It is 1.40 am on Sunday 25th January 2009 and I am at my desk after a good sleep of four hours from 8pm and until midnights and then an episodic period of constant getting up primarily because my mouth had become extremely dry.
Yesterday I considered the second in the series of programmes on the history of Christianity narrated by Michael Portillo, the former Defence Secretary in a Conservative Party Government who now describes himself as a former politician and a former Christian and who like me was raised was a Catholic. After being defeated in the 1997 General Election and seeing the response of his former colleague David Mellor to his own defeat, Michael gave what has become the model way of behaving in such a situation. His father was a Spanish Republican and his mother of Scottish background and after his defeat he recreated himself as a media personality which included a film about returning to Spain to discover his family roots. Michael returned to Parliament and was given front bench roles and then bid for the leadership of the Conservative Party but this produced a strong personal attack from within the Party about aspects of his past.
Since 2003, that cataclysmic year in my life, Mr Portillo has appeared in the weekly late night show about Politics fronted by Andrew Neill called This week in which he sits on a sofa alongside Diane Abbot, the Labour Member of Parliament who has distinguished herself in three ways: the failed attempt to create a black caucus within the Labour Party thus revealing the inherent racism within the old Labour Party which is only secondary to the anti woman prejudice with Old Labour and where Prime Minister Blair made progress on the latter but not on the former; She once stated at a conference that Britain had invented racism and was then the most racist country on earth, a statement I cannot make as my experience of other countries is very limited but I believe her sentiment is accurate, hence her joy at the election of President Obama;
She remains an outspoken opponent of Tony Blair involved in many organised votes against him and I felt her behaviour was such that her continuing membership of the Party was in question although this was something for her conscience; she then redeemed herself by making what many regard as one of the most important and memorable speeches in the House of Commons of modern times attacking the government proposal to extend holding people without charge for up top 42 days rather than 28 days arguing the country was slipping into totalitarianism in the name of liberty. The speech drew praise from other political parties and was voted by backbench colleagues as the speech of the Parliamentary year and as with Portillo appears to have found a political voice of significance.
The relationship between Ms Abbott and Ms Portillo is akin to that of Simon Mayo and Dr Mark Kermode whose weekly discussion of the latest film released on Radio Five Lives has developed an audience and life of its own because of their interaction. Michael and Diane attended the separate Harrow schools for Boys and Girls but appeared in Joint School Drama Productions.
During the past five years I have been constantly impressed by Michael’s well thought out analysis of political and party political developments in which he has embraced a refreshing honesty. I thought his programme on the era of Constantine and the impact on Catholicism and Christianity outstanding. Whereas there was information in the first programme of the series new to me such as the role of St Paul, I was already familiar with aspects of the role of Constantine and St Augustine from having studied something of this period when looking at the history of Catholicism when trying to understand the faith of my birth mother in the run up to her 100th birthday. I had also viewed an Italian made film about Constantine more recently which prompted further study.
There is justifiable doubt over the extent to which Constantine embraced the tenets of the original Christian faith but agreement that it was his decision to abandon the outlawing of the sects which led to the formation of the Catholic Church, The power of the Papacy, the selection of text for the New Testament and the establishment of Catholic Orthodoxy as well as some of its anti Christ positions of the devil such as the slaughter of the innocents and the persecution of non believers and the glorification of War. In fairness to Constantine it was a subsequent Emperor who did for the Catholic Church what Orwell did in his Animal Farm and commenced the process of turning the original reported words of Christ on their head.
Constantine was an ambitious and ruthless leader who first set his sights on being the leader of the West Empire after defeating the Roman based chief with the sign of the cross painted on the shields of his warriors. He then set of to control the Empire of the East deposing the two chiefs there and in a true act of Christian humility and modesty created a second Rome on the Bosporus, Constantinople and which in turn led to the era known as Byzantium. It was his successor who decided to equate being a Christian with being a good citizen and made being a Christian compulsory and authorising the persecution of anyone who was not.
However it was Constantine who decided that the various factions and beliefs which comprised Christianity in the third century AD should be unified and called together all the protagonists and told them to get sorted. The outcome was the decision to select which written works should form the new Bible and which should not, eliminating texts which did not fit into the concepts of what was in effect a new religion they could agree on. Thus information that Jesus was part of a family and had a relationship with Mary Magdalene and her subsequent role as an apostle were removed until the appearance of some of the texts and the recent times book and Hollywood success-The Da Vinci Code. Constantine then arranged for 50 copies of the agreed text to be created and circulated throughout the Empire as the one Orthodoxy. The programme stated that one third of the available texts were eliminated in what was essentially an exercise of compromise and politics.
