Catholic Twitter is Freaking Out About this Stained Glass Window
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 20 ก.ค. 2024
- Music written and generously provided by Paul Jernberg. Find out more about his work as a composer here: pauljernberg.com
Another controversy on Catholic Twitter is highlighting how much we struggle to understand our own culture and traditions. This time, it is about a stained glass window that some say is the epitome of everything that is wrong with the Novus Ordo Church, while others celebrate as a way to see ourselves in the Communion of the Saints.
But sacred art should do much more than appeal to our sensibilities or resonate with our secular cultural identity. It should portray the life that Jesus is inviting us to. So does this stained glass window accomplish that?
The window is a contemporary portrait in stained glass and lacks that mysterious aspect which points towards eternity and God.
This is the best summary of the video.
Says you. Not everyone feels that way.
They should have added a Eucharistic miracle symbol since that was the devotion he was promoting and it woild have elevated it. As it is: its a very nice plain depiction of him.
A missed opportunity.
I suppose you have problems with St. Gianna’s and St. Maximillian Kolbe in his striped shirt?
@@tm1830 Thank you
Every day I'm happier that I left tweeter, facebook and instagram...would never get on tiktok.
They are all toxic because there is zero personal contact.
The best description of those is like being on an island, yelling across to someone on another island. Not much is discussed or accomplished, and you feel worse off from the interaction
@@AeternusDiscipulus26 Interesting insight. In a way it's actually worse.
Same here!!! I've been off all social media since 2018, and it was the best decision I have ever made!
Same
This is the only post that I feel says anything productive.
That's literally what Carlo Acutis looked/dressed like.
Exactly rooted in the real world just like Jesus.
Only in one photo, and it doesn't prompt one's thoughts to higher things....
@@AG-fl3kl what is the solution to that? Depict everyone in white robes?
@@Waldemarvonanhalt Not necessarily but ut would be better not to just put photos up of guys in frat parties who become Saints and all the rest. There is usually a formula such as certain plants which are associated with their life or appropriate garments e.t.c. No offence but if I die a martyr wearing spandex I would not want that on a Stain Glass window.
@@carolinenorman6141 Yeah but Jesus is not portrayed without divination.
Catholic Twitter needs to stop freaking out, period. How do endless tantrums over nothing enhance one's personal spiritual development, or the position of the Church in the world? Why not concentrate instead on the life of Bl. Carlo, and be edified by it?
Spot on
I admit, I would like to see him in his altar boy garb, perhaps with the laptop and definitely with the Eucharist and Mary included in the window. It’s lazy to assume everyone knows what’s in his backpack and why, but also be sure to include the logo on his shoes-what matters more? Other Saints had hobbies, but when we focus on the mundane bits like that, we tend to lose their own focus on Christ.
I'm not Catholic Deanna, but couldn't agree more - 'branding' in spiritual art is really vulgar. His other interests & hobbies could have been symbolized within the image in a much less obvious way that would also have invited interest & interpretation. Sacred art doesn't really need to spell it all out - it's meant to draw us in!🙏
This channel is a disgrace have you all got nothing better to complain about worry about the state of the church is in a wonderful modern young man 👨there is more serious issues god knows the heart not the clothes pathetic
@@sharonfixter4345 There is absolutely nothing disgraceful about engaging in dialogue about our experience of arts - it's part of it's purpose *and it is good.* You participated in the most aggressive manner of all - not so good!
@@caroldonaldson5936 get a life !!!
@@sharonfixter4345 Bless you.🙏
Brian, I’m not a Catholic, but this was awesome. This makes me want to fall in love with expressions of sacred art and wish the rest of the church could see it as you do… Hearing this assessment reminds me of what it feels like to come to an understanding of the theology of the body (contraception particularly in mind). What continually strikes me is the profound and beautiful purpose behind even the more odd and less readily obvious practices of the Church; how all things, from art to marital acts, are sanctified to proclaim deep theological truth.
I really enjoyed it, thanks!!
I love your comment Abby! Amen, to be Holier. -Megan, A fellow Catholic
GOD Bless You and Mary, The Mother of Jesus Protect You, Abby!
Well said just be careful about the soo called theology of the body stuff. When you're unsure about certain teachings in the Church, look to Tradition . If what was taught in the past don't match up with today, then there is a problem with what is taught today. Cling to Tradition.
@@KenDelloSandro7565 Will do. If I can ask, are you referring to things in Pope John Paul II and Christopher West-type theology of the body, or do you mean modern liberal body and identity theories? (I’m just getting started, so I don’t know what all is included in the JPII TOTB)
I don't really mind the clothing aspect. St. Kateri, for instance, has been depicted in American Indian clothing in most of the pictures and statues I've seen of her. My issue is more that I'm not sure how the picture itself draws one toward contemplation. It just looks like someone walking with his head down to me rather than directing my heart and mind to his mission and love of God. That's more my issue. Maybe if he was looking upward, was in adoration, or maybe if he was sitting before a monstrance in contemplation with his laptop open or something like that it would be a bit easier, but least from an initial look, there doesn't seem to be a clear invitation to contemplate Blessed Carlo's life and the God and mission he dedicated that life to.
Exactly!! I share in your thoughts. A better depiction of him would rather be him using his everyday tools (focusing on how he used them) for God's work and to God's glory.
Hey....cultural appropriation by the church.:-)
I second that completely. Perhaps, the artist should have opted to use Saint Acutis’ photo of him wearing his altar boy garments? I saw one of his photos wearing that white garment with a cross necklace.
@@cheechak481 what?? St Kateri is a MOHAWK, not a white person.
