Gospel in Art: They accused Jesus of blasphemy

The Art of Blasphemy, by Frank Martin, 1958 © Christian Art

Source: Christian Art

Gospel of 22 March 2024
John 10:31-42

The Jews took up stones again to stone him. Jesus replied, "I have shown you many good works from the Father. For which of these are you going to stone me?"

The Jews answered, "It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you, but for blasphemy, because you, though only a human being, are making yourself God."

Jesus answered, "Is it not written in your law, 'I said, you are gods'? If those to whom the word of God came were called 'gods' - and the scripture cannot be annulled - can you say that the one whom the Father has sanctified and sent into the world is blaspheming because I said, 'I am God's Son'?

"If I am not doing the works of my Father, then do not believe me. But if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, so that you may know and understand that the Father is in me and I am in the Father."

Then they tried to arrest him again, but he escaped from their hands. He went away again across the Jordan to the place where John had been baptizing earlier, and he remained there. Many came to him, and they were saying, "John performed no sign, but everything that John said about this man was true." And many believed in him there.

Reflection on the photograph

In today's reading the Jewish people are accusing Jesus of blasphemy. So what is blasphemy? Blasphemy is speaking against God in a contemptuous, scornful, or abusive manner, and as such is a grave violation of charity towards God. It also applies to art. Some art can be seen as blasphemous. I won't show any examples of this here (though I can think of countless examples of blasphemous art). I am sure over the years we have all seen images with which we had issues or even found downright shocking.

There was a moment in our Christian art history when all Christian images were seen as blasphemous. It looked as though Christian images might be banned altogether in the 8th century. An iconoclast movement was thriving. Those promoting it relied on Old Testament texts where it says we should have no graven images of God. Fair enough. However, St John of Damascus (died 749AD) looked closely at a decision that needed to be taken by our Church as regards the use of images. He came to the conclusion that images and art not only are appropriate to used, but in fact should be used. His main argument was that St Paul refers to Jesus as the 'icon' of the invisible God. Is God invisible? Yes. Is he beyond any representation? Yes of course. However, God himself has made an icon, a picture, an image in the humanity of Jesus… so if it is good enough for God, it is good enough for us. Our icons, our art, our depictions of Christ, saints, etc., are participations in the primordial iconography of God himself. So thanks to St John of Damascus we can enjoy all the magnificent art in our churches and richly textured Christian Art history.

Our sensitivities change over time when we look at art. Our perception of what is blasphemous or not changes too with time. For example our artwork, The Art Of Blasphemy is a photograph by Frank Martin taken in July 1958: visitors evaluate a painting at an exhibition of modern art, organised by the Contemporary Art Society on the theme of religion, at the Tate Gallery, London. The painting is titled 'Gabriel And Mary' by Bateson Mason, and was considered blasphemous at the time. Mary is not depicted as a beautiful young woman. She is not seen kneeling in a prayerful pose, but rather is portrayed as lying in bed. The angel as well looks daunting rather than graceful. An unusual depiction, yes; but blasphemous to our 21st century sensitivities? No.

LINKS

Gospel in Art: https://christian.art/
Today's Reflection: https://christian.art/daily-gospel-reading/john-10-31-42-2024/
Competition: The Laudamus Award 2024 for Sacred Art - www.indcatholicnews.com/news/49310