Scripture, Tradition and Art: Three infallible sources of Truth?

[Pace]

My point is this: What happens when art is done perfectly? Another way of looking at the same question: Was the Virgin Mary an infallible source of truth?

I believe that there are two artists at work in the world whose art is pure, almost as we could say that the Virgin was pure. They seem to be perfect instruments for the Lord to play a perfect tune as He pleases.

What do you think?

 

[Kristina_P]

Art is, by its very nature, subjective. I’m not sure you could go calling it infallible.

 

[Pace]

Kristina P.:

Art is, by its very nature, subjective. I’m not sure you could go calling it infallible.

Why do you say that art is subjective by it’s very nature? Does it have to be only subjective?

 

[mercygate]

Pace:

Why do you say that art is subjective by it’s very nature? Does it have to be only subjective?

Icon writers consider their art a graphic representation of Scripture (when they paing scriptural subjects), and thus not subjective at all. The prescriptions are highly ordered and specific.

When you say “two artists,” what, or who (Who?) do you have in mind?

 

[Roman_Army]

Pace:

My point is this: What happens when art is done perfectly? Another way of looking at the same question: Was the Virgin Mary an infallible source of truth?

I believe that there are two artists at work in the world whose art is pure, almost as we could say that the Virgin was pure. They seem to be perfect instruments for the Lord to play a perfect tune as He pleases.

What do you think?

Art can never be done perfectly. How can an artist know exactly how the invisible eternal looks? Art was only meant as an instrument of prayer and worship, and to teach basic articles of faith. Also, obviously the work of art has to be approved by the Church.

And no the Virgin Mary was not an infallible source of Truth, that was only given to the apostles and their successors (in ecumenical council and the Pope is infallible in preaching ex cathedra).

 

[Ignatius]

Pace:

My point is this: What happens when art is done perfectly? Another way of looking at the same question: Was the Virgin Mary an infallible source of truth?

I believe that there are two artists at work in the world whose art is pure, almost as we could say that the Virgin was pure. They seem to be perfect instruments for the Lord to play a perfect tune as He pleases.

What do you think?

Art is not one of the sources of the inerrant word of God, only Scripture and Sacred Tradition.

 

[Pace]

mercygate:

When you say “two artists,” what, or who (Who?) do you have in mind?

If I were to say who they are, it might ruin the idea for some.

 

[mercygate]

Pace:

If I were to say who they are, it might spoil the idea in the minds of some.

Well, aside from the fact that “art” does not seem to be a source of infallible doctrine – even if it can be an expression of it – the fact that you choose to be coy with your candidates kind spoils the broth, doesn’t it. After all, you question was whether art can be a source of Truth. If by art you mean what human beings produce through their skill and talent, then “art” is not a source of Truth but may convey truth. Of course, Plato ranted at considerable length about how art is a great lie – and we know that “art” often it is just that.

 

[Pace]

Art can never be done perfectly. How can an artist know exactly how the invisible eternal looks?

I was wondering: What is perfection in this world? We would all agree (and it may even be an article of faith) that Jesus did everything perfectly. Yet we know he didn’t work all his miracles, or speak all of his words, at one time. He was perfect moving though time. He did everything perfectly (according to the circumstances present at each time) using perfect timing.

So, the perfect work of art would be just like Jesus. Jesus walked around in disguise; he revealed only as much of himself as we could accept.

Art was only meant as an instrument of prayer and worship, and to teach basic articles of faith.

I might have thought this at one time. Now I believe that all art was an attempt, whether consciously or not, to create or to bring back God or Christ. In other words, it was an attempt at Transubstantiation.

 

[mercygate]

Pace:

Now I believe that all art was an attempt, whether consciously or not, to create or to bring back God or Christ. In other words, it was an attempt at Transubstantiation.

Why?

 

[Pace]

mercygate:

the fact that you choose to be coy with your candidates kind spoils the broth, doesn’t it.

I love to talk about them. In fact, I could give the reasons that show how their work perfectly correspondes with the pure faith protected by the Church. But when I mention their names, the idea always dies for some.

If by art you mean what human beings produce through their skill and talent, then “art” is not a source of Truth but may convey truth.

But what are “skill” and “talent”? Shouldn’t they both be guided by an intense listening to the Lord? And if a person perfected their listening skills, would the Lord hold anything back from them? That is, if they had a humility to match this “listening”.

That’s what I believe happened with Mary. She listened perfectly with perfect humility. And she conceived the Word of God within herself.

Of course, Plato ranted at considerable length about how art is a great lie – and we know that “art” often it is just that.

The truth about ‘art’s lie’ plays a prominent and perfect role within the works of these two artists.

 

[Pace]

mercygate:

Why?

Maybe the Eucharist all these years was a preparation for what the perfect ‘movie’ eventually would accomplish? After all, Jesus did say, “the flesh profits nothing”.