Welcome. Our first little assignment is to read the prologue IX-XVII to the paragraph that starts with "Part 1 of this book". This book is deep and long and it is best to take it very slow. Just read these few pages and reflect on the following or anything else you want to share.
The great AHA moment for me in this early section of the prologue is Brock and Parker's revelation that, when they looked for crucifixion references in early Christian churches, they found none! Instead they found a risen Christ..."the child of baptism, the healer of the sick, the teacher of his friends, and the one who defeated death and transfigured the world with the Spirit of life."
Wow. I really resonated with the concept that focusing on a martyring Jesus, kept people in a state of guilt and perpetual "unworthiness." "It uses Jesus's death as the supreme model of self-sacrificing love and encourages those who want to follow him to love in the same way.... (placing) victims of violence in harm's way and absolves perpetrators of their responsibility for unethical behavior."
Is this reading too much into the Passion Story? I don't know. Having been raise in a liberal faith setting, I was always grossed out by agonizing images of a tortured body on the cross. How does that kind of adulation affect one's life of faith, I wonder?
I found it quite freeing to think about Jesus not on the cross....the agony of his death was always troublesome....I also like the face that we meet women right away - in the prologue....
Wow, there were some many little sentences that caught me. The first words , that it took Jesus 1000 years to die. This tradition of following Jesus is very old. Think about it was are following someone who has been followed for over 2000 years. I am just taken with this. Its hard for me to remember what Abe Lincoln said that was admirable. Just the shear weight of the enormous amount of time, and the passing of great cultures.
The cross and the dead body of Jesus is such a central image for Christianity. I think we presume that it always was such. But maybe not? I think about that . I think that people take what they need from the past, and make it useful for their present.
What do folks think about the use of Art as a way to understand the beliefs of the people?
I think Parker and Brock think the cross is a very important symbol, but later in the book they discuss how, in early Christianity, the cross was primarily a symbol of defiance of power - Roman power, specifically. Kind of saying, "Okay, you want to crucify our sacred leader? Then we embrace his martyrdom on your device of torture." Flaunting the cross was a method of thumbing their nose at authority, I guess. But in churches, Jesus is seen in Paradise, not on the cross.
I am excited about the notion of finding out what the common folk believed and how they lived, by their liturgy and sacred elements and art. In the second part of the prologue , the authors speak of learning theology from the theologians. I am very interested in learning the experience of this early people of God from their art, temples/churches and style of worship and life. Lets finish the prologue and comment on CHapter 1.
Lets also invite folks again. Finally I think that there should be a way to see our posts not just by looking in the archive.
I have it set so that up to 10 postings are immediately visible on the opening page of the blog. Simply click on "comments" to see the comments on a particular topic. When you want to start a new topic, like a new chapter discussion, please start a new post. That way we can keep our discussion organized. Thanks!
So excited about this project! I'm a new (rejoining) member of Hope and a longtime student of ancient and medieval history. I personally seeing how religions have changed and grown dramatically over the centuries--though we humans seem to have trouble accepting that they do! So this topic excited me, though the theological territory is very new for me.
The Christian practice & beliefs they mention here in the first thousand years actually feels familiar to me from my studies; it is VERY different from later Christianity. But there are depictions of Jesus on the cross in the time period they're talking about--it's just that Jesus looks happy and is clearly not in pain.
The intense emphasis on Jesus's death and suffering on the Cross, etc., is a direct result of the later emphasis on Jesus's humanity (the two come together) and comes with the rise of what's called "affective piety" in the 12th century. I have mixed feelings about this movement, which I find very powerful spiritually and honest about the human experience of suffering.
Affective piety (still alive and well today! anybody ever seen "Jesus Christ Superstar"?) has generated some truly powerful art and music, and historically has been deeply important to women, allowing them more ways to actively engage with their faith. But it is also strongly associated with the rise of anti-Semitism (the "Jews killed Jesus" concept) & made Easter a dangerous time to be Jewish in Christian territories.
But of course Christianity was around for a very long time before that development, and not every branch of the faith followed that path.
Have you ever been inside an Eastern Orthodox Church? You will NEVER see a crucifixion scene there; it's simply not part of the tradition.
Like many others I was struck by the idea of using church art as a key to how the common people understood their faith, as opposed to texts, which a traditionally more important in the history of Christianity but were also limited to a smaller, literate population.
