My question: Is it appropriate to display nude art in places of Christian worship?
The above scene greeted me when I entered the Jesuit St. Michael’s Church adjacent to the Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium for worship services during the Congress of Societas Liturgica Liturgica held in Leuven on August 7-13. People were looking up at the front side of this statue with a nude backside. Here’s the front side.
The Belgian artist Ad Wouters (1944- ) sculpted a bronze youthful St. Michael who has slain the ancient dragon, the Satan that had been cast out of heaven and had the world in its grip. The sculpture was placed in the back of the church in 2009. The young Michael has broken his sword. “Killing is not the answer,” said the artist, putting this thought into the mind of the young Michael. There will be no more killing. In God’s peaceable kingdom swords will be beaten into plowshares.
I’m sure, however, that the eyes of viewers were drawn more to the male appendage on St. Michael the archangel than to the broken sword. As I passed this sculpture throughout the week, various thoughts came into my mind. For one, I thought that angels were sexless, and therefore non-binary. Of course, Michael has traditionally been portrayed as a very masculine warrior in Roman-style military garb. Perhaps Ad Wouters retained the masculine character of Michael in the Apocalypse as the leader of the heavenly host by portraying him not as a heroic general but as a heroic boy (a kind of David figure). Angels are often portrayed in white robes. But if the angels are sinless they have no shame that needs to be covered. So there’s no reason not to have naked angels, and not just the little Baroque era pink cherubs. But portraying them as human-like presents a conundrum for artists.
The larger question, of course, is about the shock of having totally nude figures in a Christian worship space, especially one as unavoidable as this when you enter the church. I’ve been thinking about the symbolism of nakedness/clothing in recent years as I’ve returned to the body in life and in liturgy. Chapter 3 in my book, Embodied Liturgy: Lessons in Christian Ritual (Fortress Press 2016), is entitled “Naked Bodies, Clothed Bodies.” In this chapter I explore the concepts and practices of being naked before the Lord (for example, in rites of initiation like baptism) and being clothed by the Lord (for example, in the bestowal of ministerial vestments).
The juxtaposition of nakedness and clothing is a powerful religious symbol, including in the Bible. From God’s perspective the human body has received the honor of being created in God’s image. In God’s mission of redeeming sinful humanity the divine Word bestowed further honor on the human body by becoming human flesh. In the end God will redeem his human creatures in the resurrection of their bodies. But from the human perspective the naked body can be a thing of shame. Adam hid from God because he perceived he was naked. God wanted to know who told Adam he was naked. Then the figure-pointing and blaming began, which was a clear indication that sin had come into the world as humans became alienated from one another, from the natural world, and even from God. Adam and Eve tried to cover their nakedness with fig leaves. God dealt with their perceived shame by covering their bodies. In an act of grace God fashioned clothes of animal skins for Adam and Eve to provide for modesty as well as warmth. But God also restores honor to the body by dressing our bodies in festive apparel for the divine liturgy, as he did when he fashioned vestments for the high priest and other priests of Israel. We recall that the shameful nakedness of the prodigal son in Jesus’s parable is covered by his being dressed in the robe of sonship. So both honor and dishonor accrues to nakedness. But clothing also is a sign of both shame and honor.
“The Return of the Prodigal Son” (1773) by Pompeo Girolamo Battoni (1708-1787)
Honoring of the body was enacted in ancient Christian baptismal practice in which candidates went naked into the font and were dressed in a white garment (alba) when they emerged from the water and were led into the eucharistic assembly. Ancient icons of the baptism of Jesus show him naked in the water, which was probably a reflection of Christian baptismal practice.
The Leuven Congress dealt with the theme of sacramentality as it is impacted by social, cultural, and religious issues in the modern world. In sacraments God impacts the body. Missing from the major presentations, in my view, was the issue of what it means for sacramental theory and practice today that we live in a body-obsessed culture that has difficulties, ironically, both with nakedness and with dressing up. Imagine, for example, this scene of the baptism of Clovis, King of the Franks, in Reims in 411 (the site of the Societas Liturgica Congress in 2011) being liturgically enacted today—the naked baptism and the splendidly vested ministers.
