This photo of yours truly and some other priest was created by the Latin Mass Society of the United Kingdom:
There is no liturgical abuse in either photo. And just to be clear, the one with me from a 2009 photo from Saint Joseph Church in Macon is an ad orientem verncular post-Vatican II Roman Missal Mass. It is not the Ancient Latin Mass, although, yes, it looks like it, but it isn’t.
The meme photo, though, is about the orientation of the priest, either toward the nave or the apse.
Which one is more attractive? Well, certainly, the priest in the top photo is more attractive, whichever way he faces. But let’s take the handsomeness of that good looking priest out of the equation.
It doesn’t matter how his face looks, as good looking as he is. It isn’t about his pious look either. It isn’t about his facial expressions or lack thereof.
And the top photo from an instinctual perspective is evocative of something other-worldly, mysterious and magnificent as well as reverent. It is the epitome of Catholic spirituality and iconography, not to mention awesome beauty and classic sensibilities.
The bottom photo is blah and uninspirational. There is no sense of mystery, only the priest playing to the audience. Am I right or wrong and what say you by looking at the two photos, my glorious one or the bottom inglorious one?
17 comments:
A few things most noticeable and satisfying in the top photo is the balance, the composition, the order, everything makes sense. It's just appeals to the visual as in art. The bottom one appears less ordered and chaotic. The celebrants facing the populous seems brutish and less harmonious, almost against them rather than with them.
Q, excellent observation and comment!
The photographs are taken from different angles, for heaven's sake. That's why one apppears to be "balanced" and "sense making" and the other not.
As for balance in art, Shelley Esaak writes: "Humans, perhaps because we are bilaterally symmetrical, have a natural desire to seek balance and equilibrium. Artists generally strive to create artwork that is balanced. A balanced work, in which the visual weight is distributed evenly across the composition, seems stable, makes the viewer feel comfortable, and is pleasing to the eye. A work that is unbalanced appears unstable, creates tension, and makes the viewer uneasy. Sometimes, an artist deliberately creates a work that is unbalanced."
"Comfortable" or "priestly" art can be pleasing.
Art that makes us uncomfortable - prophetic art - challenges us to see differently, to understand differently, to act differently. The discomforting elements might be the scene depicted such as any one of the paintings of the beheading of St. John the Baptist. Or it might be the Massacre of the Innocents by Rubens or Poussin or Giotto.
Both elements - comforting and discomforting - should be present in the celebration of the Eucharist.
There's nothing inherently wrong with the lower photo - it's what the Roman Church has decided will be normative. That said, the upper photo achieves the same in what to me is a more ordered, cohesive, inspirational, reassuring and elevated way. The thing that I've come to profoundly dislike about the lower photo approach, is the altar becomes a barrier, like a counter in a store with a very bland background. The upper photo, normative for me in the Byzantine Church, all are unified with the priest celebrant leading and all else following. We're all headed the same way, to the New Jerusalem. In the lower photo, we collide at the altar barrier, each on our respective sides looking at each other if not down. To me, it is just dated thinking.
Fr K,
LOL - you can't even answer why only 30% of those Catholic who continue to go to Sunday Mass believe in the Real Presence. Ignore this at your spiritual peril
Fr. MJK,
I appreciate your points and I mostly agree particularly where people have had the opportunity to be both educated and exposed to different types of artistic expression and can therefore understand and appreciate them.
Regarding comfort, certainly, some of our iconography, the Beheading of John the Baptist, depictions of Hades, Christ's suffering, among others, can be uncomfortable to view. Though iconography does not have codified rules governing its execution, tradition guides us and iconography for ecclesiastical usage will always be the same. That, in and of itself, is comforting even though the subject matter might not be.
Where I differ is a tendency within the Roman Church to embrace abstract themes within art and architecture. For the sake of understanding, I'll call them stick figures, the representations of our Lord, the Holy Family etc. that adorn churches with fluid architecture and stained glass that doesn't identify as anything in particular. When the principle action that takes place within is Christ made present in the form of bread and wine - it is real - it is spiritual food that nourishes us, why on earth would we confuse the people by surrounding them with abstract imagery, themes and architecture? To me, that's not being challenged, that's being lead away from what we're attempting to bring people into and believe.
Father Kavanaugh thinks I need a definition and explanation of why symmetry is visually appealing. He provides some obscure quote from some nobody for no apparent reason other than to define the obvious. He also offers another obvious point about the angle of the photo as if that changes something. Yeah, I've been to Mass, I know how it looks. He is definitively triggered by ad orientem and feels compelled to respond, even if he has nothing to say.
qwikness,
Now you’re catching on to the “brilliance” that is Father K
qwik - The two photographs are taken from different angles. Hence, the "balance" is different.
Byz - The action of the Eucharist is to confect the Real Presence of Christ under the forms of bread and wine. That reality - a metaphysical one - is considerably different from the reality - a physical one - we experience in the non-Sacramental world.
Abstract imagery is present in many forms of decoration that have been used for centuries in churches. Look at the patterns in damask and brocade fabrics. Are the images produced by the weaving those of plants, rippling water, symbols of monarchs, letters, something else? What about the elements of baroque and rococo decoration? Abstract swirls and curves dominate, and asymmetry is found all over the place. I know thsi isn't typical of the Oriental or Orthodox styles, but it's all over the place in western churches.
