art – Rev. Tim Ehrhardt

*King Solomon’s throne room, by Edward Poynter, 1890*

Solomon’s palace took 13 years to build.

Forest Hall was the largest room in the palace. It was 44 meters long, 22 meters wide, and 13.5 meters high, and was lined with cedar from Lebanon. It had 4 rows of cedar pillars, 15 in a row, and they held up 45 cedar beams. The ceiling was covered with cedar. Three rows of windows on each side faced each other, and there were three doors on each side near the front of the hall.

Pillar Hall was 22 meters long and 13.5 meters wide. A covered porch supported by pillars went all the way across the front of the hall.

Solomon’s throne was in Justice Hall, where he judged cases. This hall was completely lined with cedar.

The section of the palace where Solomon lived was behind Justice Hall and looked exactly like it. He had a similar place built for his wife, the daughter of the king of Egypt.

From the foundation all the way to the top, these buildings and the courtyard were made out of the best stones carefully cut to size, then smoothed on every side with saws. The foundation stones were huge, good stones—some of them four and a half meters long and others three and a half meters long. The cedar beams and other stones that had been cut to size were on top of these foundation stones. The walls around the palace courtyard were made out of three layers of cut stones with one layer of cedar beams, just like the front porch and the inner courtyard of the temple. (Contemporary English Version)

Having secured the throne after his father’s death, King Solomon set himself to the task of following his father David’s ardent desire to build a temple for the Lord. The work took seven years to complete. (1 Kings 5-6)

Then, Solomon turned to building a royal palace with a complex of buildings (or halls). It seems these had the purpose of being both residences and government structures. This architectural achievement took nearly twice as long as constructing the temple of God.

Some commentators are rather hard on Solomon about this fact of taking so much time to build himself a palace. They interpret him as being distracted, almost self-absorbed – that somehow his heart was more into his own buildings than God’s temple.

I don’t really buy into that line of thinking. It seems to me this reads more into the text than what’s there. They could be right. However, it appears such commentary does an anachronistic reading of the text. Taking a standpoint of Solomon’s later devotion to his many wives, and hence their many other gods, a lack of commitment is then superimposed upon the construction projects. It’s as if Solomon finished the temple stuff in order to get his real architectural passions.

I think there’s a more plausible explanation for King Solomon’s dedication to erecting buildings in addition to the temple. The editor of 1 Kings includes the detail and dedication that went into the temple.

Let’s keep in mind that King David had been stockpiling and preparing materials, and planning for the temple, well before he died. Just because the Lord told David that he would not be the one to build it, that Solomon would, did not mean that David kept his thoughts and his hands off of getting as much ready as he could for his son.

What’s more, once Solomon put together such a marvelous and intricate building as the temple, the experience gave him a desire to work on other projects, as well. Solomon had an expansive vision of his kingdom.

As the wisest person on earth, he put his money where his mouth was, by constructing beautiful structures given to justice, and reflecting the abundance of a goodness and justice which comes through living by God’s covenant code.

Did Solomon go overboard? Yes, and no. It depends on the project, and with whom you talk to. The issue of Solomon’s building projects, as I would frame it, has much more to do with demonstrating a particular theology.

The theology I believe Solomon was trying to reflect was that Israel serves a God who is given to beauty, justice, and abundance. And those qualities are also seen in the New Testament. I think of the story when Mary came to Jesus with her expensive and beautiful perfume:

Mary took a very expensive bottle of perfume and poured it on Jesus’ feet. She wiped them with her hair, and the sweet smell of the perfume filled the house.

A disciple named Judas Iscariot was there. He was the one who was going to betray Jesus, and he asked, “Why wasn’t this perfume sold for 300 silver coins and the money given to the poor?” Judas did not really care about the poor. He asked this because he carried the moneybag and sometimes would steal from it.

Jesus replied, “Leave her alone! She has kept this perfume for the day of my burial. You will always have the poor with you, but you won’t always have me.” (John 12:3-7, CEV)

I would argue that Judas Iscariot was the one distracted – and not Mary. Thus, returning to the story of Solomon’s building the palace complex, I would also argue that perhaps some of the commentators, with an eerily familiar criticism, are actually the ones distracted – and not Solomon.

Anyway, I like my positive reading of today’s Old Testament lesson, rather than the others’ negative reading. What about you?…

O heavenly God, who has filled the world with beauty: Open my eyes to see what is beautiful, to behold your gracious hand in all your works. Open my mind to know what is true. Open my heart to love what is good. May I learn to serve you with gladness, justice, and righteousness. Amen.

Cornelia Parker’s “Edge of England” in the Milwaukee Art Museum

Art, as I would define it, is the creation of something beautiful and/or meaningful through imagination and skill. This definition is broad enough to encompass everyone as an artist. Each person mirrors the Divine Artist in some unique or special way through the ways in which they imaginatively and skillfully live their lives. Where there is no art, there is no hope. Where art exists, there are possibility and life. None of us could have made it this far in the process of our jobs, our families, let alone in life, without making great art. Art is how we make sense of things and form our views of the world. Art is both subject and object – being both formed and forming us. Life cannot exist without art because we as people are both created and creative in all we think, feel, and do.

I say all this mostly because recently being at my local art museum helped me to remember how vital it is to be an artist, and that there is no other artist like me (or you). The museum enabled me to reconnect with the vast imagination within, as I was reminded how large the world of Tim is and how much that inner world has always sought to make beautiful and meaningful connections with others – to make a difference.

I was also reminded of the ways in which art impacts us. What is beauty to one is disgust in another; and, what is repulsive to one is awe in the other – and everything in between. Yet, in every work of art we are likely to find both charm and ugliness. That reminder helps me to reflect on a recent patient visit I had in the hospital. His story was not too pleasant to me. I was repulsed by many of the patient’s decisions throughout his life. Yet, in the moment, I chose to embrace the whole painting in front of me – which included the beauty and awe of his desire for connection, forgiveness, and reconciliation. At the time, I wasn’t sure I was doing much of anything – my own art seemed rather imperfect and unseemly. When the visit came to an ending, the patient remarked, “Thank you for reminding me of my God and bringing me closer to him.” Into the mix all along was the Divine Artist, creating something gracious between us. If this was to be depicted in an actual art object, that object would include both strange beauty and repugnant representation. The question is: Will the eye of the beholder see only one, or see both? The answer to that question is the answer to whether we are willing and able to see the full scope of any person in front of us. And, like an art object, we could likely sit for hours staring and observing, finding new awareness and insights, and, thus, new meaning – in both of us.

A teaching I appreciate from my Orthodox Christian friends is that every person is a “living icon,” that is, everyone is a hand-crafted image of Christ. Even more than that, everyone is still being formed by God into a unique and special icon. In this view of Christianity, a person’s highest calling is to simply cooperate with the Divine Artist – God is the Potter and I am the clay. I would describe our part as being “actively passive.” We neither act as we see fit and just trust God will direct us, nor do we sit and simply wait for God to do something. Rather we are actively passive. An artist waits for inspiration – and in the meantime he/she intentionally pokes around for ways to be inspired. And when the inspiration comes, the work ensues – with a rhythm of action coupled with taking time to step back and see the big picture before engaging again.

What I am suggesting is that God has divine actions and divine reflections in a rhythm of formation and transformation of all human creatures. God has both given us everything we need for life and godliness in this present age and is continuously weaving life-giving grace into the fabric of our everyday lives. We are icons, and we are being crafted into icons. To put it another way, we are human beings and are continuously being made into humans. The care we receive is the care we give.