Iconography: Syncretism of the Sacred and Secular

Diana Isho

ART 4535: Art of the Baroque

Dr. Roxanne Robbin

April 23, 2014

Isho 2

Iconography, what does it entail? How does one interpret an

artist’s work of art? Is it based off of the culture, religion,

philosophy and politics of the time or is it simply subjective

estimations and ambiguity. What fascinates me about the Baroque

era in paintings is the religious subject matter. What was taking

place at the times and what was actually being copied and

recorded through the arts historically and religiously, are the

biggest influences during 17th century Europe. The Biblical

accounts, other extra biblical sources and fanciful tales namely

the Apocryphal works and hagiographies of the Golden Legend were

the main subject matter of the artists during that time

commissioned by clients such as popes, kings and queens. In my

research I will compare and contrast various paintings and

iconography around the time, leading up to the Council of Trent,

to examine what is related to the Biblical subject matter and

what influences merged in from cultural myths and religious

syncretism due to the ever ecumenical movement of the Roman

Catholic Church.

Heresies have been going on for ages prior to the 17th

century. Some scholars reference the Council of Trent as a time

Isho 3

of going back to the basics of Christianity with its simplicity

and non-conformist community. Although the Council of Trent was a

time of “reform” in some way, it was really a counter reaction to

the Protestant Reformation during 1517-1648. The Reformation

began by Martin Luther by nailing his 95 thesis to the Wittenberg

door, in opposition to the heretical teachings of the papacy,

which asked believers to pay indulgences for forgiveness of sins

including its compromise of the Scriptures at the time. This in

turn stirred up the Roman Catholic Church to reexamine its stance

and theological doctrines about God and the Scriptures. Much of

the religious subject matter and depictions in art especially the

paintings dealt with representing the Scriptures in a way that

was supposed to be simple and understandable with clarity to

those new in the faith. Not only simple but profound enough for

those who are familiar with the Biblical historical accounts and

its theology can interpret them accurately and personally. The

Roman Catholic Church’s claim was to “aid in worship and the

veneration of the saints”. What the council of Trent promised in

the beginning did work for some artists due to the influence of

the Protestant Reformation, but it didn’t really produce long

Isho 4

term in context of clarity, simplicity and genuinely to the

Scriptures. From an art historical standpoint, many things were

syncretized in such paintings with the iconography involving

cultural themes, pagan symbolism and mythology, and the

philosophical teachings of Aristotle, mixed with extra biblical

portrayals. All this under the guise of the politics the Roman

Catholic popes instituted using their authority and thus

compromising the very foundation of the God of the Bible they

claimed to follow.

In my background research I have looked over a few

references of the Golden Legend by Jocobus de Voragine for the

inspirations of subject matter that was used mostly for religious

paintings in the Roman Church, compiled during the year 1260.

Such legends and folk tales involved “saints” at the time in the

middle ages, usually saints that were martyred for their faith.

Also Apocryphal writings which are not included as inspired

Scripture in the Old Testament but was accepted by the Roman

Catholic Church later on,1 these extra biblical sources were 1 The Catholic Church has not always accepted the Apocrypha. The Apocrypha wasnot officially accepted by the Catholic Church at a universal council until 1546 at the Council of Trent. This is over a millennium and a half after the books were written, and was a counter reaction to the Protestant Reformation that rejected these writings along with the Jewish community. (Norman Geisler

