A religious revival in a city of secular art

Since the Enlightenment, "museums promoted the idea that aesthetic contemplation is a kind of substitute for religious spirituality," says Robert Nelson, professor of art history at the University of Chicago. The mission of museums was to uplift by introducing the masses to art. "The notion was, there was something almost 'salvational' about being exposed to art."

Modernism's rebellion against authority included disparaging traditional religion. Now the pendulum is swinging back. "We've gone through the period of separating art from religion," Professor Plate says. "Now we're thinking, 'Wait, we're missing something.' "

Hence, the new model offered by the Museum of Biblical Art. "We have this odd entity lodged in the heart of secular New York City, which gives us not just an aesthetic approach but also a contextual approach," Girardot says.

To David Morgan, professor of Christianity and the arts at Valparaiso University in Indiana, "museums in the American cultural landscape have a power and opportunity they never historically had. The museum was a place of privilege to go to get high culture and escape low culture. The value of this museum is that it brings religion into a neutral cultural space where people of faith or of no faith can talk about religion in a civil way."

Mr. Nelson sees the museum's foray into uncharted territory as important. He observes that museums are increasingly taking on difficult, emotionally fraught subjects. If a museum wants to be engaged with the world, it has to tackle controversial issues.

But alarm bells are ringing. "There's still a lot of worry in the art world. If art is about faith, it's scary," says Erika Doss, director of American studies and professor of art history at the University of Colorado, Boulder.

If the museum focuses on a particular religion, that could cause problems. Like most museums, it relies on public funding and has tax-exempt status.

The museum is committed to a nonsectarian approach, according to Ena Heller, its executive director. But some perceive potential dangers.

"It could foster an exclusivist notion that we have privileged access to the real truth," Girardot warns. By focusing on the Bible, it "could play into the worst instincts of certain forms of Christianity." He adds, "We live in an extremely polarized climate. Folks in positions of political power believe there's only one way. If we've learned anything, it's that separation of church and state is truly healthy for our American experiment."

Girardot advocates casting the museum's net wider to encompass more cross-cultural, comparative studies, including art inspired by scriptures from other faiths.

Another approach would be to look at biblical art not as dogma but as inspirational roots for all humankind. "If museums are only repositories to enshrine objects, they're mausoleums," says Ms. Hoffberger. "Looking at the source of inspiration is the most valid path."

Professor Morgan, an authority on the intersection of religion and art, is convinced the museum is not interested in forcing religion on visitors and will not be co-opted by the religious right. "But it's not saying religion is insignificant," he adds. "They're committed to the prospect of making religious images as something New Yorkers feel safe taking seriously. That's the uniqueness and the promise of this institution."

Page: 1 | 2