QUOTE(RkFast @ Apr 1 2007, 04:02 PM) [snapback]959480[/snapback]
How would a naked statue of Martin Luther King Jr. made out of fried chicken and collard greens, put on display in Black Hisotry Month go over?
How would a statue of Moses made out of Matzoh, put on display a week before Yom Kippur go over?
Statue of Don Quixote made out of floured tortillas? Nude, of course.
ALL OF THESE would be the cause of outrage, and rightfully so.
But when its Christianity mocked, the Faithful are told to "get over it."
THATS the problem I have with this.
And its not even the fact its a Chocolate statue...its the fact that its Christ with HIS COCK HANGING OUT. Sorry..Christ was NEVER portrayed as naked. Ever. So dont tell me...molton....that isnt a problem.
And for the record, I agree that Donohue is oversensitive.
But that doesnt make this terrible statue any less offensive to me.
This is just incorrect. See Michaelangelo's sculpture Risen Christ - loincloth added much later.
Early Christian art, esp. concerning the Baptism of Christ has a history of showing the whole package.
The infant Jesus - plenty of examples there.
Sacred Art showing Christ completely nude usually had a theological base in the incarnation
Many of these works began being suppressed during the reformation and the counter-reformation.
Oh and Ultramontane artists resisted showing a circumcised Christ (I wonder why?) so to emphasize the
incarnation (rather than his Jewishness) there was the odd phenom of portraying him fully erect (Edit: under loincloth - not a trifling distinction - my bad)