Maybe it would be helpful if the picture depicted him walking toward a church or standing in the church. The boy did not wear alter boy garb all of the time. We all need to be reminded by this modern day saintly person that we, in this age, can also live for the Lord as holy people. The saints of old are wonderful examples but we of this day and age need to remember that we are also called to holiness.
There is a commentary that states "He wears a backpack in which he carries a laptop computer, his tool for giving testimony. He is illuminated by the Eucharist that guides him like a sun."
and that he will be a contemporary Saint, which appears to be the highlight. If it was another Saint from centuries ago and he was dressed in middle ages European clothing and carrying a scroll and pen, it would be more warmly received. It seems to be a continuity.
Yes. I think SOME trads are missing something good here. Saints are not from the past only but WE can be saints now. I can imagine a young kid seeing this and it having a transformative effect. The evangelistic side of Catholic art is what I would appeal to as an argument in favor of this.
… “ a continuity.” Ya might say a hermeneutic of continuity eh?
We see how well that’s working out. I think that’s why people are upset.
I once had to take communion from a Eucharistic Ministress who was wearing dirty jeans, Birkenstocks and an “I’m With Stupid” tee shirt.
Can’t wait to see that in stained glass. I suppose people will say, “why not?”
Consider, him standing in an alb, with the laptop tucked under his arm.
@@rosezingleman5007 Ha Ha Ha exactly. As if they did not dress up the images of the Saints of years past.
Every Thomas More icon I’ve seen he’s wearing that Tudor period outfit.
Many of saint's imagery depict saints wearing humble clothes that were mundane during their lifetimes(I guess the intent is to exalt humble deeds), so I don't have any issue of depicting him wearing a hoodie and sneakers, but I can share the complain about product placement.
99% of all saints are either in their religious garbs or in formal attire from their time. Where is the 12th century equivalent of a t shirt saint?
This reminds me of those who argued in 1975 that “Jesus Christ Superstar” would bring people to faith. “It’s real!” Well it didn’t and it wasn’t because it trivialized what was vitally important by putting it to bad music. That is likely the parallel that people comparing that window to the NO were trying to make. In that they’re not far off.
@@CatholicBossHogg most medieval saints dress like medieval peasants-Francis of assisis wore the equivalent of modern t-shirts
@Aqua Fyre I’m glad for that. You cancel out my husband leaving.
I started to dig a little bit more and indeed, most of the saints are represented in their religious attires. I kinda remembered some sacred art with shepherds, with saints being martyrized and other examples like Saint Juan Diego and Saint John the Baptist, so, because of that I assumed it was common to depict them wearing humble everyday clothes.
However, to be fair most of the canonized saints had an ecclesiastical degree, and it was in V2 when they decided to start to canonize more lay people, and apparently Carlo himself wanted to be presented as commonfolk.
I quote from another comment "He was BURIED in these clothes INCLUDING his sneakers BY HIS REQUEST and now you can verify it because he was found incorrupt and his body has been placed for viewing, sneakers and all".
I think we need to re-train ourselves on what “sacred art” is, or, frankly, what makes anything “sacred”. I feel that several of the commenters aren’t understanding exactly what Brian is really getting at. It’s not about his clothes, specifically.
It’s about Catholic sacred art. Where’s the deeply rich symbolism that is in so many other saint’s images?
I can understand why people connected it to the NO. After decades of “Taste and See” people have forgotten beautiful polyphonic music. After decades of brick resurrection bump outs on walls they’ve forgotten the rich visual arts which have defined Western Civilization for over 2000 years.
Everyone here should watch “Civilisation” with Sir Kenneth Clarke here on YT and get reacquainted with our rapidly disappearing history. It was GLORIOUS.
@@rosezingleman5007 Laughs in Eastern Catholicism .We usually represent our saints in normal attire that all of us wear .
@@rebeccaanderson5626 I attended Eastern Rites most of my life. I’m unfamiliar with the iconography of running shoes and blue jeans. I must be missing out on a lot of banal crap since I’ve been attending the TLM.
I was referring to what is called “high art.” That of the great masters. We have lost touch with our own patrimony. Go laugh by yourself. I’ve spent a lifetime grieving over the decay of Christian culture and you just proved my point. If you like seeing the apostles dressed like they stepped out of the Sears catalog in 1975 then congratulations, the broader culture (as putrid as it is) is now in total agreement with your sensibilities.
@@rosezingleman5007 1) Lol what? I am sorry traditional Eastern attire does not include jeans or T -shirts
We wear what our Saints (Eastern ones ) wore in their life time .
2) This Comments basically shows the Toxicity present among some Traditional catholics. Who said we liked seeing apostles wearing jeans ? We show saints what the used to wear in real life "casual attire" . St Francis of Assisi was basically wearing his version of Tshirt in 13th century . If there is any future Saint wearing Nike shoes and a black hoodie I demand and require their images and statues to be made with the clothes that they wore in real life . Simple
@@rebeccaanderson5626 I think you and Rose had some miscommunication.
Your original comment reads as if you are laughing at/dismissing the need for reverence in sacred art. I understand that is not what you meant. From reading yiur comment, it seemed like you were saying your saints are often depicted in modern day clothing (jeans and t-shirts).
I think Rose was knee jerk reacting against this perceived dismissal of the cultural and spiritual decay in the Latin rite. I realize you did not intend this.
Look at stained glass / icons of Frassati, Thomas More..etc... They're wearing the clothes of their time.
We all follow Jesus in our street clothes. The window works for me.
People used to dress up to go to church, poor people still do.
Then the window belongs on the street.
You are always so reasonable and well grounded. I really appreciate your perspective.
I would say it's the first window of his we've seen and the absolute best ideas in relation to his icon haven't come yet.
