Pagan Statues

[CS937]

On 10/5/2022 at 9:12 PM, Nihil Obstat said:

Not the least obeisance made he; not a minute stopped or stayed he;
    But, with mien of lord or lady, perched above my chamber door—
Perched upon a bust of Pallas just above my chamber door—
            Perched, and sat, and nothing more.
 

Then this ebony bird beguiling my sad fancy into smiling,

By the grave and stern decorum of the countenance it wore,

“Though thy crest be shorn and shaven, thou,” I said, “art sure no craven,

Ghastly grim and ancient Raven wandering from the Nightly shore—

Tell me what thy lordly name is on the Night’s Plutonian shore!”

            Quoth the Raven “Nevermore.”

3 hours ago, Credo in Deum said:

I like how you start by saying you don't think you're presenting a false equivalency but then say "now granted, a mass marketed statuette is not in itself a cultural treasure".  Wake up, friend.  The entire thread is about decorating your home in pagan nick-nacks.  No one is calling for classical pieces to be stripped away or for Michelangelos' work to be taken down or to ban people from owning pictures or oil paintings of such work.  

And you're right, we do live in an increasingly progressivist society which seeks to minimize the classics by pushing relativism.  A professed Catholic who displays pagan god nick-nacks in their homes, at first glance, doesn't really help fight against that ideology. 

 

 

I haven't had the leisure to respond to the comments in this thread, for which I apologize. I will, however, recommend you check out this article: https://www.sacredarchitecture.org/articles/god_the_father_of_lights_c._s._lewis_on_christianity_and_paganism 

If you have the time, I'd like to hear your thoughts, as well as everyone else's, on the article. Off the top of my head, I know St. Basil wrote a short work on pagan literature, which discusses how Christians can use "pagan lore" with profit. Though he is dealing with literature, I think his principles can be applied to pagan art as well. The pagan "idols" are no longer worshipped and are now received by most of us as literary motifs and characters. In my opinion, having a statue of Athena is no different than having a bust of the Bard or Homer. 

[fides' Jack]

On 10/8/2022 at 5:05 PM, Nihil Obstat said:

I do not think that is a false equivalency. How many people are inspired to burn incense to Venus after a stroll through the Uffizi? I would predict that number to be hovering around zero. Where is the scandal? How is it more scandalous in the home as opposed to a gallery?

As opposed to a public gallery?

There are many classical art pieces that are Christian and are also worth having in the home.  I agree that context is immensely important, especially when you are dealing with pagan characters or themes, and especially when we know many of those pagan characters and themes have a demonic origin.

On 10/8/2022 at 5:05 PM, Nihil Obstat said:

On a more realistic level, I think that cultivating and celebrating good taste is potentially an act of virtue. We live in an increasingly progressivist society which ignores or minimizes the classics when they have the gall not to conform to the new materialist subjective orthodoxy. In consciously elevating the best examples of classical art, we can offer a potent reminder of the inherent worth of tradition and cultural heritage.

This is very true, and increasingly so.  But there are so many good pieces that are not pagan that we could get rid of all "good" pagan art and we wouldn't be missing anything.  Of course, as was argued earlier, not all depictions of pagan characters would constitute pagan art.  The piece from the Sistine Chapel is a great example.

Throughout the bible, every time God's people turn away from the idols and turn once again (over and over again) to God, a necessary part of that is destroying all the idols (and I can argue, artwork) that did nothing to glorify God.  Beauty is worthless if it is not in some way directed toward God.

23 hours ago, Credo in Deum said:

A professed Catholic who displays pagan god nick-nacks in their homes, at first glance, doesn't really help fight against that ideology. 

[CS937]

1 hour ago, fides' Jack said:

As opposed to a public gallery?

There are many classical art pieces that are Christian and are also worth having in the home.  I agree that context is immensely important, especially when you are dealing with pagan characters or themes, and especially when we know many of those pagan characters and themes have a demonic origin.

This is very true, and increasingly so.  But there are so many good pieces that are not pagan that we could get rid of all "good" pagan art and we wouldn't be missing anything.  Of course, as was argued earlier, not all depictions of pagan characters would constitute pagan art.  The piece from the Sistine Chapel is a great example.

Throughout the bible, every time God's people turn away from the idols and turn once again (over and over again) to God, a necessary part of that is destroying all the idols (and I can argue, artwork) that did nothing to glorify God.  Beauty is worthless if it is not in some way directed toward God.

Did you read the article I posted in my previous post?

 

Quote

He explained (in another scholarly work, “Hero and Leander”) that “gods and goddesses could always be used in a Christian sense” by a medieval or Elizabethan poet. Dante, Sidney, Spenser, and Milton all recognized that the redeemed gods could perform all sorts of good, true, and beautiful tasks. As he wrote in his magnum opus, English Literature in the Sixteenth Century, for them “the gods are God incognito and everyone is in the secret.” They understood paganism as “the religion of poetry through which the author can express, at any moment, just so much or so little of his real religion as his art requires.”

