In the above images you have "Fall of the Rebel Angels" by Frans Floris and "Adoration of the Name of Jesus" by Juan de Roelas. These paintings are both created for devotional purposes. However, with Frans Floris's compact composition and disarrayed human motion, does it make sense to the common viewer? Can they find St. Michael in the midst of all these 'rebel angels' without it confusing them? This painting comes together as St. Michael defeating the demons and sending them back from where they came from. They are shown in the nude and are given animal forms for parts of their bodies to show that they are not human.
Though this painting does not have every character fully dressed, the narrative is direct. St. Michael is in the middle, raising his sword against a foe. The demon angels are not fully dressed which is appropriate given that they are demons. The colors are not vivid, but earthy and subtle. The decrees of Trent, put in simple terms, that art had to be "skillful and pleasing in order to be convincing." Floris's painting puts out an almost savage feeling, but nonetheless it is "skillful and pleasing". This is depicting a battle against evil, an idea not many would be pleased with, however, in showing the public that demons exist and are defeated by the angels, then this, too, shows people that they should stand their ground against evil and fight it off. It is shocking and a lot to take in on first glance, but it does what Trent said paintings should do. It shows people the direct narrative. It is not lavish, nor is it seductive in the figures' quality; it provides a pleasing composition among the many moving figures; and most importantly, it teaches them to be strong and brave against evil like St. Michael and the other angels in this painting.
De Roelas's painting would be accepted more easily than Floris's painting for the fact that the composition is not completely knitted together by the figures. In his painting, Joseph and Mary stand in the center holding Jesus. All around them are angels and cherubs glorifying Jesus's name. In the foreground kneeling are two saints and hidden in shadow beneath the angel with the cello are two men gathered at a table. Looking at this image it is clear that these people are glorifying Jesus, or rather, adoring Jesus and His name. It is pleasing to look at and is calmer than Floris's composition. This image show people that they should, too, glorify Jesus's name. The color palette is very similar to Floris's composition with the earth tones, the reds, the browns, and the yellow ochres. It has more shadow and light variation, but overall it is similar to Floris's in terms of color.
These two paintings do a fine job of following Trent's decrees on religious art, but do these paintings by Rubens, "St. Gregory the Great Surrounded by Other Saints," and Velazquez, "Christ on the Cross" be readily accepted by the Council and the bishops who steadfastly encourage these decrees?
Though this painting does not have every character fully dressed, the narrative is direct. St. Michael is in the middle, raising his sword against a foe. The demon angels are not fully dressed which is appropriate given that they are demons. The colors are not vivid, but earthy and subtle. The decrees of Trent, put in simple terms, that art had to be "skillful and pleasing in order to be convincing." Floris's painting puts out an almost savage feeling, but nonetheless it is "skillful and pleasing". This is depicting a battle against evil, an idea not many would be pleased with, however, in showing the public that demons exist and are defeated by the angels, then this, too, shows people that they should stand their ground against evil and fight it off. It is shocking and a lot to take in on first glance, but it does what Trent said paintings should do. It shows people the direct narrative. It is not lavish, nor is it seductive in the figures' quality; it provides a pleasing composition among the many moving figures; and most importantly, it teaches them to be strong and brave against evil like St. Michael and the other angels in this painting.
De Roelas's painting would be accepted more easily than Floris's painting for the fact that the composition is not completely knitted together by the figures. In his painting, Joseph and Mary stand in the center holding Jesus. All around them are angels and cherubs glorifying Jesus's name. In the foreground kneeling are two saints and hidden in shadow beneath the angel with the cello are two men gathered at a table. Looking at this image it is clear that these people are glorifying Jesus, or rather, adoring Jesus and His name. It is pleasing to look at and is calmer than Floris's composition. This image show people that they should, too, glorify Jesus's name. The color palette is very similar to Floris's composition with the earth tones, the reds, the browns, and the yellow ochres. It has more shadow and light variation, but overall it is similar to Floris's in terms of color.
These two paintings do a fine job of following Trent's decrees on religious art, but do these paintings by Rubens, "St. Gregory the Great Surrounded by Other Saints," and Velazquez, "Christ on the Cross" be readily accepted by the Council and the bishops who steadfastly encourage these decrees?
Rubens's painting, "St. Gregory Surrounded by Other Saints," is exquisite in color and detail. The composition is wonderful with a circular motion going around it, always starting with the picture of Mary and Jesus. This image does not clearly show what it is about. The title says that it is St. Gregory and other Saints, but Gregory seems to be looking at the picture of Mary and Jesus, but his expression is hard and looks fearful rather than happy and glorifying. St. Domitilla is looking at the audience instead of at Mary and Jesus. So what about this painting makes it okay to put in a church as an altarpiece? It is because the bishop allowed it. It may have figures draped in luscious colors and satin, and it may be dangerous and lead an individual to 'want', but in the end, St. Gregory is looking up to Mary and Jesus with the Holy Spirit above him while other Saints are around him, most doing the same. It does not show the figure lasciviously, and it is skillful and pleasing to look at, so therefore, it is convincing.
