Controversial crucifix creates rift at Warr Acres,OK church
#11
Oh, here is a blog by a woman who knows a lot about Icons of the Crucifix and it is very interesting, indeed!

http://parlezmoiblog.blogspot.com/2010/04/san-damiano-crucifix-is-um-hung.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+blogspot%2FHGsa+%28Parlez+Moi+Blog%29
Reply
#12
Somewhat similar to the San Damiano Crucifix in detail. That was the Crucifix where St. Frances received the erroneous idea he was supposed to physically re-build a church, not the Church. The sisters hid that Crucifix, and no one knows who was the author of it.  The second link in the article said the artist is going to fix it. If I was there I'd be glad he was going to do that.
tim
Reply
#13
Then you have these abominations at Holy Name Cathedral in Chicago and at the Milwaukee Cathedral

[Image: cross-Holy-Name.jpg]

[Image: MilwaukeeCathedral02.jpg]

I need not say anymore!

But yes, that one is bad with the skull and especially that hidden blasphemous painting in his stomach.

Also what was with this??? Anyone know??
[Image: skull.jpg]

Reply
#14
I think the difference is between some questionable quality (I actually like that one with the big crown over the corpus) and a deliberate sacrilege.  (is that third thing in the ceremony photoshopped? please say yes!)

That blog link I posted shows a series of similar icons and also the natural art I posted all shows that there is no vertical line in te lower part of the abdoman.  In fact, only a "zipper scar" from surgery or like a woman gets from a ceasarean would cause that!

The artist did two things that took delieberate effort.  She reduced the number of muscles in the upper abdomen from the "six-pack" and she introduced a completely non-anatomical vertical line to the normally smooth belly. 

And then there is that laughing skull.

I tell you, I would say all this to her face if she were sitting in the room with me.  I do not believe that was an accidental image and then the question of how it got accepted is worth asking, but anyone who knows the story of The Emperor's New Clothes knows the answer to that one!
Reply
#15
(04-20-2010, 04:08 PM)littlerose Wrote: I think the difference is between some questionable quality (I actually like that one with the big crown over the corpus) and a deliberate sacrilege.  (is that third thing in the ceremony photoshopped? please say yes!)

That blog link I posted shows a series of similar icons and also the natural art I posted all shows that there is no vertical line in te lower part of the abdoman.  In fact, only a "zipper scar" from surgery or like a woman gets from a ceasarean would cause that!

The artist did two things that took delieberate effort.  She reduced the number of muscles in the upper abdomen from the "six-pack" and she introduced a completely non-anatomical vertical line to the normally smooth belly. 
It is one muscle (rectus abdominus) and the tendinous inscriptions can vary in external shape. The linea alba is natural too...it is very anatomical. That part at least doesn't vary among individuals.

However, if it is phallic, it is very non-anatomical. Therefore, since it has the correct anatomical features of the human abdomen, and it is incorrect for a human penis, it must be correct to have and any perversion is the eye of those who see such things.
Quote:And then there is that laughing skull.
Skulls can't "laugh". They may appear to "smile" due to their shape, but that is natural. Skulls are traditional, especially in that location.
Reply
#16
(04-20-2010, 04:20 PM)Herr_Mannelig Wrote:
(04-20-2010, 04:08 PM)littlerose Wrote: I think the difference is between some questionable quality (I almost like that one with the big crown over the corpus) and a deliberate sacrilege.  (is that third thing in the ceremony photoshopped? please say yes!)

That blog link I posted shows a series of similar icons and also the natural art I posted all shows that there is no vertical line in te lower part of the abdoman.  In fact, only a "zipper scar" from surgery or like a woman gets from a ceasarean would cause that!

