Why do pictures portray Jesus with long hair?

[AndrewAxland]

That’s a pope’s personal opinion, and he is not speaking for the Church. It can also be disputed or ignored by Catholics. Not every statement from a pope is authoritative. This is a good example.

Popes have expressed a lot of personal opinions over the centuries. Some are of consideration, some are just plain silly. We are not obligated to take them more seriously than those of any other person.

 

[undead_rat]

That’s a pope’s personal opinion,… It can be . . ignored by Catholics.

What cannot be ignored is the fact that the Image on the Shroud is in the form of a photographic negative of a human body that has been executed by crucifixion. It has been proven to be neither a photograph nor a painting. The blood is human. No one has been able to reproduce this Image, even with modern techniques.

I am sorry that you think that Pope Pius’ considered opinion on this matter is silly.

 

[AndrewAxland]

I am sorry that you think that Pope Pius’ considered opinion on this matter is silly.

Whoa! I did NOT say that. At all!

But even if I did, that would not make me a bad Catholic.

As for the rest of your post. Not really. I don’t buy it, and am not obligated to as a Catholic. To me it’s just a pious medieval counterfeit. No more.

 

[PureKathleen46]

If you have beautiful hair, you don’t cut it!

 

[QContinuum]

I think the hair in that picture is fine. Not sure if that skirt is too short though.

Might need to consult the CAF modesty police.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I too like the Pantocrator. More than that, I find it interesting how the Pantocrator, the Shroud of Turin, the Divine Mercy image, and another unapproved apparition of Jesus that an artist painted with the help of the alleged visionary (who most likely had never seen the Pantocrator, Shroud or Divine Mercy) all look very similar in terms of facial features. Long face, long nose etc. To me, this consistency of features - hair length aside because hair is changeable anyway and I doubt that getting a regularly scheduled haircut was a big priority in Jesus’ mind - seems to be more than just a coincidence.

 

[dochawk]

I too like the Pantocrator. More than that, I find it interesting how the Pantocrator, . . .all look very similar in terms of facial features.

Icons do NOT represent actual features.

EVER.

It is actually prohibited; any feature in an icon is to e generic, not a representation of an actual person’s features.

hawk

 

[undead_rat]

I did not invent the idea that Pia’s 1898 negative of the Shroud proved its authenticity:

"The Vatican experts spent some years studying and verifying all of the historical documents connected with the Shroud, and Sept 6, 1936 Pope Pius XI made the following pronouncement:

‘These [Pia’s photographs] are the images of the Divine Redeemer . . .
They derive directly from the object, surrounded by mystery, which–this can be safely said–it has now been established is no product of human hands. It is the Holy Shroud at Turin. …—it is absolutely certain that it [Jesus’ image] is not the work of man.’" ***

***From the forward to the 1970 edition of THE SHROUD OF CHRIST

 

[undead_rat]

Icons do NOT represent actual features.

It is actually prohibited; any feature in an icon is to e generic, not a representation of an actual person’s features.

Perhaps that is true in the Roman Church. The Orthodox Church has a long tradition of iconography, and included in that tradition is the concept of a “true icon” or vera iconica. That particular type of icon would have to be drawn while the iconographer viewed his subject. Then the finished icon would have to be touched to the same. Obviously these acts would be impossible for icons of long dead saints or for biblical scenes. But for icons of the Holy Mandylion, the image of Jesus made without human hand, the drawing of a vera iconica was possible. Many examples survive to this day.

The oldest known icon taken from the Mandylion (Image of Edessa) is the 6th century depiction of Christ that is in St. Catherine’s Monastery. This we believe is what Jesus actually looked like. It is an actual representation of His features.

 

[dochawk]

Perhaps that is true in the Roman Church. T

I don’t think the RCC even has such rules (but I might be mistaken. I’m referring to the general EO, which the EC follows. There are clear exceptions, such as you cite, but (usually) one of the signs of misunderstanding is detailed or distinctive features .

hawk

 

[steve-b]

Why do pictures portray Jesus with long hair if Paul says, “Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair, it is a dishonor to him,” 1 Corinthians 11:14… Jesus would definitely not have had long hair if Paul said that.

while her picture of Jesus doesn’t follow the shroud, or any picture I’ve seen, I liked her portrayal the minute I saw it.
google Akiane