www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology What about these Icons?

I disagree with your interpretation. If you note [puffin.creighton.edu] the many wounds on Jesus' body, indicative of AIDS, you will see that he is depicting Christ as a sufferer of AIDS. Thus, the sign above his head is obviously intended to be an indication of his own state, and not those he died for. If you further wish to read symbolism into that, I'm sure it is possible. The AIDS lesions on the body of Christ, connected with the sign above his head saying AIDS, is quite clear, though.

The meditation of the artist's gives even more credence to this claim, saying St. Francis used his "scarcely visible frame to cover even the hopeless and the lepers of [his] day." The preceding sentence verifies that he is recreating this scene of St. Francis with the leper by superimposing it on the scene of St. Francis with Christ. Thus, he depicts Christ as a leper, also noted by the sign.

What he did was create a picture in veneration of St. Francis which would allow those suffering with AIDS, drug use, and homosexuality to see themselves in the Suffering Christ. He used the story of St. Francis and the lepers in order to tie it all in. I personally find it very disturbing that a picture of Christ depicts him as a homosexual with AIDS, who suffers from leprosy and drug use. I have no question in my mind that that is what the picture does, and was intended to do, though.

I found this online: "Rev. Fr. Thomas Anchanikal, Vicar General and Parish Priest St. Joseph�s Church, Kalka." as well as this: "The General Secretary of the Haryana United Christian Forum for Human Rights and Administrator of Shimla-Chandigarh Diocese, Father Thomas Anchanikal..."

Based on that, I would say he was of the Latin church.

A quick check in Google confirms that it is indeed a Latin diocese in the north west of the country and includes the Punjab.

ICXC
NIKA

Indeed, the diocese in which he was serving was a Latin diocese, but so many of our Syro-Malabar priests (both in India and in the US) serve in Latin dioceses. So it doesn't answer whether he himself was a "Lateen" or not. Thanks for the research, though!

Peace,
Alex

Dear Wonderer,

Thank you for pointing out the wounds on the depiction of Christ's body. I think you are correct in your interpretation.

Unlike you, however, this does not particularly disturb me. Perhaps, however, I am conflating seeing Christ in our suffering neighbors (cf. Matthew 25) and seeing our neighbors in the suffering Christ (which, I think, you argue that this depiction does). I'll have to mull on that.

Thank you for your comments.


Peace,
Alex NvV

Whenever I see "S.J.". or "Jesuit",I run the other way, and fast!!!
This "iconographer" should be included in the anathemas read on the Sunday of Orthodoxy!

I can't see what all the fuss is about. His work looks fine to me. That is a very nice icon he gave to Pope JPII. I would not mind that cross myself (a bit smaller of course). We have seen some very strange use of the icon style adapted to more non religious subjects but his work seems ok to me. There are other art styles on the internet site as well. As for the cross, are these people not the least in our society. I dont think the icon is mean to be taken apart in terms of this means that and something else means another thing. For me I am confronted with the question of have I failed to see Christ in someone today. Have I failed to treat them as someone loved into excistance by God.

ICXC
NIKA