----- Original Message
>
> Kathryn wrote on the ambivalence of lion, which leads me to another
> question: A. QUACQUARELLI, Il leone e il drago nella simbolica dell'età
> patristica, explains the ambivalence of the lion as the product of the
> "oppositae qualitates, essenziale nella valutazione del linguaggio
> simbolico"
>
> I confess my deep ignorance: is this a retorical technique?
>
> Carlos
Dear Carlos and all interested parties,
I quote from two books on the subject of symbolism involving positive and
negative qualities in the same creature, a sort of symbological _Sic et
Non_.
The goat is a symbol of lust and general nastiness. Think also of the Judas
goat leading his own to perdition. However, there is also the scapegoat, who
carries on his back the sins of the people, a figure of Christ. Moreover,
"[the goat's frequent appearance as a sacrificial offering in the OT] has
naturally made the animal appear as a prophetic figure of the Redeemer"
(84). "[Medieval mystics made the goat, a creature which scales the heights,
a creature of acute vision and perspicacity,] the image of Christ observing
from the heights of heaven the actions of the just and the wicked, for the
sake of future rewards and punishments" (91). Louis Charbonneau-Lassay,
_The Bestiary of Christ_. Trans. D. M. Dooling. NY: Arkana, 1992. At
Strasbourg on the west central tympanum there is a goat next to the hanging
Judas, very much in Judas' space. The goat may represent Judas' vileness but
also his important role in the scheme of salvation, very much a scapegoat
and hence somewhat like Christ (there's the "twinning" theme again). The
goat's counterpart at the other end of the register is a dog, an animal with
multiple symbolism also.
Here's another citation:
"The figure of Christ is not as simple and unequivocal as one could wish. I
am not referring here to the enormous difficulties arising out of a
comparison of the Synoptic Christ with the Johannine Christ, but to the
remarkable fact that in the hermeneutical writings of the Church Fathers,
which go right back to the days of primitive Christianity, Christ has a
number of symbols or 'allegories' in common with the devil" (72). [Footnote
to this statement: Early collections of such allegories in the _Anacortus_
of Epiphanius, and in Augustine, _Contra Faustum_.]
"In medieval astrology Saturn was believed to be the abode of the
devil....Saturn [has a lion's face]. Origen elicits from the diagram of
Celsus that Michael, the first angel of the Creator, has 'the shape of a
lion'" (75). [Footnote to this statement: _Contra Celsum_, VI, 30 (trans. by
H. Chadwick, p.345). C. G. Jung, _Aion: Researches into the Phenomenology of
the Self_. Trans. R. F. C. Hull. Princeton UP, 1969 [5th printing with
corrections 1978].
This is a tiny sample of "sic et non" symbolism. It seems there's always a
"yes, but..." Fascinating subject... Sort of like human nature.
If you've read this far,
Best from here,
Kathryn
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|