Isho 5

rejected by the Jews and Protestants. In comparison to the Bible

which in total has 66 books all together, the Apocrypha or

writings of the Golden Legend has no solid source of its

authenticity thus it is regarded as folk tale and legend or not

inspired. Some of those writings can account for history but not

related to the Scriptures as being genuine, examples of art

themes used in paintings include; Anna and Tobit, Assumption of

the Virgin Mary, Judith and Holofernes and St. George and the

Dragon, among many other literary stories.2

The first paintings I chose to compare includes a wall

painting of the Last supper called, Communion of the Apostles by

an assistant to Fra Angelico in Florence and another depiction of

the Last Supper by Peter Paul Rubens in Milan. The first painting

was dated 1437-1445, and it’s the representation of the

institution of the Eucharist which is the Roman Catholic form of

partaking in Communion3. The actual Biblical account is recorded

and Ralph E. MacKenzie, Roman Catholics and Evangelicals: Agreements and Differences. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1995)2 Roelof van Straten, An Introduction to Iconography (Muiderverg: Gordon and Breach, 1985), 79-80.3 See the doctrine of Transubstantiation (based off of the unscientific theoryof the Greek philosopher Aristotle who states that all matter consists of two parts: accidents and substance) Rome says that the point of consecration in the Catholic Mass, the substance of the bread and wine change, while the accidents remain the same. Mystically they believe that it’s the actual body

Isho 6

in the Gospels that refers to Jesus Christ breaking bread and

pouring the wine during Passover, each element represents and

symbolize something about Him. The symbolism is to reflect and

meditate on His sufferings, sacrifice and atonement of sin for

mankind, believers are to remember Him and what He did. By

breaking unleavened bread and drinking the “fruit of the vine”,

it reminds the believer that Christ died for sinners and appeased

the wrath of God on sinful mankind by taking it upon Himself.

Thus proving His love for his creation through His forgiveness by

the shedding of His blood. “And He took bread, gave thanks and broke it, and

give it to them, saying, “This is My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance

of Me.” Likewise He also took the cup after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant

in My blood, which is shed for you.” Luke 22:19-20 NKJV

In this wall painting it depicts the disciples on a right-

angled bench behind a large table, with others kneeling in front

and to one side. Christ moves from one to the other handing them

the wafer bread shaped just like the ones in Catholic Mass across

and blood of Jesus, from this viewpoint they believe they drink His blood and eat His flesh. They believe in the worship of Eucharistic adoration, which is a form of idolatry. Cannibalism is denied in the Old Testament, reference to Deuteronomy 12:23. Http://www.webtruth.org/articles/theological-issues-23/transubstantiation-49.html

Isho 7

the table. This image is clearly under the influence of Fra

Angelico at that time representing Christ handing the Catholic

wafer to John. In his other hand he holds the chalice, on which

the paten, which carries the wafers lie. The woman kneeling at

the left is one of the meditating figures which Fra Angelico

included in all the wall paintings in S. Marco. Through the open

doorway on the right we see the well in the courtyard of the

convent, while a building, presumably the convent church, is

visible through the windows. This Last Supper takes place in the

refectory, so that the parallel between the conventual company at

their meals and Christ’s holy supper is drawn together

syncretizing what the Catholic tradition holds over the Biblical

account to relate to the clergy in their cultural circumstance.

This pictorial formulation may derive from a Eucharistic practice

in the convent of S. Marco. 4

Stylistically the painting is seen in classic form as to the

simplicity of the painting to tell the story. No diagonals but

rather straight lines, with no emotion showing through except the

rational composition of the subject matter having a linear

4 Gertrund Schiller, Iconography of Christian Art (Gutersloh: Lund Humphries, 1968), 39.

Isho 8

approach to the narration. There are four empty chairs below the

table on the left side, moving the eye to where the rest of the

four Apostles are located kneeling on the floor. There is one

figure that has a darker colored halo around his head, located in

the middle of the two frontal figures, which would indicate that

it might possibly be Judas.

The second painting by Peter Paul Rubens takes on a more

emotional approach to the scene in the Last Supper. This painting

dates to a later time in the mid Baroque period 1630-31, Judas is

clearly represented by having his face turned away from Jesus and

unto the viewer as if the viewer already knows his judgment.

Rubens might have a Caravaggio influence to the fact of letting

the audience be a part of his work at least in this depiction.

