Veith at Cranach, points us to a post on the blog "Faith and Theology" where they've come up with 20 Essential Paintings for Theologians. Read both posts and see what you think of the list. I'm not sure why these should be especially relevant to theologians?? Veith, of course, thinks Cranach should be on the list, and a commenter wonders why El Greco didn't make the cut (me too).
I don't know if such lists serve a purpose other than to start discussions about who/what should or should not be on the list.
As one from the reform tradition, I question whether Christ should be depicted at all?? And if he is, are we seeing the Man or the God or Both??
Also as a Calvinist, I'm not so interested in variations on the Crucifix, where Christ's body is hanging from the Tree, since that smacks of idolatry. Not that everyone treats the Crucifix like an idol, but many of the spiritually and theologically ignorant do. Those paintings depicting stories from his life or a particular incident of the Stations of the Cross I feel have more of a legitimate purpose of informing and reminding us of his sacrifice.
I disliked most of the selections. Too morbid or medieval for my taste. I also find it weird that the Renaissance painters painted these historical scenes in contemporary dress. It'd be like showing Jesus in Nike's and a backward baseball cap. But then they were painting to appeal to their contemporaries and maybe they had no idea what the average Galilean or Jew wore in Roman Judea?
Let me know which ones you like and why! (I'm open to being educated in my tastes by the opinions of others).
I wonder what kind of paintings they would pick if the selection parameters prohibited depictions of Christ??
How about "Art for Calvinists"??? Problem is coming up with a definition! Suggestions anyone?
Comments