“But what does it matter? Only that in every way, whether in dishonesty or in truth, Messiah is being proclaimed—and in this I rejoice!” [Php 1:18]
Is that a just thought and sentiment for such depiction of “the truth” and religious devotion or is there something else we ought to discern regarding His judgements of such a display?
“Messiah is being proclaimed”. BUT, is He the one being proclaimed, here? Where are all the angels looking? How big and loving does Mary look? How small and (relatively unproclaimed) does Messiah look? Sin is not so much whether or not we are doing or thinking something: sin is whether or not we are doing or thinking it by placing our focus on whatever OVER our focus on Him.
This art portrays rather blatant mother-child pagan worship, which doesn’t trip our triggers unless, of course, we came from those pagan roots. We, in our tradition, naturally bring the preeminence of Messiah to whatever we are looking at, because that is our paradigm, but, as I have noticed Skip loves to ask: the question here could well be, what would it have meant to the original audience?
As I cast this for my husband and me to look at, the thought (coming from my Catholic upbringing) was that SHE was being exalted. The thought wasn’t finished when my husband stated the same thing out loud. As we examined the rest of the frieze (is that the right term, Skip?), “all the false theology…”
Thank you, Laurita, for your thoughts… what did it mean to the original audience… Skip, what’s the dating of this art?
Leslee, is it right that in Catholic teaching Christ only gets His sinless nature because MARY bestows it upon Him? In that case, He would always be subordinate to her.
About 1700. And you’re right, Mary plays the major role. There’s a theological reason for this that comes from the Church’s formulation of the dual-nature of Christ (circa 480 AD). I’ll be writing about it in the near future.
“But what does it matter? Only that in every way, whether in dishonesty or in truth, Messiah is being proclaimed—and in this I rejoice!” [Php 1:18]
Is that a just thought and sentiment for such depiction of “the truth” and religious devotion or is there something else we ought to discern regarding His judgements of such a display?
“Messiah is being proclaimed”. BUT, is He the one being proclaimed, here? Where are all the angels looking? How big and loving does Mary look? How small and (relatively unproclaimed) does Messiah look? Sin is not so much whether or not we are doing or thinking something: sin is whether or not we are doing or thinking it by placing our focus on whatever OVER our focus on Him.
This art portrays rather blatant mother-child pagan worship, which doesn’t trip our triggers unless, of course, we came from those pagan roots. We, in our tradition, naturally bring the preeminence of Messiah to whatever we are looking at, because that is our paradigm, but, as I have noticed Skip loves to ask: the question here could well be, what would it have meant to the original audience?
As I cast this for my husband and me to look at, the thought (coming from my Catholic upbringing) was that SHE was being exalted. The thought wasn’t finished when my husband stated the same thing out loud. As we examined the rest of the frieze (is that the right term, Skip?), “all the false theology…”
Thank you, Laurita, for your thoughts… what did it mean to the original audience… Skip, what’s the dating of this art?
Leslee, is it right that in Catholic teaching Christ only gets His sinless nature because MARY bestows it upon Him? In that case, He would always be subordinate to her.
About 1700. And you’re right, Mary plays the major role. There’s a theological reason for this that comes from the Church’s formulation of the dual-nature of Christ (circa 480 AD). I’ll be writing about it in the near future.