What do you guys think about this picture:
I asked the same question a bit ago on my Facebook wall, and a friend quoted this about this picture,
‘”That picture! That picture!” cried Muishkin, struck by a sudden idea. “Why, a man’s faith might be ruined by looking at that picture!” “So it is!” said Rogojin, unexpectedly.’ (Dostoevsky, “The Idiot”)
So this picture, painted by Hans Holbein, has been featured by Dostoevsky in his writings. And it is a picture that almost mesmerizes me; not in some sort of mystical sense, but in the sense that it evokes a depth response in me as it signifies the truth of the Christian kergyma. That is, of course, that God became man in Christ; and became obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. As the Apostle writes:
5Β Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, 6Β who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, 7Β but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. 8Β And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross. 9Β Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, 10Β that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, 11Β and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. ~Philippians 2:5-11
And,
9Β For you know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though He was rich, yet for your sakes He became poor, that you through His poverty might become rich. ~II Corinthians 8:9
In the Christian Tradition this is also known as the mirifica commutatio or ‘the wonderful exchange’; and this serves as a central theme for how Evangelical Calvinists think of election-reprobation, viz. through a union with Christ theology.
Anyway, I am preaching a bit (and digressing); so how does this picture strike you? Is it too evocative and brutally scandalous? I know some Christians don’t think we should use images of Christ at all, and so for you (if that’s you), I know the answer to my question already. But I am really curious about how those of you who don’t have as much of an issue with icons like this think of this picture, and my current and recent usage of it for my blog header. It is hard to look at, admittedly for me; but it also conveys something about Christianity that I think has been lost and glossed over about Christianity in at least the American Western church—that is that Christianity and Christ crucified is skandalon or a stumbling block (the matter of my Masters thesis I Corinthians 1:17-25). Jesus is usually not presented in stumbling block kinds of ways today, and I think this picture re-invokes that kind of response. What do you think?
I would not be an iconclast per se. I’m more of a critic of particular portrayals. Often, youtube Jesus videos morph in and out of gooky (my word) cloud pictures of Jesus and gookier streets of gold, etc. I prefer the renaissance classics, e.g. the Dutch masters which is consistant with my tastes by-and-large (baroque music, old hymns, the ancient faith etc.) On a side note, I wonder how the Mel Gibson film The Passion of the Christ fits into your point about skandalion for the western church. I run from things hyped, so I have never seen this film.
This particular work you have posted passes at least on not being modern art, nor velvet art. His cadaver looks rather Eastern European to me (the pointed beard) so that is consistant with Dostoevsky. He looks too European to me, and too old, but one who has been tortured to the point of death, and then dieing might appear older. I’m skinny, but this guy is emaciated. He has no biceps at all, more like an Eastern European on a subsistence diet. I’d have to ask my two nephews, one who is a cop, the other, a funeral director (undertaker) who is now the proprietor of a restaurant, but I think that there would be less pigmentation and more of a blue-white cast to the flesh as the attending blood supply has been oxygen starved since death. The artist would have known this, because he probably had a dead model. He just did a little editing. Reminds me, on “Jeopardy” tonight, a contestant related that when she was in anatomy class years before, she and her partner named their study cadaver “Alex Trebec”. The eyes in this piece are seriously creepy.
I think His physical death is meant for us to contemplate in our minds, in the Spirit. What did He look like to His Mother, to John, and to Centurion? Joseph Arimethea saw this view as he had begged the body of Jesus. He washed and wrapped Jesus’ body. I doubt even he would have delegated such a horrible, monumentally important task to his servants. This thought brings tears to my eyes,as he was at once horrified and deeply humbled by his work, the only one for which he will be remembered. As we look at His lifeless body, where is Jesus? Is He dead in there? Is He with His Spirit taking captivity captive, or is His humanity locked in His body (mind body spirit) for three days? How does Jesus’ body look to His Father? I think, to Him, it was beautiful.
This particular painting does not move me to think about Christ’s death so much as to think about everyman’s death.
Duane,
Hans Holbein was a German from the 16th century; so not an Eastern European. I thank you for your thoughts, and I agree that the picture causes one to contemplate death in general. I think I am probably going to take this image down from my header; it’s just too much for me really (the eyes open is definitely troubling!).