When does Catholic Twitter not have unnecessary “controversies” (i.e., mountains from molehills)?
Yes exactly enough of mystery it's time people thought about making Jesus relevant. With clarity. Mystery is a luxury for educated Catholics
When does twitter, period not have unnecessary “controversies”
That wimdow looks amazing...but it might be too modern in theme, should have him worshiping with Eucharistic miracles, the thing he was about.
Oh and product placement is just wrong. We won't be wearing branded clothes in heaven...
Why don’t you pay attention to the video you obviously didn’t
@@cal2224 I did wstch it, I'm just stating my opinion. If you don't like it you can ignore it instead of rudely assuming stuff.
@@Fiona2254 your original statement was rude. Sound like an ignorant Protestant
@@cal2224 l was rude 🤣
Never used Twitter. Spent a week on FB in the early 2000
Nothing there, it's not the real world. Its glorified instant messaging
The problem with the window is it normalizes the individual which ordinarily would pass but not in a Church imo. It also isn't very well done but today just getting work done will get you the job. I make stained glass windows for the Church and you can never let technique get in the way of motive. Just making a window isn't enough because everyone thinks stained glass itself will carry the load of meaning visually but this alone won't cut it, you must reach deeper. It looks like a family photo made into a window and that's all your going to get out of it.
Yes. It’s not enough to be technically adept. This is just a craft. Yet William Morris elevated “craft” to art. This doesn’t.
YES!!!
So glad Brian is tackling this. I saw the stained glass and I had the same reaction as the title. Look forward to hearing his thoughts!
The way to be continuous with our tradition is not to freeze sartorial aesthetics in time at 1300. But rather to depict our departed in the clothing of the time period. I don’t think any medieval saint had an issue with depicting their recent saints in medieval garb
Okay, I'm posting this before watching the video just to gauge my own reaction. I've seen the picture in question and it's not my cup of tea. That said, if they canonize Dr. Hahn, I'd imagine a sweater vest in his window. In short, I have bigger fish to fry. I have a feeling this video will only solidify my decision to vacate all social media, especially the twitter land.
Thank You Mr. Holdsworth. Compelling indeed...
I said earlier that a post made by someone else sharing a similar sentiment was the only valuable post. I lied. Anybody sharing this opinion has made a valuable post.
And I think an icon of Dr Scott Hahn in a sweater vest with a cardigan or jacket would be awesome.
@@HolyKhaaaaan I agree. And i think he should be holdomg a bible open to revelation. Like he's teaching with it.
@@HolyKhaaaaan Yeah but Scott Hahn generally wears a Suit.
If you wouldn't wear that into church, why would you allow it to adorn the walls?
Thank you that was such a good explanation. It will help me understand other sacred art too and it helps me understand what I find so troubling about NO art and theology. Great video
I agree with you, but I actually love this image, because it seems pretty extraordinary for being this ordinary. Just imagine a teenager seeing this image.
Also, 95% of churches are filled with similar stained glass portraits just with like more famous saints.
I love watching your thoughtful videos. Thank you
Imagine Adidas in the near future
"Adidas. The only brand saints wear."
"Adidas. You're holy enough to wear it."
"Adidas. Wear it like a saint."
"Adidas. Beatification not included."
All Day I Dream About Sanctity
@@BugPod 🤣🤣
I.m.o., it was the artist's method to express the historical time of the saint. Otherwise, he could have been depicted wearing sandals of the Roman times.
I might point out that in the Late Republic, clothing was mass manufactured as well. Who knows? Maybe there are some trademarks that we don't see because only Romans would know them.
@@HolyKhaaaaan Exactly! Besides, we are not sure capitalism was practiced then. Or maybe …
ADIDAS: All Day I Dream About Saints
Thanks Brian, God bless you.
I think very few today are capable of making good sacred art. I just thought the window had poor compositional quality. We should take inspiration always from old iconography.
You are a wise man, Brian. Thank God for the gift He gave you and for your ministry! 🙏🏼
Apart from the strangeness of devoting stained glass to someone not liturgically a Saint, I think it is very appropriate.
Saints are not stained glass images, but real human beings. If that stained glass helps to remind people that he was a perfectly normal, run of the mill teenager. then it will have done its job.
As to the strangeness, there are several parishes that have stained glass images of Fr McGivney, the founder of the KofC. Not common, that is very true, but not unheard of in the Church.
Run of the mill teenagers are not saints.
I haven't seen anyone here discussing a run of the mill teenager.
Then you should put on your glasses. 🤓
No one should aspire to be a perfectly normal, run of the mill teenager.
Brian, the baby boomers were children when the novelties of Vatican II were introduced. We saw our parents say not a word when the new mass and folk music was introduced. Our parents were the WWII generation. They were obedient to a fault having nothing to say and it appeared not daring to think. The people in their 20s + early 30s who were strumming their guitars and their peers who were young nuns and priests redecorating the church and ripping down the altars were "the silent" generation. They were young adults in the 60s, the Peter Paul and Mary crowd. That's why the new music sounds like a hootenanny.
I was born in 1952. I started singing in the TLM choir in 4th grade. We had to learn the New Mass when I was in 7th or 8th grade. None of us liked it but the young nuns were quite excited. The were all born before 1945 which is when the war ended.
Please stop attributing modernism to the baby boomers. The constant blaming of us for everything you don't like or agree with is childish not to mention simply historically inaccurate. Do some simple arithmetic. The oldest of the baby boomers were 15 years old during the 2nd Vatican council, most of us much younger. By 1965 the oldest of us was 20 years old. We had no role in any of the modernist changes. One could say we were the first victims.