It's a fascinating idea, and I like it a lot, but I wonder about missing the fact that the late antique/early medieval churches they discuss were built by very powerful people at the top of the social spectrum. You just don't get higher than the Emperor of the Roman Empire. Common people "read" those images, but they didn't create them; likewise they may have heard some of the crucifixion-heavy texts the authors omit.
People also would have seen a lot of the portable art in churches that is no longer there--reliquaries, for example, which did often feature happy Jesus on the cross if appropriate (i.e. if the relic inside was supposed to be a piece of the Cross). Maybe even manuscript illustrations.
OK, last one: I love that authors talked about the orant.
I've never actually heard the term before, but I know the concept. For the first 1100 years of Christian practice, people did not pray with their palms together and heads bowed, as we usually do now. Instead they shaped their body to echo Jesus's on the cross, by either standing up with arms outstretched, or lying face-down on the floor with arms out.
Try standing in that position, and then the usual palms-together one. You don't have to be a big believer in yoga or bodywork to get that the positions feel intensely different and communicate a different kind of spirituality.
Our current palms-together, head-bowed position came directly from feudalism; it was the position of a knight swearing allegiance to his liege lord, and it positions God as the ultimate in the feudal hierarchy. Hence it's all about making your body small.
I love what the authors say about the strength and openness of the orant position; it really feels true to me.
Wonderful insights, Sarah. Here is a quote from the prologue that I feel really sets the tone and intention of the book: "When we began to look at Christianity through the lens of its visual and ritual worlds, we found that much of what we'd been taught had to be re-examined - beginning with our modern assumptions that doctrinal texts provided a primary orientation to early Christian faith. We worked to understand the world of early Christianity not as the literate FEW knew it but as the visually literate MANY knew it when they worshipped in churches and recited memorized scriptures and creeds. For them, visual art and poetic and narrative literature, found in prayers, stories, psalms, and hymns, shaped Christian life and sustained it." (page xvi)
Do we think that this is a valid basis for re-discovering the earliest understanding of Jesus and his purpose on Earth?
Welcome. Our first little assignment is to read the prologue IX-XVII to the paragraph that starts with "Part 1 of this book". This book is deep and long and it is best to take it very slow. Just read these few pages and reflect on the following or anything else you want to share.
ReplyDelete"I was surprised when I read .... "
and
I want to learn more about...
The great AHA moment for me in this early section of the prologue is Brock and Parker's revelation that, when they looked for crucifixion references in early Christian churches, they found none! Instead they found a risen Christ..."the child of baptism, the healer of the sick, the teacher of his friends, and the one who defeated death and transfigured the world with the Spirit of life."
ReplyDeleteWow. I really resonated with the concept that focusing on a martyring Jesus, kept people in a state of guilt and perpetual "unworthiness." "It uses Jesus's death as the supreme model of self-sacrificing love and encourages those who want to follow him to love in the same way.... (placing) victims of violence in harm's way and absolves perpetrators of their responsibility for unethical behavior."
Is this reading too much into the Passion Story? I don't know. Having been raise in a liberal faith setting, I was always grossed out by agonizing images of a tortured body on the cross. How does that kind of adulation affect one's life of faith, I wonder?
I found it quite freeing to think about Jesus not on the cross....the agony of his death was always troublesome....I also like the face that we meet women right away - in the prologue....
ReplyDeleteWow, there were some many little sentences that caught me. The first words , that it took Jesus 1000 years to die. This tradition of following Jesus is very old. Think about it was are following someone who has been followed for over 2000 years. I am just taken with this. Its hard for me to remember what Abe Lincoln said that was admirable. Just the shear weight of the enormous amount of time, and the passing of great cultures.
ReplyDeleteThe cross and the dead body of Jesus is such a central image for Christianity. I think we presume that it always was such. But maybe not? I think about that . I think that people take what they need from the past, and make it useful for their present.
What do folks think about the use of Art as a way to understand the beliefs of the people?
I think Parker and Brock think the cross is a very important symbol, but later in the book they discuss how, in early Christianity, the cross was primarily a symbol of defiance of power - Roman power, specifically. Kind of saying, "Okay, you want to crucify our sacred leader? Then we embrace his martyrdom on your device of torture." Flaunting the cross was a method of thumbing their nose at authority, I guess. But in churches, Jesus is seen in Paradise, not on the cross.
