This Doesn't Belong in the Church
Вставка
- Опубліковано 29 лют 2024
- Support the channel by visiting:
brianholdsworth.locals.com/ or
brianholdsworth.ca/support
Everyone knows that #beauty is in the eye of the beholder and that true #art is defined by self-expression rather than the communication of beauty. But the problem with that view is that every single thing a person does, is a revelation of themselves (ie. self-expression).
If art is about self-expression, then everything is art… and also, nothing is art. And it’s worth asking, how did we get to a point in which art has become so devalued in the minds of those professing to be its stewards and curators?
And the answer is, because art and culture are downstream from philosophy and creed.
So what are the underlying philosophies that dominate the contemporary artistic world? They are #modernism and #postmodernism. Both of which fundamentally reject and deny any notion of the objective beauty.
Music written and generously provided by Paul Jernberg. Find out more about his work as a composer here: pauljernberg.com
Podcast Version: brianholdsworth.libsyn.com/ - Розваги
Thanks for watching. If you'd like to support the channel, visit:
brianholdsworth.locals.com/ or
brianholdsworth.ca/support
I don't know, that bronze sculpture behind the altar of the Church in the thumbnail speaks to me of the Sublime, much like El Greco's painting of the Annunciation. The Sublime is not always pretty. What is more of a danger to art is the grotesque.
Petty non issue.
Brian, thank you so much for your eloquent explanation of the nature of art as God intended for it. My grandmother was an artist, and I am learning how to paint oil on canvas. I feel inspired to paint God's beautiful landscapes in a way that moves people to want to be there. My Christian friends and family really love my paintings. We can be creative and work with God by being docile to his intervention and gentle guidance. It's an amazing experience.
One of my Christian co-workers saw one of my paintings and got this look of shock on her face, looked at me, and said "what a beautiful soul you have!" I thought that was /so/ weird because what does my soul have to do with my painting? I'm in the Dark Night (conformed by multiple priests), so I can't relate to my co-worker's comment. However, I can totally relate to your explanation about art that is universal in nature - because God's beauty is universal. That's what I hope to communicate with my art.
Thank you soooo much for your work. I confess that I am one of your unsupportive watchers, but that will change soon.
Your overall point is good, but your choice of thumbnail was not. La Resurrezione in the Paul VI Audience Hall depicts Jesus rising from a nuclear crater in the Garden of Gethsemane. I don't like most modern art but this is actually very powerful and meaningful, especially for anyone who grew up in the shadow of the cold war. Christ has and will conquer.
That fits perfectly in the catholuc churp
I'm convinced there is a connection between the spiritual health of a civilization and the art it produces.
The irony being that art started getting really good right when the church started declining lol
The art always reflects the mythologies and zeitgeists of the time. They are collective dreams and sometimes prophecies. Just like our own dreams may be.
That's deep. I guess we're about at the same state as the cavemen based on the art.
Absolutely. You can listen to the music or look at the paintings or sculptures of any time period..... Or person..... And know what the culture is of that time. You'll feel who they are through the art and music and sculpture. I mean that's why it's called self expression. And looking at ugliness as art is just showing the state of our current world and culture.
So our art is so bad because our civilisation has accepted sniffing your mates poop off your finger in McDonalds 3am?
I won't shy away from saying that statue is outright demonic.
What statue is demonic?
The one in the thumbnail -- The Resurrection (Fazzini)
It’s not demonic. It’s beautiful if you understand the meaning of it.
@@NevetsWC1134 So art has to be explained in order to justify itself as beautiful? -- Nah, I'm the beholder. I'll judge it by how it makes me feel.
@@arzelleus wait till you see a biblically accurate angel then you'll stop yapping about beauty because it looks nice rather then it's meaning
We are living in an epoch of ugliness. Everything seems to be ugly, art, architecture, music, fashion, cars ...Even people make themselves ugly by tattoos, piercing, hair style, clothing ...
exactly, it's a pagan response to the "so called" death of Christianity.
So true…
Yoga pants 🤦🏻♂️
Yes, and it's being done on purpose. If one of God's attributes is beauty, enemies love ugliness and will try to impose it on us.
Agree! And we are called negative for rejecting negative things (ugliness and vulgarity).
Yet beauty never goes out of style. If you focus on the ugly then that’s all you’ll see
My late father drew and painted pictures so real that they looked like photographs. He painted a picture of a horse for a customer. A photo was taken of the painting. After the film was developed, the customer was astonished. He said that the horse looked so real in the photo that at first that he thought it was a real horse. My mom, my brother, and I agreed. The customer paid for the picture and took it home. My father did several paintings of my mother, and they were so beautiful. He painted a mansion, a still life at a beach. He did two paintings of the Four Horsemen of the book of Revelation in the Bible. In spite of his amazing talent, my father was very critical of his own artwork. He would study his paintings to see how he could improve his future works. He told my brother and me that there was always someone who could do better paintings than his. There is much truth in that.
I am an artist, except that I use colored pencils instead of paints. I can't draw people like my father could. But God gave me a wonderful gift for drawing animals, and that is what I do.
Ultra Re 9:53 alism is just a photo or copy. That's not art..
@@DemainIronfalcon Why not? All art is a copy, at some level. It's a reconfiguration of ideas or objects which have already been produced. Only God creates absolutely new ideas, humans just replicate His ideas in a lesser creation. Like Plato's World of Forms, only the world of forms is the omniscient and perfect Mind of God. Or as J.R.R. Tolkien put it, all human creation is just "sub-creation", a reflection of God's actual creation. Just because art is very realistic and replicates the form it is based on very well, that doesn't mean it's not art because it's somehow not "creative" enough; it's in a sense the best art of all, because it reflects best actual true creation. Anyway, what business is it of yours to say someone's late father was not a real artist because he painted pictures of horses and his wife too accurately?
The ability to perform a classical piece of music is art. The ability to create extremely realistic paintings is art. The ability to sing an aria that sounds like Caruso is art. Realistic painting is art even the feelings that it evokes are peace or calmness instead of inner angst. Many people enjoy art that makes them feel something. Other people enjoy seeing a message. Some of us are still classicists. We like color and passion, but we adore balance.
