<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A humanist iconography?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://castleofnutshells.wordpress.com/2009/01/04/a-humanist-iconography/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://castleofnutshells.wordpress.com/2009/01/04/a-humanist-iconography/</link>
	<description>The evolving theology and creeping faith of Damian Caruana</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 14 Nov 2009 22:11:50 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Damian</title>
		<link>http://castleofnutshells.wordpress.com/2009/01/04/a-humanist-iconography/#comment-1292</link>
		<dc:creator>Damian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 22:03:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://castleofnutshells.wordpress.com/?p=1492#comment-1292</guid>
		<description>Thanks, Josh. You&#039;re right that renaissance religious painting is not iconography - I didn&#039;t mean to suggest that it was. And you&#039;re right that &#039;artistic expression&#039; mightn&#039;t be the best way to describe iconography, but truth is that it is art expressing theology, so I don&#039;t think it&#039;s invalid. If there are Orthodox reading this post (and I believe a few do), then I would love them to explain their problem with the phrase.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks, Josh. You&#8217;re right that renaissance religious painting is not iconography &#8211; I didn&#8217;t mean to suggest that it was. And you&#8217;re right that &#8216;artistic expression&#8217; mightn&#8217;t be the best way to describe iconography, but truth is that it is art expressing theology, so I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s invalid. If there are Orthodox reading this post (and I believe a few do), then I would love them to explain their problem with the phrase.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Josh</title>
		<link>http://castleofnutshells.wordpress.com/2009/01/04/a-humanist-iconography/#comment-1291</link>
		<dc:creator>Josh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 16:45:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://castleofnutshells.wordpress.com/?p=1492#comment-1291</guid>
		<description>Just as a point of clarification, though, the early renaissance religious painting is not monolithically iconography.

Also, referring to icons as &quot;artistic expression&quot; might get you in trouble with some of our Orthodox friends. Just a heads up.

Regardless, these are some interesting thoughts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just as a point of clarification, though, the early renaissance religious painting is not monolithically iconography.</p>
<p>Also, referring to icons as &#8220;artistic expression&#8221; might get you in trouble with some of our Orthodox friends. Just a heads up.</p>
<p>Regardless, these are some interesting thoughts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
