. I’m not necessarily creating “sad” paintings, but rather wrestling with this question: how can I create something, standing in the pit of Ground Zero, and still choose to look up? It’s painting through tears, and it’s a big part of my journey as an artist.

I see my art as part of the river of God, made up of God’s tears, which I have in common with a broken world. Rather than offering an idealized landscape for people to look to as an escape from reality, I paint in the ashes. Out of the ashes. From the ashes. And I’m not offering false hope, nor am I offering a nihilistic spiral of despair. Rather, I’m interpreting a longing that is deeply hopefully and real.

The Third Language

Makoto Fujimura — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 11:09:39 -0700

Christy Tennant serves as Director of Development and Public Relations for the International Arts Movement. She interviewed Mako about his thoughts on "The Third Language." First, some comments from Christy.

One of the things I love about working for International Arts Movement is that I get face time with our founder, Makoto Fujimura, regularly. What a treat it is for me to sit with this inspiring individual, discussing deep issues, wrestling with the things that are difficult to get my mind around, and gleaning insights about beauty and the gospel. In many ways, and I know I’m not the first to say this, Mako is teaching me “how to see” – art, the Bible, Jesus, and the world around me.

At IAM, we talk a lot about something Mako refers to as a “third language.” This refers to a way of talking about things – culturally, politically, sociologically, internationally – in a manner that seeks to unite, rather than divide. Jesus said, “Blessed are the peacemakers,” so our desire to be unifiers in a disparate world flows from looking at the world through the lens of the gospel. If it matters to Jesus that we work toward making peace with our fellow man, then it must matter to us too.

There are certain words, phrases, and terms that have become tainted by projected meanings or implications, causing these otherwise benign terms to suddenly have a deeply negative or divisive bent. Or, perhaps the words themselves are not benign, but rather beautiful, in their original, fundamental meaning, but because of associations, those words have become divisive.

An example, unfortunately, is the word “evangelical.” As I understand it, at its root, the word has to do with being a messenger of good news. Yet my generation has witnessed this word being redefined so that to the present secular world, it does not suggest “good news.” Rather, it is offensive. As both a noun and an adjective, the word “evangelical” evokes a politically conservative, hypocritical sub-culture within Christendom that, more often than not, bears little resemblance to the character traits Jesus described in the portion of Matthew commonly known as “the Beatitudes.”

Mako Fujimura has been thinking about this third language for years, so recently, while waiting for the glue to dry on one of the paintings he was working on, we sat in his office and talked about it.

MF: In February, I was sitting with Tim Keller at a wedding, and he asked me about how things were going with IAM. During the conversation, I talked a bit about the “third language,” and at the time he listened thoughtfully, nodding occasionally. In the last few weeks, I’ve read Tim’s new book (The Reason For God: Belief in an Age of Skepticism, Penguin Group, 2008), and I was delighted to find that from the very opening of the book, he is speaking predominantly in third language!

The way he talks about the gospel is the third language; it’s not mere conservative talk, but it’s also not liberal. It’s “radically comforting, and radically challenging” at the same time. It’s not “Christianeeze” words that have no context or meaning to non-Christians, but it is language that very much points to God’s intent to redeem all of creation and restore humanity to the original intent – bearers of God’s image.

The third language is buzzing everywhere – it’s just in the air. Look at Sen. Obama. He consistently uses language that aims to be unifying – language that doesn’t divide the political landscape.

So the third language unifies. And we need that today. Look at 9/11. This was a momentous historical bookmark that required either divisiveness or using the opportunity of chaos to get back to principles of what democracy can do.

Tim (Keller) is amazingly prophetic. He was doing this (using the third language) in the ‘90’s in his presentation of the gospel. He created a language that broke barriers of conservatism and liberalism – not necessarily intentionally, but he did it. He resisted using the “cultural war” language and, instead, offered a different way for Christians to look at cities and urban centers. Rather than being against the city, with all of its brokenness, he taught Christians to love the city. Or, as some would say, he taught us to be “in” it, but not “of” it – which is a profound biblical teaching. The third language is a way of exhorting Christians not to hate culture, nor necessarily to become “of” the culture, but rather to engage with the existing culture as it is now, where it is now, and change its framework by being in the midst of it. We should approach our place in the city as the Israelites did in Jeremiah 29 – planting ourselves in community, raising our children, seeing them wed, and equipping them, rather than cloistering them in a sub-culture that is all but irrelevant to the rest of the world. This is a goal of finding a third language.

Third language is very transformative and radical, and embodies the same conviction that I had when I moved my family from the suburbs of NJ to the heart of lower Manhattan. If I want to be a Christian in the arts, I need to be planted here. This is not idealism or mere passion – it’s theology.