@@nancywhite3501 the mind loves to even itself to find harmonic balance . It is soothing to find symmetry and and a sense of certainty and stability gives incentive to engage in sensory interactions that achieve this powerful emotive peaceful contentment .
Homosapiens find peace and harmony much more available when life or thought balance is achieved , our mind rewards our soul or conciencse with contentment.
However receiving this harmony requires a reasonable level of prepositioned contentment from the individual, which is relative for each person and their situation.
Stronger afflicted emotions when a human is in any state of indeterminate anxiety can lend itself to an individual seeking a less harmonious engagement of the senses. This is our mind or soul seeking to restore the balance by adjusting the scales, which is indicative of a person finding solace in less harmonized sensory engagement..
So people need to be sensitive to fellow humans circumstances, sometimes in more extreme cases people become entrenched in a less harmonious life experience which gives way to them living a life which finds a balance very different from another, so what I'm postulating is subjective..
Catholics: Beauty helps lead people to God
Also Catholics: Here’s a big Ghoul to loom over the pope. 😂
That hideous statue is a baphomet hidden in the sculpture. It was not created by Catholics but by the enemies of Christ and His Church.
I don't think most catholics are on board with this.
They are not being subtle
The statue was designed by a non-Catholic who hates Christ and hates the true Catholic Church.
@@GunFunZS i bet they are.
My mum works in the art industry, restoration. She started off restoring beautiful gold leaf pieces in cathedrals and other old building as well as paintings. Now she works for the Tate modern in London and she said to me the other day “how on earth did I end up in modern art?” Some of the things they have her working on are absolutely horrible
The key is that she never said no. She was happy for the work, always going wherever the money was. She never set a line in the sand that she wouldn't cross. And that's partly the fault of everyone in the community because we don't tend to support our own. We don't band together, lock arms, and make sure our team is taken care of. In a lot of ways, your mother knew she didn't have a choice because she knew on a subconscious level that she had no staunch allies in the fight.
@threeriversforge1997 Bravo, bravo! U have very astutely and succinctly described the current human condition. We all complain and yell for change, but as soon as someone steps forward to challenge the system or the false "narrative" foisted on humanity....crickets!
The ptb have cleverly devised a system of rewards for loyalty, but unspeakable repercussions for criticizing or exposing the truth. Eg: Anne Heche, Michael Hastings, Anthony Bourdain, Kate Spade, Chester Bennington, Chris Cornell, Paul Walker and Julian Assange are just a few! 😢😢
@@americangirlx4 Thank you for your kind words.
This is a problem of culture. One team understands that you must tend the roots if you want a bountiful harvest. The other team seems to expect fruit to simply appear as if by magic, or that someone else will tend the garden.
Culture is the collection of a million little things that set you apart from 'the other'. In this, we can learn a lot from the jews, muslims, and amish. They tend to their own because they understand the importance of creating the sense of teamwork, of being part of something bigger than the individual. And they understand the team must be of value to the teammates. You can't ask people to struggle hard to make the team successful if the only people who benefit are the leaders of the team. Everyone needs to know they can climb the ladder, that their compatriots will fight for them if outsiders attack.
We don't do that, so it's no wonder we're always on the losing side.
Look at every culture throughout the West. Look at how they were in 1920 or 1950. Compare that to today. Not only have they been homogenized to a great extent, but now you can't even say what it means to be from that culture. Being French, German, Swiss, or English used to mean something. They used to be rather distinct in language, foods, clothing, and all the little things that set them apart. Collectors and Archeologists have written entire libraries about the little differences.
Today, all that's gone because people didn't stand strong to support their culture. Instead, we got traitors and backstabbers who were happy to drink from the cup of foreigners. Their ears filled with promises of wealth and power, of a bright and shining future, even the lowest were made to feel like they were part of something bigger and better.
How do we fix it, though? How do we ask people to take a chance after so often being let down?
Time for her to quit.
@@americangirlx4 Do you mind if I ask about the ptb?
Even just on the face of it, the “artwork” just doesn’t look holy or appropriate for where it’s located. It honestly looks scary
Look up the statue as a statue of Satan. Then you’ll see why it so scary. It’s a very evil piece of art.
yes. so?
a lot of churches have a bunch of scary statues and faces on them, be it gargoyels or just demonic faces peering down on people. some churches have skulls in them, walls covered by bones.
That sculpture is grotesque. I'm not sure whose idea it was to have a brutalist building with mediocre modern art in the vicinity of the Vatican, which has perhaps the greatest collection of timeless amazing art ever consolidated in one place.
Dont be silly, that Sculpture is simply beautiful, go read art abooks!
@@paulofrade2552 If I have to 'read art books' to appreciate the beauty in a piece of art, the piece of art fails at being a piece of art.
@@notcrazy6288 No, wrong again, The Resurrection' by Pericle Fazzini is a sculpture full of meaning and symbology, the problem with the people today is that they dont like to think, to reflect. People today just want simple things, nothing that make you questions, its simply sad. And in Christianity we see this too, everyone is look for answers, when they should make questions, because that´s the only way to find truth.
@@paulofrade2552 that dark sculpture is just plain evil looking. It has no place in the Vatican or any church.
That piece looks evil. Don't match the good and holy a sculpture is supposed to be paired up with the Vatican. If you can't see how ugly and evil it is, you don't understand what the dood said in the video.
The same cultural phenomenon that embraces art purely as a means of self expression is continuously glorifying the ugliest parts of the self. Thus, we keep getting uglier and uglier art.
I don't feel at home in the modern day churches though it has everything that makes it a place of worship.
I feel at home in traditional churches where I get the peace and quiet. I feel connected with the Lord just by looking at the Tabernacle. I feel connected with the congregation. The setting and ambience just perfect. It is an awe inspiring feeling.
Not so with the modern day churches and modern day Christian art.
This is my personal experience and opinion.
We have a modern (1962) church which is unusual but attractive and suitable for worship, but it was designed by a parishioner called Pious Baines.
You might take interest in the Orthodox. The way parishes are painted, iconography, etc.
Otherworldly
Yeah, I hear you. I've thought of doing a comedy video about modern churches.
