Islam vs Protestantism concerning graven images


#1

How do the above compare?


#2

They don’t.

Protestants permit and even encourage the use of images except ‘as aids to worship’.

Thus there have been a number of famous devoutly Protestant graphic artists.

Islam forbids the making of any images of any living thing.

Why don’t you ask about ‘Judaism vs. Protestantism concerning graven images’…

Just doesn’t have the same ‘slam-value’ does it?


#3

[quote=Steadfast]They don’t.

Protestants permit and even encourage the use of images except ‘as aids to worship’.

Thus there have been a number of famous devoutly Protestant graphic artists.

Islam forbids the making of any images of any living thing.

Why don’t you ask about ‘Judaism vs. Protestantism concerning graven images’…

Just doesn’t have the same ‘slam-value’ does it?
[/quote]

The question wasn’t a slam, I just happen to be slightly more educated about Judaism thanks to the kind and thoughtful replies by Jews to many questions I have asked.

[quote=Steadfast]Islam forbids the making of any images of any living thing.
[/quote]

Does Islam forbid images of the deceased “as aids to worship”?

No slam intended.


#4

[quote=Steadfast]They don’t.

Protestants permit and even encourage the use of images except ‘as aids to worship’.

Thus there have been a number of famous devoutly Protestant graphic artists.

Islam forbids the making of any images of any living thing.

Why don’t you ask about ‘Judaism vs. Protestantism concerning graven images’…

Just doesn’t have the same ‘slam-value’ does it?
[/quote]

Actually this is not a slam like many things protestant it varies there is no one postion. You my friend are dead wrong in speaking as your opinion that represents all protestants. Some do use images as aids to worship especially high church Anglicans and high church Luterhans. Luther had statues of Mary in fact he came back form exile and blasted the iconoclast who destroyed all the images in the catholic cathedrals and parishes in their protest. Luther thought they went mad his protest didn’t include such trivial things which had become part of Christian piety from the earliest centureis of Christianity.
Many low church sects in their origina such as anabaptist, Calvinist, baptist. Puritans and Quakers are Amish severe inconclast and permit no permitted images even of Christ their churches were barren of art even a cross was seemed as something unusual an no their were not a lot fo artist coming out of these protestant traditions… IF you want to look at a protestant sect that woudl represent the typical incolclast in a timewarp look at the AMish no images. This would be the typical protestant sect in America iduring the colonial period. They unlike the rest of protestantism have held to their iconclast beliefs.

Now in the 21 st century some of the churches in these denominations have loosened up their origianl teachings but of course you couldn’t drink in these denominations at one time either. Protestantism does not realize the constant changing of their doctrine one century its forbiddent to drink the next its ok to drink alcohol one century no sacred images the next century they are ok. To find stainted glass windows, holy paintings, statues, etc in some of these protestant tradition for example the Puritans.
Protestants look at their own particular denomination and think this represents all protestant practice and ideology of not only the present time but the past. Well they don’t over the 500 year of protestantims their has been many changing of postions on particular issues even those such as mundane as the permission of holy art.


#5

Mac,

My answer was meant to address the majority view in Protestantism, not to give a break down of what this or that splinter group believes. And for the record, Lutherans do not use images as ‘aids to worship’ they will have them in their churches but they don’t use them in worship. I speak with direct knowledge on this one, what Luther did is another matter…Lutherans don’t follow him in everything…

What the Anglicans do is their own problem, and believe me, they have plenty of problems.

My point was that there is nothing in Protestantism, as a whole, which forbids the making of pictures or graphic images per se and I adduced the fact that there have been a number of great artists who happen to have been Protestant.

Islam has a wholesale prohibition against the making of any images. This prohibition is generally ignored when it comes to pictures of their leaders, etc. but the proscription is there none theless


#6

[quote=Steadfast]Mac,

My answer was meant to address the majority view in Protestantism, not to give a break down of what this or that splinter group believes. And for the record, Lutherans do not use images as ‘aids to worship’ they will have them in their churches but they don’t use them in worship. I speak with direct knowledge on this one, what Luther did is another matter…Lutherans don’t follow him in everything…

What the Anglicans do is their own problem, and believe me, they have plenty of problems.

My point was that there is nothing in Protestantism, as a whole, which forbids the making of pictures or graphic images per se and I adduced the fact that there have been a number of great artists who happen to have been Protestant.

Islam has a wholesale prohibition against the making of any images. This prohibition is generally ignored when it comes to pictures of their leaders, etc. but the proscription is there none theless
[/quote]

At the risk of sounding cheeky, if Lutherans don’t follow what Luther believed, why are they called Lutherans?


