Thank you. Unfortunately, disappointing for me since it stops with liturgical in the east. I hardly see the explanation for the west. In what concrete and specific way are western icons (before the renaissance mixup) liturgical?
yes, I know I stopped before reaching this question, I am thinking about it now and hope to speak about it. There are 3 kinds of “icon”: unmovable (like frescoes, mosaics, stained glasses etc), portable icons with some liturgical and some only devotional. It seems that in the West, we have only the first and third kind. Do we ever have the second kind? Should we? what replaces this in the roman liturgy?
Thank you sister. I don’t mean it towards you, but a kind of “default” explanation (as it seems to be the easiest) among western iconographers is to start and sometimes end with - it is liturgical, hence sacred and proceed to talk about how they are venerated in the east (at least that is my limited experience).
But shouldn’t the explanation rather start with the difference between transformed heavenly reality represented by icon (or statue - but stylised sacred of course, not naturalistic due to humanist philosophy) be it fresco, paintings/statuary on winged altarpiece, or devotional di/triptychs, where these can serve sometimes devotional/liturgical (albeit in different practical way) purposes, but fundamentally representing presence of heaven in special way. That is what Caravaggio cannot do.
Thank you. Unfortunately, disappointing for me since it stops with liturgical in the east. I hardly see the explanation for the west. In what concrete and specific way are western icons (before the renaissance mixup) liturgical?
yes, I know I stopped before reaching this question, I am thinking about it now and hope to speak about it. There are 3 kinds of “icon”: unmovable (like frescoes, mosaics, stained glasses etc), portable icons with some liturgical and some only devotional. It seems that in the West, we have only the first and third kind. Do we ever have the second kind? Should we? what replaces this in the roman liturgy?
Only one that comes to mind is the Cross in the veneration.
Well, and the crucifix in procession (in and out).
Thank you sister. I don’t mean it towards you, but a kind of “default” explanation (as it seems to be the easiest) among western iconographers is to start and sometimes end with - it is liturgical, hence sacred and proceed to talk about how they are venerated in the east (at least that is my limited experience).
But shouldn’t the explanation rather start with the difference between transformed heavenly reality represented by icon (or statue - but stylised sacred of course, not naturalistic due to humanist philosophy) be it fresco, paintings/statuary on winged altarpiece, or devotional di/triptychs, where these can serve sometimes devotional/liturgical (albeit in different practical way) purposes, but fundamentally representing presence of heaven in special way. That is what Caravaggio cannot do.
Thank you, very clear, concise and helpful 🙏🏼❤️