Step one: sing some of those "Jesus is my girlfriend" songs in a British accent with laser show and a 200ft tv screen
Step two: Get some caffeined-up, tattooed hipster pastor to give a 4-year-old-level Sunday School lesson
Step three: Get the plate passed around
Step four: On their way out the door, up-sell them with coffee, books, insurance plans, HVAC services, etc..
I thought this would make a really funny video, but then I realized no one would get the humor BECAUSE THEY GO TO A CHURCH EXACTLY LIKE THAT!
🤣🤣🤣🤣
@1stdebunker
I have a hobby to visit other catholic parish churches. I didn't no that the church gives an indulgence when visiting different churches. I heard Fr. Chris Alar's Explaining the faith series on UA-cam about indulgence.
I have visited only one or two Orthodox churches.
But would visit those who are in communion with Rome. I would visit other Orthodox churches but first priority is visiting catholic orthodox church. Thanks.
I was thinking recently “why does modern art look so awful”?
Because it's based on relativism, and that's evil.
The most obvious thing. In front of us, yet many couldn't see it anymore. Greetings from Bali/Indonesia.
Because there is hardly any clarity in the consciousness of mankind, thus abstract views prevail.
Very few can focus on what is.
because Brian says its awful and Brian is right about everything, especially Art
@@bumponalog5001Thank you
“Modern art” is by its nature designed to be a negation of the sublime. It is an extension of the Nietzschean project of the transvaluation of values. The idea being that Nothing is truly valuable: nihilism.
I couldn't agree with you more. Greetings from Bali/Indonesia 😮❤️🙏
@@paulfaigl8329 hello from the (mostly) United States!
@@paxalotin they may be bad representations, but at least they were aiming at something; instead of aiming at literally nothing. I’d rather have bad classical art than a sea of nonsensical modernity that strives toward Nothingness.
@@paxalotin also, a good deal of what you are talking about isn’t even classical art, it’s the first gasps of modernism and even postmodernism accreting. William Holman Hunt was active in the mid to late 1800’s at the same time that nihilism as a concept was becoming widely accepted among “intellectuals” and artists. Really, you have to go back to before the baroque period to get to anything really good.
@@paxalotin I think we agree about the topic and I think you’re right about certain movements within art; specifically religious iconography.
The entire message of Marcel Duchamp's urinal was that _anything_ , even a urinal, is art the moment you call it art and put it in a museum. Yes, that is the complete and utter rejection of any kind of intrinsic quality of art. Of course the art world completely misunderstood the message, because it immediately put an enormous price on Duchamp's urinal and started obsessing with the question of which urinals were "real" Duchamps and which weren't. This question is of course moot because Duchamp just sent in a standard, industrially produced urinal to that exposition that had nothing unique to it whatsoever.
But I digress. CS Lewis argued in "the abolition of man" that the moment you deny intrinsic beauty, by extension you deny all intrinsic value and all intrinsic ethics. And since ethics and values are external to man, nothing remains. It's the ultimate nihilism. It's an extremely dangerous path to take. Today, society works because even atheists (most at least) still have a lingering sense of ethics even though they deny tthe source of it (God). But how long can you keep on believing in the product while at the same time denying the source?
Are we still on this whole divine command bs? Even chrsitian philosophers do not claim God is the only source of morality, we have been debating objective morals without God for over 200 years and yall are still tied to the divine command theory. Also CS Lewis wasn't a philosopher, his apologetics were pretty unsound.
Society works better when religious people progressively abandon morals that are inconsistent with reality and start adopting precisely that sense of ethics that doesn't come from any god but from humanity. Pointing to nihilism is just fearmongering.
@@QuietlyContemplatingAs a marxist: Where does Marx ever say that the goal is to destroy „the very idea of art“? I am just curious. I’ve read most of what the man wrote and this just sounds incorrect.
All objects made by man are art. It could be good art or bad art or, like a pen or a fork or a pistol, it can be functional art but it’s all art.
@@johnsinclair4621QuietlyContemplating is essentially correct but didn’t state it well. Marx and Engels dedicated their work to Satan. I know you Marxists like to deny this but there are ample examples and if you know anything at all about Christianity it is clear just reading the Manifesto that all of the tenets of Christianity are being inverted. The essence of Satan is inversion. If the art made in honor of God is made to be beautiful and uplifting then it follows that the art made in honor of Satan should be ugly and oppressive. When we look at the work of the major Marxist artists, including such people as architects we see that this is precisely what they produced; ugly and oppressive art. That’s proof in works. If what you produce is Satanic then what you are doing is Satanic.
Watch people go through a museum, slow slow through traditionally considered beautiful art, and how they zoom through modern art.
Amen, Brian! I grew up in an artist family and was already selling my work (woodcarvings) in my early teens. I went to college to pursue art more intensely but was so repulsed by what was being passed off as art that I changed majors.
“Art for the sake of art is idolatry and in the end, fatal to art.” - Dr Peter Kreeft
True
I couldn't agree more.
Bleh. This is inconsistent with my reading of patristic aesthetics.
So what is the point of art?
@@yoeyyoey8937 That depends on the specific work of art that we're talking about. Usually it's representing and sharing some fundamental truth about the world, humanity, or a particular group of people, often as a means of honoring or respecting that which is depicted and inspiring others to do the same. I think. I could be completely wrong about that, but it seems to make sense, based on my experiences.
Revelation 18:16-17
“Alas, alas, that great city, that was clothed in fine linen, and purple, and scarlet, and decked with gold, and precious stones, and pearls! For in one hour so great riches is come to nought.”
“Unintended nap.” I find myself lapsing into more of those the older I get 😆
Good video.
Me too.
I anticipate becoming an expert artist in naps.
I'm totally repelled by that background.
It is demonic looking.
Like a dark forest bursting forth from the underworld manifesting creatures. Yuck.
To quote Branford Marsalis when asked about “free jazz”:
“That’s not art. That’s just a bunch of self-indulgent b***s**t.”
he ain't real jazz anyway
What's free jazz?
