Crucified-Frog Sculpture Troubles the Pope

  • Thread starter Thread starter childofmary1143
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Why is it that every time a topic like this comes up(it was the same with the PZ Myers incident) that the common response is “I bet he wouldn’t do this to the Muslims/Jews/Gays/Some other group”?

It’s ridiculous, and makes Catholics look like whiners. First of all, we shouldn’t condone violence by any group, secondly you all seem to think that ever Muslim/Jew/Gay would jump all over an artist who made something insulting. Most of them would dislike it, but would not go around making fatwas and doing car bombings like some seem to think.

we have no knowledge of what the artist is trying to convey in this picture, so it is unfair to just jump on it as an insult to Christ, and if this bothers you so much, can I point you in the direction of something that is actually worth getting angry over, like genocide and infanticide?
 
I withdrew my annual donation to both MOMA in New York and MOCA in Los Angeles due to objectionable art.

Saying that Christians are acting like whiners when they complain, write letters, refuse patronage, etc., is to buy into the secular argument. When Jews and Christians allow their faiths to be denigrated in the “go along to get along” mentality, they need only to look back into the 20th Century Germany to see how well that worked out, globally. (And yes, I have other examples from history)

Invoking the Islamic argument is a real one, like it or not. Islam is one of the three great religions of the day. Granted it is a only a percentage of the religion that advocates violence to get its point across, but that number, most frighteningly to me, is growing in the US as well as worldwide. (Off topic, and the stuff of a new thread)

The fact remains the same. Artists/curators who claim “new, bold, brave, confounding, revolutionary” vision in creating anti-religion art, don’t utilize the same courage when taking on a group that will relieve them of their craniums.

Did I sound like I was advocating violence? It’s not in my playbook. I am an activist, however. I get involved in school boards and city recreation panels. I will happily voice my support to subsidize a trip to The Museum of Tolerance, or Norton Simon, or the Smithsonian. I will oppose any trips on the city/county dime to museums I feel provide hate-speak towards any religion.

Intolerant? You bet’cha!
 
This kind of thing has been around since the 2nd century A.D. graffiti captioned „Alexamenos praying to God“, in which a man is depicted standing devoutly in front of a crucified, donkey-headed figure.

A scandal to the Jews, folly to the Greeks… For grasp of the sheer counterintuitiveness of the Christian message, this miguided artist has something to teach me. Yes, his work is offensive and disgusting and an unspeakable mockery of the love of Christ. It makes me, as a Christian, feel slapped in the face. But the Cross itself is the biggest offense and ugliness of all, and it hits me in the face too – for example, when it obliges me to live sacrificially and to forgive. If that slap hurts worse, how much of me is on which side?

Some time ago, protesting the Pope‘s visit to my country, atheists posted hateful stickers stating, among other things, „Baptism is child abuse!“ Whoever thought so had a better understanding of the enormous consequence of being baptized into Christ‘s death than many a Catholic godparent.
 
maggiemay2u said:
“P— Christ”, “S&M Last Supper”, and the sculpture of Mary smeared with elephant dung (done by the same ‘artist’ who submerged a crucifix in urine) are messages to be sure.
Click to expand...
Maggie, I’m a bit confused. The elephant dung artwork… are you referring to Chris Ofili’s collage, “The Holy Virgin Mary”?

“P— Christ”, a photograph of an crucifix submerged in urine, was done by Andres Serrano. Is this the upside down crucifix in urine you refer to?

“S&M Last Supper”… is this an artwork or the advertising poster for the Folsom Street Fair, which last year stirred controversy?
 
What a horrible sacrilege against the Holy Cross. The Sign of God shouldn’t be treated that way.

Although it isn’t nearly as bad as that sacrilegious photo of the crucifix defiled in the artist’s urine. :mad:

It was funded by tax-payer dollars too, and put into a museum. :mad:
 
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top