Painted by the Master of St. Giles, Franco-Flemish ca. 1500
Stripping and then being dressed is a powerful religious symbol and ritual that suggests and enacts a change of status. St. Francis of Assisi famously demonstrated his resolve to follow Christ according to the gospel precepts by his dramatic act of removing the clothing he was wearing because of his father’s wealth, standing naked before his father and his associates to renounce wealth, and then donning a simple peasant’s tunic to live a life of poverty.
Francis of Assisi is shown renouncing wealth in this painting in the series of the Life of St. Francis paintings in the Basilica of St. Francis in Padua (1297-1300), thought to be the work of Giotto. His nakedness is being covered by the bishop.
Picking up on this dramatic action a later Franciscan credo became nudus nudum Christum sequi (“follow naked the naked Christ”). It was a radical call to cast aside worldly wealth and belongings in order to identify with and serve the poor. Influenced by this Franciscan spirituality, late medieval painters portrayed a Christ who was naked at his birth, death, and resurrection. In scenes of the Madonna and Christ child painted in the late Middle Ages Mary’s breast is typically exposed and the Christ child is naked.
Paintings of the Virgin Mother Mary breast feeding the infant Jesus were ubiquitous in the churches of the late Middle Ages. Lucas Cranach the Elder (1472-1553), the court painter to the electors of Saxony, sometime burgomeister of Wittenberg, and godfather to Martin Luther’s first child, painted many nude figures, including Adam and Eve in his famous Allegory of Law and Grace, which expresses Luther’s doctrine in pictorial form. This is his rendition of the Virgin nursing the infant Christ from ca. 1515, just before the beginning of the Reformation. He captures Mary as a young mother pondering the meaning of what had taken place.
In this time of plague and warfare artists also portrayed a suffering Christ who could identify with suffering humanity. The epitome of this portrayal of the suffering Christ is Matthias Grünewald’s largest work, the altarpiece for the Monastery of St. Anthony in Isenheim. The monastery had a hospital and the Antonine monks of the monastery were noted for their care of plague sufferers.
On the cusp of the Renaissance with its interest in the nude body the Italian painter Luca Signorelli (c. 1450—1523) painted massive frescoes of the Last Judgment (1499–1503) in the Orvieto Cathedral. Below are the adjacent panels of the resurrection of the dead and the consignment of the damned to hell. Of course, the bodies resurrected from the dead are mostly naked.
The function of church art, especially in the West, is to teach by evoking and sometimes provoking theological affirmations. The issue of nude art in church, as I see it, comes down to the question of whether the theological affirmations should reflect God’s perspective on the body or the human perspective. Should church art reinforce the divine view of the human body as a thing of honor created, redeemed, and sanctified by God or the human view of the human body as a thing of shame that needs to be covered? Being saints and sinners at the same time (simul justus et peccator) also affects our perception of and response to the nude body.
Artists assumed that they had license to paint the figures of Adam and Eve nude since that’s how they were created. When they disobeyed God’s commandment they were ashamed and focused their shame in the genital area. So they made aprons of fig leaves to cover themselves when they appeared before God. This was a giveaway that they had eaten of the tree they were commanded not to eat. When God expelled them from the Garden of Eden he made clothes of animal skins for them. But some artists continued to paint the primal couple naked.
“The Expulsion of Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden” by Masaccio (ca. 1426) is a fresco in the Brancacci Chapel. Three centuries later, Cosimo de’Medici ordered fig leaves to be added to conceal the genitals of the figures. These were removed in the 1980s when the painting was fully restored and cleaned. It would seem that the painting is not in line with Genesis since Adam and Eve leave the Garden naked rather than clothed in animal skins (the fig leaves would also have been erroneous). But what is the chronology, theologically considered, between God providing clothing for Adam and Eve and their expulsion from the Garden of Eden? Certainly the drama of the event is increased by having the figures leave paradise nude. But consider that clothing wasn’t needed in paradise; it was needed in the world outside the Garden. And animals would not be sacrificed for their skins within paradise. Michelangelo’s painting of the Genesis story on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel also shows the pair leaving paradise still nude, perhaps suggesting in his eyes a residual honor for the body in the fallen world (see the image following this article). Masaccio’s portrayal of Eve’s howling pain and Adam’s inability to face the situation is psychologically profound and artistically unprecedented.