I so agree with you. I am an artist myself. But the type of art I do is of a beautiful world filled with life and joy. I remember from 95 to 96 I have visions that I believe were from God showing me a new world that was so beautiful I could not describe. It even had different seasons like Spring, Summer, Fall, and Winter. Since then I make my art from those visions. I admit I do have my down days, but as an artist I do not express that in my art. I make pictures expressing how good I want to feel, and need to feel. Pictures of nature and ideal places that are good like God intended this world to be. Some say my art is a lot like Thomas Kincaids work.
Art in the Vatican looks like Hell. How appropriate.
When I was in art school, we took trips to NYC each spring to go to the museums. My least favorite was the Guggenheim. I am not a huge Picasso fan, but was actually really glad to see his work there to balance out the scribbles on notebook paper and the huge white canvases with a single dot of color in the middle. I don’t have a problem with others (of dubious taste) liking them, but as an artist, to see unskilled work such as that touted as great masterpieces that supposedly took years or decades of experience to produce is absolutely galling. A 3 year old can splatter color on a white canvas (sorry, Jackson Pollock, not a fan of yours either), or scribble a rudimentary face on a sheet of notebook paper.
You should have a problem of people liking crappy "art". That's why this crap is being made. We are too tolerant.
This made me think of the newer pieces of art inside the Cologne Cathedral. There’s a stain glass window that it just random square pieces of different colors. It looks like pixels, nothing more. There were other pieces I didn’t like but that was the main one.
I found a small church in Paris, St. Severin, that also had abstract glass windows. I actually felt more at home there than in the big cathedrals. Remember the class windows were the Bible to those who couldn't read. Everybody can read nowadays, so the focus should be on the message the preacher preach
One of the main things that has drawn me to the Orthodox Church is the fact that in Eastern Orthodoxy, beauty is central, and essential to our souls, and part of the way that God communicates to us, and we are supposed to make our own souls more beautiful as a way to grow closer to God.
I love that. The beauty of Gregorian chant is the same beauty that is found in the stars on the tilma of Our Lady of Guadeloupe. Such beauty comesfrom heaven. I have recently found the Latin Mass, and the beauty of the Catholic Church the way my father first discovered it. I will stay with my dear Catholic Church and pray for her. God bless you. 🙏
Wonderful!! I've also found similar beauty, mystery, in our Divine Liturgy of Eastern Catholic. The buildings / icons / vestments are similar to EO
Yes, this is why so many of your Catholic brothers and sisters, such as myself, have found the beauty of tradition and will never leave it. God bless you!
You should probably be drawn to the truth not beauty. Submit to Rome.
Beauty and truth are the same. Submitting to a Pope instead of God... yeah, no thanks. Rome isn't the holder of that key to God like it pretends to be. @@YoujustgotJ1NXED
This might be your best video yet! Relativism truly is the tyranny of our age. Thanks for the great work. We’d be happy to contribute to your channel
Superlative video that was much needed, thank you Brian ! Prayers for you & your apostolate 🙏🏼
We must hold fast to the three transcendentals: what is truly good, what is true & what is beautiful ad orientum as oriented towards God…
Once again, absolutely spot on and something I've been pondering for years now. I'm proud and glad to support you on a monthly basis, Brian! Well worth it!
What is said here of art being downstream of culture and philosophy can be said of music as well. No surprise why many start to appreciate more music from yesteryears than today's modern music, and I personally don't think for one moment that it is mere sentimentalism.
I think deep down, we like the classical music of the past. It is why we see a lot if it in movies and video games.
people always listen to the music of "the good ol days" and demonize the current
even my grandfather was hounded by his parents for listening to rock n roll but then hounded his own children for listening to pop
The problem is, there isn't many artists capable of creating really good art nowadays. That is in direct consequence of how art has been taught and discussed in the professional world for generations now. Deeply talented people who should be encouraged to develop their skills, minds, and souls so they can create truly transcendent art are being drowned by the sad modernity and not given the chance to achieve greatness. There are many self-taught artists or those who struggled against the adverse currents, but they are not helped and they're deplatformed at least. There are practical consequences of the reigning philosophy. Same is true for education in humanities in many places - we lost tools by not using them, we don't have masters to guide the students, we are being actively fought and hunted for even daring to question the status quo. (I come from post-communist country where a whole generation of professors, artists, the whole intelligentsia was simply killed off, which makes the situation somewhat straightforward. But even looking at America and the rest of Europe, those same generations seem to have died off without being replaced. Choices were made along the way even by those who did have the benefit of studying under greats).
Of course, the internet is the great equaliser in terms of both education and platforming, at least in theory, so it should be easier than ever to find those artists who don't adhere to the common philosophy and who are capable of creating beauty. (Hence, us meeting here.) So perhaps these are the best circumstances we've had for a long time for a revival.
Now talk about how demonic Rupnik's art is, and why his demonic artwork has been placed in some of our most holy places, such as Lourdes, the tomb of Padre Pio and most of the art of the Pope Francis Vatican.
Very true indeed.
What is demonic about his art pieces? The eyes? None of the pieces I’ve seen seem too offensive. What am I missing?
wait how is his art demonic? There is literally nothing demonic about it, its just classical moisaic
@@Seraph-pw6ft
The mawkish sentimental ugliness. The abject lack of skill or basic understanding of anatomy and physiology, the meaninglessness of the composition. The laughable googly eyes,"Western pulp manga"
Now check out Paul VI modern art collection for earlier deliberate in your face ugliness
@@littleminion5433
There is zero classical form or content. (Give is your classical comparisons)
Ugly and talentless.
Beauty isn't subjective; taste is subjective, and people are allowed to have bad taste. I don't know why this is so difficult for intellectuals to understand. In art, we study various theories, techniques, and traditional practices which in turn make a work of art beautiful. There is an objective standard to beauty. Works that adhere to these standards are more beautiful than those that don't. Even an untrained eye can tell the difference, even if their mouth can't articulate it. Art is a reflection of the soul, and an artist who consistently produces art that is ugly either lacks skill or has no connection to the divine, as that which is divine is inherently beautiful and evidence of its presence. However, to gain a connection to the divine requires a level of humility which many of these intellectual art movements revile. Notice how modern art movements have shifted from aesthetics to intellectualizing their art, dissecting a piece's "deep philosophical meaning" and its "subjective nature" based on an individual's equally subjective perception and standards. This isn't an accident. Modern art is based in narcissism and subjectivity, rejecting all things divine, good, and true, which is why their art is so ugly, because the philosophy they base it on is as hideous and dangerous as a plague.