Also, having a dog with a bone underneath Judas indicates a more

Northern European iconology of symbolizing greed which is like a

companion to Judas because of his betrayal of the Messiah. This

was an unsuccessful first attempt at producing the Last Supper

historically according to Rubens commission by his patrons

backing out the last minute. Rubens charged 4,000 Guilder for

that painting, perhaps the high price was too much. Leonardo da

Isho 9

Vinci’s last Supper was also an influence on Rubens work in

context to express the full range of emotion on the Apostle’s

faces.

This piece looks to be more crowded instead of the linear

approach, and has a more closed in look like a circle around

Jesus and no halo but light emitting from his head. Again the

shock of the impending revealing of the betrayer is at hand. In

the background is a building located in the back with two pillars

sticking out. From the looks of it, it seems Rubens used what

appears to be a reference to the St. Peter’s Baldachin in Vatican

City right behind the Last Supper scene. Again the appeal to

what’s popular reflected in Rubens work as he was coined the

title of the “Henry Ford” (quotes from Dr. Robbin) of the

painting world at the time by mass producing paintings for

clients in an organized and businesslike fashion.

This is not your historical scene from the Biblical account

but rather what fitted the culture, the differences of the two is

that the elements in both depictions of the last supper look

different. Christ is not holding the Catholic wafer but rather

just a normal looking loaf of bread which is leavened and a cup

Isho 10

of wine. The huge golden halo’s are not present in Rubens piece,

but trying to make it more simple, that Christ is the one who is

the Light of the world so by adding light around His head only

gives it more of a clearer meaning, which was the only successful

part in my opinion about this painting. In the context that one

should focus on Christ and not the elements themselves or the

saints but the one whom it symbolizes in relation to His

sacrifice in matters of religious context. The assistant to Fra

Angelico did not really focus on Christ Himself but rather Christ

in that painting had his back turned toward the audience. In

Rubens piece Christ is facing the audience and looking up to

bless the bread, Judas is looking towards the audience as well

but more directly with a regretful and fearful gesture, asking

the viewer a question of a life time…whose side are you on?

The influence of culture through iconology depending on the

cultural traditions of the society reflected and manifested in

the arts throughout the ages. In the context of Biblical

accuracy, one could not separate the Biblical scenes from their

culture and had to add in their own icons and allegories to

relate to the audience at hand, not always grasping the true

Isho 11

meaning in the Scriptures within the context historically and

theologically. Art reflected the times and the politics but not

always the core issue of the subject matter they attempted to

portray. Another comparison I’ve chosen involves two different

theological viewpoints and references to symbols and icons to

tell the story. The first is from Lucas Cranach the Elder and

Younger. It’s a panel of an altarpiece in Weimar, Germany titled,

Christ on the Cross, the risen Christ slays Death and the Devil.

Second I chose to compare Jose Ribera’s Immaculate Conception to

show the differences in theological viewpoints and symbolism.

Beginning with Cranach’s piece, which began by Lucas Cranach

(1472-1553) and was completed by his son, also of the same name,

in 1555. The heart of the 16th century Reformation and indeed of

the Christian faith, is the doctrine of justification by faith

alone in Christ, the Savior. Here is an excerpt from part two of

the Smalcald Articles, expressed by Luther who sited his sources

from the Bible.5 “The first and chief article is this, that Jesus

Christ, our God and Lord, “was put to death for our trespasses

and raised again for our justification” Romans 4:25. He alone is

5 See Articles of Smalcald part 2 http://bookofconcord.org/smalcald.php

Isho 12

“the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world” John 1:29.

“God has laid upon him the iniquities of us all” Isaiah 53:6.

Moreover, “all have sinned,” and “they are justified by his grace

as a gift, through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus, by

his blood” Romans 3:23-25. In as much as this must be believed

and cannot be obtained or apprehended by any work, law, or merit,

it is clear and certain that such faith alone justifies us, as

St. Paul says in Romans 3, “for we hold that a man is justified

by faith apart from works of law” Romans 3:28, and again, “that

he [God] himself is righteous and that he justifies him who has

faith in Jesus” Romans 3:26. Luther stressed to observe this

distinction with particular diligence as to not confuse the two

doctrines and change the Gospel into law. In comparison to the

doctrines and rituals of the Roman Catholic Church, which

deviated from the simplicity of the Scriptures into man-made laws

and traditions.6 “This in turn would darken the merit of Christ

and rob disturbed consciences of the comfort which they would

otherwise have in the holy Gospel...”

