What is the screen like? How do we think about a projection screen in worship? What does it do? What models do we use to filter our thinking? Is it a song book? Movie theater? What is it like?
In the early days of movies, many directors simply put the camera in front of a stage. The camera didn't move around, but sat like an audience member at the theater watching play. All the action happened in one place in front of one camera that didn't move, turn, or zoom. It was Theater in Pictures. It took some time before people started moving the camera into the action itself, or editing different shots together.
The same thing happened with television. Since radio was the dominant entertainment medium of the time, many early TV shows were simply photographed radio shows. From variety programs to crime dramas, it was, as Linda Ellerbee called it, "Radio with pictures." It took a few years before new patterns emerged, like Lucille Ball's 3-camera situation comedy.
I think we're in the same position with video screens in worship. We still largely think of the screen as something else. We still haven't figured out what worship media looks like as its own medium. In many ways, we're still discovering what the screen is in worship because it is like many things but nothing in particular.
I also think screens have been controversial in worship because we "project" (pun intended) other things onto it. No one wants to "watch TV" in church or have their worship turn into Hollywood entertainment. In short, part of the problem is that the screen does not naturally have a strong model that's already part of worship.
So, what is the screen like? If it's a big song book, then we'll project just lyrics and maybe music. If it's a bulletin, we'll project announcements, or maybe the order of worship and responsive readings. If it's television, we'll show video programs that tell stories. If it's a movie theater, we'll make the screen the center of attention and expect to be entertained. We might even show ads and promotionals before the service starts to take advantage of the captive audience and to keep them entertained while their just waiting for the main event. If it's a business presentation, then we'll emphasize outlines & graphs, teaching & motivating people about our "product," whatever that might be.
Some of these models might offer some possibilities, but none are a direct fit. None of these models both take full advantage of the capabilities of the medium AND reflect the purposes of worship.
One helpful approach to considering the role of visual media in worship is to look at what visuals we already use in worship. Digital screens might be new, but visuals certainly aren't.
One of the most fundamental visuals in worship is Architecture of the worship space. Whether your sanctuary is ornate or plain, it visually says something about what's important in worship. The very room focuses our attention in some way. If the screen is an architectural element, it should function in conjunction with the room, not compete with it. Maybe that means placing the screen in as unobtrusive-yet-visible position as possible. To me, the perfect screen disappears when not in use, not so much by retracting but by blending into the background. Sadly, most screens are framed by a big black television-shaped rectangle that calls for attention even when blank. Maybe blending with the background means using a default color palette for graphics that matches the room. When the screen should not be the focus of attention, it could display a plain, simple image that reflects the style of the room rather than leaving a stark white rectangle on the wall.
Another fundamental visual element in worship is Liturgical Furniture. Like architecture, the furniture declares something about what we value in worship. The placement and arrangement of the pulpit, baptismal font, communion table, and cross, for example, is not just a matter of utility, but give shape and definition to what the tasks of worship are all about. Such things help distinguish worship spaces from concert halls or an auditorium.
The screen is often a de facto piece of liturgical furniture, serving as a focal point for leading worship. And as with architecture, the goal is to avoid having the screen compete with other elements. In many churches, for example, the most functional place for the screen is centered on the front wall, often right over a cross. Since Christ's cross crystallizes the very reason we worship, covering it is not an insignificant problem, but neither is it insurmountable. If the cross must be covered, it should reappear somewhere else. Some churches project an image of the cross on the screen in place of the one behind the screen, but that has always struck me as an insubstantial representation. I think a better option might be a free-standing cross to replace the one on the wall. That removes the competition for wall space and also moves the cross into the action.
In any case, the way we think about the role and interaction of both architecture and traditional liturgical furniture can inform us about the role of the screen and how it interacts with the worship space.
A more straight-forward example of traditional visuals in worship is stained glass. If the screen is like stained glass, we'll project simple symbols or bible stories. These are intended to remind us of the symbols and stories that shape us as God's people. The thing about Stained Glass is that it is static. The same images hang in the walls for years, effectively becoming part of the architecture. The positive side is the consistency. Such images are a "cloud of witnesses" that remind us constantly of who we are. Maybe the screen could emulate this consistency by projecting such images repeatedly. Maybe the screen could expand these images somewhat by telling one story through a series of images rather than in just one. Maybe the screen could focus our attention on particular symbols or stories depending on the time of year or special occasion. The key here is seeing the role of visuals as shaping the worship experience through enduring symbols that shape our identity.
A more contemporary variation on worship visuals are Banners. Like Stained Glass, these fabric or printed banners portray symbols and images from Christian history in order to give thematic shape to worship. Being more flexible than glass, they change frequently, often using seasonal colors and symbols for special occasions, such as baptism, Advent, or Lent. Of all the visual elements listed so far, I think the screen is most like banners, but even more flexible. As a thought experiment, imagine someone who comes out with a pole, taking down one banner and hanging another throughout the service. Instead of simply declaring with one banner "it's Christmas time," a series of banners could be used to tell the Christmas story. Seeing the screen as versatile and powerful banner that sets the tone and tells the story gets us a long way to appreciating the power of the screen for leading worship in a way that complements all the other aspects of the environment.
Yet there's one more traditional element in worship that can guide our thinking about the screen. If the screen functions visually like a banner on steroids, it behaves rather like a musical instrument. In fact, a Pipe Organ might be the best corollary for how a screen is used in worship. Like the screen, a Pipe Organ too is a big lump of expensive technology. It too needs to be installed in a worship space in a way that complements the surrounding architecture. It too is used primarily to lead worship, particularly congregational actions. It too requires expertise to operate and maintain. It too is operated from a keyboard from a corner of the room. It too requires not just technical know-how, but also aesthetic talent, familiarity with the body of historical religious artistic works, and probably some training in liturgy and theology. Just as a piano tuner is not necessarily the best person to manage a full music ministry, a "computer geek" is not necessarily the best person to run a media ministry. The same sorts of questions and thinking that go into choosing music for worship should be used to guide a visual ministry.
In short, the screen is like a lot of things, both secular and religious. But maybe the best way to think about the screen is that it applies the power and preparation of a musical instrument to the visual role of an infinitely flexible banner.
Comments