What happened at WYD...?

[StBenedictLabre]

I’m still unclear about why portraying Christ as a woman would be disrespectful in and of itself, but I can accept that this particular production may have been contempuous of Jesus and thus blasphemous. Thank you.

He is the Son of God and to portray him as a woman is wrong as it mocks him. As Mother said, they wouldn’t have a woman portray Abraham Lincoln or George H.W Bush as that agin would be disrespectful to those men but it is far more so with the Son of God…

 

[billsannie]

If you listen to Mother’s “rant” again, she briefly touched on this underhanded scheming again. The organizers knew the Pope was there and they wished to put on a provocative performance in order to upset the Holy Father, his entourage and the general audience…

I don’t think listening to the rant again would be spiritually helpful for me, but what you say makes sense and I’m certain you’re right about it. Certainly not appropriate, at best.

 

[boomerang]

I’m still unclear about why portraying Christ as a woman would be disrespectful in and of itself, but I can accept that this particular production may have been contempuous of Jesus and thus blasphemous. Thank you.

Look at it this way: depicting Our Lord as something He was not, makes His legacy very confusing, something that can be changed, perhaps even should be changed, willy-nilly. First, He’s a “woman”, next He’s not the Son of God. Where does it end? It was a bad, thoughtless choice. It was indeed blasphemy and that is not an insult to women. Think of depicting the Blessed Virgin as a man. A big, rough man with a beard and a hairy chest. How disgusting. All this crud is just a prelude to the confusion that reigns today. I’m envisioning “Caitlyn” Jenner. The world needs less confusion, not more.

 

[7_Sorrows]

Look at it this way: depicting Our Lord as something He was not, makes His legacy very confusing, something that can be changed, perhaps even should be changed, willy-nilly. First, He’s a “woman”, next He’s not the Son of God. Where does it end? It was a bad, thoughtless choice. It was indeed blasphemy and that is not an insult to women. Think of depicting the Blessed Virgin as a man. A big, rough man with a beard and a hairy chest. How disgusting. All this crud is just a prelude to the confusion that reigns today. I’m envisioning “Caitlyn” Jenner. The world needs less confusion, not more.

Not only that, but what message did it send the youth attending WYD from around the world?

 

[mersch]

To me, prtraying Jesus as a woman by a Christian, not only is it wrong-- it takes away from those of us that are women. Think of it this way. what if the Virgin Mary was portrayed as a man? No big deal, right?- Wrong! She had every right to call a spade a spade, disrespectful and blasphemous. World youth day was not portraying some fictional play…

 

[DaveBj]

I’m still unclear about why portraying Christ as a woman would be disrespectful in and of itself, but I can accept that this particular production may have been contempuous of Jesus and thus blasphemous. Thank you.

I think you may have it backwards. I don’t think the presentation portrayed Christ as a woman; rather, the producers used an obviously female actor to portray Jesus Christ, who was a man. Any way one looks at it, it was a very bad idea, and to do it in front of the Pope! Yes, Mother Angelica was right to call down wrath on it.

 

[7_Sorrows]

I think you may have it backwards. I don’t think the presentation portrayed Christ as a woman; rather, the producers used an obviously female actor to portray Jesus Christ, who was a man. Any way one looks at it, it was a very bad idea, and to do it in front of the Pope! Yes, Mother Angelica was right to call down wrath on it.