6 The Roman Catholic doctrines that emerged compared to the Pharisee’s in Jesus time. See link http://www.gotquestions.org/Sadducees-Pharisees.html.

Isho 13

Lucas Cranach clearly understood the central teaching of the

Reformation and the proper distinction between Law and Gospel is

illustrated by his altar painting at Weimar.7 In the center

background, Moses is shown teaching the Ten Commandments to the

Old Testament prophets. They are standing on a circle of barren

path, along with a figure representative of all human beings who

are under the law’s condemnation. Man is shown here being chased

into the fires of hell by death (pictures as a skeleton holding a

spear) and the Devil (in the form of a monster wielding a club).

The prophets taught, as did Moses, “Cursed be anyone who does not

confirm the words of this law by doing them” (Deuteronomy 27:26,

compare Jeremiah 11:13). Yet it’s not only our actual sins that

condemn us, but our sin nature, the curse that we inherit from

Adam and Eve the first human beings. Directly in front, Martin

Luther is standing with an open Bible in hand. His feet and hands

are positioned like those of Moses. His message, however, is one

of Gospel, not law. On his face is a look of steadfastness and

serene confidence. He stands on lush grass in which flowers grow,

7 Gertrund Schiller, Iconography of Christian Art (Gutersloh: Lund Humphries, 1968), 162.

Isho 14

unlike the bare stony ground on which Moses stands. Of three

passages written in German on the open Bible, the third one

reads, “Just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the desert, so

also must the Son of man be lifted up, so that all [who believe]

in [him may have eternal life]” John 3:14.

Dominating the painting is Christ on a cross. The amazing

message of the Gospel is that by his death, Christ takes away the

world’s sin. The message written in Latin on the transparent

banner held by the lamb in the center foreground declares that

Jesus is “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world”

John 1:29. His outstretched arms are also reminders that He is

the world’s Savior. This was John the Baptist’s message, and John

is shown standing underneath the crucified Christ on His left

side. With right hand pointing up at Christ on the cross and left

hand pointing at the lamb, John is shown proclaiming the meaning

of Jesus’ death to Lucas Cranach, the painter. Cranach represents

all who believe. A stream of blood from Christ’s pierced side

splashes on to Cranach’s head. It is as the first verse on

Luther’s Bible says, “The blood of Jesus Christ purifies us from

Isho 15

all sin” 1 John 1:7. Therefore like Luther, Cranach also stands

confidently.

Jesus is shown in the painting’s right as the risen One,

youthful and full of life, standing on death and the devil, with

the staff of his victory flag pushed in the Devil’s throat. His

gold-edged cloak flows toward the lamb’s banner and the cross. As

a result it’s actually both banner and cloak that bear the words,

“the lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world”. From this

painting Christ’s eyes meet ours, inviting us to believe and

trust in His finished work on the cross for salvation and

forgiveness of sins. The other set of eyes that meet ours belong

to Cranach, the painter, His feet face in the direction of

Christ. But he has turned from his adoration of Christ to look at

us also, as an Evangelical message to preach the Gospel to the

lost and trust in the risen Lord and Savior of our souls. Now the

“Counter Reformation” is in hot pursuit, because the Catholic

institution is about to lose business, why talk about God’s

Grace? Let the people pay for it themselves, bringing believers

back to a yoke of bondage that they themselves cannot carry.8

8 Jesus replied, "And you experts in the law, woe to you, because you load people down with burdens they can hardly carry, and you yourselves will not