 

[Credo in Deum]

22 hours ago, CS937 said:

Then this ebony bird beguiling my sad fancy into smiling,

By the grave and stern decorum of the countenance it wore,

“Though thy crest be shorn and shaven, thou,” I said, “art sure no craven,

Ghastly grim and ancient Raven wandering from the Nightly shore—

Tell me what thy lordly name is on the Night’s Plutonian shore!”

            Quoth the Raven “Nevermore.”

I haven't had the leisure to respond to the comments in this thread, for which I apologize. I will, however, recommend you check out this article: https://www.sacredarchitecture.org/articles/god_the_father_of_lights_c._s._lewis_on_christianity_and_paganism 

If you have the time, I'd like to hear your thoughts, as well as everyone else's, on the article. Off the top of my head, I know St. Basil wrote a short work on pagan literature, which discusses how Christians can use "pagan lore" with profit. Though he is dealing with literature, I think his principles can be applied to pagan art as well. The pagan "idols" are no longer worshipped and are now received by most of us as literary motifs and characters. In my opinion, having a statue of Athena is no different than having a bust of the Bard or Homer. 

I like the link you posted since it also deals with using pagan lore for profit to evangelise and point others towards Christ.  This is what was done with the pagan temples, which were converted to churches. It was why Michelangelo incorporated them into the Sistine Chapel, and so forth.  Now, I think using St. Paul as an example of this is wrong though since St. Paul doesn't point to a specific pagan god to draw a parallel to Christ, but points to their acceptance of their own ignorance of the gods, which is why he drew them to the spot dedicated to the unknown god in order to point them towards the True God, Christ. 

With that said, these motives differ from buying pagan nick-nacks simply because you like the look of them in your house. Now if you are going to arrange such pieces in your house in a way that will likewise point towards the Kingship of Christ and thus edify those who visit your home then, by all means, go for it.   

 

[Nihil Obstat]

3 hours ago, fides' Jack said:

But there are so many good pieces that are not pagan that we could get rid of all "good" pagan art and we wouldn't be missing anything. 

Of course we would - we would be missing those pieces we got rid of. Art is not really fungible - one piece is not replaced by another piece, even if they are both equally artistically valuable.

If we ever lose Botticelli's Birth of Venus, through theft or war or accidental damage (God protect us), we will have lost an irreplaceable cultural treasure. Yes we will have many equally worthy pieces of religious art, but regardless we would have lost something that is effectively priceless.

[fides' Jack]

22 hours ago, CS937 said:

Did you read the article I posted in my previous post?

Yes I did.  Thank you, it was worth the read.

20 hours ago, Nihil Obstat said:

Of course we would - we would be missing those pieces we got rid of. Art is not really fungible - one piece is not replaced by another piece, even if they are both equally artistically valuable.

If we ever lose Botticelli's Birth of Venus, through theft or war or accidental damage (God protect us), we will have lost an irreplaceable cultural treasure. Yes we will have many equally worthy pieces of religious art, but regardless we would have lost something that is effectively priceless.

I appreciate the sentiment.

I'll be honest, I am a little torn on the issue.  I completely agree with @Credo in Deum that pagan knick-knacks should not be kept in the home.  I also agree with you that we've completely lost our sense of objective beauty, and perhaps if we made an effort to preserve those pieces that exemplify true beauty, it could make a difference.  Beauty is not in the eye of the beholder.  I still also think that beauty is worthless if it is not in some way directed toward God.  Do saints in heaven care about Botticelli's Birth of Venus?  Probably not.  Does objectively beautiful art, made by beings who were made in the image of God, give glory to God?  Possibly.

I'm also way out of my depth on the matter.  I've thrown in my two cents.

[CS937]

2 hours ago, fides' Jack said:

Yes I did.  Thank you, it was worth the read.

I appreciate the sentiment.

I'll be honest, I am a little torn on the issue.  I completely agree with @Credo in Deum that pagan knick-knacks should not be kept in the home.  I also agree with you that we've completely lost our sense of objective beauty, and perhaps if we made an effort to preserve those pieces that exemplify true beauty, it could make a difference.  Beauty is not in the eye of the beholder.  I still also think that beauty is worthless if it is not in some way directed toward God.  Do saints in heaven care about Botticelli's Birth of Venus?  Probably not.  Does objectively beautiful art, made by beings who were made in the image of God, give glory to God?  Possibly.

I'm also way out of my depth on the matter.  I've thrown in my two cents.

https://lucazavagno.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/saradi-mendelovici.pdf

 

^This is also worth reading  

[KnightofChrist]

Idols as Art could have saved the lives of many early christian martyrs. 

Meh. We modern christians are fatso lazy wimps.