"There is an objective standard to beauty. Works that adhere to these standards are more beautiful than those that don't." This is literally the debate lol, the "standards" you appeal to would be tossed out in the 500's as being dogshit, what are you even talking about
"Beauty isn't subjective; taste is subjective, and people are allowed to have bad taste."
What a utterly self inflated and self obsessed view to hold of your own subjective view of reality.
Beauty is not subjective? Well tell that to All Of Human History.
Beauty standards are literally shifting and changing like the seasons. What is a stylish fashion choice? What is the preferred colour of skin? Cubby or Skinny? High Heels for Men or Women?
Your own ignorance is painful and your utter inability to see how easily society has throughout the changes of the ages shifted its view on Beauty and what is considered beautiful is just tragic, and these are only examples of Human Beauty Standards, there have been countless other views on whatever other subject be it poetry and literature, paintings, architecture or any other thing in existence.
Get off your high horse you are embarrassing
I never liked the Sculpture or the Hall. I’m waiting to see it age out and something beautiful and inspiring done in its place.
Has no one done the research on that statue? Its from Japan and were remnants of the atomic bombings and to them it looked like Christ rising from the ashes and they found comfort in it that it came from such a horrific event. They gave as a gift to the Vatican.
When I saw the statue and saw this video, I felt I had to actually look up the statue, that there had to be context and background to it that gives more meaning to why this statue exists.
Knowing that solemn reason. This seems to suggest this is a piece of lament for the victims but to show that Christ is able to come out of the ashes of even the worst situations.
While I can see why most people don't like the art. I would hope that it causes most people to stop, look it up and its history and reflect the meaning, which probably means it's more impactful than many Christian art pieces in that regard.
You're argument is subjective. The claim that the piece is ugly is objective.
@@stevedoetsch it's from my perspective, yes, but objective facts of where it came from are not the same thing as defining what is beautiful, which is literally to the eye of the beholder, the definition of subjectivity, you're turning this into an argument of semantics.
The only absolute truth in beauty you could define i suppose is what God finds beautiful, but until he comes down and sets things straight on this statue, we're stuck with our own definitions.
La Resurrezione in the Paul VI Audience Hall depicts Jesus rising from a nuclear crater in the Garden of Gethsemane. I don't like most modern art but this is actually very powerful and meaningful, especially for anyone who grew up in the shadow of the cold war. Christ has and will conquer. Brian's overall point is however well made, even if his thumbnail choice wasn't great.
@@JasonPSchafer thanks. Can you explain why the architecture of the building it's housed in looks like a snake? I'd love to know what inspires that.
Your video has quite profound ideas and is very fascinating
I hope more people will see your video and touch their hearts!
I hope your channel grows!!
You did a fantastic job on this - you persuaded me to agree with your stance.
This is fascinating. I wonder if , in the modern secular world, art is more defined as simply an expression. Whether it's a modern canvas covered with unidentifiable colored blotches of paint, or a toilet....or an orchestra playing discordant notes and calling it a composition, it is all defined as some sort of statement of expression. And thus, considered "art".
"Sacred Art" is distinct , and should be for the explicit purpose of expressing the Divine.
What is happening now, in ALL Christian Churches,( music, architecture, art, as well as the theology ) seems to have been a gradual removal of the sacred and replacing it with the secular.
Thank you for the beautiful and eloquent way you have expressed this. What is happening with the art, seems to reflect what is happening in every area. Not a happy thought, but clearly a reality.
I went to college for 4 yearsfor art, art history and fine arts specifically. Since a young child paintings intrigued me and I knew that I wanted it as a career. I was able to grants and ask my family to help me and finally got to live that dream. Well after I got out of school I went into gallery work and well it was actually a nightmare. My work, where I had to pay to be hung, was placed next to modern art which sold like hot cakes. I stuck out like a sore thumb, well long story short I never sold much of my work and in the end had to sell it for incredibly cheap.
After I thought why not go into curation, which waiting for a curator position was terrible but once I offer an apprenticeship it was to a modern art museum. I hate it, I knew the facts presenting the pieces but really nothing else. I had no passion talking about it. One piece I remember as clear a day, it was stacked pieces of circular vinyl and metal on a canves, it was cool looking as everything looked perfect centered but other then that I had nothing more to say. I had even spoke to the artist who didn't have much to say past, why symetrical shapes are attractive. Which is true but nothing really else. He had came up with the idea one day when boxes had piled up at his house, conicedently from large to small. The people who visited him place had thought he did it on purpose and that intrigued him I guess. So then he came up with the piece. It was valued for about 3000, no idea what happen to it or the artist.
How much money what this artist laundering?
Maybe you have a calling to do religious iconography with your talent. Perhaps look into it?
bravo. I am a practising painter and try and use these principles in my work.
In college, knew of an art professor whose philosophy of art was exactly that all self expression IS art. I could never quite reconcile that with the gorgeous works of the past compared to the ugly of modernity. But I was an Eng. Lit. major, so what did I care!
I'm a statistician and I consider myself an artist.
I was asked if Statistics is an Art or a Science in an interview.
I responded saying that Statistics is an Art because a science cannot be the foundation of Science, as Statistics is how we have modern science. Art, similar to what you said, is a way of revealing the truth, whether it is with the right test, a paint brush, or an instrument.
I would love to dig deeper on this with you in a conversation about it. I saw, on Avoiding Babylon, how you don't typically check your email and that it is generally hard to get ahold of you so I'm hoping this comment gets there lol.😅
To me nothing could be further from art than statistics... how can the human spirit express itself through such a formulaic and structured medium? How can pure objectivity be artistic?
@@maximeb190 The numbers are the paint and the tests used are the form.
There is a lot of subjectivity to it, it isn't pure. Take it off the podium you have it on.