#7

Just to clear the air, I meant no disrespect toward any group. I’m learning that it’s best to walk on eggshells when requesting information.

I’m trying to learn to be charitable to aggressive and disrespectful posters who are here to “straighten us out”.


#8

[quote=mark a]Just to clear the air, I meant no disrespect toward any group. I’m learning that it’s best to walk on eggshells when requesting information.

I’m trying to learn to be charitable to aggressive and disrespectful posters who are here to “straighten us out”.
[/quote]

Good response.

A100 - I like the Luther response, too. It’s a topic I’ve take up with my Lutheran friends, one of whom is going into a Lutheran seminary soon. His response was a chuckle.


#9

Well, the name was foisted on them by Catholics, actually…they called themselves, simply, Evangelicals.


#10

[quote=Steadfast]Mac,

My answer was meant to address the majority view in Protestantism, not to give a break down of what this or that splinter group believes. And for the record, Lutherans do not use images as ‘aids to worship’ they will have them in their churches but they don’t use them in worship. I speak with direct knowledge on this one, what Luther did is another matter…Lutherans don’t follow him in everything…

What the Anglicans do is their own problem, and believe me, they have plenty of problems.

My point was that there is nothing in Protestantism, as a whole, which forbids the making of pictures or graphic images per se and I adduced the fact that there have been a number of great artists who happen to have been Protestant.

Islam has a wholesale prohibition against the making of any images. This prohibition is generally ignored when it comes to pictures of their leaders, etc. but the proscription is there none theless
[/quote]

Well your poiting to the problem with protestantism what Lutherans used to do in the 16th century. Having stutues as an aid to worship. And even Matin Luther himslef they no longer do. IF you visit the Lutheran churches in Europe many look identifcal to catholic cathedrals including statures the crucifix and yes Lutherans did use images as aids to worship although I doubt that happens much today in 21st century america. Lutherans used to have confessionals also they don’t have them anymore.
Not all anglicans or anglican preactices are that bad.
Ah that is your 21st century evangelical interpretation of scripture and art. Go back in time my friend if you are protestant of the anabpatist or Calvinist lienage in the 16th -19th century and your not talking about freedome of expression in the protestnat world.
Sure you allowed today in many protestant movements to express yourself but that is of a very recent trend in protestantism. Poitting to the changing doctiren of protestantism.
Besides Lutherans and Anglicans there was not a lot of artwork coming out of the other sects of protestantism. Besides them compairing the artwork of all other portestants comibned to the artowrk of catholic christians is like comparing Mount Everest to a molehill. The great museums and and art historian witness to the fact of catholic arts sheer mass of work an superiority compared to protestant art epsically from the time of the 1500’s to the 1900’s it dwarfed th contributions of protestant artist.
Sorry the great artist of the period were almost all catholics and they were giants of the field which towered over the protestants in the field. THat trend continue today the best Jesus films are from Catholics like Mel Gibson and Franco Zaffarelli. Protestant Jesus fillms are rather bland in comparision kind of alot of protestant art.


#11

[quote=Maccabees]Well your poiting to the problem with protestantism what Lutherans used to do in the 16th century. Having stutues as an aid to worship. And even Matin Luther himslef they no longer do. IF you visit the Lutheran churches in Europe many look identifcal to catholic cathedrals including statures the crucifix and yes Lutherans did use images as aids to worship although I doubt that happens much today in 21st century america. Lutherans used to have confessionals also they don’t have them anymore.
Not all anglicans or anglican preactices are that bad.
Ah that is your 21st century evangelical interpretation of scripture and art. Go back in time my friend if you are protestant of the anabpatist or Calvinist lienage in the 16th -19th century and your not talking about freedome of expression in the protestnat world.
Sure you allowed today in many protestant movements to express yourself but that is of a very recent trend in protestantism. Poitting to the changing doctiren of protestantism.
Besides Lutherans and Anglicans there was not a lot of artwork coming out of the other sects of protestantism. Besides them compairing the artwork of all other portestants comibned to the artowrk of catholic christians is like comparing Mount Everest to a molehill. The great museums and and art historian witness to the fact of catholic arts sheer mass of work an superiority compared to protestant art epsically from the time of the 1500’s to the 1900’s it dwarfed th contributions of protestant artist.
Sorry the great artist of the period were almost all catholics and they were giants of the field which towered over the protestants in the field. THat trend continue today the best Jesus films are from Catholics like Mel Gibson and Franco Zaffarelli. Protestant Jesus fillms are rather bland in comparision kind of alot of protestant art.
[/quote]

Um, Okay…

Triumphalist Salad


#12

[quote=Steadfast]Um, Okay…

Triumphalist Salad
[/quote]

Well it’s not if its the truth.
Comparing the catholic church art to your church’s art would be like comparing Michelangelo to fingerpainting.
The Truth always Triumphs.
PEople travel from all over the world to see catholic art in Italy.
How many people travel to your church outside of your state to see your church’s art?