Bobby:
That is a very haunting painting. I don’t really know what to make of it–but then, who am I? There are those who take the Second Commandment very literally…but if so, what are we to make of with all the modern, Protestant-friendly cinematic representations of Jesus Christ? …Or even The Passion of the Christ–which made the Gospel concrete to me as an atheist-agnostic-non-believer in a way that I had never grasped before. As iconographical as this painting might be, it is incredibly evocative of something that has indeed been lost in the modern, first-world Protestantism.
The painting emphasize the humanity–of Jesus–especially in the mortal aspect of His humanity–but not at all in the way that Jesus is commonly humanized these days. This painting evokes a certain pathos in the eye of the viewer that defies all of our common misconceptions about Him.
This is Jesus Christ as He would have looked on Friday afternoon, just after He was crucified, and before He was clothed and buried. Here is our Lord and Saviour at the singly weakest moment of His incarnation, when all would have looked completely hopeless to His followers. All of his disciples had left Him–first among them Peter–except for Joseph of Arimathea and the women who had followed Him from Galilee. The great Messiah had been crucified, and all the hopes and dreams of His followers dashed. They must have felt disillusioned, abandoned, lost.
…But what they must not have yet fully realized is that just as He had foretold, Jesus Christ had died for their sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that He would be buried, and that He would be raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures. He had plainly taught them this during His earthly ministry (Mk 8:31, 9:31, 10:33-34; cf. Mt 12:39, 16:4), but they had most likely not yet fully grasped it. In knowledge of this truth, however, we know now that what the painting depicts is not a mere rabble-rousing teacher who has met his untimely demise, but rather God Himself in the moment of His greatest humility–or to be more precise, Jesus Christ, the Son of God and the second person of the Trinity, in His greatest moment of humility.
This is the man who has borne the sins of the many upon the Cross, who bore the curse for our sins upon the Cross and was forsaken by the Father, now helpless and being prepared for burial, all His life and vigour and vitality taken away from Him–and yet, in two short days, He would rise triumphant over the grave, the firstfruit of the resurrection, raised to new life, soon to reign in Heaven, and ultimately to return in glory.
This painting is the illustration of the implicit interlude in Philippians 2:8-9, 1 Corinthians 15:3-4, and Hebrews 12:2. This is Christ crucified: the Passover Lamb whose body has been broken for our sins. This is the very heart of the Gospel: God made flesh in human form, living among us, suffering and dying for our sins, and being raised on the third day.
…All that being said, I feel silly saying this as an afterthought, but perhaps it is a bit much as the masthead for your blog. It depicts something we should reflect on more–God in His grace and mercy condescending to live and die among us as the atonement for our sins. But I fear that there is a risk in trivializing it by taking such a profound subject and turning it into a blog image. On the other hand, your use of it and your calling it to our attention has got folks thinking, so that’s a good thing….
That picture confronts me for what I know it will invoke in my non-believing friends and family members. Some of those people have rejected faith because of what could broadly be described as the ‘divine child abuse’ theory; “Mark, how could you worship a God who would do that to his son?” The sheer ‘deathliness’ of that image forces me to contemplate who this God is, and what was really going on in that death, and then how to explain (or proclaim?) it to people who, for whatever reason, see that death as the very thing which prevents them from belief.
In an odd kind of way, I am a bit hopeful when people tell me it is Christ’s death that puts them off, because at least the thing that scandalizes them is the thing which ought to. It is so easy for folks to get bogged down in issues which are relatively unimportant. My hope is that despite (or through) their offense, they would see the truth.
@Stefan,
Thank you for that eloquent reflection, on something so true and central to the Christian faith; something that we don’t often reflect on at all! Holy Saturday!, the in between time; which could be taken as an analogy for where we are now in the unfolding of salvation history, between the 1st and 2 Advents. I agree about using it for my header, but I might, every now and then use it that way; just for a jolting effect, at least it has this on me … the humanity and reality of what happened to our LORD is captured well (but not exhaustively of course) by this picture. Thank you Stefan.
@Mark,
Thank you too. Yes, the “divine abuse theory,” of course when folks invoke that it just tells me how naive they are to the whole context of salvation history, a proper understanding of a doctrine of God, and the gracious vicarious nature of the atonement in Christ as he lovingly chose to take our poverty that we might have his riches.
Amen, when you write: “In an odd kind of way, I am a bit hopeful when people tell me it is Christβs death that puts them off, because at least the thing that scandalizes them is the thing which ought to….” If the Gospel is not scandalous, it’s not the Gospel! Thanks Mark.