Religion and Art

B.H. Roberts once said, “The best thing about a painting or piece of sculpture is that which cannot be described. And that elusive, mysterious quality we call its spirit may arise from something quite apart from its rhetoric, or logic or distinction. It may be even as the voice of God: not in the strong wind, that rends the mountains and breaks in pieces the rocks before the Lord…but in the still, small voice which follows the wind and earthquake and fire.” This week, we attended an art exhibit in the BYU Museum of Art about religious pieces. The majority of items in the exhibit were paintings, but there were also some sculptures and etchings. There was a wide variety of religious themes and the way they were depicted. There were works of the Saviour himself, other characters from the scriptures, well-known symbols of religious subjects, and more obscure ones. So, there were many ways in the display to convey feelings about religion.
I feel like I understand art a lot more now than I ever have before, thanks in large part to an Art History class I am enrolled in this semester. It was fun to be able to identify characteristics in the contemporary art that are borrowed from styles from the last 500 years. Through being in that class and conversations with other people, I believe that meaning in art is specific to the viewer. There are certainly themes and symbols which were intended to be noticed by the artist, but I believe that most of the “deep” meanings seen in art are manufactured by the individual to try to gain more from the viewing experience. For that reason, I really enjoyed browsing the gallery and evaluating a wide range of pieces rather than spend 15-20 minutes on the same one. I feel like I gained more from studying and appreciating the woodcuts of Rembrandt and Durer than trying to discuss all of the “hidden, deep” symbolism in a contemporary painting that seemed far inferior to me in subject, composition, and style. I really do appreciate the tour we were given and the work put into leading us through the exhibit, but I personally gained more from the introspection than the guided discussion.
One piece that I especially enjoyed was Rembrandt’s etching of Raising of Lazarus: The Large Plate. It was done all the way back in 1632, so almost 400 years ago. Yet, I could still see the care and detail given to this seen of the Messiah’s life by one of the great masters of Western art history. The figures are powerful and the moment dramatic. The dress and objects surrounding the bursting tomb are authentic and realistic. I was impressed by the wide-eyed look of the men surrounding Jesus as Lazarus’s head first starts to emerge. It made me think of what miracles God can work in my life if I let him, and that I need to be believing and not doubt.
I thoroughly enjoyed the exhibit, and hope I can continue to view more art in the future. I was able to spend a few hours in the Getty Museum in LA in August, but I would really like to go back and spend more time there so I can see more of the galleries. I plan on making an effort to do so when I go home for Christmas break in December. I hope I’ll be able to see more religious art so that my appreciation for it and ability to interpret it may continue to grow.

Hymns of the Early Saints

The chronology of the 4 gospels in the New Testament has been a source of discussion and research for a long time. Although a common belief is that John was written in the 90s AD and was the last of the four records written, some scholars disagree. Some reasons that would seem to support John being a later record are his enormous amount of unique material and correlation with the commonly accepted date of his writing of the Book of Revelation. Another important idea among some scholars is that of “High Christology.”
“High Christology” is the idea that Jesus is more elevated in John’s record than the others. It says that Jesus is portrayed as more of a great teacher and man in the other three, but that Jesus is looked upon as more divine and all-powerful in the gospel of John. In these scholar’s eyes, this idea is one that developed over the decades since Christ’s death--or, in other words, Jesus’s reputation and importance had been inflated by second-generation Christians over the more mortal one held by the contemporary disciples of Christ. This idea of “High Christology” developing over the centuries, however, is one that I reject. As a practicing Latter-Day Saint, I believe that the earliest apostles and disciples of Jesus knew who he was, and that the church organized by Christ with Peter presiding had a pure knowledge of the gospel, in the same form we have it today.
This rejection is also supported by some of the texts of earlier writings. In a few places of the New Testament, early Christian hymns are quoted by the writers. Indeed, John opens the first chapter of his record quoting a song about how the Word was with God in the beginning, and that the world was created through the Word. This is obviously in keeping with the accepted view in John that Jesus was divine and important to God’s overall plan for his children. It even goes so far as to say that Jesus was a key figure in the creation of the Earth. This is not the only instance of quoting early Christian hymns, nor was it the earliest. In fact, Paul quoted some early Christian hymns in his writings well before John did such. These hymns are powerful evidence that first-generation Christians also believed in the High Christ.
One example of Paul quoting a hymn is in

Judas Iscariot and Barabbas

The final week of Jesus Christ’s mortal life was his most important. He spent all week teaching in the temple and making final points against the rulers of His day. He performed the Atonement and suffered in Gethsemane. He was convicted and crucified. Finally, He rose triumphantly from the tomb that held Him bound. This last week, which encompasses what we now call the Passion, is written about in more detail by the Gospel writers than any other in His life. Because we have four slightly different accounts of this most important of times, we can learn different things from each.
The Book of Matthew, for example, shows fulfillments of Old Testament prophecy in the Saviour’s actions during the Passion. One important thing that Matthew teaches us about the Passion is when Judas first went to the chief priests and a hint as to why. We read that he leaves right after Jesus is anointed with the alabaster box of ointment by the woman, and Jesus once again prophecies his coming death. Maybe Judas finally understood that Jesus was really going to die. Maybe he decided that Jesus wasn’t really the Messiah he was looking for that would thrust out the Roman occupiers and establish the political and spiritual Israel again. Maybe he doubted and thought that Jesus of Nazareth was just another false Messiah who was a danger to the spiritual well-being of his people. Regardless of what exactly was going through his head, something happened to Judas during this incident. He made a deal to betray his friend and Master for thirty pieces of silver, a deal which he would fulfill in the coming days.
Another insight I learned while studying the last few chapters of Matthew was the irony and symbolism of the release of prisoners. As was the custom of the Passover celebration, Pilate offered to release Christ or Barabbas to the people, to which the hand-picked group of Sadducean supporters chose Barabbas. There is a very symbolic comparison between these two men which I had never noticed before. Because certain names were so common during this time, people were often distinguished by a suffix of whom their father was or where they were from, hence Simon bar-Jonah, or Simon son of Jonah. Bar Abbas is one such suffix, and so was not the thief’s given first name. Early manuscripts of Matthew reveal to us that his name was in fact Jesus bar-Abbas. Early monks were likely too ashamed that the murdering seditionist should have the same name as Christ and deleted it from the text. But there is purpose in the comparison. Jesus of Nazareth sought to bring about the kingdom of God, so did Jesus bar-Abbas. Jesus of Nazareth sought to bring it about by faith and repentance, while Jesus bar-Abbas sought to bring it about by murder, violence, and force--the method most Jews of the day expected the Messiah to usher in his reign. Jesus bar-Abbas means “Jesus son of the Father” while Jesus Christ was literally the Son of Heavenly Father. These are just a few of the comparisons.
The narrative ends with Jesus proclaiming his absolute power and commanding the disciples to take the gospel to the ends of the earth. Through Matthew’s account, we see the triumph of Jesus over death and the steps it took to get him there.