Catholic Thought discussion

Part 3, Chapter 1
The Question of Images

What is the role of images in Christian worship? We see that images were by no means exclusively denied in the Old Testament, but they are certainly limited. At some point Judaism embraced a sort of iconoclasm but with the coming of Christ, “the God who no longer completely conceals himself but now shows himself in the form of the Son. This transformation of the narrative of the Ark of the Covenant into an image of the Resurrection reveals the very heart of the development from Old Testament to New.”

With Christ at the center of history, all sacred images then are in some sense images of the resurrection. “Thus the images of the early church have a thoroughly sacramental significance.” These scacred images are intended to “draw us onto an inner path, the eastward path, toward the Christ who is to return. Its dynamism is identical with the dynamism of the liturgy as a whole.”

Art at its finest, such as Baroque art, is supposed to “insert us into the liturgy of heaven.”

Ratzinger proposes five principles of art properly ordered to divine worship.

1. The complete absence of images is incompatible with faith in the Incarnation of God.
2. Sacred art finds its subjects in the images of salvation history, beginning with creation and continuing all the way from the first day to the eighth day, the day of the resurrection and Second Coming, in which the line of human history will come full circle.
3. The images of the history of God in relation to man do not merely illustrate the succession of past events but display the inner unity of God’s action. In this way they have a reference to the sacraments, above all, to Baptism and the Eucharist, and, in pointing to the sacraments, they are contained within them.
4. The image of Christ and the images of the saints are not photographs. Their whole point is to lead us beyond what can be apprehended at the merely material level, to awaken new senses in us, and to teach us a new kind of seeing, which perceives the Invisible in the visible.
5. The Church in the West does not need to disown the specific path she has followed since about the thirteenth century. But she must achieve a real reception of the Seventh Ecumenical Council, Nicaea II, which affirmed the fundamental importance and theological status of the image in the Church.

Finally his conclusion: “There cannot be completely free expression in sacred art. Forms of art that deny the logos of things and imprison man within what appears to the senses are incompatible with the Church’s understanding of the image. No sacred art can come from an isolated subjectivity.”

I really liked this chapter. One of the little comments he made that stood out to me about sacred art was when he called it an Alleluia in visual form.

Michelle wrote: "I really liked this chapter. One of the little comments he made that stood out to me about sacred art was when he called it an Alleluia in visual form."

I did too Michelle. I’ll try to highlight a quote or two that I found engaging.

The summaries both you and Kersten come up with are awesome! Those must take forever to compose :)

Ratzinger's attitude about art reminds me of the Elizabeth Lev book we read.

Michelle wrote: "The summaries both you and Kersten come up with are awesome! Those must take forever to compose :)"

Oh thank you. I don't know how Kerstin does it, but as I read I highlight and then when I'm done with that section and ready to post a summary, I go back and see which highlights are the most critical and try to portray that in the summary. I guess that summary yesterday must of taken me a half hour to 45 minutes. This book is harder than others.

Celia wrote: "Ratzinger's attitude about art reminds me of the Elizabeth Lev book we read."

Yes, especially when he mentioned Baroque art. That was post reformation art. He seemed to praise Baroque over Renaissance, which I would disagree. But he probably has more theological reasons than I do.

I thought this passage fascinating. It’s a very long paragraph but insightful into Judaism’s view of art and the evolution into Christianity.

The prohibition of images in Islam and in Judaism since about the third or fourth century A.D. has been interpreted in a radical way, so that only non-figurative, geometrical designs are permitted in the ornamentation of the sanctuary. However, in the Judaism at the time of Jesus and well into the third century, a much more generous interpretation of the image-question developed. Paradoxically, in the images of salvation we see exactly the same continuity between synagogue and church that we have already noticed in our discussion of liturgical space. As a result of archaeological discoveries, we now know that the ancient synagogues were richly decorated with representations of scenes from the Bible. They were by no means regarded as mere images of past events, as a kind of pictorial history lesson, but as a narrative (haggadah), which, while calling something to mind, makes it present. On liturgical feasts the deeds of God in the past are made present. The feasts are a participation in God’s action in time, and the images themselves, as remembrance in visible form, are involved in the liturgical re-presentation. The Christian images, as we find them in the catacombs, simply take up and develop the canon of images already established by the synagogue, while giving it a new modality of presence. The individual events are now ordered toward the Christian sacraments and to Christ himself. Noah’s ark and the crossing of the Red Sea now point to Baptism. The sacrifice of Isaac and the meal of the three angels with Abraham speak of Christ’s Sacrifice and the Eucharist. Shining through the rescue of the three young men from the fiery furnace and of Daniel from the lions’ den we see Christ’s Resurrection and our own. Still more than in the synagogue, the point of the images is not to tell a story about something in the past, but to incorporate the events of history into the sacrament. In past history Christ with his sacraments is on his way through the ages. We are taken into the events. The events themselves transcend the passing of time and become present in our midst through the sacramental action of the Church.

In just one paragraph, Ratzinger pulls the origins, the history, and theological significance so clearly. He is just brilliant.

Manny wrote: "Michelle wrote: "The summaries both you and Kersten come up with are awesome! Those must take forever to compose :)"

Oh thank you. I don't know how Kerstin does it, but as I read I highlight and t..."

LOL! I do it the same way :-) And the time involved is similar. And yes, this book is a bit harder. Ratzinger flows effortless from one thought to another, which is great for reading, but to summarize you have to put the dividing lines somewhere.

Manny wrote: "Yes, especially when he mentioned Baroque art. That was post reformation art. He seemed to praise Baroque over Renaissance, which I would disagree. But he probably has more theological reasons than I do. "

And Ratzinger grew up in southern Germany, where Baroque is the norm from little country churches to big basilicas. In German we call the region in Bavaria where he is from the "Herrgottswinkel", the "Corner of God". I prefer Baroque over Renaissance too. They are both splendid, don't get me wrong. For me Baroque with its joyful exuberance is hard to top. At the same time when these churches were built there was also a great devotion to the suffering Jesus being scourged. Remember, the Baroque period was from 1600 - 1750, and this was also the time of the Thirty Years War (1618-1648) where the populace suffered greatly. In many of these churches you have statues or paintings of the suffering Jesus chained to a pillar wearing a crown of thorns.