Get Religion has this interesting story at An icon of controversy.
I have to admit if the Icon in question is similar to the picture they post I don't get the controversy.
It does appear this is a rather big deal though to the people of this Parish. I suspect Get Religion is on to something that the Icon is not really the issue but perhaps a rough relationship between the Priest and some in the parish.
I have to admit if the Icon in question is similar to the picture they post I don't get the controversy.
It does appear this is a rather big deal though to the people of this Parish. I suspect Get Religion is on to something that the Icon is not really the issue but perhaps a rough relationship between the Priest and some in the parish.
Update!!
Ok Pro-Ecclesia told me to actually look at the ICON. The pic is above. Now I must have missed that this Crucifix is like 10 feet tall and yes the stomach area is really highlighted. So yeah I can see why some people are going what the heck. I am curious though is there some intentional Penis imagery there that is part of the history or is that just how the that area of the body has been done?
Update II
A sound comment from the Get Religion comment Section:
People need to think before they speak, but I guess the thrill of being interviewed by a reporter prevented it. Those are abdominal muscles in a thin man. The image many be “pre-Renaissance” in its perspective and proportion but can any adult really believe that to be a rendering of the figure’s penis? The 12th century Italian peasants who were the first parishioners to see a St. Damiano cross apparently were more sophisticated than we are. Or, maybe we’ve gotten so chubby in the 21st century, we’ve forgotten we actually have abdominal muscles—and those are the top 4 of the “6-pack”. That said, I’m not surprised that elementary school children would interpret it in that way—but that’s typical behavior for 9-12 year olds. (Probably even 12th century ones!).
Well I did not think of that either.
7 comments:
Dude!
Did you see the photo of the actual crucifix at the Oklahoman website? Yes, it is the Lord's abdominal muscles, but it is MUCH more pronounced than in other San Damiano crucifixes and is CLEARLY drawn to resemble the male genitalia.
Now, that's NOT to say the image is inappropriate. There very well may be theological significance tied to the image, as in the Christ the Bridegroom iconography.
But no one who has seen images of the actual crucifix at issue can plausibly deny that the abdominal muscles in that icon are MEANT to resemble a penis.
Ok I will have to go look at that. I just wonder though if that was the intent. I mean what does the Abdominal muscles have to do with gentials.
Go look at the photo, and you'll see what I mean.
Yeah I posted it an updated. Again I am not sure if that is what it is meant to represent but yes it looks odd
I've never seen a 6-pack that looks like that!
;-)
Again, I'm not saying that the obviously genitalia-shaped abdominal muscles are necessarily inappropriate. I'm assuming there is some theological meaning, e.g., Christ as the eternal Bridegroom of the Church.
OC, I just found your blog via Taylor Marshall and I like it. Now, the icon. I embroider icons and other things. I've learned a really important lesson from this. Step back and show it to somebody else. You never know what might be there that you missed.
As for the iconographer, I believe that she will blend the abdomen in more. It looks like a good faithful icon and from the article she's sorry about the bruhaha. I guess it takes a while, but I've loved icons and looked at so many, they look like proper religious art to me and I prefer them to lots of western art and especially to banners:) and I'm a Latin Catholic. Thanks again, AnneG in NC
Jesus is HUNG!
Post a Comment