Art Divides Religion Of all the great divisions in the monotheistic religions of the world,
art is one of the most divisive. It cuts with a keen edge into two camps,
those that do and those that don't. That is, those who read the second of the
Ten Commandments from a broadly conservative point of view, and those who
make of it a narrow, liberal interpretation. The second commandment reads:
"You shall not make a carved image for yourself nor the likeness of anything
in the heavens above or in the earth below, or in the waters under the
earth." Judaic and Islamic followers take this quite literally. Jewish people
eschew most figural representation insofar as spiritual matters are concerned
and Islamic followers go a step beyond that to ban nearly all of what we in
the western world consider art entirely from their daily lives. And though
the commandment specifically mentions only carved images, Jews and Muslims
generally interpret this to also include painting. The prophet Mohammed said
that on Judgement Day, God will command every painter standing before him to
give life to his pictures. And when he fails, he will be cast into hell for laying
claim to God's creative power.
The Christian church in its early, formative years was itself ambivalent
about art. Whether through doctrine, or a lack of trained Christian
artists, the earliest Christian art, that of the Roman catacombs, for the most
part restricts itself to religious symbols. The earliest depictions of
Christ seem to have been personal rather than official elements in religious
decoration. Iconography split the Eastern Orthodox church in the eighth
century and the Catholic church during the Reformation in the
seventeenth century. From the time it was legalised by the Roman Emperor
Constantine in 313 CE, the western church seems to have read the second
commandment from a narrow point of view, reasoning that it banned only
the worship of carved images, rather than the images or other manifestations of
figural art itself.
The Catholic church, early on, seems to have decided the ends of religious
indoctrination justified the means of sculptural and painted art. That
is, they considered it a tool for imparting the lessons of faith to the illiterate,
as visual examples of the life of Christ and the saints, and as a means of
stimulating prayer and devotion. Consequently, nearly all art created before
the eighteenth century had some religious significance. And in fact, the church
seems to have overdosed on art in decorating its places of worship, triggering
an almost cataclysmic decline in religious art as the reformation and
counterreformation made their impact felt. In northern Europe, where the
reformation was most powerful, many churches seem to have followed the
Islamic tack and began scouring the walls of their sanctuaries of religious
painting while selling off the work of earlier sculptors to private collectors.
With the advent of widespread literacy in the Christian world during the
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the church found it easier to bow
to reformation forces than contend with artists, who had never been that
easy to contend with in the first place. Then too, artists, for their part,
while missing the patronage, may also have been somewhat "burned out" insofar
as religious works were concerned. Even Rembrandt and Rubens had to
struggle mightily to match the work of Michelangelo and Caravaggio. It was much
easier to satisfy the broader taste of wealthy collectors, kings, queens,
dukes and duchesses than the strict religious structures of the Catholic
church, even when still creating works with religious themes.
Eventually, even private collectors lost their taste for religious works,
starting early in the nineteenth century and into our own. The church,
when it had need of them at all, used artists primarily as interior
decorators rather than relying upon them to impart doctrine or illustrate religious
events. And so today, while the split is still there, it's of far less
consequence. Only the Islamic world today continues to insist upon
living without art for religious reasons (except insofar as calligraphy and
architecture are considered arts). Although the Mormon Church and
certain religious sects continue to ban painting and sculpture as part of their
worship environment, few would contend, as did Mohammed, that all
artists will be sent straight to hell for their endeavours (though perhaps some
should be).
Contributed by Lane, Jim
31 December 2000 |