Monastic decor, in many cases, is downright severe. Many, myself included, find it far more uplifting and inspirational than florid exhuberance. That sort of thing is entirely personal taste.
Fr. MJK,
I understand your point however, what I'm suggesting is that ecclesiastical art should not be outright representational (the Mormons do this and it's jarring if you aren't used to it), or abstract to the point that one would think it is representing something from a cosmos other than our own. That's all. An exhibition of modern art can, and, perhaps, should be challenging particularly if it draws upon political/social themes in an attempt to make a statement or draw a reaction. Conversely, when I enter a church temple, I hope to see glorification and inspiration that I don't necessarily have to interpret to see/appreciate. I'm not suggesting laziness, just that people bring their problems and burdens to church and it shouldn't be a struggle to leave feeling refreshed and strengthened.
It just occurred to me that I have never thought of baroque or rococo as being abstract. Sumptuous or, glorious fantasy maybe, but, not as we mostly think of abstract several hundred years removed from both of those styles.
It might surprise you to know that I do appreciate this form of beauty:
https://i.international.la-croix.com/0x0/prod/uploads/news/2018/02/1517910354.jpg
This, however, just leaves me cold. I feel absolutely nothing except wanting to go outside in a space such as this. My problem, I guess.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Fholycrossmonastery.com%2Fguest-house%2Fvisits-retreats-programs%2F&psig=AOvVaw3vWl1sWPVznMfJyK4J0pQy&ust=1650749438731000&source=images&cd=vfe&ved=0CAwQjRxqFwoTCIDf1YPPqPcCFQAAAAAdAAAAABAG
Byz - I don't think it is your "problem," just your preference. Personal preferences are neither right nor wrong.
Some people, though, want to turn their preferences into norms for everyone. THIS (their preference) is what a Catholic church looks like. THIS (their preference) is what Catholic music sounds like. And they conclude that churches that don't reflect their preferences in music or decor or language or whatever aren't Catholic.
Art impacts people in very different ways. I am completely taken with a simple still life image - a dark brown bowl filled with light brown eggs amazes me. https://www.postcardfromholland.com/still_life_eggs_earthen_wear.jpg
A painting of a table piled with the carcasses of game birds, fruit, musical instruments gives me shivers!
As for the stark but elegant simplicity of a monastic chapel, such as the one at the Trappist monastery of the Holy Spirit in Conyers, Georgia, works for me. https://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/articles/counties-cities-neighborhoods/conyers/m-5992/
I'll note again that my brother-in-law, who was a monk here for 17 years, made the abstract stained glass windows along with Fr. Methodius who, almost 90, still runs the glass studio there!
Fr K still can’t answer why only 30% of Catholics who bother to go to Sunday Mass believe in the Real Presence? Could it possibly be that the manner in which it is celebrated with the priest’s back to God in the tabernacle and receiving Holy Communion in the paw might be having a negative impact? In the EF we don’t have this problem of folks not believing in the Real Presence. Maybe that is why Pope Benedict issued Summorum Pontificem. I am starting to think some priests would prefer no Catholics rather than tolerating Catholics who prefer the EF.
Fr. MJK
I do appreciate still life images myself.
https://reemans.blob.core.windows.net/stock/70240-0-medium.jpg?v=63735936897823
https://d7hftxdivxxvm.cloudfront.net/?resize_to=fit&width=800&height=632&quality=80&src=https%3A%2F%2Fd32dm0rphc51dk.cloudfront.net%2FTMhgyBlmjbExT5IP5xQRcg%2Fnormalized.jpg
Indeed, the monastery in Conyers is certainly elegantly simple. It's an engaging space because of its purity and loftiness. I, personally, would love a simple high altar with candles and crucifix.
The two photographs were posted on the LMS Facebook page by a contributor who wanted to make a (somewhat weak) pun regarding orientation. There is no way the LMS, or indeed anyone who knows anything about liturgy, would interpret the first picture as being an EF High Mass. The absence of altar cards, the fact that the subdeacon is not holding the paten in a humeral veil, the thurifer placed dead centre; these give the game away.
I would point out to Fr Kavanaugh that a predilection for Gregorian chant and sacred polyphony over Rambling Syd Rumpo and his guitar is not merely a 'personal preference'. It is the stated preference of the Church (see SC, Musicam Sacram and the GIRM). And how does someone who prefers, say, Gothic to Baroque get to make this the 'norm'? AWN Pugin was a genius who did much to popularize the Gothic revival but even he couldn't convince everyone that this was the only 'authentic' style.
John Nolan,
Bravo! I find it amusing you did not receive a response! Well, maybe not!
TJM
Yet it's a pity that someone who can comment sensibly has to preface his observations with a parade of straw men, oscillating gently in the breeze ...
John Nolan,
I have a question. How has Traditiones Custodes been enforced in England? In the US it is a mixed bag. "Tolerant" liberals are enforcing it while allowing liturgical abuses galore in the OF.
Post a Comment