The naked Christ, the new Adam, is the focal point of Christian devotion. His crucifixion, like all torturous executions, was meant to be an event of humiliation and shame. In the Roman practice crucified men were hoisted onto the cross completely naked. But Christ as the new Adam, obedient to the Father even unto death, went to the throne of the cross without shame. What men intended as an act of shame Christ embraced as an act of honor. Christian martyrs followed Christ’s example and went naked to their deaths also as acts of honor. Should we avert our gaze upon Christ on the cross because he is in a state of total nakedness? Must his manhood be covered so we can look upon him?
As an 18-year old in 1492, Michelangelo carved a wooden crucifix with a nude corpus and gave it to the Basilica of Santo Spirito in Florence as a thank-you gift for their willingness to let him study human anatomy by dissecting deceased bodies. The monks apparently thought it would scandalize the faithful if it were hung in a public place, so it was placed in the sacristy. Over the years it went to other locations and was heavily painted. Only in recent decades has it been rediscovered, attested as Michelangelo’s authentic handiwork, and restored. It has now been returned to hang over the sacristy door in the Basilica of Santo Spirito in Florence to which it was originally given.
Concern for modesty in church art has resisted full nudity. But Michelangelo (1475-1564) pushed the envelop by festooning the walls and ceilings of the Sistine Chapel in the Vatican (a place of worship, not a museum) with nude bodies, from the creation of Adam on the ceiling…
…to the resurrection of the dead and Christ coming in judgment on the wall above the altar.
It is evident in the close up of Christ the Judge that there was an attempt to provide covering for some of the male figures after Michelangelo’s time. In 1564 (after the Council of Trent) the more “prominent” nudes in The Last Judgment mural above the altar were made more “decent” by the artist Daniele da Volterra, who was commissioned to paint braghe (draperies) on the offending nudes, including Christ. He was lampooned ever thereafter with the nickname Il Braghettone – Big Pants.
Pushing the envelop even further, when Michelangelo painted the Sistine Chapel ceiling between 1508 and 1512, he incorporated 10 pairs of male nudes (called ignudi, from the Italian for “naked”). For Michelangelo the shape and proportions of the human body are integral to God’s organic creation. But because the ignudi did not seem relevant to the themes of the piece, Michelangelo’s ignudi outraged several popes. Most of the figures are surrounded by huge garlands of oak leaves, and clustered about them are thousands of acorns resembling the penis, or “prickhead”, in Tuscan slang (testa di cazzo). The most likely reason for their abundance is that they are an allusion to Michelangelo’s patron, Pope Julius II, who commissioned the work, and was of the della Rovere family. There have been several theories about what the ignudi represent. Certainly they represent the ideal male form that was perhaps present in the mind of God who floats in an outline of the human brain in the creation of Adam scene. Here is one pair of ignudi.
Michelangelo also sculpted a risen Christ rising from the tomb naked. The biblical account says that when Peter and John entered the empty tomb they saw the grave clothes rolled up in a corner. The sculpture was erected in the Church of Santa Maria sopra Minerva in Rome. A 17th century pope required the genitals to be covered. So a bronze cloth which improbably defies gravity has been affixed over the figure’s genitals. Michelangelo’s intention was to show the resurrection in a perfect body, so none of the wounds of Christ’s crucifixion are showing. The added bronze cloth diminishes the glory and honor of the resurrection body. Ironically, it also draws attention to that which it covers.
Michelangelo actually began sculpting a figure of a nude risen Christ that he abandoned because of imperfections in the block of marble. It was finished by other artists, bought and placed in a private home, and currently on display at the Capitoline Museum in Rome.
A subject for a nude Christ that has been mostly without controversy has been the infant Jesus. This painting is in a side chapel of St. Peter’s Church in Leuven. It shows the Christ child in the Temple being held by the aged Simeon.
Christ must be portrayed nude in his crucifixion, but usually with a loin cloth wrapped around his pelvic region covering his genitals. This painting of the crucified Christ is also in St. Peter’s Church in Leuven (although moved to a side chapel when I took this photo because of renovations in the chancel).
The following painting by Lucas Cranach the Elder is the central panel of the altar piece in St. Wolfgang’s Church in Schneeberg, Erzgebirge. It is interesting that Cranach’s crucifixion scenes always include people at the base of the cross expressing various reactions to what was taking place.