Isho 16

The next painting is by Jose Ribera, and his work focusing

on the concept and doctrine of the Immaculate Conception (Mary

the mother of Jesus was sinless). This idea is also located in

some parts of the Golden Legend with her supposed assumption to

Heaven and extra biblical writings that were dismissed.9 There is

no reference to Mary being sinless in the Biblical account nor

does it have credible sources to back up the claim Biblically

speaking.10

Ribera was a Spanish artist who lived at Naples during the

time he finished this painting in 1630. Ribera also received the

honor of becoming a knight of the Papal Order of the Vatican,

which was one of the highest achievements any painter in Italy

could hope for. Ribera’s depiction of Mary which is heavily

lift one finger to help them.” Luke 11:46 NIV9 Jacobus de Voragine, The Golden Legend, (New York: Arno Press, 1941), 449. 10 The Latin Vulgate is the Latin translation of the Bible done by St. Jerome in the fourth century.  It is here in Luke 1:28 that is found the unfortunate Latin translation which says "ave gratia plena "Hail full of grace.'" Originally, the New Testament was written in Greek, not Latin, but the Roman Church has derived its doctrine from the Latin translation, not the Greek original.  Therefore, it constructed its doctrine on a false translation.  Of course, it cannot correct itself since so much is invested in the worship, adoration, and prayer to Mary in the Roman Catholic Church and to recant of this false teaching would greatly lessen its credibility.  Unfortunately, thismeans that millions of Catholics will continue to look to Mary for help, not Christ who is truly full of grace and truth (John 1:14). See link http://carm.org/mary-full-grace-and-luke-128. *For translation misconceptions see link http://carm.org/hasnt-bible-been-rewritten-so-many-times-we-cant-trust-it-anymore.

Isho 17

influenced by Roman Catholic doctrines not to mention his roots

being in Spain, although not proclaimed official doctrine of the

Roman Catholic Church until 1854, the belief that the Virgin Mary

was conceived without sin in order to be pure enough to be the

mother of Christ had been debated since the twelfth century. The

event was first celebrated as an official Catholic Church feast

day in 1476 with the support of Pope Sixtus IV and was strongly

promoted by Jesuits11 at the Council of Trent (1545-63).

This supposed Mary figure is depicted as wearing white and

blue with a yellow/goldish background, the traditional colors

Mary is associated with (mostly blue) in Catholic paintings. The

symbolism of the colors could also be the cultural colors of

Spain, using this combination to reflect heavenly qualities. She

has twelve stars above her head and the moon in the form of a

crescent shape is under her feet. She is surrounded by what

appears to be or supposed to be Cherub but not really they are

cultural icons called “Putto” in Italian which means small chubby

boy, they also resemble cupid-like figures. Putti (plural) are

11 Ann Sutherland Harris, Seventeenth-Century Art & Architecture, (New Jersey: Pearson Education, 2005), 212-213. *See link for more information on the Jesuit order,http://www.gotquestions.org/Jesuits.html.

Isho 18

commonly confused with, yet are completely unrelated to,

Cherubim. “The Cherubim” refers to the Biblical angels, which

have four heads of different species (animal and man) and several

pairs of wings.12 While “Cherubs” represent an order of angels,

Putti are secular and present a non-religious passion. Here comes

the mixture of iconology of the sacred and secular references

coming and merging together, becoming syncretized, due to

ecumenism of the Roman Church.

Mary in the paintings looks to be standing on top of a

serpent/dragon like creature which is being crushed under her

feet, this could be associated with the false Catholic teaching

that Mary is the co-redemptrix crushing Satan under her feat. She

is hovering above a city and underneath her to the bottom left is

a patch of lilies. The icon of lilies culturally and

traditionally associate with feminine purity, perhaps in the

context of the cultic teachings of her being sinless.