The other aspect of the impact of Constantine which has been the subject of controversy is that he imported into the religion the concept of new temples of worship filled with art and precious metals and so in another Animal Farm adaptation he amended Blessed are the Poor and the Meek into Blessed are the Poor and the Meek and those whom use their wealth to glorify God and themselves.
Another of Constantine developments which had counterproductive consequences was to promote Sundays, the Sabbath, as the day each week to be set aside of religious activity. Given the propensity of human beings to espouse the state religion for the purpose of confirming their loyalty and achieving personal and family advancement while behaving exactly as before, it can be argued that setting aside one day each week was better than nothing. However this was another Animal Farm moment because the agreed New Testament is explicit about the religion being a totality of thought and intention as well as public behaviour and public utterance. So instead of thy shall worship God and carry out the teachings of Christ every moment of your life it became thy shall on the Sabbath and the rest of the week make merry.
It was then the turn of St Augustine to take the religion several major steps further at a time when the Roman Empire had self destructed. He developed the concept of a church with a head and a hierarchy which was spiritually above the various states and their rulers leading to the Papal hierarchy today with a man who leads an estimated two thousand million believers whom first responsibility is to God and second to their nation. The religion developed by St Augustine in one sense divorced itself from the religion as a passport to citizenship into stating that by becoming a citizen of the church you should transfer your faiths into your citizenship but only when compatible. In this sense he went back to the original Christianity where keeping faith was more important than keeping life or being a good citizen. However instead of preaching acceptance of persecution and salvation through martyrdom he reconciled the holding of wealth gold, lands, fine clothes and jewellery with a developed concept of original sin and defined the concept of a just or Holy War and which led to creation of the Papal Army and the subsequent extension that it was OK to kill other human being including non combatants in whatever number the weaponry of day enabled as long as it was approved or required activity of the state of which you are a citizen.
According to Wikipedia it was the Council of Rome AD 382 which decided which texts were in and which texts should be excluded from the new testament and 391 when the Latin translation was first made for circulation and it was not until the Council of Ephesus 431, the year after the death of St Augustine that the decision was taken to make an act faith that Jesus was both Man and God through his incarnation. It was two decades later that that Papal primacy was declared at the Council of Chalcedon.
MySpace friend Cock a Snook recently asked that I contribute the following questions
Art and Provocation. How these two meet?
Is there anything that you as an artist believe would provoke the audience?
Should art be provocative?
So this being the Sabbath and I the son of a priest, I have chosen to make this letter to the friends of Cock a Snook.
My sisters and brothers in the creation of contemporary art, greetings. Do not waste your time in such considerations if is to be at the expense of your work. Your faith in yourself as a contemporary artist and your commitment to creation of new work should always be foremost in your daily thoughts.
To continue to qualify as a contemporary artist you must now take account that on January 20th 2009 the world as we had come to know it changed as we moved into the era of President Obama and his message of a one world art. This is art which is responsible and which collaborates with others and contributes to the betterment of others while furthering individuality, being free from artistic persecution and free to create new art.
Dear brothers and sisters in contemporary art, this is a time for inclusivity and accepting that there are many pathways to the creation of new art.
It is important that some artists continually remind the present of the past by the recreation of work in the styles and techniques of our ancestors.
It is important that some artists explore beyond the present boundaries of what is art, as they, and others explore beyond the boundaries of our planet and into the infinity of the universe.
It is important that some artists seek to do no more than chronicle their time, whether they use traditional or new techniques and forms.
Dear MySpace friends in contemporary art, the artist should only be concerned and take responsibility for the work they create but not for how others interpret, make judgement and react to that work.
Dear everyone who regards themselves as contemporary artists, I will answer the question posed by our host in this way. I have a concept artwork called Ten Commandments for 2009 and which includes such statements as Kill all contemporary artists, Kill all Bankers, Kill anyone who you believe has set out to kill you and it is morally justified to slaughter any women, children and male non combatants while attempting to exterminate your enemies. This would be an accurate chronicle of today but unlikely to be shown in public because of the fear of condemnation or prosecution for incitement or for obscenity if for example I change kill to f....k all Christians Jews and Muslims although it is an accurate statement of what many Jews, Muslims and Christians preach or do when they get power over others who have different beliefs and viewpoints.
Is it being responsible to join in everyone else who cheers the king as he passes by wearing no clothes or to send him a text asking his majesty if he is aware he not wearing any clothes in which instance good on you, especially in these weather conditions, but if not, I have a royal robe available if we can agree the right price.
Dear contemporary artist friends of Cock a Snook it is good that some of you continue to present the truth through your work, ask questions and challenge what is considered orthodox but having good intentions is no defence in law or protection from the wrath of the media, of politicians and of others with the ability to do you harm. It is good that some are prepared to be martyred for their art as it is for the lives and freedoms of others. So while you are not responsible for the reactions of others to your work, you should always take into consideration the potential consequences, both now and in the future.