I agree. Most of those involved in Vatican 2 were born in the early 1900's. And most are dead today and the ones who are still alive are in their 90's like Pope Benedict 16.
I agree. People tend to forget that it was the WWII generation in charge at the time, and like you pointed out, they were obedient to a fault. My great-great aunt (born in the early 1900s) actually believed that the Pope knew every language on Earth, and could read people's thoughts. That nonsense is what kept them from fighting the innovations.
Words that need to be said. Thank you.
I attended Catholic schools during that changing time of the 60’s. We were taught by the nuns that the Pope was God’s representative on earth. He was chosen by God to lead the people. No one ever questioned the pope and no one questioned any one with a religious vocation. The idea of the religious being real people under all of that ancient garb did not occur to us. Clothing does help form an opinion of who a person is, even if it was not an accurate opinion.
The ideas that are instilled in us as children stay with us through life. We can reject those beliefs but they are still in there, tugging at us.
I was too young to think about if what Vatican II was doing was right or wrong. The pope had said to do these things so we did, without question. You don’t question a man who is called by God to lead God’s people.
Today there is a huge shift in belief about these things. The things that priests and nuns have done that are appalling to us have been openly revealed. They ARE just people. You can question ideas and motives. You must.
St. Frances was told in his vision to build the church. Apparently he believed that meant to make a building. No, that was not it. The direction that the Roman church was going was wrong and apparently Frances was the only person that God could speak to that would listen, however, even Frances had problems fulfilling his calling.
While we are in the body none of us reach perfection. Christ’s sacrifice made us right with God in our spirits but we must grow bring our souls and our bodies into subjection to the word of God throughout the rest of our lives. When we stop doing that we start going backward. We will reach the place that he has pointed us to when we see him face to face but we must strive to fulfill that call until then.
@@ellietobe thank you. I'm a convert to the Church (former Lutheran). I've been told that it is easier for us converts to see thru a lot of what's going on because we are looking at it from the outside in. In the Lutheran Church I grew up in, we had ad orientem worship, an altar rail, "communion" on the tongue, chant, bells and incense. It is odd to me to see Catholic parishes that DO NOT have those very same things.
I never met Carlos Acutis before. But this video makes me feel so comfortable. Maybe I just detracted to the photo that was taken. and your explanation of this topic makes me feel so calm and got my reconsolidation of heart.
Well... it is always difficult as how to depict lay saints, especially current ones, since if we ask anyone who's their favorite saint, they'll most probably say a nun or a priest, which is easy to depict in their religious garment... I think a suit is good for lay saints. It also shows the important fact that they were much more in the world than other saints but they were not part of the world, without the informality of the everyday clothes.
My take away from this is that you are incapable of seeing modern symbols as art. Only old symbols can be art. But this is because you are incapable of seeing the holy in modern times. Pity.
What's your opinion on the icons of St. Joseph wherein he is wearing a brown tunic exactly like how he did in real life and would have resembled peasant attire until the last 200 years?
You have a good feeling about the quintessence of sacred art. Very well compiled to what sacred art supposed to be👍
Well said!
Brian, I love your channel!! I'm a staunch Trad and FSSP Massgoer. That said, I must say I really don't see a problem with this portrayal of Blessed Carlo. One of the beautiful things about our family, the saints, is that they lived in all different points in time, and yet, however they dressed in their particular day and age, they achieved holiness in the timeframe and the setting in which God placed them.
Carlo isn't dressed immodestly, which would indeed make the depiction inappropriate if he had been shown that way. Other saints, such as St. Thomas More, are shown in the styles of the time in which they lived - Thomas is even often shown wearing his insignia of office as a government official under Henry VIII. A hundred, two hundred, five hundred years in the future, who will have any idea that Carlo's wearing Adidas? (I don't see a brand name in the picture of the window?) All the faithful will know by then will be that Carlo lived in this approximate timeframe. When we look at portraits or stained glass of the saints of other times, I'm sure we often try to imagine meeting them during their earthly life and seeing how they actually looked in the flesh. I think the jarring thing for us in this time is that we recognize details such as the Adidas, but I kind of doubt that future generations will have that same experience looking at the window. All they'll probably see is a young man of the late 1990's/early 2000's.
Honestly, I don't think there's anything wrong with this portrayal of Bl. Carlo. (Except that it might have been nice to have some kind of halo, to indicate his holiness, not that you'd have seen one physically around his head if you'd met him, obviously.) But I really just don't see anything awful about showing him as he actually looked on earth. If he can become holy in a hoodie and Adidas, we can become holy wearing whatever we wear in ordinary everyday life. This probably isn't the only icon that will ever be made of him, and others later on may well emphasize other aspects of his life. Maybe one in the future will show him at his computer creating his famous Eucharistic website? :)
Amen!
Apparently there are stained glass windows of Blessed Pier Giorgio Frassati and Blessed Chiara Badano in the same church. It would be interesting to see what they look like.
Over reaction to anything modern: it’s simultaneously what makes Catholicism great and sometimes whiny. This is not far from every other icon. We are missing out on the beauty of this saints life by arguing about this.
Well ultimately it is it's ability to take us to God not pondering on his life so much, though that has a part of course.
We in the Catholic Church have lost what sacred art actually means. The process to create it. The process to become and be a SACRED ARTISAN.
Eastern Orthodox has maintained that and therefore our Eastern brethren never lost it. I pray they reunite with us and help bring us BACK to Sacred Art.
St Jerome is often depicted wearing next to nothing and Mary Magdalene usually wears rags in art depicting her. I think him wearing the clothes of his time is fiyting as he is an example of holiness in this time.