I'm a painter and I consider myself to be quite a traditional painter or at least an aspiring one. It is so difficult to find places to display my paintings because most galleries are completely anti traditional/classical styles and are only displaying this modern contemporary art crap that simply makes no sense. I need to find likeminded Catholic painters and form some kind of Catholic painters guild, or gallery so that we can allow for traditional and sacred paintings to be seen.
I started a group called Creative Conservatives on Facebook for just this reason. I was tired of being surrounded by people who don't share my values. I figure, we need to have more groups to support people like us. Ita not a professional group by my means, most people are hobbyists or small business types, but it's just nice to be around creative people who share at least some core values with me.
Fascinating topic and very well expressed
if we follow this paradigm, it is worth recognizing that not only modernism is inappropriate in churches, but also such styles as baroque, classicism, mannerism and so on. I live in catholic country ( Italy) and it is worth mentioning, that many churches, which were rebuild in baroque style don’t provoke a profound and spiritual feeling. Fat cupids, sentimental madonnas, abundance of secular architectural elements - all of that seems festive but not very spiritual. Same patterns can be observed in classicism and mannerism - even the philosophy which inspired such art flows not correlate with a profound spiritual life. All in all, this topic is rather challenging, for instance the masterpiece of Renaissance - Sistine Madonna: the woman with whom Raphael painted Madonna was a whore. Or if we talk about baroque, despite many ugly representations of religious plots, there was a Rembrandt, who depicted a parable of Prodigal son - absolutely fascinating and wonderful. In mannerism there are a terrible and tasteless Parmigianino and quite unique and spiritual El Greco. So despite some straight forward tendencies there are some examples of genial artists in every ( no matter, how secular it is) flow of art. And history of art proves it.
Without a higher power, the artist ceases to magnify God but can only magnify the ego. Art is no longer about the art. It’s about the artist.
Which is why so much of contemporary art is ugly, and more often just lame and uninspired.
It’s purely just “look at me, look what I did, pretty cool huh? Wanna hear about my petty ego bs?”
Woah, amen, yes
@@badmen1550 what kind of artists are you thinking about?
contemporary art is so diverse.
never before have so many people been given the chance to create art and never before have so many different paths been explored, from Luo Li Rung to Micheal Heizer. There is so much diversity you have to be precise at who you are demonizing here.
Beauty is not in the eye of the beholder. Taste is in the eye of the beholder. Beauty is an empirical reality
how do you measure beauty?
because I think that statue fits in a church, next to gargoyls and skulls. it fits.
Thank you for a valuable discourse.
I took a couple courses on architecture. Those old Churches were absolutely amazing in how they were built, but people took their time to build them and put detail into it. today everything is build in a couple months. I think all the results of our culture are directly because of the demand for instant gratification.
You hit a grand-slam with this one.
Brian, this was exceptionally well stated. Thank You. That hideous Vatican statue sits in an auditorium shaped like a snake. How have we fallen so far?
The audience hall isn't shaped like a snake. That's a myth.
It is only a "snake" if the image becomes heavily warped. Warped images are not representative of reality.
Don't be taken in by anti-Catholic memes.
The Paul vi Audience hall absolutely appears to be a serpents head, from the side elevation’s shape, the odd ‘eye’ shaped windows on the sides and the weird interior finishes. The fish-eye photos on the internet accentuate the serpent look but it is obvious in plain photos too.
@@jgpt857 No, you can't see it without the distortion.
I would like to donate, but I don't use either PayPal or Stripe. Might there be a way for credit card donation?
Thank you. You can use credit card for both without being a signed in user.
That makes sense. When I was younger and looking at modern art in art class, I struggled to interpret the art presented to me. I couldn't find anything good about it, so fundamentally, I wasn't able to discern anything.
so because you personally can't find beauty in it means what exactly?
Modern art is untethered from skill. When you see a Caravaggio painting you think "I can never do that!". When you see modern art you think "I can definetly do that!".
Modern art mostly looks just like the Stone Coat Countertops exotic pour. Ahhhhh.... You Got This!
idk man when I look at the modern art from people like Luo Li Rung I'm pretty sure I'd never be able to do that no matter how much I tried, same goes to Micheal Heizer and other "modern" artists.
damn even Claude Monet was insulted as being the end of art once.
You mentioned Gregorian chants but what was that beautiful singing from that women called again?
“Salvation is Created” Pavel Tschesnokoff
ua-cam.com/video/H3v9unphfi0/v-deo.htmlsi=qidPWQBSwC9lvstD
Misirere mei, Deus
@@dyejedi Thank you for the correction! Had a brain slip!
Miserere mei, Deus - Allegri - Tenebrae conducted by Nigel Short
Great video. I am an artist and I have seen modern art is less about the art and more about the name or the face.
ka = female & spiritual, the Teacher, Source
ba = male & material, the Master, God
ka & ba = the Guru & the Muse
That's the universal part of ka-ba-la, the la is the individual or personal
la = body (~ ba) & nobody (~ ka), the Pupil (eye or I), Ego (external ego ~ ba & internal ego ~ ka)
With this frame, you can do much more than the ba-only construction, where there is no place left for the female energy or spirituality.
I got 12 years extra to find a 'simple' basic construction that can make us understand why we feel this way or that way, without creating another conflict.
The WECK-pot (based on the idea of a preserving jar [weckpot in Dutch] with W= Wellness, E = Education, C = creativity, and k = Knowledge) is a name for a completely different approach on problems or situations you don't agree with. At this moment, everything begins and ends with material gain or loss (and money can buy you more things than presents). I see something different in the work of art - I see Jesus rising from the ocean or arising from the seaweed (the living water instead of the purifying flame). We have unlearned the use of images to say more than words are able to do.
At the start of the last chapter in my present life, I wrote a manuscript in 33 days that became the base of the ka-ba-la frame and every project that I've worked out since then. I wanted the manuscript to be published and gave it the title: Words are like water, they can take any form ...
The publisher rejected it and sent me away as if I was a waste of time already. She actually did me a favour because EVERY detail became a story of its own (but was not ready to be served). When diner is ready, the cooking is over and I haven't started yet with the REAL work!!!
