banners

Banners in Worship

by

Banners are found in sanctuaries of large cathedrals and small rural churches. This article offers some means for evaluating the purpose and qualities of banner art.

Improving Liturgical Banners

The Song of Solomon sings, “His banner over me is love,” and other scriptural allusions remind us that flags, standards, and banners were an ancient art. (See for example Exod. 17:15, 16; Ps. 20:5; 60:4; Song of Sol. 2:4; 6:4, 6:10; Jer. 50:2.) Indeed, Constantine’s substitution of the cross for the Roman eagle on his army’s banners is legendary. But what of the contemporary use of banners in the church?

A recent survey of church art in our county revealed that the visual art most often being produced by both Protestant and Catholic churches is the banner. Many small rural parishes, county seat churches, and the congregations adjacent to college and university campuses are enthusiastically reviving interest in liturgical textile art.

It is also apparent, however, that there is a wide range of quality in the banners displayed. In fact, most banners, while showing our contemporary desire for variety in the worship environment, also demonstrate the churches’ need for thinking more carefully about the theological, liturgical, and artistic principles involved in banner art.

Many churches first approach banners as a project in Christian education undertaken by youth or by children in the church school. Undoubtedly a banner can be a useful tool for teaching the symbolism of important themes in biblical theology. Typical is the attempt to express a joyous response to God’s love since banners are often seen as celebratory implements like flags in a parade, a not unlikely comparison.

But a red felt banner with the slogan “Smile, God loves you” in variegated colors is not necessarily the most effective means of expressing the wonders of divine grace, however sincere the fledgling banner makers may be. The search for fresh ways of giving form to faith will surely avoid trite phrases and clichés.

Theological Criteria

How then can we encourage better banners? First, because there has been a long controversy over the proper use of images in the church, some theological criteria need to be established. Shall there be an attempt to portray Christ, or shall only symbols be used? Shall new visual metaphors be encouraged, or shall only familiar signs like the cross and dove appear? Shall banners be used only on special days of the church year, or should they become fixtures like the national flag?

Rather than being simply an aid to devotion, or a gimmick to “get the kids involved,” a good banner can be a significant offering of praise to God for the creation and redemption of life. The banner may express our gratitude for spiritual gifts or may put us in touch again with the anguish of suffering and sacrifice. A banner may affirm an important conviction, as when an Epiphany banner reminds us of the worldwide thrust of the gospel.

Designers of church banners, then, will have the same theological principles to guide them as church musicians, architects, or dramatists. They will know that the best banners grow out of the life of a community, just as flags emerge from the life of nations. If God speaks in history, then the artist needs to have studied the history and contemporary witness of the church which commissions the banner. All banner makers, whether amateur or professional, need to think carefully about the theology of the church and of the particular occasion(s) on which the banner will be displayed. Somehow the artist must discover links between the reality of God in the midst of a worshiping people and visual forms available in the textile art of banners.

Closely liked with a church’s theology is its liturgical practice, so some knowledge of liturgy is important for banner markers. Too often, banners made by children and youth have been hung for a Sunday service when the young persons had special responsibilities for the worship, but then the banners were left hanging for many months afterward, whether or not they were appropriate. This illustrates our need to recall that banners, unlike permanent windows, can have a temporary utility by highlighting a theme for a particular Sunday or season in the church year.

Enlisting Artists

Artistic excellence is also difficult to achieve with untrained eyes and hands. Composition, color design, and manipulation of different materials such as rough burlaps or satins—these are considerations not unlike musicians’ concern with rhythm, tonality, timbre, phrasing, and the like. While many churches, even rather small ones, give at least minimal recognition and pay for the skills of organists or choir directors, few churches carefully select a person with visual artistic skills to oversee and direct the production of banner work. Perhaps because of iconoclastic views of art, particularly in Protestant churches, we have not enlisted the help of people with art training.

Yet such artistic persons live in even the most isolated communities. Art teachers in the public schools, photographers, and persons in newspaper advertising have skills that could dramatically improve the banners produced even in church schools. Many artists probably would be quite flattered to be asked to design a challenging, interesting project such as four banners based on Old Testament readings for the Advent services.