This is how I feel. In his life he had no problem wearing and being seen in these clothes. I feel like this sentiment is coming from a place of bias toward lay people as typically saints are depicted wearing cassocks and habits due to the religious orders they are part of but a habit for a nun is everyday clothes just like jeans are everyday clothes for Carlos.
I don't have a problem with the clothes he's wearing per se, it's that the artwork fails to point to and evoke what it should.
Sure, the shoes could have been more generic. And I do not disagree with BXVI.
But many stained glass windows are just portraits of saints in their own garments.
Do we extend these arguments to ancient or medieval soldiers who are portrait in battle dress? Farmer saints dressed as farmers? Kings wearing their crowns?
All of these are usually portrayed in what they wore on their path to holiness, not as immaterial perfected souls.
Yeah but they are not in their casual attire. Those paintings are really idealised with a lot of symbolism. Unless you think Saints were in mountain with plants that did not grow there or under the Cross of Christ.
No, but they were still depicted in the garment that got them to heaven. I mean St. George fought for a pagan empire and is still depicted in the same clothes he used to shed blood.
@@YardenJZ Yeah sure but I do not see how that is innapropriate exactly. Granted not all Military Uniform looks formal but enough are and can be idealised. Even during the Middle Ages and the Early Modern Period, Knights were an idealised picture, though being a pikeman was slowly becoming acceptable for the Nobility, only as a stepping stone for greater things, Cavalry or Commanding such as Raimondo Montecuccoli. Edit: Put simply, bad example as he was still idealised as a Warrior Saint. Also you know being a Soldier in the Roman Empire was acceptable at the time. Many Christians joined and pledged their allegiance to the Emperor.
I don't think it was inappropriate, but that is my point. That was their path to holiness. Blessed Carlo's was via the internet. Literally. He was a 21C kid through and through.
If that stained glass window inspires even one 12-year old who is struggling to realise he, too can become a saint - it's all worth it.
Brian: can you do a video on prayer? Specifically imaginative/Ignatian prayer and Eastern/non-imaginative prayer, and the contrasts between the two from a Catholic perspective.
I agree with you Brian Here we go again, why are we allowing these modern artist who are trying ‘easily’ to destroy our Sacred Art
I love traditional stained glass, but this is also beautiful because it depicts the boy as he actually was in life and doesn't make him out to be something he never was. I'd like to see this in my own church.
Well he is literally looking at the FACE of GOD!!!
An icon shouldn't portray anyone as they actually were in life, but rather as they eternally are in heaven.
@@arthurdanzi404 That's unrealistic I think.
@@duaneadams5210 perhaps. But that's been the whole point of iconography since the earliest times.
Regarding the appreciation of art in general, mimicry is usually considered one of the lower forms. It largely lacks the interpretative or transformative elements ingredient in "good" art, with which a masterpiece forges the familiar everyday into something transcendent.
I hadn't gone to church since when I was in my Catholic high school. Your videos made me start going to church for the first time in 3 years. Now I worry that the Catholic faith will be irreparably polluted with progressivism and abandonment of tradition. What can I as someone who is a Extremely recent member of the community do to stop my church from adopting the wrong practices you've talked about? I have a beautiful cathedral in my town and would hate to see it's amazing art painted over.
But in 300 years no one's going to know what tracksuits and Adidas are? So I'm all for that stained glass window. Might seem a little commercial and pretentious and wonky to us now but in three hundred years it's going to be viewed upon completely different.
@@p.doetsch6209 is that possible?
@@p.doetsch6209 I vote yay on this one
Yeah its going to be viewed as "why is a saint wearing shoes made by that immoral 21st century company that openly used slave labor?"
@@CatholicBossHogg I doubt anyone is really going to remember Adidas in 500 years at this point. If somebody's clothes are somehow the focus of controversy here and it's not an issue of modesty, no wonder trads are seen so negatively at this point. There's no focus on the substance.
@@georgelabe-assimo4365 I don’t think the controversy is about the clothes. It’s about it being BAD ART. I say this as an art historian, but I’m not on Twitter so haven’t seen the actual flares.
The “art” if that was the aspiration, is cheesy. The artist should have exercised their imagination and tried to find what made Bl Carlos’s soul transcendent, what made his life different. Surely his spiritual life was more than online evangelicalism? What spiritual devotions helped him grow in holiness? He could’ve been depicted in modern dress but better his altar boy garb or the upper part of his suit and something like a book or crucifix. It shouldn’t be temporally anchored in a certain decade. To show the backpack, well you might as well depict him with a game boy. That would also indicate absolutely nothing about what made him worthy of admiration. It’s a failure as art.
What is the problem with the stain glass image? That is what he wore. He carried a laptop that he used to record Eucharistic miracles. In the past, saints were portrayed wearing their habits or the clothes of the time.
"That's what he wore" is so dumb. He also wore boxers to bed, and a bathing suit to the pool, and he also wore a suit to church! Why not portray him in what he wore, a suit?
He should be wearing clothing from the 14th century for it to be “sacred”.
Wearing name brand clothes. It doesn’t look saintly
Then he could still be depicted in modern dress except with him looking at the Eucharist. That would make it actually representational art. As it is, he looks like a stained glass mannequin in a department store advertisement.
That image is beautiful... It's a very good form of portraying the universal call to sanctity, we don't need to do extraordinary things, but do our ordinary daily Life extraordinary
Adidas: The official footwear for All Soles Day...
The window is fine. The stained glass artwork itself is actually pretty traditional, I’ve seen some more sloppily made stained glass windows at Catholic Churches.
It can be technically good stained glass and still be lousy as art and it is very bad as hagiography. It only represents a teenage person of twenty odd years ago and fails to tell us anything at all about him and what made him different from millions of other kids. Where is the iconographic information? All I can guess (without searching his name online) is that he played a sport? Or that he carried a backpack. How did these lead to him being a blessed?
