We’ve got about two centuries of art to catch up on.  But that’s okay!  We can do it!  It’s frankly embarassing how provincial Catholic art has become, with certain obviously exceptions, nearly all of them literary.  Even the most interesting visual art about religion is generally about the complications of religion–stuff like Pi*s Christ, which I would argue is actually a religious, even reverent work that takes exception to how we no longer really care about Christ, and in, fact “piss” all over his message. (Serrano is an interesting case here, though, because a lot of Latin-American artists or American Latino artists use a lot of really, really cool Christian imagery).

However, the Church has an ambivalent if not all-out angatonistic relationship to modern art and modern art rarely uses religious imagery or themes anymore, despite their richness.  This might be a reflection of a much larger problem, namely the lack of relevance of the Church’s symobls and images anymore.  The degree to which the Church and Christianity in general become relevant (and not oppressive) will eqaul, I bet, the amount their images are again used in art (and not as something to attack).

Anyways, an article about this here.