#13

So then, Hogarth, Bach, Handel, Dürer, Cranach, Van Gogh and Rembrandt were all second class?

Or are we talking about sheer numbers?

What are we comparing here? Quality or quantity…the RCC certainly has the edge in the latter, (but then, a 1500 year head start will do that for you) but who though could seriously argue that “Catholic Art is better than Protestant Art”?

Except, of course from a simplistically triumphalistic perspective…

like…

yours…


#14

Uh aren’t those guys mostly Lutherans?Like I said Luther and especially European Lutherans didn’t have a problem wiith iconoclast overreaction. These guys were not the radical refromers that make up american protestant roots which suffered form sever puritan iconclast syndrome.

And yeah catholcism would be mount everest in art sorry.
Lutherans probably due to their close relations with the catholic church were not alergic to art they were lonely bunch in the many sects of protestantism that loved barren walls. Luther was a catholic priest after all you loved err catholic art.
And Lutheran art was very dare I say catholic looking.
I am sorry but your denial that outside of Lutheran and Anglican art there is devoid of much significant protestant art is laughable. Be in self denial my friend.


#15

No, Hogarth and Handel were Anglican, Rembrandt and van Gogh were Reformed.


#16

So you have 2 artist outside of the anglo catholic, Lutheran communions. That’s not impressive that’s a molehill compared to Mount Everest like I said. I never denied the artistry of anglo catholic and Lutheran traditions. You have pointed to two artist. THey seems to be the exception rather than the rule.

Rembrandt went to Italy to study and his influences were who else Carravaggio and Ruebens and other Catholic artist. He’s the one legitamate protestant artist whose training and influence were deeply catholic.
Van Gogh reflects the modern attitude of protestant art the 18’00s reflect a loosening up of protestnat attitudes towards art. He was a modern impressionist hardly a reformed era artist.

TO me you have one artist that is legitamate Rembrandt who went to ITaly to study the Italian catholic masters. Oh gee what a suprise he coudn’s study the baptist masters there were no such thing.


#17

Dude,

Do you really think the 4 or 5 names I listed were meant to be an exhaustive compendium? there are a great many more famous Protestant artists. I am not about to go down a list of all of them, comparing their merits with a list of Catholic artists…it would be stupid and subjective…my point was merely to show that your comment to the effect that comparing Catholic and Protestant art was “like comparing Mount Everest to a molehill” was ill advised.

And do you really want to vouch for the confessional orthodoxy and loyalty of Michelangelo and Carravaggio? What are we talking about here? If you want to talk about artists who were really good AND who were confessionally orthodox and loyal, the list gets much smaller…please stop moving the goalposts.

I think I’ve made my point now, and don’t really have too much more to say on it, I do look forward to being neener-neener-boo-booed- err, interacting with you in the future.

With each successive post you show your triumphalist blindness to ever greater degree.

What shall we do next, discuss who killed more of their theological opponents, Catholics or Protestants?

Notre Dame has fallen on hard times, perhaps we should compare the relative quality of NCAA football programs along confessional lines…

This is silly…


#18

Just becuase I stated the truth your in a hissyfit.

Your right about one thing this thread is going nowhere as you can’t accept the obvious truth of the Catholic Church being the Mount Everest in its contributions to the arts in comparison to the Calvinist and Evangelical Communites in respect to the arts. Its not triumphalistic its the truth. You can’t give a nod to the obvious. Your the one with the bias he can’t get over. Pretty soon your going to tell me protestantism dominated European history the first 1500 years of Christianity. Look the truth is the truth the catholic church is far more influential on several matters thatn the protestatn church and whatever truth you have came from us first. The Bible the Creeds the basic tenets of Christian faith were catholic first. Christian art was catholic first and doen best by catholics.


#19

Well, it wasn’t actually a hissy fit…but then, perception is often more powerful than reality.

I meant it to be more along the lines of a pointed rebuke couched in semi-comical language…but…well…I didn’t quite get it across…

God bless you and keep you and yours.

Mike


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.