This painting and subject matter is filled with much

controversy among theological and Biblical scholars. The Catholic

Church many times misinterpret the Mary of the Bible as the one

12 See link for Biblical Cherubim http://www.gotquestions.org/cherubim.html.

Isho 19

referenced to in Revelation 12:1 “a great sign appeared in

heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her

feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head.” This is a blatant

misinterpretation of the Scriptures due to the fact that the book

of Revelations is using symbolic language, in context it is not

representing Mary, but rather the nation of Israel.13 In the Old

Testament Israel is represented as the wife of God. Being clothed

with the sun speaks of the glory, dignity, and exalted status of

Israel, the people of promise who will be saved and given a

kingdom. The picture of the moon under her feet possibly

describes God’s covenant relationship with Israel, it comes right

out of Joseph’s dream in Genesis 37, where the sun stood for

Jacob, the moon for Rachel, and the twelve stars Joseph’s

brothers which make up the twelve tribes of Israel. Israel is

often pictured as a mother giving birth, agonized and suffered

13 A great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, with the moon under her feet and a crown of twelve stars on her head. 2 She was pregnant and cried out in pain as she was about to give birth. 3 Then another sign appeared in heaven: an enormous red dragon with seven heads and ten hornsand seven crowns on its heads. 4 Its tail swept a third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to the earth. The dragon stood in front of the woman who was about to give birth, so that it might devour her child the moment he was born. 5 She gave birth to a son, a male child, who “will rule all the nations with an iron scepter.” And her child was snatched up to God and to histhrone. 6 The woman fled into the wilderness to a place prepared for her by God, where she might be taken care of for 1,260 days. (Revelation 12:1-6)

Isho 20

for centuries, longing for the Messiah to come and destroy Satan,

sin, and death, and usher in the kingdom. The dragon creature on

the bottom refers to Satan the woman’s mortal enemy who appears

in the book of Revelations 13 times. He has afflicted relentless

pain on Israel, desiring to kill the woman before she could bring

forth the child that would destroy him. Jesus Christ in His

incarnation was of Jewish decent. Despite Satan’s efforts to

destroy Israel and the messianic line, Jesus’ birth took place as

predicted by the prophets (Isaiah 7:14; 9:6; Micah, 5:2).

Jesus shall rule as King over the nations of the world, as

Christ ascended into heaven, He will protect Israel from Satan by

hiding her in the wilderness, perhaps the region of Moab, Ammon,

and Edom, east of Palestine. So In fact this is a reference to

the events in the book of Revelation and not the Mary the mother

of Jesus for her story was only mentioned more prominently in the

Gospel of Luke and a little in the rest of the Gospels, no more

or less. Also Mary continues to have children after Jesus so she

did not stay a virgin all her life.14

14 Matthew 12:46-47 - "While He was still speaking to the multitudes, behold, His mother and brothers were standing outside, seeking to speak to Him. And someone said to Him, "Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside seeking to speak to You."

Isho 21

Comparing the two paintings one clearly understands the

theological aspect of the subject matter and times, and the later

a syncretized dance between the sacred and the secular. Both

paintings use the classical approach to narration by letting the

picture tell the story, but context is key to interpretation.

Cranach’s painting is more solid and clear in terms of history

and theology but Ribera’s is very much combined with other

cultural elements and icons that changes the meaning and makes it

difficult understand to those who do not know about Biblical

interpretations and context.

Syncretized images and cultural mingling of belief systems

is prevalent in today’s art world in hopes of making a unified

global system of a type of peace that will eventually end in

chaos (reference to the Tower of Babel). Reformations happen

when something wrong is parading itself as the right. The arts

are the first to express that revelation to the viewer, if their

worldview is heading in the right direction. Iconography has been

passed down through the ages and the same type is still in use Matthew 13:55 - "Is not this the carpenters son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?"John 2:12 - "After this He went down to Capernaum, He and His mother, and His brothers, and His disciples; and there they stayed a few days." For more references see link http://carm.org/did-mary-have-other-children.

Isho 22

today but in a different context altogether. The best way to

separate the syncretism and express individuality is to really

study it in-depth and have a knowledge of the subject matter

whether sacred or secular, one needs to look without bias and

compare the two like a detective to figure out what the truth is

and the truth shall set you free.15

15 “Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free." John 8:32 * (most biblical references I used come from the NKJV, and NIV)

Isho 23

Isho 24

Isho 25

Isho 26