The Catholic Church fell into a hole after WWII when they hired Protestant or even atheist architects to design new churches. The result can be seen now in churches that look like pizza parlours. There is.one near me that looks like a giant sombrero that has been stomped on.
My husband and I belong to a personal parish - the founding parish, in fact - of the Ordinariate of the Chair of St. Peter. That is a Roman Catholic Church, approved by Pope John Paul II, founded by an Episcopal, now Catholic, high church priest, for Episcopalians converting to Catholicism. Other Catholics and converts are welcome. There is an emphasis on beauty in both the liturgy and in church construction and decoration. When we first returned to San Antonio, our first parish had a large, minimalist, auditorium-style church building. The pastor and the musicians treated Mass like a show, with jokes and entertainment that often eclipsed the liturgy. I taught CCD and my husband I were lectors, but we were very unhappy there. A deacon we became friendly with was transferring to the Ordinariate parish, and told us about it.
We visited and knew it was right for us. The traditional artworks and statuary, the stained glass, the colors and decoration are all intended to draw the heart and mind to Heaven, and they do. The liturgy is based on the old Book of Common Prayer, some of the most beautiful writing in the history of the English language. The K thru 12 school is also built and decorated beautifully, all faithful to Catholic Tradition and teaching. Ugly or plain art and decor cause one to draw away; beauty in religious art and language unite us with the angels, and praise rises in our hearts. (If you want to see photos of our parish, Our Lady of the Atonement, visit atonementonline.)
Excellent conversation
yes & thanks
The sculpture in the thumbnail and at 7:13 is 'The Resurrection' by Pericle Fazzini - I didn't like it either until I learned what it portrays, which is the resurrection of Christ from the midst of a nuclear explosion. In other words, it's an attempt to bring the Resurrection to bear on the horrors of 20th century catastrophes. Now I rather like it. You could say it lacks a certain beauty on first sight, but so does much of gothic grotesque art. The sculpture is a modern grotesque, which I find appropriate given the grotestqueness of much of modern life.
I don't disagree with the idea of it, although I'm not sure the church is the right place for it. Having said that, grotesque art portraying war in general seems to me to belong more in a history book then in a church, and I'm not sure a portrayal of hell on the main altar is the right place and, even if it were, it should be made obvious that it's hell. Also, Christ is indistinguishable from the nuclear evil that He is rising out of, which, in my opinion, dilutes the message of the sculpture.
@@aleksandragieralt7370 I see what you mean & sympathise with what you're saying.
With regards to Christ being indistinguishable from the nuclear evil-I think the sculpture itself is an odd mixture of a crucifixion scene and a resurrection scene; after all, being caught in a nuclear blast is a crucifixion, not a resurrection; and the "beams of light" (if we interpret them that way) are beams of destruction, not life or glory . . . but I think that's due to the limitations of sculpture itself as an artform, and doesn't reflect poorly on the artist-he wanted to portray the idea of "resurrection from our nuclear age", so he had to do some conceptual blending to achieve it. If you look at the Isenheim Altarpiece of Matthias Grünewald, you see he depicts a brutal crucifixion scene in one panel, and Christ rising from the cross in power & glory in another panel . . . I think Fazzini was going more or less for the same idea-but obviously you can do that on two separate paintings, but not in one sculpture.
Also, I looked it up to check: from what I gather, this sculpture is in the "Paul VI Audience Hall" in Rome, it's a diplomatic / congress room, not a church with an altar. You see how it's appropriate in this setting, because the Pope sitting in front of a sculpture of Christ amidst a nuclear blast represents the Church speaking to our own age with its nuclear dangers.
@pretty-white-lamb it being in the audience hall makes it less jarring, but it's still not my cup of tea. I do have more particular taste in art though.
La Resurrezione in the Paul VI Audience Hall depicts Jesus rising from a nuclear crater in the Garden of Gethsemane. I don't like most modern art but this is actually very powerful and meaningful, especially for anyone who grew up in the shadow of the cold war. Christ has and will conquer. Brian's overall point is however well made, even if his thumbnail choice wasn't great.
@@aleksandragieralt7370The room the sculpture is in is not really a church, it’s a lecture hall so I have heard.
Good thing that sculpture isn't in a church but an audience hall.
Sculpter? 😂
It is still associated with Catholicism being in Vatican city and is not a good overall look for the Church.
It is still in a building in Vatican City and is associated with Catholicism, which makes it not a good look.
@@lanetrainfixed
It’s a statue that was created after the Cold War to represent Jesus surviving the destruction of nuclear war. It was a gift I’m pretty sure. And it is quite amazing. Should we get rid of the Catholic Churches that are built out of the bones of martyrs?
As you have touched upon Dada, perhaps an interessant fact, one of its ringleader retrieved the faith in his maturity (Hugo Ball, 1886-1927)
to be fair that scultpture in the thumbnail is in an audience hall not a church.
I agree with your principles. I don't think picking that image as the cover photo for the story is quite accurate, for a couple of reasons. 1) That's not actually a church, that's a lecture hall, so it doesn't have to follow all the rules for sacred art. 2) It's a depiction of the Resurrection, and so it's not unreasonable that most of the image is a kind of chaotic mess, as that depicts death and the dead (In particular, in connection to the threat of nuclear war). Art doesn't have to make ugly things beautiful; just look at the work of Hieronymus Bosch depicting hell. Now, that statue is not a favorite of mine, But I don't think it belongs in the same category really ugly modern art in churches.
Not all life is beautiful and fine. Some is dirty and painful. It's the personal struggle that is necessary. Suffering is both ugly and beautiful.
Before Vii, art was focused on Heaven, towards God. Today, is about man and his diabolical desires and rejection of divine revelation.
Exactly right. Modern art is just another attempt to conform God toward oneself instead of conforming oneself toward God.
@@bubaganush8954
Somehow, from inside holy Church, the diabolical religion of man has led many to abandon holy religion and adhere to the modernist ecumenical religion. It’s repulsive.
Modern art is widely thought to have started in the 1860s. Dadaism specifically started in 1915.
@@jdotoz
Modernism goes way back. I know that. I am talking about when it invaded the church.
