They were typical of a historical period (please don't ask me which one, I don't remember). Atthe time there was a heresy (sorry, can't tell which one either, I studied it a lot of years ago!) claiming that Jesus' nature was NOT human but only divine... These paintings of Mary breastfeeding him ("Madonna del latte" are their comon definition; "Madonna of the milk") were meant to underline the "humanity" of Jesus and show that he was perfectly human as much as having a divine nature.
As this heresy disappeared, there was no more necessity of showing Mary breastfeeding Jesus and this type of imagery was abandoned. But it's perfectly genuine and there are lots of examples in Italy.
Okay, thanks for giving a source. Still, it's not like Mary is breastfeeding the baby Jesus here, so there's no need for us to see even a hint of cleavage here.
True. This drawing portraits our Lady in a very inappropriate and disrespectful way. I checked the profile of the guy who drew it, and most of his drawings have this immodest tendency.
I think it’s the lighting I think it’s the lighting? Because when you look at her right side of the chest it looks bigger than the left, but only because the light is so big. So I imagine that wasn’t intentional.
Very talented. Beautifully executed. However, shows too much skin and makes her weird as if she was wearing makeup or something which is kind of disturbing/disgusting.
Makeup could be seen strange, but i am disagree with you on skin. Don’t forget, in some traditional art, even on some Holy Icons it is ok to show Mary with a bare breast, when she feeding Jesus.
Nudity doesn’t always equals sexualisation. But here she is totally clothed.
They are not at all. It's inappropriate though to depict the Mother of God in a way that would have been deemed immodest by her very self as someone from a Jewish background of the time, and, more importantly, someone elected to be the immaculate vessel through which the sinless Lamb of God enters into creation.
Do you condone depicting the Blessed Virgin with make up and showing more skin than what she showed during her life?
Shouldn't we respect her choices and orient our images to what she herself decided to do?
I mean.. we are both Catholic, right? After all we met in the Catholicism subreddit. If you are not Catholic then you are free to think what you want about Mary, but as Catholics we believe her to have been sinless and obeyed every just prescription perfectly. Obviously, this includes the modesty laws of her time which she not only met but surpassed, as with all other virtues, all other humans except for Our Lord.
On top of that, the oldest Icons we have of her neither depict her showing skin other than her face and neither do they put makeup on her face.
Why is she called Madonna? I'm sorry in advance if this is inappropriate to ask, I am in OCIA and still learning
Because it is means Our Lady.
Madonna name originated from what language?
Italian
Who is the artist?
An Indian artist who mostly goes by pseudonyms.
Source
The neckline of the dress is too low according to the standards of modesty issued by Pope Pius XI. Not a fan.
What do you think of Icons with Mary breastfeeding Jesus?
They were typical of a historical period (please don't ask me which one, I don't remember). Atthe time there was a heresy (sorry, can't tell which one either, I studied it a lot of years ago!) claiming that Jesus' nature was NOT human but only divine... These paintings of Mary breastfeeding him ("Madonna del latte" are their comon definition; "Madonna of the milk") were meant to underline the "humanity" of Jesus and show that he was perfectly human as much as having a divine nature.
As this heresy disappeared, there was no more necessity of showing Mary breastfeeding Jesus and this type of imagery was abandoned. But it's perfectly genuine and there are lots of examples in Italy.
And how do you know they're genuine icons?
Because there are such Holy Icons, mostly venerated in Eastern rite churches.
I understand that this anime art can be seen too sensual though, but i think author is just not religious and did not meant no disrespect.
Found Western example. Church Santa Maria in Trastevere in Rome. There is art of Madonna with bare breast.
Okay, thanks for giving a source. Still, it's not like Mary is breastfeeding the baby Jesus here, so there's no need for us to see even a hint of cleavage here.
Hm, i see reason in your opinion. Have a good day.
How do you even have that in your back pocket lmao.
weird eyes and face and boobs sticking out in a sexy way, not my vibe
True. This drawing portraits our Lady in a very inappropriate and disrespectful way. I checked the profile of the guy who drew it, and most of his drawings have this immodest tendency.
no wonder he is posting his " art " on deviantart. there is nothing beautiful about his works
Come one man, maybe it is a bit too sensual, but call it sexy? I am not sure you right. After all it is not Icon or art for veneration.
I think it’s the lighting I think it’s the lighting? Because when you look at her right side of the chest it looks bigger than the left, but only because the light is so big. So I imagine that wasn’t intentional.
That is beautiful
Omg i love the artstyle, so beautiful
I'm a fan of contemporary yet reverent artwork, nicely done.
I love the style. Is beautiful
It is kinda looks like old 1990 anime
A biblical anime would be fire
I mean, I may not be devote, but you really have some interestong stories
What stories?
Well, the new testamento is a good colección of stories. All thenlife of Yisus
Oh i see. My favourite Christianity inspired stories is Lord of the rings and Superman.
What about Narnia?
It is also inspired by Bible but i am not a big fan of it, it is nice book though
I liked when I was a kid
David vs Goliath in old testament
Ah yes, my favorite fandom...
Very talented. Beautifully executed. However, shows too much skin and makes her weird as if she was wearing makeup or something which is kind of disturbing/disgusting.
Makeup could be seen strange, but i am disagree with you on skin. Don’t forget, in some traditional art, even on some Holy Icons it is ok to show Mary with a bare breast, when she feeding Jesus.
Nudity doesn’t always equals sexualisation. But here she is totally clothed.
[removed]
[removed]
Why are female bodies disgusting for you?
They are not at all. It's inappropriate though to depict the Mother of God in a way that would have been deemed immodest by her very self as someone from a Jewish background of the time, and, more importantly, someone elected to be the immaculate vessel through which the sinless Lamb of God enters into creation.
Do you condone depicting the Blessed Virgin with make up and showing more skin than what she showed during her life? Shouldn't we respect her choices and orient our images to what she herself decided to do?
You're making a lot of assumptions here based on your opinions about her "choices" regarding her culture that you just don't know.
I mean.. we are both Catholic, right? After all we met in the Catholicism subreddit. If you are not Catholic then you are free to think what you want about Mary, but as Catholics we believe her to have been sinless and obeyed every just prescription perfectly. Obviously, this includes the modesty laws of her time which she not only met but surpassed, as with all other virtues, all other humans except for Our Lord.
On top of that, the oldest Icons we have of her neither depict her showing skin other than her face and neither do they put makeup on her face.
This "artist" mostly makes smut. please lets not post pornographers' art in this subreddit.
I like the black Madonna