What is this supposed to be, Peter -- an anthology of tweets? This is even less coherent than your usual efforts. And you still haven't got over that annoying tendency to say 'we' when you mean 'me'.

I agree that most modern art is crap. But throughout history most art has been crap, religiously-inspired or otherwise; we're just in the fortunate position of having forgotten all the bad stuff. And again, I'd love to see how you explain Hokusai and Praxelites from your bizarre standpoint that all great art arises in the Christian tradition.

"Does this not explain so much in our culture; the noise and the money, the blandness and boredom and worse, the absence of hope?"

I have plenty of hope. If you don't that's YOUR problem. I hope, for instance, that one day soon articles like this will be universally recognised as the drivelling nonsense they are.

Peter,

"It is now a long time since artists proclaimed that their work was "To the glory of God.

But what other kind of art is there? Strictly speaking there is no other kind, there is only the pretence of art."

I'd be interested in what you think of this:

http://s1072.photobucket.com/user/Poirot4/media/fc6e26aa.jpg.html

It's a drawing I did in for a friend to render his ideas in image.

It's not to the glory of God.

More, it's a rendering of man's conundrum - his reality amidst his ideas.

I would consider it "art", because there is a message beyond its imagery. Make of it what you will, it's designed to make you think, but more on man's condition methinks than any truth regarding God.

What happens when The Very Divine Person becomes an artist - specialising in abstract art, who also pointed out that ALL visual representation is an exercise in abstraction, even photography.
Some references by and about His art.

There is of course no objective world apart from the process of perception involving light, the mechanisms of the eye, and the brain.

http://www.adidaupclose.org/Art_and_Photography/rebirth_of_sacred_art.html

Artists statement

http://www.aboutadidam.org/readings/transcending_the_camera/index.html

The Realization of The Beautiful
http://www.adidamla.org/newsletters/newsletter-aprilmay2006.pdf

Plus this reference too which is an introduction to The Orpheum Trilogy

http://www.adidaupclose.org/Literature_Theater/skalsky.html

"I hope, for instance, that one day soon articles like this will be universally recognised as the drivelling nonsense they are," says Jon.

I agree with you, Jon. Such articles have no place in intelligent forums.

"The dichotomy of the real and the ideal coincides with the creedal language of the visible and the invisible."

It's really the dichotomy of the ideal and the alleged.

The history is somewhat visible, and increasingly so as more people delve into early Christian history; but the basis for the claims of reality are less visible.

Such arrogance.

"The filiation of the ideal and the real results in theological language; the only language that is capable of truth since truth exists only when the ideal and the real are integrated."

Theological language is the only language capable of truth?

Tosh.