Yesterday I considered the second in the series of programmes on the history of Christianity narrated by Michael Portillo, the former Defence Secretary in a Conservative Party Government who now describes himself as a former politician and a former Christian and who like me was raised was a Catholic. After being defeated in the 1997 General Election and seeing the response of his former colleague David Mellor to his own defeat, Michael gave what has become the model way of behaving in such a situation. His father was a Spanish Republican and his mother of Scottish background and after his defeat he recreated himself as a media personality which included a film about returning to Spain to discover his family roots. Michael returned to Parliament and was given front bench roles and then bid for the leadership of the Conservative Party but this produced a strong personal attack from within the Party about aspects of his past.
Since 2003, that cataclysmic year in my life, Mr Portillo has appeared in the weekly late night show about Politics fronted by Andrew Neill called This week in which he sits on a sofa alongside Diane Abbot, the Labour Member of Parliament who has distinguished herself in three ways: the failed attempt to create a black caucus within the Labour Party thus revealing the inherent racism within the old Labour Party which is only secondary to the anti woman prejudice with Old Labour and where Prime Minister Blair made progress on the latter but not on the former; She once stated at a conference that Britain had invented racism and was then the most racist country on earth, a statement I cannot make as my experience of other countries is very limited but I believe her sentiment is accurate, hence her joy at the election of President Obama;
She remains an outspoken opponent of Tony Blair involved in many organised votes against him and I felt her behaviour was such that her continuing membership of the Party was in question although this was something for her conscience; she then redeemed herself by making what many regard as one of the most important and memorable speeches in the House of Commons of modern times attacking the government proposal to extend holding people without charge for up top 42 days rather than 28 days arguing the country was slipping into totalitarianism in the name of liberty. The speech drew praise from other political parties and was voted by backbench colleagues as the speech of the Parliamentary year and as with Portillo appears to have found a political voice of significance.
The relationship between Ms Abbott and Ms Portillo is akin to that of Simon Mayo and Dr Mark Kermode whose weekly discussion of the latest film released on Radio Five Lives has developed an audience and life of its own because of their interaction. Michael and Diane attended the separate Harrow schools for Boys and Girls but appeared in Joint School Drama Productions.
During the past five years I have been constantly impressed by Michael’s well thought out analysis of political and party political developments in which he has embraced a refreshing honesty. I thought his programme on the era of Constantine and the impact on Catholicism and Christianity outstanding. Whereas there was information in the first programme of the series new to me such as the role of St Paul, I was already familiar with aspects of the role of Constantine and St Augustine from having studied something of this period when looking at the history of Catholicism when trying to understand the faith of my birth mother in the run up to her 100th birthday. I had also viewed an Italian made film about Constantine more recently which prompted further study.
There is justifiable doubt over the extent to which Constantine embraced the tenets of the original Christian faith but agreement that it was his decision to abandon the outlawing of the sects which led to the formation of the Catholic Church, The power of the Papacy, the selection of text for the New Testament and the establishment of Catholic Orthodoxy as well as some of its anti Christ positions of the devil such as the slaughter of the innocents and the persecution of non believers and the glorification of War. In fairness to Constantine it was a subsequent Emperor who did for the Catholic Church what Orwell did in his Animal Farm and commenced the process of turning the original reported words of Christ on their head.
Constantine was an ambitious and ruthless leader who first set his sights on being the leader of the West Empire after defeating the Roman based chief with the sign of the cross painted on the shields of his warriors. He then set of to control the Empire of the East deposing the two chiefs there and in a true act of Christian humility and modesty created a second Rome on the Bosporus, Constantinople and which in turn led to the era known as Byzantium. It was his successor who decided to equate being a Christian with being a good citizen and made being a Christian compulsory and authorising the persecution of anyone who was not.
However it was Constantine who decided that the various factions and beliefs which comprised Christianity in the third century AD should be unified and called together all the protagonists and told them to get sorted. The outcome was the decision to select which written works should form the new Bible and which should not, eliminating texts which did not fit into the concepts of what was in effect a new religion they could agree on. Thus information that Jesus was part of a family and had a relationship with Mary Magdalene and her subsequent role as an apostle were removed until the appearance of some of the texts and the recent times book and Hollywood success-The Da Vinci Code. Constantine then arranged for 50 copies of the agreed text to be created and circulated throughout the Empire as the one Orthodoxy. The programme stated that one third of the available texts were eliminated in what was essentially an exercise of compromise and politics.
The other aspect of the impact of Constantine which has been the subject of controversy is that he imported into the religion the concept of new temples of worship filled with art and precious metals and so in another Animal Farm adaptation he amended Blessed are the Poor and the Meek into Blessed are the Poor and the Meek and those whom use their wealth to glorify God and themselves.
