![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Apr. 11th, 2006 05:15 pmSometimes, even when you know what the logic behind a particular 'revelation' of a late medieaval visionary, you just... are forcibly reminded that different ages see things differently.
Nuptial mysticism: fine and dandy. And I've got used to all the 'drinking from the wounds of Christ stuff', up to and including the breast-feeding parallels. But then I read the 'VIta et Revelationes' of Agnes Blannbekin, and her vision in which - in the context of a Eucharist - she swallowed the foreskin of Christ. As they say over at![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-community.gif)
deleterius, that sporks itself.
Actually, I'm still not TOTALLY sure what the logic behind that vision was, other than the obvious sharing in the suffering of Christ, and the connection between the shedding of Christ's blood and Communion. I suppose it's a conveniently detatched body-part which is roughly the same size as a small wafer...
Nuptial mysticism: fine and dandy. And I've got used to all the 'drinking from the wounds of Christ stuff', up to and including the breast-feeding parallels. But then I read the 'VIta et Revelationes' of Agnes Blannbekin, and her vision in which - in the context of a Eucharist - she swallowed the foreskin of Christ. As they say over at
deleterius, that sporks itself.Actually, I'm still not TOTALLY sure what the logic behind that vision was, other than the obvious sharing in the suffering of Christ, and the connection between the shedding of Christ's blood and Communion. I suppose it's a conveniently detatched body-part which is roughly the same size as a small wafer...