I’m pretty sure they didn’t. So it fails. Pachamama is better art.
@@rosezingleman5007 It tells us that he was an average young man? Think how Isador the fatmer is presented it isn't overly symbolic.
@@rosezingleman5007 It tells us that he's going on a pilgrimage, which is what he wanted to do before he died of leukemia. It was his goal to visit and document every site wherein a Eucharistic miracle occurred. Instead, as is indicated by the IHS and sun behind him, he's on a pilgrimage to see Him whom the Eucharist signifies.
@@kevint7288 But the window tells us nothing of this history, but should.
@@rosezingleman5007 It does though. With sacred art, a lot of times you need to know what you're looking for. For example, many people have no idea that many Mary statues depict Mary stepping on the serpent, not because of bad catechesis but they just don't pay attention to her feet. One would have to know it's there to see it.
Similarly, once a person knows that Acutis was very much into pilgrimages, it makes sense to depict him wearing a backpack, jeans, a light jacket, and sneakers (but I'll admit ad placement was probably poor taste). It makes sense because that's what kids today wear when they go on pilgrimages. (Having been to the World Youth Days, I can attest to that!) Personally, I would've had him carry a laptop or something since he did create a website, but it's one of the first depictions of Acutis, so I'm sure there will be more inclusions as we close in on canonization.
Also, it's not like modernizing a saint is all that new. Caravaggio, for example, frequently scandalized people by putting contemporary (at the time) clothing on many Biblical figures rather than depict them in their milieu. And yet, today we would say these paintings are beautiful.
I am not a Catholic but I enjoy your videos. I especially related to the bit where you mentioned people wanting to relate to their faith. This is something I see happening in my church as well, many leaders are creating more “profane” and “worldly” representations and portrayals of the faith and to me this does not bring us closer to the ideal of heaven, but it lowers heavens glory down to an earthly diluted message.
So is it wrong to depict sanctity in ordinary life, and should only be depicted exclusively in the sacraments? I'm not saying that seeking the sacraments aren't necessary for sainthood (only baptism of course), but we should always seek for sanctity in every moment of our life. Every day, hour, minute and second. Not just only when we go to mass or confession. Blessed Carlo Acutis didn't only seek the sacraments; he also dedicated his time with the poor, being a good son and a friend, and probably lived everyday with the joy he was a son of God; things that also saints can do.
I absolutely and completely agree with you. Well done and God bless you abundantly. +
You’ve made a video on why beauty is not in the eye of the beholder, in which I heartily admire your argument and wholeheartedly agree. Assuming beauty pertains to the object, might we assume that the clothing of past era’s was simply objectively more beautiful, and this more appropriate for an icon, while today’s clothing is simply below par? I’m not advocating for the return to togas or gold embroidered waistcoats and breeches, however should we accept that most modern clothing simply does not lend itself towards the portrayal of the perfected man?
I usually agree with everything Brian talks about, but not on this occasion. I live in an ancient nation replete with stained glass windows installed centuries ago, but not all of them convey a sense of the sacred. More modern ones created in Victorian times are a distinct genre, but still able to convey holiness.The Carlo Acutis window depicts him as as an 'ordinary' boy and the fact that such an ordinary boy is now a Blessed is a great witness that will encourage others to follow in his footsteps.
Why'd it change from premier to publish?
Check out The Catholic Art Institute, established by St. John Cantius in Chicago. A wonderful ministry that's dedicated to restoring the sacred.
Is this one? th-cam.com/channels/iWrcNki7k_Yno6I0pA70dw.html
@@greatpretender83
Not certain if that channel is affiliated but you can easily look up the parish on a search engine.
@@anthonyburke3000 Looks legit to me
@@greatpretender83 Yeah, I found their website and then followed their youtube link and it led to that same channel
Please STOP stereotyping Baby Boomers as faithful to the Vatican II liturgical tenets!! I’m a Baby Boomer who received my First Communion and Confirmation in 1960 and 1963 respectively. I’m very traditional at heart, and, though there are no Latin masses in my diocese, I love the traditional liturgy and prefer it. We have found a priest who offers the sacred liturgy of The Mass in a manner consistent with traditional form, despite being in the Novo Ordis form. Pigeonholing always goes awry; however, having said that, I agree with you! God Bless You ✝️
Your generation is a disaster and you should feel shame for it. Offer it up though
*not faithful to the Vatican II liturgical tenets.
The "Spirit of Vatican II" is not faithful to Vatican II.
@@georgelabe-assimo4365 Thank you 😊
@@CatholicBossHogg Why is the post-WW2 generation a disaster? The men behind Vatican II were children of La Belle Epoque, the grew up in the late C19th and early C20th. They were not 1950s kids. Remember they had seen good traditional Catholics slaughter one another by the million in their own lifetime.
Brian please do not label people. I am a baby boomer and I am me!
I imagine I am quite different from others in my age group because we are individuals! We are not trads or boomers or whatever. We are often cool people who have immersed in our faith since the good true old days!
The Vatican has an agenda and I do not listed to them anymore.
I listen to Jesus, scripture and sound doctrine.
This young boy is perhaps not more of a saint than maybe an unknown very poor, ill child who we do not even know.
This is all propaganda from Rome and I won’t listen anymore. It has been corrupted.
I pray the boy is in Heaven anyway. But such an unnecessary fuss. 😳
I, for one, am glad to finally be able to relate to the heroes of the Church.
What it is about Carlos that you relate to?
@@DeannaWillistonOFS His faith in the face of serious illness.