What are some new possibilities for creating interesting banners? One answer is to have the banner take shape before the eyes of the congregation throughout a season. During the seven weeks of Lent, our congregation saw a single banner progress from a plain purple hanging to a fully imaged work on Easter Sunday. On each Sunday a different symbol of Christ was added, yet integrated so that a visual unity was achieved along the way as well as at the end. Thus a stump produced a shoot which became a vine that grew to cruciform shape and included white flowers for Easter. The ever-changing banner was a real interest-grabber, although we probably erred by trying to include too many images in one banner.

Where can banners be displayed? I have seen good banners in the entrance halls, over doors, and from balcony railings as well as from rods suspended from ceilings and walls of sanctuaries. Pulpit antependium hangings and Communion table paraments are essentially banners. Small banners representing the twelve apostles were hung from the aisle candle holders during one service. In a special service with clowns and mimes, a central banner was suddenly unfurled from its rolled-up position by a tug on a securing string which released the velcro binding

A procession of banners is, of course, a compelling visual experience, particularly when combined with stirring music by instruments and voice, for as Marion Ireland’s book Textile Art in the Church has shown us, “Religious flags and heraldic flags are by nature processional, and therefore mobile” (Marion Ireland, Textile Art in the Church [Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1966], 69). And how many churches have hung banners outside to line entrance walks or to flutter in the breeze from doorways or even steeple towers? That is often done by galleries, theaters, and such stodgy institutions as museums; why not by churches?

Design Principles

What, then, makes a good banner design for churches? Marion Ireland’s classic book discusses six basic principles: organic unity, theme, balance, rhythm, hierarchy, and evolution (Ireland, pp. 181–192). We can summarize her discussion by certain questions that a designer of banners needs to address:

  • Does each part contribute to the whole, or do unnecessary elements distract from the unity?
  • Does the banner have a dominant theme identified by some preeminent shape, color, line, or meaning?
  • Does the banner have a balance of color, line, and form within itself, and does it balance with other visual elements such as the windows of the sanctuary?
  • Does the rhythmic repetition of color, line, or form strengthen the design?
  • Is there a hierarchy of elements so that each part is appropriately related to the dominant theme?
  • Does the design progressively lead the eye toward the central visual meaning of the banner?

People respond to textures and shapes as well as to colors and movement. A crucifixion banner was constructed by a Hiram College student who used rough materials to match the mood of her subject: burlaps, wools, and leathers were joined in a semiabstract design which is more powerful because of the textures used. In a Thanksgiving banner by another artist, a shimmering blue satin was used for sky effects, this material contrasting vividly with the warm tones and textures of the earth shapes. Rich embroidery of bright colors, metallic threads, and rickrack set against a black background created a majestic design in another banner to emphasize the crown of life from Revelation with its background of suffering.

Shapes can be varied also from the usual vertical rectangle. Long triangles or inverted arches may echo stained windows, while narrow horizontal strips over doorways may provide significant entrances and exits for worshipers. The Newman Center at Kent University produced a huge circular banner on a frame, perhaps one of the most unusual forms to utilize, although one often seen in museums and galleries which display contemporary examples of textile art.

Certainly, designers should be encouraged, if they have the skills, to experiment with abstract shapes. The chaplain at Hiram College commissioned a creation banner, but no particular direction was given to the artist such as “reproduce Michelangelo’s fingers of God and Adam.” From the artist’s imagination emerged a swirl of blue and green forms, clearly evoking the organic forms of the earth and the waveforms of the ocean, while not literally reproducing either. Such a banner is harder to dismiss than a simple banner saying, “LET THERE BE LIGHT.” The eye and mind trace, again and again, the blues and greens as they interact in curvilinear loops. Meanings are multiple and metaphoric rather than literal.

