Imaging the Father in art

  • Thread starter Thread starter jonathan_hili
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jonathan_hili

Guest
Hi all.

I’m not sure that there is an official Church position on this, but what is everyone’s feeling about picturing God the Father, especially as we see evident in works by Michelangelo (i.e. God “the Old Man”)? I understand imaging the Son since he was (and is) incarnate, and the Spirit as figurative flames or a dove (since we read this in Scripture), but should we be portraying the Father in this manner?
 
This isn’t a matter of “ought to” or “should”, but a matter of possibility. God the Father cannot be imaged, because it is literally impossible. He is infinite, eternal, immeasurable, totally perfect Being. He specifically forbade images of Himself because they detract from the reality - we naturally just paint Him as a sort of grandfather figure, as we can see in the history of western art.

It is permissible to paint the “Ancient of Days” from the Book of Daniel, since the characteristics of that mysterious being are described by the prophet. I don’t see how it can even be possible for us to make a specific image of God the Father, however, without giving offense to the glory of God and lowering Him in our own minds.
 
It’s weird, people technically aren’t supposed to, because we don’t know what he looks like.

But, of all places, the Roman Catholic capital (Vatican, Sistine Chapel) has a lot of images of God the Father.
 
jonathan_hili said:
Hi all.

I’m not sure that there is an official Church position on this, but what is everyone’s feeling about picturing God the Father, especially as we see evident in works by Michelangelo (i.e. God “the Old Man”)? I understand imaging the Son since he was (and is) incarnate, and the Spirit as figurative flames or a dove (since we read this in Scripture), but should we be portraying the Father in this manner?
Click to expand...
It has been part of sacred art for over a millennium and is not condemned by the Church.
At first only the Hand of God, often emerging from a cloud, was portrayed. Gradually, portrayals of the head and later the whole figure were depicted, and by the time of the Renaissance artistic representations of God the Father were freely used.
Click to expand...
In the VIII Century, in his treatise On the Divine Images, the Doctor of the Church John of Damascus wrote: “In former times, God who is without form or body, could never be depicted. But now when God is seen in the flesh conversing with men, I make an image of the God whom I see. If we attempt to make an image of the invisible God, this would be sinful indeed. It is impossible to portray one who is without body.”
Click to expand...
Prior to the 10th century no attempt was made to represent a separate depiction as a full human figure of God the Father in Western art. Yet, Western art eventually required some way to illustrate the presence of the Father, so through successive representations a set of artistic styles for the depiction of the Father in human form gradually emerged around the 10th century AD.
Click to expand...
Typically only a small part would be represented, usually the hand, or sometimes the face.
Click to expand...
By the 12th century depictions of God the Father had started to appear in French illuminated manuscripts, which as a less public form could often be more adventurous in their iconography, and in stained glass church windows in England. Initially the head or bust was usually shown in some form of frame of clouds in the top of the picture space, where the Hand of God had formerly appeared.
Click to expand...
In Renaissance paintings of the adoration of the Trinity, God may be depicted in two ways, either with emphasis on The Father, or the three elements of the Trinity. The most usual depiction of the Trinity in Renaissance art depicts God the Father as an old man, usually with a long beard and patriarchal in appearance, sometimes with a triangular halo (as a reference to the Trinity), or with a papal tiara, specially in Northern Renaissance painting.
Click to expand...
Representations of God the Father and the Trinity were attacked both by Protestants and within Catholicism, by the Jansenist and Baianist movements as well as more orthodox theologians. This had the effect both of reducing Church support for the less central depictions, and strengthening it for the core ones.
Click to expand...
Artistic depictions of God the Father were uncontroversial in Catholic art thereafter, but less common depictions of the Trinity were condemned. In 1745 Pope Benedict XIV explicitly supported the Throne of Mercy depiction, referring to the “Ancient of Days”, but in 1786 it was still necessary for Pope Pius VI to issue a papal bull condemning the decision of an Italian church council to remove all images of the Trinity.
Click to expand...
While representations of God the Father were growing in Italy, Spain, Germany and Holland, there was resistance elsewhere in Europe. In 1632, in England, the use of the images of the Trinity in church windows was condemned. In 1667 the Pan-Orthodox synod of Moscow specifically included a ban on a number of depictions of God the Father and the Holy Spirit, which then also resulted in a whole range of other icons being placed on the forbidden list.
Click to expand...

Example of stained glass portrayal of the Holy Trinity.
 
Joko2599 said:
It’s weird, people technically aren’t supposed to, because we don’t know what he looks like.
Click to expand...
That’s not correct, Joko. We don’t just lack knowledge of what God the Father looks like - we cannot depict Him** because He doesn’t look like anything**. Infinity is not measurable, and eternity cannot be placed in time. To depict God the Father as a bearded old man not only denigrates Him, but it’s also just heretical.

One of the reasons I was an atheist for the first 20 years of my life was because Those Silly Christians always depicted God as some doddering old wizard in the clouds. I couldn’t worship that being, and I am glad to say that I don’t.
 
Classicist said:
That’s not correct, Joko. We don’t just lack knowledge of what God the Father looks like - we cannot depict Him** because He doesn’t look like anything**. Infinity is not measurable, and eternity cannot be placed in time. To depict God the Father as a bearded old man not only denigrates Him, but it’s also just heretical.

One of the reasons I was an atheist for the first 20 years of my life was because Those Silly Christians always depicted God as some doddering old wizard in the clouds. I couldn’t worship that being, and I am glad to say that I don’t.
Click to expand...
That is true. But both of us still come to the same point, it is not possible to depict God the Father.
 
R_C said:
Then again, neither does the Holy Spirit have the body of a dove, yet God Himself chose to “depict” Him as such 🤷
Click to expand...
The quote from John is very profound. When we make an image of the Lord, we see the divine person in the mystery of incarnate flesh. Since the Son is totally united with the Father who generated and begot Him in eternity, we see the Father - even in the love of the incarnate Word.

This still means we can’t depict “The Father”, the Person, as an old man in robes with a crown. 😛
 
Daniel refers to God as “the Ancient of Days.” cf Daniel 7 where Daniel recounts his visions or dreams. From this we obtain the image of God as an old man. This is only imagery, not reality.

Reb Levi
 
Joko2599 said:
It’s weird, people technically aren’t supposed to, because we don’t know what he looks like.
Click to expand...
We also don’t know for sure what Jesus, or for that matter most biblical people, looked like. 😉
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top