@@Catholic-Perennialist that would definitely be difficult to show in stained glass. They chose a healthy, vibrant depiction of Blsd. Carlo, but you are right-he did not despair and that is a struggle for all of us, let alone a teenager. God bless!
When o first saw that stain glass I thought it was of Marty McFly. Great video describing sacred art
I am a working sacred artist. The problem with the window is mainly in the gesture. The clothes are really not what's causing the lack of transcendence. Every saint of any age is portrayed in the attire they wore in life. It could be done very well, even with jeans and tennis shoes. The main problem is that it just looks like a casual photograph. IF his gesture was more in line with traditional sacred art AND it retained his own personality... it would have been non controversial, maybe even great!
"Adidas:The official shoe company of the Catholic church!"👟👟⛪
At least they didn't portray him wearing a pair of Converse.
My thoughts exactly.
@@withremnanthearts At the National Shrine in Washington DC there is a mosaic of an “average American boy” circa 1960 who is depicted wearing Converse hi top sneakers. It’s not a saint, just “art” which most people here don’t consider a distraction. And that’s the point. Saints are depicted in a timeless manner because they are supposed to be emulated by future generations not just ours, so artists used to strive to pull them out of the easily identifiable age. Artists who didn’t follow this convention were not popular in their own time. Someone mentioned Caravaggio, he was condemned mostly because he showed biblical events in what was thought a crude, “Roman street” manner. What we notice isn’t that Doubting Thomas looks like a guy in a Roman market, but the stunning use of chiaroscuro-dark areas with stunning light. That’s the essence of Caravaggio. Early Renaissance artists often showed the Jerusalem Romans wearing the garb of the current citizenry and the viewer may find this amusing. But it wasn’t out of ignorance that an artist would do this. It was the artist turning tables on the viewer saying “you crucified Jesus.”
But they’d never (or rarely) depict a canonized saint that way because there are artistic conventions. Holdsworth didn’t even bring that up which is unfortunate because it leaves the discussion here unfocused on the true issues.
Would you be happier if he were wearing medieval or first century clothing? All the pictures I have seen of St. John Bosco are an actual photo of him. And there is a symbol in the window, the IHS with the Holy Spirit shining out.
In the glass, he should've left his backpack behind. The way death breaks his sickle at the Parousia.
You always present a balanced view. I like the window - it represents what he looked like and a modern young person might relate to him and explore why hes being presented as holy - leading them to use the internet to explore holiness just as he did. But mayhaps in the background it could have included a Eucharistic symbol.
Exactly
I mean, he didn’t wear a habit all his life
I think one of the problems is that there are no symbols that point towards Christ;
St Clare and her monstrance, St Francis's eyes turned to the heavens, St Kateri with her lilies.
As a man who attends SSPX Masses, I have to say this window is perfect. Its the clothes he wore. I could see if they depicted St. Joseph this way causing a stir. It's a showing of who the saint was in their life, period.
No.
@@CatholicBossHogg Yes.
@@redneckpride4ever No.
@Redneck-however we get no information whatsoever about who this person is, what made him worthy of being a saint, nothing about his spiritual life, his prayer life, or the miracle that led to his being a Blessed. If it was a stained glass image of me walking down the street with my purse, would you know, “oh, that’s Rose who prays for her whole family and is devoted to OL of Fatima.” No you wouldn’t, nor would you be spurred to find that out (in the unlikely event that a cause for sainthood is ever opened for me). The artist is supposed to give us that information by things in the image and this artist didn’t and that’s why it stinks.
@@rosezingleman5007 in book of revelation , the souls of the people who were matyered for the testimony of Jesus Christ were given a white robe signifying their holiness and victory , I think saints should be painted in white robes .
Yes, the product placement of the shoes is NOT spiritual!
He gave up his life willingly -- even gladly -- as an act of reparatory suffering. How does this window convey that?
well, i had no idea about this but glad to have found out about carlo acutis now :)
Also I think its interesting that two major religious scandals currently involve backpack imagery - this window and Jesus use of a backpack in the Chosen ... could be the exploration of the holiness of everyday ...or could be we are too shallow to know the real issues
I can appreciate the traditional mindset. I am an enthusiast of Latin, classical music, and the great patrimony of our Church. A very conservative Catholic.
That being said…new modes of artistic expression CAN have merit. From early Church mosaics and illuminated manuscripts to the high gothic style, there is a lot of variety. Enter the Renaissance and suddenly no one is wearing clothes and everyone has the body of Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Regarding clothing choices, a vast amount of sacred art is actually very anachronistic. Dutch masterpieces have the Holy Family wearing Northern European garments, Italian Renaissance masterpieces have them dressed like 16th century florentines etc. I think the artistic interpretations have historically been way more bold then we are perhaps used to considering.
If Church art was too ossified we would never have progressed beyond strict icons done in mosaic style.
With all due respect, I have seen saints dressed in the outfits of their time. From saints who are dressed like slaves to saints who are dressed in plain day clothes like a robe. I know that a lot of traditionalists only like outfits like priestly garments and religious habits which make a person "look" holy. There is usually little room for anyone to look like an everyday person in their world just like the religious people of Jesus' time. Jesus did not look and act on how they saw the Messiah which was more like a military leader like David. I guess if you do not like anything modern, you are going to take exception to it and have an issue. Also I am sure when everyone gets to heaven the first thing that will be asked, "So how did you like the stain glass window of Carlos?" Such a dumb and ridiculous controversy and just another thing to distract us from God and the saints.
To me the problem isn't the clothes he's wearing or that it's modern in itself, it's that it fails to achieve what it should.
He could be wearing traditional or religious clothes etc but the image could still fail to point to hat it should point to and evoke what it should evoke.