Velazquez's painting, "Christ on the Cross," is simply Christ on the Cross, as the title states. It is showing Christ having been Crucified, but it leaves the viewer wondering at what point in the Crucifixion this is. It would show the on-looker that they should be like Christ and give their life for Him as He gave His life for them. That they should pick up their cross and carry him. The Council of Trent said that a piece "should not represent false dogmas, nor any that give occasion to the uneducated for dangerous errors." This piece is convincing in its simplicity. It is dark in color, very dark. His white body sticks out against the plain dark background. His face is shaded and his eyes closed. His body hangs loosely on the cross, seeming to indicate that he is either dead, or dying, as he is losing strength to stand upright, as this image indicates by the slant of his body. It is not pleasing to look at, but it has the 'emotion' that Trent said should come from the painting. It has the feeling of sorrow and suffering exuding from Christ's image. It may be turned away by Trent because of its "independent and self-standing mode of knowing or expression," but it does show a moment in history that is both sacred and influential, as well as emotionally moving.
These next paintings by Caravaggio, Paolo Veronese, and another done by Rubens, are ones that show a shift in content within religious paintings. Trent's decrees are still in place during the times that these paintings were created. Did the bishops let these slide because they favored these particular artists? The Council of Trent left he bishops in charge with what can and cannot be acceptable for the public to view and devotional art.
This first painting done by Veronese, "The Last Supper," is a devotional piece, but it is different than the usual paintings that depict the last supper.It shows the onlooker that Jesus is blessing a man and giving him the Eucharist. Though this is titled the last supper, it seems more like Jesus and elements of the last supper included in a supper celebrated by a big family. Everyone except those watching Jesus and the man are caught up in their own thing. They are eating, chatting loudly, based on their facial expressions and body positions. They are celebrating more than they are taking part in a sacred meal that only the disciples are allowed to attend. The Council of Trent wanted works that did not have iconoclasm; "images should be legitimate and helpful", and lastly that they should be "appropriate to their time and setting." This painting sits on the border of all of these. It is helpful and legitimate in that it is definitely Christ and the disciples at the last supper with Christ giving out the Eucharist after a blessing, and helpful in that it shows the devout that this is what really takes place during Communion during Mass. The priest holds the bread up to Christ, who in the saying of the priest's blessings, turns the bread into his body. This is done through the Holy Spirit. In this image Christ is legitimately present, as he is in Mass when the bread is consecrated through the blessing. It is not sensual in any way and does not lead the devout to think of sinful things. It is earthy in color, much like Floris's and Roelas's paintings. It is clearly a depiction of the last supper as it has all the elements that are a part of every painting that was made of the last supper. Jesus and the bread, the disciples, the the table with the white cloth, and the rest of the feast.
The painting by Caravaggio, "Doubting Thomas," is like Velazquez's "Christ on the Cross." It is straightforward in what it's depicting and there is nothing that gets in the way of that point in history. It shows Thomas putting his finger in the wound on Christ's side. This would show the devotee that they should believe even if they do not see. Thomas said "I must put my hand in his side and see the wounds on his hands and feet before I believe." Thomas doubted and Christ showed him that there should be nothing to doubt. It tells the devotee not to doubt. It is dark in shadow earthy in color like many of these early religious works. The figures are clothed and it fall into the realm of what the Council wanted, but what about the paintings made of devotional art later in the centuries?
There is this work by Rubens, " Saints Domitilla, Nereus, and Achilleus," the figure is not nude or revealing any of her body parts that would cause a sensual arousal, but she is draped in a beautiful satin gown, gleaming with silver and highlighted with a bright light. Her stance says that she is of a different status than those around her, especially with St. Nereus holding out his hand for her to go before him. Though this shows that a man should treat a woman well, it also may incline women into thinking that image is what matters instead of heart. This painting starts the shift in which paintings begin to reintroduce rich color into religious paintings, as well as elements that might have been deemed unacceptable by the Council of Trent. This is best shown in Joachim Beukelaer's piece, "Christ in the House of Mary and Martha."
Everywhere there is food. It is painted with colors that make it seems as though you could take it straight out of the painting. It is hard to pick out where Christ is. He is in the center, but in the background instead of the foreground. This piece could be interpreted in a 'wrong' way by the public. They could look at this and be filled with intense wanting of this food. They could take from this that feasts in this quantity are fine, that it isn't 'greedy', but 'necessary'. There isn't any seductive nature in the figures, but it is shifted onto the food. The food becomes the focal point, not Christ. It is a very skillful and pleasing painting, and it is a depiction and historical event that took place in Christ's life. Religious art had become a form of sacred rhetoric, in which Cicero taught that, "rhetoric should, teach, delight, and persuade" the viewer. It is certainly delightful and persuasive, but what is it persuading, what is it teaching, and what is it delighting? It all points to the food, not Christ. In fact the only way to tell that it is Christ in the background is because he has his arms spread and people surrounding him as if he is spreading his word. Otherwise, the viewer would not know that it is Christ.