@@janetechaney7099 Then you should have said that. You'd still be wrong, but you would be clear.
I think it's important to note that certain genres of art, even though they were created as expression of self or for mass appeal, can still produce truly beautiful, truth-seeking works. Just like our living in the world can - and should - be oriented towards God, or how glimpses of truth always show a glimpse of God Who is Truth, even of they're experienced by people who don't know Him. So, art of all kinds can be beautiful and important. However, that is not the same as saying it has a place in a church or in the liturgy. This art should be held to the highest standards and be holy.
I think it perfectly conveys the source of the teaching that those men stand on!
Depends on where you go to Mass it can be a real torture.
Then why go?
That's not IN the church; a little bit of research wouldn't have hurt..
oh just makes an appearance with the pope
@@littlelulu5675 The type of people we're dealing with here^
My first college English paper was supposed to be on what makes art, and my second was supposed to be on an artist, thank you for your older art videos, they were my base for what constitutes good art and why we still look at Michelangelo’s art with awe, but no one will care about major artists of today 100 year from now
lol
people said the same about Claude Monet and we still look at his works with awe, even though his works were seen as degenerate.
even artists like Jean-François Millet, who in my opinion was a revolutionary of his time, were looked down upon and seen as "the end of art" for depicting the wrong things.
why do you think your opinion will stand the test of time?
Well said, Brian. You were referencing, of course, Pope St. Pius X, who defined the qualities of sacred music in his motu proprio, Tra le sollecitudini (1903). That encyclical should be required reading for all seminarians and lay ministers. I’d also highly recommend Pope St John Paul II’s Chirograph on that document. Not every piece of art is fit to enter the Mass (paraphrasing).
The sculpture of Jesus rising from the destruction of a nuclear bomb is very symbolic and it’s amazing. Especially for when it was made. During the Cold War. Everyone feared nuclear destruction and it shows that no matter what happens Jesus will rise from it.
It is ugly. Images of Christ SHOULD be adornated and beautiful
@@josephpchajek2685 you’re saying that an image of Christ and his church surviving nuclear fall out or end times isn’t the gospel? “the gates of hell will not prevail”.
@@igorlopes7589 is Christ on the cross depicting a beautiful moment? Or is it capturing suffering for all of us to see what he went through for us? It’s beautiful yes but it’s also brutal.
@@NevetsWC1134 Yes, but this image at the Vatican is not beautiful at all, it is only brutal. Specially since its supposed to be some sort of Ressurection
La Resurrezione in the Paul VI Audience Hall depicts Jesus rising from a nuclear crater in the Garden of Gethsemane. I don't like most modern art but this is actually very powerful and meaningful, especially for anyone who grew up in the shadow of the cold war. Christ has and will conquer. Brian's overall point is however well made, even if his thumbnail choice wasn't great.
Not all art should be beautiful. Art sometimes depicts ugly things and we should expect it to be ugly. "Resurrection" is just such a work. There's nothing pretty about living "two minutes to midnight." Since it doesn't appear in a church but in a lecture hall, the instructions about sacred art don't really apply.
Totally agree
I like this: marriage doomed to divorce 😮🙃😮 Spot on.🙏❤️🙏
Thank you!
You're right on spot I've always hated that... Thing.
Speaking as an EXORCIST the depiction is brilliant ; you speak from a place of DEEP IGNORANCE here concerning beauty, therefore .
5:07 So I see and use it.
In our church, someone, who is sometimes pretty naive, thought, we could give some coloring sheets to our children, so he made it with a fairy or a mermaid. He couldn't understand, that we disagreed.
I really appreciate this video. Here's my honest question: what is the standard of beauty? How can we know it? I agree that beauty is not ultimately in the eye of the beholder, but it seems that tastes in beauty are somewhat subjective, and they change over time. What is the standard, and how far does it reach? He mentioned music and said certain music is unfit for church, but how can we know what is good and bad without inserting subjective preferences? Honest questions from an inquirer. Thanks for the video!
Very good take.
Yes yes yes! Thank you, it’s true .Modern art doesn’t belong there😢
Our church’s third-world priest from the Philippines covers our chapel alter with painters plastic and 2x4’s when the alter is not being used.
The dust just keeps collecting and the pastor told me I couldn’t clean the chapel nor remove the construction- type plastic and wood alter covering.
When priests won’t allow the chapel to be cleaned and repaired how can we expect them to competently portray artistic beauty in our chapel?
The chapel holds our tabernacle….
Hi Brian, just donated. God bless you, your family, and your ministry.
Brian, it would be stupendous if you could find a way to interview one of my favorite authors, Michael O'Brien. He's Catholic, Canadian, and has deeply thoughtful insights on art and totalitariansim.
This is so important. Thank you.
Does anyone have anything positive to say or should we continue to embrace the spirit of despair, pessimism, cynicism and judgment. We need to stop complaining about the church and start leading souls to Jesus.
I was puzzled by a picture that seemed to be impossible to understand. The artist said that I needed to find out the message in his picture. I replied that I couldn't detect the message in his picture because there was no form or shape that could guide me in figuring out the message. For instance, it's pretty hard to find a bird in a picture if it doesn't look like a bird.
Excellent assessment! Thank you.
This is interesting - I am currently taking a creative arts class and this is one of the major themes of the class. I agree that art should have standards to be judged by, but of course most artists disagree. Everything has to be "art", but that mind set I believe is destroying what it means to be creative and create art. I can't say that in class though!
Finally, the right kind of person is speaking about this.
To grasp the objective beauty we need reason but at the same time intuition. This is why sometimes is not easy to define it with words.
What's the painting that shows in the end? It's beautiful, the awe of those faithful among the liturgy!
commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Zdzis%C5%82aw_Jasi%C5%84ski_Palm_Sunday_1891.jpg
@@BrianHoldsworth THANKS!!!
Where did you find your beautiful stained glass lamp/candle?
That statue in the audience hall is horrendous. It’s more suited for a horror movie. It looks like a demon shooting out evil energies.
thank you for sharing these reflections brother
Well said Brian!!
This is Great! Wonderful Illustration...
They really saw that and thought "this wont scare any children"