The Blood of Christ

[_zeezrom]

Thanks to all who posted here. I read all and wish I had time to respond...

Stigmata.

I am repulsed by the art in the OP. Christianity is a cult of human sacrifice, or at least of one human sacrifice. No thanks.

When I first saw this painting, I was drawn to the paradox. It's sort of a personal thing, I suppose.

[_zeezrom]

For the record: I don't think Twilight is worthy of praise.

[_Chap]

St. Catherine of Siena was a mystic. The painting is attempting to portray one of her mystical experiences. Difficult to do if you are the person having the experiences. Always seen in a mystic's writings, sometimes as poetry. It is near impossible for someone else to do it for you.

It's a kitschy painting, but full of deep meaning. :) Vanni was a painter in Siena, so no doubt, he painted more than one painting of the Patroness of that city. This particular one is meant to show a vision she had of Jesus. It isn't literally what occurred. Rather, to show how intimate her relationship was, in very strong religious tones.

Old Testament sacrifices were tied to atonement. In Christianity, these sacrifices prefigure Jesus. Jesus, being God's Perfect sacrifice. The intimacy in this painting is that of St. Catherine, to the atonement of Jesus. The receiving the blood of Christ symbolic of the Eucharist.

Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you. John 6 is very clear.

It isn't that we're obsessed with blood. We aren't. :) We just accept what we view as God's Final and Perfect Revelation: Jesus Christ.

If our daughter starts telling us she has dreams about drinking someone's blood, and even writes poems about it we get her to a doctor. If an authoritative religious organization labels her a 'mystic', famous artists do paintings of her fantasies.

If a man on the internet goes on about the need to eat human flesh and drink human blood, we find him and do something about it, usually involving restrictions on his liberty and shutting down his sites. If people say that in a book held to be 'sacred' by an authoritative religious organization, then we dress up in our best clothes and listen to someone reading it aloud in a big public ceremony.

There is really no basic difference of kind here: it is just a matter of sacralization and sanitization. Personally, I am mildly embarrassed when I look back at what I once considered quite normal.

[_Dr. Shades]

It flows life. It flows love.
I drink and I live

So far, so good (if you're into cannibalism).

At you, I spit and I hate!

Talk about ingratitude! Jesus should withhold the blood until the drinker gets a serious attitude adjustment.

[_Drifting]

That image would be considered R rated, mind bending, graphic gore if the characters within it were't associated with religious beliefs.

[_Chap]

That image would be considered R rated, mind bending, graphic gore if the characters within it were't associated with religious beliefs.

When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: I knew that the religion taught to me by my parents and practiced by all the authority figures around me was the normal way to think, although there were people out there called 'heathens' or 'heretics' who believed weird things in the name of their religions.

But (a rather long time after) I became a man, I put away childish things. I realized that my own religion was just another religion. And in its own special way, it was just as weird as everybody else's had previously seemed to me.

[_madeleine]

St. Catherine of Siena was a mystic. The painting is attempting to portray one of her mystical experiences. Difficult to do if you are the person having the experiences. Always seen in a mystic's writings, sometimes as poetry. It is near impossible for someone else to do it for you.

It's a kitschy painting, but full of deep meaning. :) Vanni was a painter in Siena, so no doubt, he painted more than one painting of the Patroness of that city. This particular one is meant to show a vision she had of Jesus. It isn't literally what occurred. Rather, to show how intimate her relationship was, in very strong religious tones.

Old Testament sacrifices were tied to atonement. In Christianity, these sacrifices prefigure Jesus. Jesus, being God's Perfect sacrifice. The intimacy in this painting is that of St. Catherine, to the atonement of Jesus. The receiving the blood of Christ symbolic of the Eucharist.

Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you. John 6 is very clear.

It isn't that we're obsessed with blood. We aren't. :) We just accept what we view as God's Final and Perfect Revelation: Jesus Christ.

If our daughter starts telling us she has dreams about drinking someone's blood, and even writes poems about it we get her to a doctor. If an authoritative religious organization labels her a 'mystic', famous artists do paintings of her fantasies.

If a man on the internet goes on about the need to eat human flesh and drink human blood, we find him and do something about it, usually involving restrictions on his liberty and shutting down his sites. If people say that in a book held to be 'sacred' by an authoritative religious organization, then we dress up in our best clothes and listen to someone reading it aloud in a big public ceremony.

There is really no basic difference of kind here: it is just a matter of sacralization and sanitization. Personally, I am mildly embarrassed when I look back at what I once considered quite normal.

Again, the painting is not the literal experience of St. Catherine.

No doubt, many disciples stopped following Jesus, and continued to do so. "As a result of this, many [of] his disciples returned to their former way of life and no longer accompanied him." The Protestant reformation rejected the Real Presence of the Eucharist, turning it into a symbol. Mormons continued that tradition. Not even caring if they use the same matter (wine).

We aren't cannibals. When I receive the Eucharist it tastes like a wafer, a lot like matzah, and the wine tastes like wine. We don't come away from communion with blood dripping from our lips and flesh in our teeth.

[_madeleine]

chap, I just want to be clear that my above explanation isn't a condemnation. In that sort of passive-aggressive type coming from Mormonism. Just an explanation.

I understand where you are coming from. The first time a Catholic explained the real presence to me, I called him a cannibal. He in turn, called me a heathen.

It is an acceptance of faith. Christ revealed who He is, I accept that revelation. For myself, my relationship with Jesus Christ is an encounter. The painting shows, artistically, an aspect of that encounter. It is of the heart and soul.

The Eucharist is the source, center and summit of our faith. You'll find many Catholic writings, art and miracles that surround the Eucharist. Some are much more disturbing than a painting. Being provoked, jarred out of our preconceptions and expectations, is one of the attributes of Christ. The Cross, being the prime example.

Some would say, our society (western/US) has sanitized death to the point that it has no affect on us. Don't you think it should? Shouldn't we be provoked?

I'm a simple Catholic. Christ is at the center, always on my horizon. I can't explain others experiences for them. I have had my own, unexplainable, experiences that cannot be explained away as tricks of the mind. Believe me, I tried that route for most of my life. When I asked a Catholic friend, what meaning I should take, what should I do, what, what, what? He only said, why does it have to mean anything more than God's love.

From the writings of mystics that I have read, that is their same approach.

Peace.

[_madeleine]

That image would be considered R rated, mind bending, graphic gore if the characters within it were't associated with religious beliefs.

It is not meant for entertainment. :)

[_madeleine]

St. Catherine of Siena was a mystic. The painting is attempting to portray one of her mystical experiences. Difficult to do if you are the person having the experiences. Always seen in a mystic's writings, sometimes as poetry. It is near impossible for someone else to do it for you.

It's a kitschy painting, but full of deep meaning. :) Vanni was a painter in Siena, so no doubt, he painted more than one painting of the Patroness of that city. This particular one is meant to show a vision she had of Jesus. It isn't literally what occurred. Rather, to show how intimate her relationship was, in very strong religious tones.

Old Testament sacrifices were tied to atonement. In Christianity, these sacrifices prefigure Jesus. Jesus, being God's Perfect sacrifice. The intimacy in this painting is that of St. Catherine, to the atonement of Jesus. The receiving the blood of Christ symbolic of the Eucharist.

Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you. John 6 is very clear.

It isn't that we're obsessed with blood. We aren't. :) We just accept what we view as God's Final and Perfect Revelation: Jesus Christ.

I'm so glad you are here, Maddie.

Thanks zeez.