The painting by Caravaggio, "Doubting Thomas," is like Velazquez's "Christ on the Cross." It is straightforward in what it's depicting and there is nothing that gets in the way of that point in history. It shows Thomas putting his finger in the wound on Christ's side. This would show the devotee that they should believe even if they do not see. Thomas said "I must put my hand in his side and see the wounds on his hands and feet before I believe." Thomas doubted and Christ showed him that there should be nothing to doubt. It tells the devotee not to doubt. It is dark in shadow earthy in color like many of these early religious works. The figures are clothed and it fall into the realm of what the Council wanted, but what about the paintings made of devotional art later in the centuries?
There is this work by Rubens, " Saints Domitilla, Nereus, and Achilleus," the figure is not nude or revealing any of her body parts that would cause a sensual arousal, but she is draped in a beautiful satin gown, gleaming with silver and highlighted with a bright light. Her stance says that she is of a different status than those around her, especially with St. Nereus holding out his hand for her to go before him. Though this shows that a man should treat a woman well, it also may incline women into thinking that image is what matters instead of heart. This painting starts the shift in which paintings begin to reintroduce rich color into religious paintings, as well as elements that might have been deemed unacceptable by the Council of Trent. This is best shown in Joachim Beukelaer's piece, "Christ in the House of Mary and Martha."
Everywhere there is food. It is painted with colors that make it seems as though you could take it straight out of the painting. It is hard to pick out where Christ is. He is in the center, but in the background instead of the foreground. This piece could be interpreted in a 'wrong' way by the public. They could look at this and be filled with intense wanting of this food. They could take from this that feasts in this quantity are fine, that it isn't 'greedy', but 'necessary'. There isn't any seductive nature in the figures, but it is shifted onto the food. The food becomes the focal point, not Christ. It is a very skillful and pleasing painting, and it is a depiction and historical event that took place in Christ's life. Religious art had become a form of sacred rhetoric, in which Cicero taught that, "rhetoric should, teach, delight, and persuade" the viewer. It is certainly delightful and persuasive, but what is it persuading, what is it teaching, and what is it delighting? It all points to the food, not Christ. In fact the only way to tell that it is Christ in the background is because he has his arms spread and people surrounding him as if he is spreading his word. Otherwise, the viewer would not know that it is Christ.
When the Council of Trent instated its decrees on how religious art should depict Catholic, or devotional aspects of faith, it made three rules: "Iconoclasm is wrong, images of sacred subjects are legitimate and helpful, and such images should be appropriate to their time and setting." The images from Floris, Roelas, Velazquez, and others followed these decrees wonderfully, though there were criticisms, the decrees were followed. Rubens followed these decrees in his works "Raising of the Cross," "Descent from the Cross," and many others, but over the years the decrees were pushed and stretched until there was religious art like "St. Gregory Surrounded by Other Saints," "Christ in the House of Mary and Martha," by Beukelaer, and "The Last Supper," by Veronese. According to Trent's regulations, it would be hard for them not to nitpick at these paintings listed previously. There are ways to find how they may fall into the decrees, but again, that is stretching them a whole lot.
Art Fortune. “Secular Subjects Art Works.” Juan de Roelas. 2006. Last modified 2014. http://www.artfortune.com/search.php?lastname=frans+floris
Belkin, Kristin L. “Rubens.” Saints Domitilla, Nereus, and Achilleus. 1998. Print
O’Malley, John. “Art, Trent, and Michael Angelo’s Last Judgement.” Religions 3.2, (2012): 344-356. MDPI AG, ProQuest Library Search (accessed November 19, 2014).
Viladesau, Richard. “Counter-Reformation Theology and Art: Examples of Ruben’s Paintings of the Passion.” Toronto Journal of Theology 28, no.1 (March 2012):29-42. Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost[l1] (accessed November 19, 2014).
[l1]
Belkin, Kristin L. “Rubens.” Saints Domitilla, Nereus, and Achilleus. 1998. Print
O’Malley, John. “Art, Trent, and Michael Angelo’s Last Judgement.” Religions 3.2, (2012): 344-356. MDPI AG, ProQuest Library Search (accessed November 19, 2014).
Viladesau, Richard. “Counter-Reformation Theology and Art: Examples of Ruben’s Paintings of the Passion.” Toronto Journal of Theology 28, no.1 (March 2012):29-42. Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost[l1] (accessed November 19, 2014).
[l1]