Images as a Resource for Catholic Theology
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The text gives an good overview of the relationship between theology, the Catholic Church and images. However, it is too undifferentiated with regard to the Christian denominations (different image theologies have yet led to schisms in the Church!; Some reformers dealt intensively with theology of images because they were against images [e.g. Calvin] -> resumen: there is a strong discussion in the History of Christianity and Theology with the theology of images).
In the Middle Ages there were important theologies of images (Nikolaus v. Kues, Meister Eckhart etc, who referred to Augustine), you don't mention or refer to.
The Reformation caused a rupture between the Catholic Church and art, because now so-called "autonomous art" emerged with the consequence that religious art gradually lost its relevance - and art and religion got seperated. In other words, artists were now free to create - without the Catholic Church, because Protestants began to collect and buy autonomous art. That is so important for the theology of images, that you should problematize it. That is an important reason why contemporary theology is distant towards art or art as an locus theologicus. Only the Second Vatican Council takes up art again in the Constitution of Liturgy. So the II. Vat. opened up Catholic Theology for art again. This is why German Theologians began to discover art as a source of theological knowledge.
- Meaning of Iconic Turn in its epistemological relevance for images is too less described in your text: Images not only represent, but also have an epistemic function. Pictures open up references to reality and perspectives that are open to the subject for further interpretative exploration: they produce insights... If you would say more about the theory of images (see iconic turn), then you could say more about the topic of your text "the potential of images for theology" on your own as an independent contribution. By the way: Iconic Turn with its insights/theory elements in Catholic Theology is less reciprocicated (you claim something different in line 139). In Protestant Theology see a very fundamental work: Malte Dominik Krüger, Das andere Bild Christi, 2017. In Catholic Theology: Hans Joachim Höhn, Iconic Turn.
If you go deeper in the history of theology of images (and not Christianity in general), and say explicitly that your focus lays on the Catholic tradition, then your article will be more convincing in its argumentation and will be more coherent.
Author Response
Tank you very much for your review.
Please, see my answers in the attached word-document.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Thank you for the opportunity to review this very interesting article. The structure of this article is logical and the five steps proposed to lead us toward the conclusion are important in theology is very helpful. Given how well the paper argues for the inclusion of images I think it is best to avoid beginning the article with the thought that they are not necessary in themselves. In her work, "What is art for?" anthropologist Ellen Dissanayake successfully argues that art is in fact a biological necessity in human existence and fundamental characteristic of the human species. I think it would be better to start this article from this position as it can only strengthen the argument made by the author in this article.
With regard to the argument on pg 2&3 that images do not have the capacity to change in the way words do - I think that this is an idea worth challenging. The way we see images changes perpetually just as the material quality of the image and any reproductions that we might see also change the way we see the image with time. The changes we see in the image have the capacity to change us in return. James Elkins gives a good account of this in his book, 'The object stares back: On the nature of seeing', but there is a substantial body of literature in the area of embodied seeing that would be helpful here. The embodied experience of seeing, and the transformation that is possible when we see is significant in the relationship between images and theology. At this point it would also be helpful to consider the work of Icons. In his short work, "The Dwelling of the Light: Praying with the icons of Christ", Rowan Williams describes how to look at an icon prayerfully "...is to be brought into the presence of the one who radiates the light and love of God. Such an encounter cannot leave the viewer unchanged." This rich area of imagery and theology needs to be acknowledged and explored in some way to complete the paper.
The examples discussed in this paper are of great interest and I am inspired by the conclusions that the author is able to draw together. An inclusion of some images from these examples in the paper would be a great addition as it would do what the author is arguing for - enabling the reader to learn by seeing. Thanks again for the opportunity to review the work.
Author Response
Thank you very much for your review.
Please, see my answer in the attached word-document. A new revised version of the article is also attached.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
Although the author advocates for the potential of images for theology, they omit to discuss the rich scholarship on religious images and theology from an art historical perspective. Some of the main issues presented in this article are its vagueness in terms of period and context, lack of methodological approach, and ambiguous argument with not a single example of artwork or theological discourse included in the discussion.
The author approaches the subject from a historical perspective, with no solid theological methodological approaches (nor methodologies proper to art history or history). Also, the article presents over-generalized arguments with no solid examples to ground them, especially in regard to the accuracy of some claims. Focusing on a specific time period/geographical location, the article needs to be grounded in theory, from a theological perspective, applying a methodological approach proper to theology. The author must ask : Why were religious artworks created in the first place? What is the place of art in theology? Was religious art created with a theological mindset (an example that comes to mind is the Chi Rho Page from the book of Kells)?
