Amplexus of St. Bernard
If he clings to me in love
I will free him,
Protect him
for he knows my name.
Homoerotic or not?
I came across that discussion on FB yesterday and left a comment, which was a mistake because I think it was an intellectual discussion over my head - so I removed it. It involved another discussion on another site, a closed group, so I wasn't informed of what had been discussed. So how could I contribute intelligibly?
The homoerotic dimension of religious art has often been a topic discussed by Catholics online - especially gay Catholics - even if they are just SSA and chaste and celibate. Likewise, straight Catholic men strongly object or react to this kind of stuff. It reminds me of the embedded phallus on the Crucifix of San Damiano story documented by Michael Calace in his film Rape of the Soul, which I wrote about here in 2010. He claims, "The heavily marketed original San Damiano crucifix that St. Francis of Assisi prayed to and which he said spoke to him, clearly depicts an erect penis with testicles, and has been copied and redistributed throughout the world." (source) Calace, touted as an art expert and an experienced Catholic religion teacher stated, "The church continually showcases the previously closeted San Damiano crucifix as a key symbol distinguishing the post Vatican II church, thus standardizing debauchery in the priesthood, while misleading and abusing faithful Catholics who have suffered severely." (source)
Apparently these innovative art-history commentaries are attempting to link the so-called 'embedded sexual imagery' and the 'homoerotic' dimension of centuries old paintings to the sexual abuse scandal in the Church. Desperate times call for desperate measures - but don't transfer your personal fears onto ordinary people, and more importantly - on students. (Calace is referred to as an 'experienced Catholic religion teacher.)
Amplexus of St. Lutgarde
Chaste and pure.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
That's what they say, huh? Truth be told, and something many of us forget, 'what is received is received according to the mode of the receiver'. Thus when we interpret art or when we seek to interpret mystical matters, we often do so according to our own bias, way of thinking, or taste - and sometimes we project our fears and prejudices into the debate. I think many people do that.
As I attempted to say on FB, this is such a complex issue and I agreed with something Melinda Selmys pointed out saying if there is a homoerotic component to some of the art, such as that which depicts the amplexus of certain male saints, it is not pornographic. What I meant was, if the viewer interprets the scene or emotion in that manner, it is more or less neutral, and personal opinion. It doesn't lead to lust, or at least it shouldn't. In fact, it may be the disposition of the beholder, especially in our day, which is the cause of such an apprehension or interpretation.
Nothing to get worked up over, especially for spiritual persons, since in the spiritual life the purgative way purifies and elevates the senses and one moves beyond that. This stuff needs to be understood supernaturally, me thinks. John of the Cross writes about spiritual lust and 'impure' movements in prayer. So it's not surprising, especially for those who are not 'spiritual'. (I say that in the sense of 1Cor.2:14 - 'The natural man ...cannot understand it, because it is judged spiritually.)
Doubt of S. Thomas - John Granville Gregory
Jesus, lover of chastity. Have mercy on us.
Jesus, lover of us. Have mercy on us.
Jesus, lover of us. Have mercy on us.
That said, I'm not sure how those concerned Catholics would handle stories of saints such as Blessed Bernardo Francisco de Hoyos de Seña - his experience kind of turns the mystical marriage thing on its head, in so far as it mirrors the spiritual nuptials of S. Teresa of Avila. As for the amplexus theme depicted in the lives of the saints in art, both male and female saints enjoyed this favor, and like the Bernini sculpture depicting the rapture of Teresa, which many liken to the expression typical of orgasm, of course we are going to depict it and view the supernatural event in more or less erotic terms. Thus, when it comes to men, everyone wants to call it homo-erotic.
Spiritual Marriage of S. Rose of Lima
On the other hand, some saints were
raised to 'transforming union'
in mystical marriage
with the Divine Infant Jesus.
Yet it is what it is, either in literature, in the Bible, or in art, we face human limitations in depicting the mystical marriage of the soul with Christ. Yet it is what we are called to, union with Christ in God. In a sense, the amplexus or embrace of Christ, the probing of the wounds of Christ by the saints is not all that different from the moment Christ took the hand of Thomas, inviting him to place his hand in his side. Some contemporary artists have represented this in a homoerotic fashion perhaps, but that is an error. (I'm not suggesting the example shown above is homoerotic.)
Anyway, I've written about this stuff in the past, so I won't spend a lot of time on the subject. If perchance a person sees it another way, as St. Paul writes, "if you have a different attitude, this too God will reveal to you." We hope. There really are contemporary examples of homoeroticism in the manner saints and Biblical figures are depicted in art. I don't deny or defend that, but I think some of the fine art of the past is interpretted that way according to what we've been exposed to today. We've lost our way. As a culture, we are caught up, even blinded by sensuality and lust. As the Prophet Daniel exclaimed in Today's first reading: 'beauty has seduced you, lust has subverted your conscience.'
Fantasy scene from "The Devils"
Unfortunately, this is how some artists
eroticize and corrupt the meaning
of the amplexus, or embrace of Christ.
I really do not know the intent of the artist. It does not trouble me that men would show physical affection in public. For me that is not sexual. Art has always depicted male and female genetalia. So, it follows that religious art, some anyway, would as well. I remember being taught by the good nuns in grade school that Adam and Eve, after eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge became aware of their nakedness and were ashamed. Our inheritance from them is the same sense of embarrassment and shame in all things related to our bodies. A good picture tells a story. A great picture exposes emotions in the viewer.
ReplyDeleteI think many people use these arguments for their own agenda.
DeleteI approve of this sort of art if it is done well and not done with an unhealthy (gay) motive. Remember, men hugging is not "gay," it's human and normal. I find that the only people who think that men hugging are gay are people who, themselves are gay. Gay men tend to sexualize that which is, for normal men, well...normal.
ReplyDeleteTotally agree.
Delete