This banner, then, reminds us that symbols can take different forms in the visual medium. Protestant churches have been word-oriented in liturgy and musical art, which perhaps explains why most banners being created today contain language. But words can be spoken or sung more effectively than portrayed in the visual arts unless particular attention is taken to make the very form of the letters and words artistically pleasing with excellent calligraphy. The banner normally should be more a window or a stage than a book: a focus for meditation, or an occasion for reflection on the drama of God’s presence in the world.

Makers of banners have the opportunity to renew a congregation’s sense of the beauty of God. They can provide a changing environment that matches the shifting moods of music or the moving themes of the church year. By their movement in procession and their display inside and outside of churches, banners can enliven the worshiper’s awareness of the dynamic quality of faith which is rooted in the living God.

Banners in Old and New Testament Worship

by

A banner is a standard or ensign that serves as a focal point for a community or a rallying point in warfare. Such symbols appear in the Bible chiefly in a military context. Analysis of the function of banners in the Bible, however, reveals their applicability to worship as well.

Banners in the Old Testament

Although banners and standards originated in Egypt and countries like Babylonia, Assyria, and Persia to the East, they also made their way into Palestine during Old Testament times. The children of Israel carried such standards on their march through the deserts to the Promised Land. Thereafter, standards or banners (depending on how one conceives of them) must have been quite common on the biblical scene because of the rather frequent use of such designations in the Scriptures.

The development of ensigns and standards no doubt took place in a military context. In the countries surrounding Israel, including Rome, standards were carried by the various divisions of the army or were attached to the masts of fighting ships. The early standards were not banners or flags made of fabric but figures, emblems, or images of animals and birds, or of the gods, made of wood or metal, brightly painted and fastened at the end of a long pole or staff.

The eagle was a common emblem on a banner in all countries. Some of the ensigns or standards were connected with the religion of the country and could be found at temples or other places of worship. The exact nature of the standards of Israel (Num. 2) is not known, but their presence at the camp causes scholars to believe that the wandering in the desert was understood as a military expedition. Later, standards and banners were used for other purposes, such as communication.

The purpose of standards has evoked debate among Bible scholars. Were they simply symbolic identification marks, for example, of a regiment of the army? Or is a deeper meaning and purpose to be seen? Such banners or standards certainly served as marks of identification, but they also represented the ideals and aspirations of the people bearing them and were used as a means of arousing the emotions and devotion to a cause, person, or nation. Images and inscriptions carried at the head of a group or mounted on an elevation, caused the people to “rally around the flag” in a unified effort. Throughout human history, loyalty to movements or causes has been encouraged through the use of powerful symbols, slogans, or songs that help to create a common identity for those in the movement. Banners and standards have served this purpose. Since worship is the declaration of loyalty to the Great King, one can readily see the application of banners in a worship setting.

In the Old Testament, three different Hebrew words are used to designate a standard or banner. Often they seem to be synonymous, but broader usage allows one to make certain distinctions between them. Degel is used for the standard or ensign of Israel encamped in the desert. “The Israelites are to set up their tents by divisions, each man in his own camp under his own standard” (Num. 1:52). “The Israelites are to camp around the Tent of Meeting some distance from it, each man under his standard [degel] with the banners [’ot] of his family” (Num. 2:2). The standard of Judah was on the east side of the camp, Reuben’s on the south, Ephraim’s on the west, and that of Dan on the north. “So the Israelites did everything the Lord commanded Moses; that is the way they encamped under their standards, and that is the way they set out, each with his clan and family” (Num. 2:34). It appears from this that degel designates a larger group or division of people organized around a central goal, and no doubt the “armies of Israel” marched in this fashion to the Promised Land. In Psalm 20:5, degel becomes a battle flag: “We will shout for joy when you are victorious and will lift up our banners in the name of our God.” In Song of Solomon 2:4, however, it is used in a beautiful figure of love: “He has taken me to the banquet hall, and his banner over me is love.”

