0 members (),
592
guests, and
103
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,530
Posts417,673
Members6,182
|
Most Online4,112 Mar 25th, 2025
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564 Likes: 1
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564 Likes: 1 |
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,028
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,028 |
Dear Father;
"EEEK" gives us an idea of what you feel about this, but I (and probably some others) would like to have your theological persepective on this.
There was also a vigorous debate on the propriety of this monstrance over there at New Liturgical Movement, so much so that the combox was yanked offline.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,505
Member
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,505 |
It reminds me of an Icon which Jesus is portrayed in a medalion held by the Most Holy Theotokos. Personally for my tastes I dont like it and have never liked that Icon either. Now dont go calling me an antidicemarionite. Stephanos I
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 299
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 299 |
Oh I hate to be a critic of this for I am sure that this is being made with profound love for Our Lord and his Holy Mother. That being said this is a very strange looking statue/icon. (I am not quite sure)
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,691 Likes: 8
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,691 Likes: 8 |
Maybe the picture needs to be zoomed out to see a bigger view of the Tabernacle. The way the image on website looks, there's a Hindu feel to it, because the Blessed Mother looks as though she is sitting cross-legged in Buddhist/Hindu-Guru fashion; the moon implies some kind of goddess or something.. it doesn't "feel" right to me. Not that I'm questioning the motives or intent of the people involved in building it.. just a gut feeling.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564 Likes: 1
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564 Likes: 1 |
The thing frightens me. I would be hard put to it to grasp any serious theological point that it is attempting to make.
An often-violated rule of the present Roman Rite is that "Benediction", with or without a monstrance, may not be done as an independent service, but only as a supplement to another service: Vespers, the Te Deum, or something similar. It must be more than ten years since I last experienced it at all.
Fr. Serge
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 648
Orthodox domilsean Member
|
Orthodox domilsean Member
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 648 |
You mean the "Queen Mother"... weird.
And I'm generally a pretty huge fan of St. Stanislaus Kostka.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564 Likes: 1
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 5,564 Likes: 1 |
The Icon (called the Platytera in Greek and the Sign in the Slav languages) is magnificent and joyful. I've already expressed my opinion of the monstrance.
Fr. Serge
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,399 Likes: 33
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 2,399 Likes: 33 |
Having only now read to the end of the link I provided, I find in fact that: The Church of St. Stanislaus Kostka, one of Chicago's famed Polish Cathedrals is home to a nine foot wide Iconic Monstrance of Our Lady of the Sign as part of the planned Sanctuary of The Divine Mercy that is being constructed adjacent to the church. The Monstrance will be found within the sanctuary's adoration chapel which will be the focus of 24-hour Eucharistic Adoration and where there will be no liturgies or vocal prayers, either by individuals or groups as the space will be strictly meant for private meditation and contemplation. This raises a separate question: How appropriate is the traditional form of the icon itself for the use as a monstrance? That is, accepting the Latin devotion and usage, is not this icon in a sense made for such a use: a glass pix to accept the consecrated host placed over the circle having the image of Christ? This is not the traditional Latin practice -- using an icon -- but is there anything essentially incorrect or inappropriate?
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 6,595 Likes: 1
Member
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 6,595 Likes: 1 |
Would not the this Icon in fact prove a distraction during Eucharistic Adoration ?
I thought that one wa supposed to look on the Consecrated Host and focus your thoughts on Christ that way - wouldn't this huge Icon be rather a stumbling block ?
I have to say that this is not something I would appreciate - the Iconic Monstrance I mean
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 510
Member
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 510 |
Reverend Fathers, sisters and brethren C^BA ICYCY XPUCTY!
Yes Father, thank you for your council. You seam to know how to hit the nail on the heads in very few �words�.
Could this be how Westerners saw it when Easterners stole their customs refashioning them, making them our own? Could this be any worse then a Rafael Madonna on a pre-1960 iconostas? Did not the Pope tell them to look to the East? No wonder their chaplet of DIVINE MERCY chants �Holy God� with an insertion �and on the whole world� like the Fileoque to the Creed. (Unless I am mistaken and that is how it is sung in their Good Friday Presanctified.)
Does not the �monstrance� (tabernacle / arc) part on our icon of the Sign reads the Word in an embryo state inside the Mother of God? If so their interpretation may not be our perspective but speaks true. We must remember before the Renascence the Gothic cathedrals were covered with stone statuary, most in Byzantine costuming and iconic staging. The moon is a Western interpretation from Revelation. No worse then when we put crescents at the foot of our crosses when the Turks were controlled in Rus� Minor.
People who pray in stained glass houses shouldn�t throw prosphora.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,028
Member
|
Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,028 |
People who pray in stained glass houses shouldn�t throw prosphora. Well, the prosphora will just bounce off the glass, anyway.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,904
Orthodox Catholic Toddler Member
|
Orthodox Catholic Toddler Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,904 |
This whole thing has a complicated mixed set of theological points.
Some of which are disturbing.
Michael
|
|
|
|
|