Some additional comments:
Focusing on a specific time period and context would help frame the author’s argument. As is, it is hard to argue/prove that theology – at large (Christian in general? Catholic? Protestant? Eastern?)—is not concerned with images. The author needs to demonstrate that first. Also, later, the author argues theology often dealt with images secondarily. So theology, according to the author, is indeed concerned with images (the author previously argued the contrary).
At times, the author uses familiar prose. A thorough editing and proofreading would be helpful.
Pictograms start to appear in the 2nd c., with the cross (“T”) being used as a seal. The author seems to focus on painted surfaces only, with no references to sculpture. Why?
Some images, especially in the medieval period, were used for theological purposes (see: Stephen Murray’s book on Amiens; as commentaries on Redemption and Salvation, see Anna-Maria Moubayed’s article on Saint-Martin-de-Besse)
The author mentions on line 73, the two powerful media of Christianity: the “word” and the sacrament. What about liturgy? What about art and the visual culture? They too have power. (i.e. if images didn’t have power, there wouldn’t have been the iconoclasm). Both theology and art require physical and intellectual human skills for their embodiment.
The author writes: “Western Christianity, which leaned towards a rational experience of faith” Please cite your sources and elaborate. As is, this is vague and very speculative (see: charismatic movements). And when did it lean toward a rational experience of faith? How does it differ from Eastern Christianity? Why does it matter? Is the author focusing solely on Western Christianity? If so, they would need to define this focus in their intro, along with the time period, geographical context and, potentially, the religious denomination.
The author didn’t cite Pope Gregory the Great properly. The latter meant the illiterate by “the ignorant [of letters].” The citation is: “Pictures are used in churches so that those who are ignorant of letters may at least read by seeing on the walls what they cannot read in books.” The author inaccurately paraphrased Pope Greogry’s words into “the ignorant to learn what to believe.
The author must refrain from using the word “ignorant” when referring to the illiterate. They are not synonymous.
Line 114: The author needs to provide a citation for “pictures for the ignorant,” and rephrase ”ignorant” to the illiterate.
Line 117: Here again, the author is using ignorant as synonymous with pauperi. The author should apply more thorough research on the Biblia pauperum (Paupers’ Bible) as, contrary to the author’s claims, this tradition of Bibles includes pictures accompanied by brief texts. They were like modern-day comics.
In the third section on Images and Theology, the author mentions that images should not only be the subject of art historical studies. Yet, art history as a discipline, deals with the context of the image and its meaning, which includes theology. What angle/methodological approaches would theology apply to images? Biblical theology, historical theology, systematic/dogmatic theology, or practical theology? The argument is not grounded enough, which does not make it convincing.
The author mentions Cardinal Schönborn’s 1984 publication while discussing the iconoclasm. There is a vast amount of (more recent and focused) publications on the matter, which include discussion on theological debates involved in the iconoclasm – between the iconophiles and the iconoclasts (not to mention the advent of Islam, which prohibited images, and which influenced the iconoclasm).
Line 186: Could the author please elaborate on the representation of the Trinity in the context of doctrine?
Line 194: “However, this remains, so 194 to say, a minimum level of engagement with images in a theological sense.” What does the author mean here? It’s quite vague.
Line 227: The author should use “finally” when introducing the conclusion only.
Line 232: This is what art history does. It still not convincing how theology would address images from a theological perspective alone, without the image’s context, authorship, formal elements, patron, socio-historical context, etc.
Section 4: The definition of theology should be addressed in the introduction.
The author writes: “It is closer to the scientific, rational-logical approach to exploring the reality, emphasizing knowledge, understanding, judgement – essentially everything that is expressed with concepts – and is less inclined towards artistic expression, which prioritizes aesthetic, sensory, and emotional perception of reality, making it appear less precise and rather vague.” Not only is this sentence redundant, but it also wrongfully discards methods and approaches proper to the disciplines of art history, history, cultural studies, and archaeology. The statement is highly speculative and lacks proper arguments / examples to support it.
Line 255: rephrase “not unfamiliar”
The manuscript requires some proofreading and editing as some sentences are repetitive and use a familiar tone.
Author Response
Thank you very much for your review!
Please, see my answers in the attached word-documen. A revised version of my article is also attached.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The text is so much clearer now. Well done! The revision was worthwile!