There have been paintings of the crucifixion of Christ that portray Christ and the two thieves crucified with him completely nude with penis exposed, as was the custom in Roman crucifixions. Among them are crucifixion scenes by the 19th century German painter Max Klinger and the 20th century Italian painter Vittorio Carvelli. But those paintings are in museums and my interest in this article is nude art in places of worship. Perhaps a crucifix or a crucifixion scene that worshipers might gaze upon in devotion requires some degree of modesty for the sake of the human beholder. Catholic and many Lutheran altars have a crucifix on, behind, or above the altar that serves as an object of devotion. Lutheran pulpits in Europe also feature a crucifix as a visual reminder that “we proclaim Christ crucified” (1 Corinthians 2:23).
Edward Knippers is a contemporary American artist whose major work has been painting Biblical scenes with all nude figures. Raised in a fundamentalist family, he became an Episcopalian and strove to glorify the human body in art as God’s good creation, which the Son of God assumed, and that is promised resurrection. As far as I know, his work is not on permanent display in any church. But his paintings have been exhibited in churches and church schools, including the Truro Episcopal Church in Fairfax, Virginia in the summer of 2010 (Knippers’ home parish), the Lutheran Theological Seminary at Gettysburg March 15- May 15, 2010, the Marxhausen Gallery of Art of Concordia University, Seward, Nebraska in 2009, and St. Andrew’s Church, Mount Pleasant, South Carolina, in September 2009, as well as in many art museums. Here is his expressionistic Crucifixion.
A prominent German artist who is attracted to religious and church art is Michael Triegel (1968- ). His style reflects the old Renaissance masters. He was commissioned to paint a portrait of Pope Benedict XVI by the Diocese of Regensberg. But his painting of the resurrection of Christ was ordered removed from the Museum of the Wurzburg Cathedral because it portrayed a naked Christ rising from the tomb and leaving his grave clothes behind.
A more permanent display in a worship space with a nude Jesus are the paintings for the Stations of the Cross in St. Paul’s Episcopal Church in Norwalk, Connecticut. The paintings have provoked controversy because of their setting in a war context. They were commissioned by St. Paul’s in March 2004, from New York City artist Gwyneth Leech. The artist comments, “I was asked to combine the traditional stations iconography with elements of the world we live in. This brief eventually led to my vision of Christ as a prisoner of war, and as a hostage tortured by insurgents. The crowds are refugees. The people weeping at the foot of the cross are grieving Iraqis and Americans who have lost family members to bombs and to violence.” This scene of Jesus stripped of his clothes before being crucified suggests the torture of prisoners at Abu Ghraib in Iraq.
Station 10. Jesus is stripped of his garments.
Station 12. Jesus is crucified.
Worshipers might encounter nude art not only in the worship space but as they enter it. Beginning with Romanesque churches and continuing into Gothic, the tympanum above the west doors of cathedrals and churches became sculptured scenes, especially of the Last Judgment. This scene of the Last Judgment is on the tympanum above the main west door of the Amiens Cathedral. It shows Christ the judge on his throne as the angels blow trumpets and wake the naked dead who are divided into the saved and the damned. The damned go naked into hell. The saved are clothed in white robes and crowned for their entrance into heaven. The first saint to enter into heaven in this scene is Francis of Assisi, who was canonized only a few years earlier in 1228 (he died in 1224).
Scenes of creation were also common on medieval churches. Figures of Adam and Eve were usually nude. Frederick Hart (1944-1999) created the sculptures portraying creation on the Washington Cathedral. This sculpture in the tympanum above the west entrance, entitled “Ex Nihilo,” portrays the creation of humankind with semi-nude figures.
The following bronze sculpture is not inside the worship space but is outside the main entrance to Westminster Presbyterian Church in Minneapolis. The sculptor, Paul Granlund, says it draws its inspiration from Hebrews 12:1: “let us throw off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles.” Worships cannot avoid seeing it as they enter and leave the church.
The question of the appropriateness of nude figures in the worship space is as ambiguous as nudity itself in our experience of it. I would be interested to know what readers think about the appropriateness of nude art in the worship space, and also to be informed of any examples of nude art in churches.
Pastor Frank C. Senn, STS