This reminds me of a sermon I heard just recently at my church. I'll sum it up to this; God don't care about what you wear, He cares about your heart.
Religious art often contemporised figures from the past (northern renaissance art is famous for it)but modern clothes are a problem nowadays? What do you want robes and wings? Honest question what would the Image be as a honest one isn't good enough?
Fun fact: pope Benedict's book was intended to be a correction of Guardini's eponymous book.
Gratulálok video again. Especially making the difference between an icon and a portrait.
Three stripes, one brand. It's all about the holy Trinity
Could it be possible that both creators of the two images were rushing to get the images out and not really focusing on making the images truly sacred?
I really think they should have left the branding out of the picture
If anything should go is the branding on the sneakers. The rest of it, I have no issue with.
There isn't any logos on the sneakers so it's not really branding
I just wonder how much sacred art have these trads seen. I guess they would love to dress St. Dominic Savio or Blessed Joselito in togas with looking at you with stern 2d faces or maybe would love to see St. Martín of Porres looking more important. There are lots of examples of sacred art from every período depicting saints as they were, and try to avoid any anachronisms or missrepresentation of what they were. The whole rant about appropiate clothing is so superficial as clothing styles change with time. The issue here is that styles are changing so quickly that apropiateness cannot just keep track also the fact that since the XIX century we have photography has changed how we expect people to be depicted as we have now real. likenesses rather than painted portraits, idealizations or reconstructions from memory. So the work of the artista who did that stained glass actually is superb even in its liturgical aspect as it does continue a tradition in its truest spirit. If you want the guy suiting up or wearing a toga you can go crazy and comission a new stained glass or mosaic.
Thank you
I would appreciate if blessed Acutis portrayed kneeling and praying. Not that one - walking. They should change the posture.
Many seem to fall into the pitfall of believing that because something is aesthetically pleasing to oneself, it must be sacred. This window is not profane, it's honest.
No one is saying its profane. We're saying is tackey and less than ideal.
You want honest? Try and sell something and you’ll get “honest” all day long.
If you want good art, it has to have transcendence. This is like a page from a clothing catalog.
@@CatholicBossHogg 8:05 Brian calls it profane around here. When I see an image of a saint, I want to see the saint, not some prettied up image imbued with the aesthetic preferences and bias of the artist. Honesty alone glorifies the reality created by God's hand.
@@rosezingleman5007 But this is not transcendence. Transcendence is a quality possessed by God alone. Prettying up this image would not make it more transcendental, it would merely imbue the image with the aesthetic preferences and biases of the artist. This image of Carlo is holy because it honestly depicts how a Saint lived his life. Honesty alone glorifies the reality created by God's hand.
As a non-Catholic I want to say thanks for keeping me updated on what Catholics are talking about
What a difference it would have made if they portrayed him kneeling before a Tabernacle or a Monstrance.
The Adidas clothing could be part of the iconography for blessed Carlos Acutis.
I enjoyed this video and the educational quality of it. I would wonder, are we conflating the use of contemporary clothing with what we believe is to be appropriate clothing for the icon? Does the stained glass representation of medieval and classic saints in contemporary clothing past the same test we apply to this piece? Or are we drawing a distinction without a difference? I mean this as a actual enquiry.
Look at stained glass of St. Francis of Assisi, he is wearing contemporary clothes of a monk, but the inspiration is in his face and the peaceful gestures of his hands. Would his being surrounded by the animals be construed as Profane?
For me, to look at sacred art, I am more drawn to the face and body movement, and how it depicts the serenity, pain, love, contemplation of God's love, etc that it is conveying in the aspirational sense. Having said all that, I do not find it in this piece in a moving sense. But again, to focus on the garb (style) and not the essence, I think distracts the conversation.
There's a picture of Carlo Acutis wearing a suit with a tie, he should've been depicted like that, in a more prayerful posture, like kneeling before the blessed sacrament as he currently is one of the Eucharistic blessed.
I think it’s perfect for Catholic school when you enter the school or leaving the school right by the door
I have SEEN it all!!
Brian what do you think of the biblical sabbath¿?
What do you mean by "biblical sabbath"?
I agree wholeheartedly..
I love my parish and its priests, and most of the music...but the stained glass over the altar is just like the one being discussed. This has always bothered me, but I couldn't articulate why.. Thanks, Brian.
This weekend, we are going to worship in Orlando at Our Lady Queen of the Universe Shrine. Their music is ALWAYS sacred and done with excellence. The stained glass is reminiscent of those created for much older places of worship. Although some the statuary is totally out of place and inappropriate, crossing the threshold , one truly enters a sacred space.
Song in the end?
Who is Blessed Carlo Acutis? Please educate me, I don't do Twitter.
No matter how beautifully and eloquently put, I personally don't agree with your reasoning. It depicts him just the way he was and I love that about that piece of art. An authentic depiction of a young, modern teenager. That itself makes me appreciate it very much.
I appreciate your love of symbolism and your passion for what it can express. However, sacred art can point people towards God in more ways than one. While some stained glass windows can and should depict saints in garb that symbolizes their participation in the beatific vision in order to remind us of our own goal, this is not the only way to point people towards sanctity. In our world today it is so easy to think of saints as relics of the past, as solely part of our tradition. Yet the church is alive today, and there are saints living this very day. People need to be reminded of this. They need to see others in the modern era living the path of holiness. Blessed Carlo doesn't need to be wearing more traditional garb for me to realize he's with God in Heaven. The fact that he's being represented in stained glass is enough. I feel convicted seeing his casual clothing because it leaves me no excuse for my own depravity, for in a lot of ways I am like Carlo, living in the same world. And yet he walked the path of holiness.