Tuesday, 20 April 2010
-
A Controversial Crucifix: 'Pornographic' say Parishioners
A crucifix is often one of the focal points of a church. It is a constant reminder of the sacrifice Christ made for our freedom and the burden we bear as followers of Him. Yet one crucifix at the St. Charles Borromeo Catholic Church in Oklahoma is reminding worshipers of something completely different.
“I think it’s an embarrassment to our Lord,” parishioner Rita Cook told The Oklahoman. “I think it’s an embarrassment to our parishioners. And I think it’s an embarrassment to our visitors.”
So what is it about this crucifix, commissioned by Monsignor Edward Weisenburger and created by iconographer Janet Jaime, that is causing such controversy? It all has to do with the appearance of Jesus' “distended abdomen.”
Rather than seeing a swelling stomach, many are seeing a giant erect penis.
Weisenburger and Jaime stand by the piece, which Reggie Jaime, husband of the artist, suggests “isn't just a subjective drawing.” The icon was based on the traditional San Damiano crucifix, though the abdomen does appear to be significantly more pronounced in Jaime's work.
Jaime has agreed to modify the crucifix.
What do you see when you look at the icon in question? Do you find it offensive? Do you think this is just a misinterpretation on the part of the parishioners? Do you think the artist should have been a bit more careful in the rendering of the image?
Related Posts
Post a Comment
- Back to revelife's Revelife Site!
- Note: your comment will appear in revelife's local time zone: GMT -05:00 (Eastern Standard - US, Canada)
About the Author
-
- From: modernmelody
- Name: Rebecca
- About Me: I'm the lead editor for Revelife!
-
True
Stats: This Week All Time Posts: 3 163 Views: 1340 163791 Comments: 38 2664 View all posts by modernmelody
Comments (30)
It'd be easier to judge if this post had included a picture of the icon in question that wasn't cut off below the chest...
The way the artist decided to distend the stomach was truly unfortunate. It's a wonder he didn't see it himself.
yea.... i am suprise he didn't see it himself...
BWAHAHAHAHHAHA!
Oh he knew! I'd stake my soul on it
Yeah, he knew. Just wanted to see how much he could get away with.
hehehe! That makes my morning.
@NikBv@xanga - That's why I included the video, which contains plenty of shots of the crucifix in its entirety.
@modernmelody - I realize that, but they aren't particularly scrutinizable in that form.
Either way, does it really matter? From an art perspective, I am certain the artist knew what he was doing, but only those with minds already in the gutter would see it at first.
From a physiological perspective, it would be accurate. During death every man on a cross would be "erect" as a side effect of the growing shortness of breath, the strength it takes to push up against the nails, etc. (very similar in effect to the growing fad of "auto-eroticism" that has taken the lives of several celebrities - most notably David Carradine)
When people complain, you can explain it like that.
The artist is a she, not a he, unless you know many men named "Janet"...
The editor chose poorly in using a picture cut off at the chest when the point of the article was the rendition of the abdomen, and the fleeting glances of the figure in the video are not sufficient.
The visual rendition of the drawing has nothing to do with whether your mind is in the gutter or not. Truth be known, the body would have been very bloody and bruised, and nude. Humiliation and torture were what crucifixion was all about. The "wraps" about the waist are for vanity's sake. We are supposed to be focusing on the horrific manner of death, and the fact that Jesus physically died and rose, conquered death, thereby giving us a pathway to eternal life, not on the physical aspects of his Human body.Considering the area where he lived, and the nationality of his parents, most likely Jesus would have been short and olive skinned, not the 6' tall white anglo saxon that most pictures portray him as....
Yes, it is controversial, but it also gets media attention and makes people think, at least momentarily, about Jesus and the cross, and His sacrifice for us. Might plant a seed in someone's mind that eventually turns them back to God, and really, that's all we can pray it will do.
At least it wasn't commissioned by our "National Endowment for the Arts", and gave some "artist" thousands of dollars to stick a crucifix in a glass of urine....
I honestly, don't get the whole image of Jesus still on the cross. I mean isn't the point that he died on the cross, was buried, and rose again 3 days later? He didn't just stay on the cross, He conquered death. Its just something I've never really understood.
I don't really know if I am offended by it or not, because Jesus lives in my heart, not on a crucifix.
This wasn't clear, I want to see the original. If this painting is a modern version, the artist obviously was playing a "Leonardo" on The Church. If it is a copy of the original from th12th century or whatever, and the abdomen looks similar, those people had a very different mind set, I would think.
For a modern painting it is pretty blatant and I would not have approved of it. It is pretty obvious that an erect penis and elephantine testicles can been seen in this painting, come on.... the painting is a joke against the church, one that I personally am snickering at, but a joke against the church nonetheless...
however, that said, it is up to people to leave, and cut off funding for that church, because we all know that it will be removed for financial reasons before any other reason...