ReplyDeleteI am excited about the notion of finding out what the common folk believed and how they lived, by their liturgy and sacred elements and art. In the second part of the prologue , the authors speak of learning theology from the theologians. I am very interested in learning the experience of this early people of God from their art, temples/churches and style of worship and life. Lets finish the prologue and comment on CHapter 1.
ReplyDeleteLets also invite folks again. Finally I think that there should be a way to see our posts not just by looking in the archive.
I have it set so that up to 10 postings are immediately visible on the opening page of the blog. Simply click on "comments" to see the comments on a particular topic. When you want to start a new topic, like a new chapter discussion, please start a new post. That way we can keep our discussion organized. Thanks!
ReplyDeleteSo excited about this project! I'm a new (rejoining) member of Hope and a longtime student of ancient and medieval history. I personally seeing how religions have changed and grown dramatically over the centuries--though we humans seem to have trouble accepting that they do! So this topic excited me, though the theological territory is very new for me.
ReplyDeleteThe Christian practice & beliefs they mention here in the first thousand years actually feels familiar to me from my studies; it is VERY different from later Christianity. But there are depictions of Jesus on the cross in the time period they're talking about--it's just that Jesus looks happy and is clearly not in pain.
The intense emphasis on Jesus's death and suffering on the Cross, etc., is a direct result of the later emphasis on Jesus's humanity (the two come together) and comes with the rise of what's called "affective piety" in the 12th century. I have mixed feelings about this movement, which I find very powerful spiritually and honest about the human experience of suffering.
Affective piety (still alive and well today! anybody ever seen "Jesus Christ Superstar"?) has generated some truly powerful art and music, and historically has been deeply important to women, allowing them more ways to actively engage with their faith. But it is also strongly associated with the rise of anti-Semitism (the "Jews killed Jesus" concept) & made Easter a dangerous time to be Jewish in Christian territories.
But of course Christianity was around for a very long time before that development, and not every branch of the faith followed that path.
Have you ever been inside an Eastern Orthodox Church? You will NEVER see a crucifixion scene there; it's simply not part of the tradition.
Like many others I was struck by the idea of using church art as a key to how the common people understood their faith, as opposed to texts, which a traditionally more important in the history of Christianity but were also limited to a smaller, literate population.
ReplyDeleteIt's a fascinating idea, and I like it a lot, but I wonder about missing the fact that the late antique/early medieval churches they discuss were built by very powerful people at the top of the social spectrum. You just don't get higher than the Emperor of the Roman Empire. Common people "read" those images, but they didn't create them; likewise they may have heard some of the crucifixion-heavy texts the authors omit.
People also would have seen a lot of the portable art in churches that is no longer there--reliquaries, for example, which did often feature happy Jesus on the cross if appropriate (i.e. if the relic inside was supposed to be a piece of the Cross). Maybe even manuscript illustrations.
OK, last one: I love that authors talked about the orant.
ReplyDeleteI've never actually heard the term before, but I know the concept. For the first 1100 years of Christian practice, people did not pray with their palms together and heads bowed, as we usually do now. Instead they shaped their body to echo Jesus's on the cross, by either standing up with arms outstretched, or lying face-down on the floor with arms out.
Try standing in that position, and then the usual palms-together one. You don't have to be a big believer in yoga or bodywork to get that the positions feel intensely different and communicate a different kind of spirituality.
Our current palms-together, head-bowed position came directly from feudalism; it was the position of a knight swearing allegiance to his liege lord, and it positions God as the ultimate in the feudal hierarchy. Hence it's all about making your body small.
I love what the authors say about the strength and openness of the orant position; it really feels true to me.
Wonderful insights, Sarah.
ReplyDeleteHere is a quote from the prologue that I feel really sets the tone and intention of the book: "When we began to look at Christianity through the lens of its visual and ritual worlds, we found that much of what we'd been taught had to be re-examined - beginning with our modern assumptions that doctrinal texts provided a primary orientation to early Christian faith. We worked to understand the world of early Christianity not as the literate FEW knew it but as the visually literate MANY knew it when they worshipped in churches and recited memorized scriptures and creeds. For them, visual art and poetic and narrative literature, found in prayers, stories, psalms, and hymns, shaped Christian life and sustained it." (page xvi)
Do we think that this is a valid basis for re-discovering the earliest understanding of Jesus and his purpose on Earth?