The word nes is translated as “ensign” or “standard” in the English Bible, but it refers more specifically to a rallying point for the people. It marks the center of attraction on which people should pin their hopes. Generally, such a signal was raised on some special occasion, always on a high elevation and very conspicuous. After Amalek’s defeat, Moses called the altar of thanksgiving Yahveh nissi, “[Yahweh] is my banner” (Exod. 17:15). Messiah himself becomes such a standard and a rallying point of nations (Isa. 49:22). The banner was raised to assemble the soldiers of an army at the sound of trumpets (Isa. 13:2; 18:3). As in Isaiah 30:17, a banner was set up on a hill to communicate an urgent message. The banner tells the people to flee from the country to the cities for safety (Jer. 4:6–7). When the army left a banner on a hill unattended, it was a sign of defeat (Isa. 31:9). Under this type of standard may be included the fiery serpent of bronze raised on a pole, which was to be the rallying point of salvation for the people (Num. 21:8–9).

The third term, ’ot, is used less frequently than degel and nes and generally refers to lesser banners, such as signals and signs. In Numbers 2:2, as we have seen, it is issued to identify the smaller family within the entire division, the latter being described by degel. In Psalm 74:4 (rsv) it is used to speak of enemy forces setting up “their own signs [or banners] for signs.”

Roland de Vaux has questioned whether the terms translated “banner” or “standard” really refer to signs or flags. The word degel, he suggests, means a division of the army itself. The word nes refers to a pole or mast raised on a hill, as a signal to rally against the enemy (in a manner similar to Moses’ upraised arms in the battle against Amalek). In de Vaux’s view, these standards or ensigns were religious symbols, and the ark of the covenant played a similar role. The main argument for the use of banners and flags in Israelite warfare is that other ancient Near Eastern armies used them (Roland de Vaux, Ancient Israel: His Life and Institutions [London: Darton, Longman & Todd; New York: McGraw-Hill, 1961], pp. 226–227).

Banners in the New Testament

The New Testament does not speak of banners and ensigns in the same sense as the Old Testament. Luke designates the figurehead of the Alexandrian ship “Castor and Pollux,” with the term parasēmos, meaning “distinguished, marked,” and not with the expected word sēmeion, “sign” (Acts 28:11). A connecting link between the Testaments might be the Septuagint’s translation of ‘ot in Numbers 2:2 by the term sēmeion, which brings to mind the numerous occurrences of sēmeion in the New Testament in the general sense of “sign, mark, signal”: “Teacher, we want to see a miraculous sign from you” (Matt. 12:38); “at that time the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky” (Matt. 24:30); “This will be a sign to you” (Luke 2:12); “no sign shall be given to it but the sign of Jonah” (Luke 11:29 NASB). It is significant that the Septuagint seems to support de Vaux’s view; in Numbers 2:2, degel is translated by the word tagma, which in Greek literature is generally a military term meaning a detachment or division of soldiers.

The most significant occurrence of a banner in Scripture, however, is found in the portrayal of the triumphant Christ in the Revelation to John. Here, as the Word of God, Christ appears at the head of the armies of heaven, executing the judgments of the Almighty (Rev. 19:14–15). “On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written: king of kings and lord of lords” (Rev. 19:16). No banner is mentioned, but the robe itself, evoking the image of a flowing, richly-colored royal mantle, performs the function of a banner with its proclamation of Jesus’ dominion over all authorities. The victorious church, the company of those who have “overcome” the pressures of a hostile culture and false religious system, rallies to its banner and to its Lord. The imagery of this entire passage is reminiscent of Psalm 149, which speaks of those who take “the high praises of God … in their mouth, and a two-edged sword in their hand, to execute vengeance on the nations, … to execute on them the judgment written” (Ps. 149:6–7, 9 NASB).

Thus the robe of the King of kings forms the link between the banners or standards of warfare mentioned elsewhere in Scripture and the banner as associated with worship. Unlike the poles or ensigns of military usage, this garment is a piece of fabric similar to the flags or banners we now associate with the pageantry of Christian celebration. Worship—the ascription of dominion to Christ—and warfare—the defeat of his enemies—here become one and the same. It is this understanding of worship as spiritual warfare that gives banners their place and value in the context of worship.