.
@LadyGwenivere@xanga - They don't show the actual image here completely. You have to see the full thing to see the shocking part.
You can obviously see the Savior's "junk" sticking up and hanging out... I think it is offensive and I am so totally open minded that most Christians think I'm going to burn in hell...
I've never seen anyone's abs look like that. However, the male organs DO look like that. Janet did a really poor job if she was trying to make it look like a distended abdomen. She did a great job if she was trying to cause people to think of male sexual organs.
I'm not Roman Catholic, so I don't have to look at a crucifix every Sunday. However, I can tell you that I would NOT look at that thing every Sunday. I'd find another parish.
@LadyGwenivere@xanga - I agree with you. Frankly, an empty tomb would be more appropriate to have in the front of a church! He's alive!!!
@LadyGwenivere@xanga - I see it as a reminder of the suffering Jesus went through to free us from sin next time I feel tempted to do something I shouldn't. Your point is just as valid though, but does that mean that you never wear a cross, or just a cross without Jesus on it? Is a cross by itself still a symbol of everything you just said?
I don't have this problem. Jesus is not suffering on my cross. My cross is an empty cross because Jesus was victorious over suffering and death.
Heretic means to choose in Greek. Didja know that?
Unorthodoxy is orthodoxy.
Rev. George Moore UCC
@LadyGwenivere@xanga - We look at pictures of Jesus on the cross to remember and glorify his suffering, and also to remind us that when we suffer it is part of our death with Christ and resurrection with him. There is nothing wrong with it, and it's a comfort to many.
@stillooking2find@xanga - It's wonderful to look at and meditate on pictures of our Lord.
@afreaka_boy@xanga - If you are speaking of the "death erection," it is actually priapism, a medical condition caused by injury to the spinal cord/cerebellum. This can be seen in executions by hanging (because of obvious trauma there), but is not a reasonable means via crucifixion. Erection is, fundamentally, controlled by the nervous system (parasympathetic) and psychologic stimulation more than other organic factors. The "erotic asphyxiation" you are more likely referring to is the consequence of hallucination & heightened sexual awareness from the brain's deprivation of oxygen coupled with some mechanic stimulation; to clarify, that would be a psychological response to a physiological phenomenon and is not, from my knowledge, typical to people in hypoxic states. It is technically classified as a paraphilia (fetish). Since an erection is typically controlled by psychologic factors more than organic ones, and because pain and exercise are significant inhibitors of sexual stimulation in the normal psyche, erotic asphyxiation in this case is unlikely.
Moreover, there is no indication from any record that this took place in Jesus' circumstance, so such a conclusion would be unreasonable and to assume that it happened would be presumptuous and therefore unjustified.
@NightCometh@xanga - ok yes I get that.. but wouldnt an empty cross, knowing that He has the victory over death and because of that so do we, bring more comfort? I know it does to me. I love looking at pictures of Him too, but I find the ones drawn of Him with children bring more comfort to me.
@Orlando@xanga - ok.. eww. I would not want to be looking at that.
@sarahzthoughts@xanga - I wear a cross, but its an empty one with a little diamond in the middle to remind me that we all start out of lumps of coal but God can turn us into something beautiful.
@stillooking2find@xanga - amen to that :)
Exodus 20: 4,5 and 6
Not make a carve image: People in the ancient world produced many kinds of idols, images, and other substitutes for God. Israel was forbidden to do this from the beginning. They could not make anything that would detract from the exclusion worship of the living God. However, the prohibition of fashioning images was not an injuction against every kind of art.
The phrase bow down...nor serve form a pair of Hebrew words that describes one idea : any form of worship to another god. Godis a jealous God. In other words, He has a zeal for the truth that He alone is God, and He is jealous of any rivals.
The Hebrew verb traslated visiting can mean coming in an act of mercy (as in Ruth 1:6) or coming in divine judgment (as here) third and fourth. Idoatry would bring judgement tht would affect the idolaters descendants.
The Lord's mercy would extend even more to the descendanrs of righeous people. The contrasting of the phraes "third and fourth" (verse 5) with thousands demonstrates that God mercy is greater than His wrath. The lingering effects of righeousness will last far longer than the lingering effects of wickedness.
Romans usually crucified people in the nude, so the issue is more of placement than accuracy.
I don't even know how to explain how this should be such a non-issue. The fact is that it IS NOT an erect penis. I admit that I would probably have to look twice at such a thing if seeing it for the first time, myself. But, it would be evident to me pretty quick that it wasn't what I thought when just glancing. So, I would cease to be surprised and just move on. Seriously.
lol. I doubt it was on purpose.