The artist did two things that took delieberate effort.  She reduced the number of muscles in the upper abdomen from the "six-pack" and she introduced a completely non-anatomical vertical line to the normally smooth belly. 
It is one muscle (rectus abdominus) and the tendinous inscriptions can vary in external shape. The linea alba is natural too...it is very anatomical. That part at least doesn't vary among individuals.

http://www.lifeinthefastlane.ca/wp-conte..._21sfw.gif
Quote:And then there is that laughing skull.
Skulls can't "laugh". They may appear to "smile" due to their shape, but that is natural. Skulls are traditional, especially in that location.

The skull in that painting has an extra curve. I don't quibble with a skull being there, but that one  has an exageratede  grin, nnot the  natural result of the normal skull structure. And the male abdomen  does not have a vertical line in the manner she placed it.  But the scrotum does, and that is not a painting produced  by an inexperienced student. She modeled it on a model that clearly has been imitated without those elements. She added those elements.
Reply
#17
(04-20-2010, 04:00 PM)crusaderfortruth3372 Wrote: Then you have these abominations at Holy Name Cathedral in Chicago and at the Milwaukee Cathedral

[Image: cross-Holy-Name.jpg]

[Image: MilwaukeeCathedral02.jpg]

I need not say anymore!

But yes, that one is bad with the skull and especially that hidden blasphemous painting in his stomach.

Also what was with this??? Anyone know??
[Image: skull.jpg]

The very essence of these modern monstrosities (like the top two) is the look of Christ Defeated.  The look is one of utter and total despair and defeat.  Christ knew from the start that his mission on earth was for Him to defeat death and sin.  Not the other way around.  JPII's crozier / cross was a typical example of the Defeated / Despairing Christ.  A suffering crucifix which is classically portrayed is theologically correct.  The defeated / despairing modern "crucifixes" (if you can call them crucifixes at all) are blasphemous.
Reply
#18
looks like they wouldn't like the San Damiano crucifix, either:

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.iconsbydelphia.com/images/damianocloseup2.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.iconsbydelphia.com/damianocxpage.html&usg=__uPMfr-AjOg993pJqYsd-LaZzPuY=&h=550&w=364&sz=99&hl=en&start=3&itbs=1&tbnid=SBbPiIjLhp-IyM:&tbnh=133&tbnw=88&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dsan%2Bdamiano%2Bcrucifix%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DG%26tbs%3Disch:1
Reply
#19
(04-20-2010, 04:30 PM)i.p.i. Wrote: looks like they wouldn't like the San Damiano crucifix, either:

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.iconsbydelphia.com/images/damianocloseup2.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.iconsbydelphia.com/damianocxpage.html&usg=__uPMfr-AjOg993pJqYsd-LaZzPuY=&h=550&w=364&sz=99&hl=en&start=3&itbs=1&tbnid=SBbPiIjLhp-IyM:&tbnh=133&tbnw=88&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dsan%2Bdamiano%2Bcrucifix%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DG%26tbs%3Disch:1

There is no scrotum in the San Damiano. You have two horizontal curves there, and while a phallus-sensitive imagination might see something in the shading of the upper part, it is nothing like the unavoidably obscene sacrilege  that Janet Jaime produced.  She chose to make that change from the original. She was looking at the original which did not go as far as she chose to go.
Reply
#20
(04-20-2010, 04:27 PM)littlerose Wrote: The skull in that painting has an extra curve. I don't quibble with a skull being there, but that one  has an exageratede  grin, nnot the  natural result of the normal skull structure. And the male abdomen  does not have a vertical line in the manner she placed it.  But the scrotum does, and that is not a painting produced  by an inexperienced student. She modeled it on a model that clearly has been imitated without those elements. She added those elements.
It is just open a bit. My avatar has an overbite (but I like the image otherwise. It was hand drawn by someone and posted on the Internet). That is not a big issue.

The linea alba does extend that far down. It goes all the way to the insertion of the rectus.

I think it is an accurate and traditional piece of art in every way that I have seen it.

Interesting you know what a scrotum looks like and not the structure of every human abdomen though.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)