The Use of Images in Worship

One of the areas that we are exploring in The River is the use of images within worship. I am interested in this area of using images and since I'm usually behind the controls at The River I do feel responsible for what we do, however, I would like to point out that these are my opinions only and not necessarily those of the church - also I'm open for discussion on these matters.

There are three questions people frequently ask:

1- Do you have permission to use those images?

2- Do you have to use all those images, they are so distracting?

3- Isn't there a danger of worshiping the images in contradiction to Biblical teaching?

Do you have permission to use those images?

Since The River began (Jan 2001) as far as possible we have only used images that we have taken ourselves or that we know are copyright free (or to be more accurate - uncontrolled). Obviously by doing this we are building up a large collection of images that we will shortly be making available for anyone to use in worship.

Some sources for uncontrolled images:

• The Scriptorium

Images are distracting?

No they aren't!

Ok so for a more rounded reply I should say that this is a matter of opinion and since The River is "exploration of worship using various styles and media" we sometimes use images as part of this. However they should not become the focus (see next section) and our aim is that the images may enhance worship or simply form a back drop to the event. In this context if they help fine if they don't fine, however if you find that they positively distract then that is a bit more tricky.

People are distracted by all sorts of things, by those around them, by flowers, noise outside, banners, etc. Some of these things are out with anyone's control and some of these things have been put there to help enhance worship (e.g. banners). Really all that we can say is that if you find the images unhelpful is sorry and try closing your eyes to block them out and focus on God.

Worshiping images?

Most of our images fall into the categories of Abstract, Nature, Thought Provoking or Divine (for want of a better term). To define what I mean by these terms, Abstract images may be used simply to have some kind of interesting but non-intrusive visuals going on in the background. Nature is often a good reminder of what God has done in creation "The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands." Psalm 19. Thought Provoking images of poverty, pollution, crime, etc can stir us to cry out for the world. It is only when we get to the topic of what I have called Devine that problems of images of Christ come up.

The argument for not using images runs something like...

"Be very careful that the images aren't focused on - especially the depictions of Jesus himself - don't want to be breaking God's commandment of images of him."

"Images are fine in their place but images are dangerous when we become the focus of our worship, when we need images to come into the presence of God"

Verses quoted:

Exodus20:4-6 "You shall not make for yourself an idol in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing love to a thousand [generations] of those who love me and keep my commandments."

Leviticus 26:1 "Do not make idols or set up an image or a sacred stone for yourselves, and do not place a carved stone in your land to bow down before it. I am the LORD your God."

Romans 1:22-23 "Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles."

The point here seems to be that the images are dangerous because they will end up being the focus of worship. Our aim, when using images within The River is that the images help people worship, to enhance or enable worship not that the images become the focus of worship. I would be interested to hear if people think we get the balance right.

There is also an argument that any image we try to make of God actually detracts from our worship as no image can do Him justice and we just end up with an impoverished view of God. Again, I find myself agreeing with this statement but still finding images helpful in some contexts.

The one event so far where we have used a large number of images of Christ was the Good Friday service (13 April 2001) - we used everything from classical paintings to close-up photos of a nail being driven into a wrist. For that event there was a choice of using one set of images depicting the crucifixion or using many different depictions of it. One of the reasons I wanted to use lots was so that we didn't focus on someone who happened to be depicting Christ on the cross - in stead we have lots of very different looking "christs". Hopefully this avoided people gazing into the eyes of some actor in a photograph but enabled them to see each image as a representation of the Passion of Christ.

There is also an argument that images have always been part of our worship - take icons, stained glass, the cross, eagle lecterns, flowers, banners, etc.. So now we are using digital stills, video, etc. this is simply a development of recent technology not a change in theology or practice. However, I am aware that some Christian traditions would have difficulty with some or all of the things mentioned above.

I'm am not a scholar in this area. I am open to discussion and keen to learn from others what they find useful and what they object to. Please feel free to get in touch... - Graham

Again I would like to point out that this page is my personal views as I feel some responsibility for the images used at The River.

What others say: Using Images in Worship by Jonny Baker from YFC London & Grace