Another of Constantine developments which had counterproductive consequences was to promote Sundays, the Sabbath, as the day each week to be set aside of religious activity. Given the propensity of human beings to espouse the state religion for the purpose of confirming their loyalty and achieving personal and family advancement while behaving exactly as before, it can be argued that setting aside one day each week was better than nothing. However this was another Animal Farm moment because the agreed New Testament is explicit about the religion being a totality of thought and intention as well as public behaviour and public utterance. So instead of thy shall worship God and carry out the teachings of Christ every moment of your life it became thy shall on the Sabbath and the rest of the week make merry.
It was then the turn of St Augustine to take the religion several major steps further at a time when the Roman Empire had self destructed. He developed the concept of a church with a head and a hierarchy which was spiritually above the various states and their rulers leading to the Papal hierarchy today with a man who leads an estimated two thousand million believers whom first responsibility is to God and second to their nation. The religion developed by St Augustine in one sense divorced itself from the religion as a passport to citizenship into stating that by becoming a citizen of the church you should transfer your faiths into your citizenship but only when compatible. In this sense he went back to the original Christianity where keeping faith was more important than keeping life or being a good citizen. However instead of preaching acceptance of persecution and salvation through martyrdom he reconciled the holding of wealth gold, lands, fine clothes and jewellery with a developed concept of original sin and defined the concept of a just or Holy War and which led to creation of the Papal Army and the subsequent extension that it was OK to kill other human being including non combatants in whatever number the weaponry of day enabled as long as it was approved or required activity of the state of which you are a citizen.
According to Wikipedia it was the Council of Rome AD 382 which decided which texts were in and which texts should be excluded from the new testament and 391 when the Latin translation was first made for circulation and it was not until the Council of Ephesus 431, the year after the death of St Augustine that the decision was taken to make an act faith that Jesus was both Man and God through his incarnation. It was two decades later that that Papal primacy was declared at the Council of Chalcedon.
MySpace friend Cock a Snook recently asked that I contribute the following questions
Art and Provocation. How these two meet?
Is there anything that you as an artist believe would provoke the audience?
Should art be provocative?
So this being the Sabbath and I the son of a priest, I have chosen to make this letter to the friends of Cock a Snook.
My sisters and brothers in the creation of contemporary art, greetings. Do not waste your time in such considerations if is to be at the expense of your work. Your faith in yourself as a contemporary artist and your commitment to creation of new work should always be foremost in your daily thoughts.
To continue to qualify as a contemporary artist you must now take account that on January 20th 2009 the world as we had come to know it changed as we moved into the era of President Obama and his message of a one world art. This is art which is responsible and which collaborates with others and contributes to the betterment of others while furthering individuality, being free from artistic persecution and free to create new art.
Dear brothers and sisters in contemporary art, this is a time for inclusivity and accepting that there are many pathways to the creation of new art.
It is important that some artists continually remind the present of the past by the recreation of work in the styles and techniques of our ancestors.
It is important that some artists explore beyond the present boundaries of what is art, as they, and others explore beyond the boundaries of our planet and into the infinity of the universe.
It is important that some artists seek to do no more than chronicle their time, whether they use traditional or new techniques and forms.
Dear MySpace friends in contemporary art, the artist should only be concerned and take responsibility for the work they create but not for how others interpret, make judgement and react to that work.
Dear everyone who regards themselves as contemporary artists, I will answer the question posed by our host in this way. I have a concept artwork called Ten Commandments for 2009 and which includes such statements as Kill all contemporary artists, Kill all Bankers, Kill anyone who you believe has set out to kill you and it is morally justified to slaughter any women, children and male non combatants while attempting to exterminate your enemies. This would be an accurate chronicle of today but unlikely to be shown in public because of the fear of condemnation or prosecution for incitement or for obscenity if for example I change kill to f....k all Christians Jews and Muslims although it is an accurate statement of what many Jews, Muslims and Christians preach or do when they get power over others who have different beliefs and viewpoints.
Is it being responsible to join in everyone else who cheers the king as he passes by wearing no clothes or to send him a text asking his majesty if he is aware he not wearing any clothes in which instance good on you, especially in these weather conditions, but if not, I have a royal robe available if we can agree the right price.
Dear contemporary artist friends of Cock a Snook it is good that some of you continue to present the truth through your work, ask questions and challenge what is considered orthodox but having good intentions is no defence in law or protection from the wrath of the media, of politicians and of others with the ability to do you harm. It is good that some are prepared to be martyred for their art as it is for the lives and freedoms of others. So while you are not responsible for the reactions of others to your work, you should always take into consideration the potential consequences, both now and in the future.
No comments:
Post a Comment