Relationship between Christ and the Holy Spirit

[Ashley Trice]

I am studying medieval poetry and have run across several representations of Christ's death in which Christ yields up the HOLY GHOST (rather than just His spirit or soul) to His Father. This seems to me unorthodox or at least heterodox, but I have not been able to find any sources that mention it or support for or against the representation. I have seen similar representations in Crucifixion art, where the Father holds a dove that appears just to have ascended to Him from Christ. Is this idea familiar to anyone?

[M.C. Steenberg]

Ashley, if you happen to have any of these pieces of art in digital format, or could easily scan them in, feel free to email them to me and I'll post them here on the message board, such that people can see the type of thing you are talking about.

INXC, Matthew

[Gregory Myron]

Occasionally we see rare icons of the passion that have a dove ascending above Jesus on the cross, but in these cases the dove is respresenting his own spirit, not the Holy Spirit

[Ashley Trice]

Gregory, how can we know that the dove does not represent the Holy Spirit?

[Richard McBride]

"...where the Father holds a dove that appears just to have ascended to Him from Christ. Is this idea familiar to anyone?"

As an aside to the Dove question, this depiction of the "Father" seems unusual. I suppose Ashley refers to European painting and woodcuts coming after 1054 AD. I have seen no depictions of God the Father from Eastern sources -- from Byzantine ikons.

[Gregory Myron]

Ashley.... we can be sure that it isn't the Holy Spirit because there has never been any interpretation in the church's theology that understands Jesus to have given up the Holy Spirit, only his own spirit. This is how the fathers have all interpreted it, as far as I know. Maybe other people here will have specific examples?

[M.C. Steenberg]

Richard, perhaps you are already aware that the reason behind the lack of Orthodox icons of the Trinity that portray the three Persons as two men of differing ages and a dove, is that the portrayal of the Father as a human person is strictly forbidden by canon law, as God the Father never became incarnate.

Thus, icons of the Trinity as 'Old man, young man, and bird' (as these particular paintings are sometimes nicknamed) are technically uncanonical. An example of what I am talking about is this:

http://www.monachos.net/mb/messages/4225/504.jpg

(Users reading this message by automatic email notification may have to jump to the board to see the image.)

However, though such images as this are uncanonical in a struct sense, popular piety produced many of them over the course of history, and it is not entirely uncommon to find them in present-day churches -- some of which are even purported to be miracle-working. Perhaps this is evidence that God's willingness and desire to share His grace will not be thwarted, even by bad icons. http://www.monachos.net/mb/clipart/happy.gif

Still, there is a theological 'mistake' portrayed in such images (a confusion of the attributes of the Persons of the Holy Trinity), and as such they are not genuine reflections of the Orthodox understanding of the godhead. But for this very reason, they do have a certain teaching value in an academic, but not devotional, sense.

INXC, Matthew

[JenniferThompson]

Ashley,

I think you are right that the idea of Jesus' giving up the Holy Spirit, rather than His own, at the cross sounds very unorthodox. The others seem to concur that the Holy Spirit is not what Orthodox icon writers mean to portray in a dove ascending from the cross. Is it possible that the medieval poets you are studying could have misunderstood icons such as these? Would the timing have been right for such a thing to happen? From what region does this poetry come?

Maybe questions like these could help in understanding why the beliefs of the writers seem to be so different from the Orthodox.

God bless you in understanding this!
Jennifer

[Ashley Trice]

Jennifer, your suggestion is very appealing to me--that is precisely what I am trying to find, evidence that these poets misunderstood something or followed a flawed line of reasoning, or something. The poetry I am studying is primarily fourteenth-century English poetry, which I realize would have more to do with Roman Catholic than Orthodox theology, but I am just trying to find any precedent or explanation that can shed some light on it.

[M.C. Steenberg]

Ashley, you have made me curious on this! Could you tell me: in the medieval sources which you are studying, how is it that you are sure the dove seen ascending from Christ at the crucifixion is, in fact, the Holy Spirit and not Christ's own personal spirit? Perhaps if we can identify this, we can begin to trace back through at least the artistic variations on the 'theme' and try to find the point at which the divergance began. I do believe, however, that it will be discovered as an aberration, even from within the Roman Catholic and greater Western traditions, which generally understand the release of the Spirit at Christ's death in the same manner as we Orthodox.

INXC, Matthew

[Ashley Trice]

Matthew, I wish I could know for sure! I began with poetry, and it is unambiguous. I'll print here an example, hoping not to be too tedious:

At none [noon] houre louerd crist of thysse lif he wende:
He [cried], 'Eloi'; the holi gost to his fader he sende.

Trying to understand why the poets would say such a thing (the Latin poem from which they were translating says only "animam," spirit) led me to art to look for parallels, and I have found two so far. (I think I will have access to a scanner tomorrow and will try to post them.) I would like very much to think that the dove in these paintings does in fact represent only a human spirit--are there, perhaps, other representations of human spirits by a dove (e.g., in portrayals of the deaths of saints/martyrs?)--and that a misunderstanding was the cause of the poets' mistake, but so far I have been able to find nothing concrete, and so I have been looking for those with more expertise in art and/or theology than I have.

[M.C. Steenberg]

Dear all,

Ashley has sent me scanned graphics of some of the medieval artwork relevant to this discussion. I post these two images for further discussion:

[Robert C. Mac Donald]

Interesting. I'm not certain the figure at the top of the second image in the last post is supposed to be the Father holding the Son's soul or spirit, though. The cruciform halo makes it more likely that this is Christ, holding the Paraclete, whom he will send.

[Ashley Trice]

Robert, I just read your posting and was very interested in your observation. I think you are right; I had not observed the figure very closely, and was simply accepting the authority of Sarah Appleton Weber, who prints the image in her book _Theology and Poetry in the Middle English Lyric_. Her notes to the Figure say, without question, "He [the Father] holds the Spirit to His breast, Who in the form of a dove appears to have just ascended to Him from His Son." Can you suggest a source for more information on the halos?

[Robert C. Mac Donald]

Ashley,

Sorry, I really don't know much about the conventions of medieval art, and can't suggest any references. Concerning the poem you quoted above, however, I have a couple of observations.

I wonder whether it's possible the author chose "gost" over the disyllable "sowle" simply because it scans better (just a conjecture; I have no ear for poetry). The "anima" of the Latin original would more aptly have been translated as "soul" than as "ghost/spirit," but a memory of the Vulgate (In manus tuas, Domine, commendo spiritum meum) might have inclined the author toward the latter.

Then again, "gost" may have a more generic meaning that includes the notion of soul, so that the poem refers to the ascent of the soul of Christ to the Father; as it was (and is) undoubtedly holy it is so described here, and the resulting apparent reference to the Holy Ghost, third Person of the Blessed Trinity is merely a coincidence.

[Jason]

I know that in Orthodox ikonography, the image of Jesus must always have a "halo" with the cross in it (just like the halo in the second black-and-white picture here), and also the Greek words "ho wn." Ikons without these are considered "uncanonical."

The picture is too small to see whether "ho wn" appears in the halo, but the form of the cross makes Robert's suggestion seem right: the picture could be of Jesus seated in heaven, holding the Spirit, preparing to send him.