Art as Expression

How art expresses belief about creation

Christian beliefs about creation are found in Genesis, the opening book of the Bible. Catholics believe that God is the creator and that human life depends on God. Religious art gives these beliefs a visible form: an artist’s choice of figures, gestures and composition can communicate ideas that are difficult to express in words.

An artwork is an interpretation, however, not a photograph of creation. To understand its religious meaning, connect what the artist shows with the belief it expresses, while recognising the limits of the image.

Michelangelo’s Creation of Adam

Michelangelo painted The Creation of Adam on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel in Rome around 1511. It forms part of a larger collection of scenes from Genesis. The painting depicts God giving life to Adam, the first man.

God is represented as an older man, and God and Adam reach towards one another. This makes the relationship between creator and humanity the centre of attention. God is the source of life; Adam receives life rather than creating himself. For Catholics, this expresses humanity’s dependence on God.

Adam is portrayed as strong and physically ideal. This can communicate the goodness of God’s creation: Genesis 1:31 describes everything God had made as “very good”. The painting therefore presents human life as something valuable, not as an accident or a mistake.

Humanity in the image of God

Genesis 1:27 teaches that humans are created in the “image of God”, often called imago Dei. This means that humanity has a distinctive likeness to God and a unique relationship with God; it does not mean that God has a human body.

Michelangelo makes God and Adam similar in form, size and position. This visual resemblance can express the belief that humanity reflects God. Their reaching gestures also suggest a relationship between them, rather than an impersonal act of manufacture.

For Catholics, the painting can encourage reflection on the value of human life and on their own dependence on God. Its significance is therefore more than artistic: it can help viewers understand a belief, strengthen faith and become a focus for religious reflection.

What the painting cannot fully show

God is eternal, meaning without beginning or end, and transcendent, meaning beyond and not limited by creation. Depicting God as an older man makes God recognisable, but may misleadingly suggest that God has a body or has aged. Showing God and Adam at a similar scale can express likeness while failing to convey the greatness of God compared with humanity.

This use of human form to represent God is called anthropomorphism. It gives an invisible reality a familiar visual form, but should not be understood literally.

The reaching hands are also an artistic interpretation of the giving of life. Genesis 2 describes God breathing into Adam’s nostrils, not bringing him to life through contact between their hands. The painting communicates dependence on God without reproducing every detail of the biblical account.

A contrasting expression: Hildreth Meière’s creation mosaics

Hildreth Meière’s Six Days of Creation mosaics were dedicated in 1930 at St Bartholomew’s Church in New York. They are made from glass and form a series across five entrance-hall domes. They provide another Christian expression of creation, rather than a specifically Catholic setting.

For comparison with Michelangelo, consider Meière’s hand-of-God imagery. Instead of presenting God as a complete human figure, it uses a hand as a symbol of divine action. The hand is central and much larger than the cloud. A surrounding circle represents the universe, with lines extending from the hand towards its edge.

These features emphasise God’s power and the reach of God’s influence throughout creation. The image can also suggest that God remains active in creating and sustaining life, rather than depicting only one past moment.

Comparing their meaning and significance

Michelangelo focuses on a personal relationship: God gives life to a particular human figure, Adam. The resemblance and gestures between them make the painting especially useful for expressing imago Dei. Meière’s hand imagery places greater emphasis on the whole universe and the extent of God’s creative power.

Their representations of God also differ. Michelangelo’s complete human figure makes God appear personal and approachable, but risks making God seem like a human being. Meière’s more abstract use of a hand avoids depicting a complete body, yet still uses a human feature. Some Christians therefore object that even this symbol may encourage an overly human understanding of a God who has no physical form.

Neither artwork expresses every Christian belief about creation. Michelangelo’s single scene is powerful at communicating humanity’s relationship with God; Meière’s symbolism is powerful at communicating God’s activity throughout the universe. Their different emphases show how Christian art can illuminate different aspects of the same belief.