It’s very annoying to me that there was such an uproar about a statue of Jesus made out of chocolate.
From Cnn.com:
A planned Holy Week exhibition of a nude, anatomically correct chocolate sculpture of Jesus Christ was canceled Friday amid complaints from Catholics, including Cardinal Edward Egan.
The “My Sweet Lord” display was shut down by the hotel that houses the Lab Gallery in Manhattan, said Matt Semler, the gallery’s creative director. Semler said he resigned after officials at the Roger Smith Hotel shut down the show.
The artwork was created from more than 200 pounds of milk chocolate and features Christ with his arms outstretched as if on an invisible cross. Unlike the typical religious portrayal of Christ, the artwork does not include a loincloth.
The 6-foot sculpture was the victim of “a strong-arming from people who haven’t seen the show, seen what we’re doing,” Semler said. “They jumped to conclusions completely contrary to our intentions.”
But word of the confectionary Christ infuriated Catholics, including Egan, who described it as “a sickening display.” Bill Donohue, head of the watchdog Catholic League, said it was “one of the worst assaults on Christian sensibilities ever.”
The hotel and the gallery were overrun Thursday with angry phone calls and e-mails. Semler said the calls included death threats over the work of artist Cosimo Cavallaro, who was described as disappointed by the decision to cancel the display.
It seems just silly to me that this was canceled. I saw a picture of the sculpture, and not only is it an incredible piece of art (edible at that!), but it isn’t irreverent in any way.
I love David’s reaction:
I think the Naked Chocolate Jesus is a beautiful thing and it shows another side to the Christ and forces us all to reconsider his place in our lives.
Isn’t that the purpose of both art and religion?
Isn’t it rare and intimate when both purposes converge to give us new thought and new shining lights of insight?
Would Naked Jesus in Burlap be just as offensive? Naked Jesus in Cream Cheese? I think I’ve seen a Naked Jesus in Butter before and it was utterly revolting — from a Trans-Fat sense.
Is Jesus only allowed to be celebrated in Catholic Church approved materials?
Is the entire world only permitted to enjoy him in certain paints and woods and porcelain mandated by Catholics?
Do those who belong to the Church of Chocolate Jesus have no say in how their icons are presented to the eyes of the universe?
Hasn’t chocolate, for some, become the very embodiment of Easter?
Isn’t Jesus supposed to belong to everyone and not just the vocal outraged?
Is a child’s crayon drawing of a naked Jesus just as offensive as a six foot version in chocolate?
I don’t remember this sort of fury when Jesus was found in burnt toast, window reflections and tree bark — and there was no way to know if he was naked in those visions or not. Those Jesus sightings were considered messages from the supernatural and living evidence of Jesus in our lives on earth.
What difference does it make that one artist found Jesus in Milk Chocolate?
This Naked Jesus in Chocolate bugaboo is the Flag Burning issue all over again in chocolate and Piss Christ repeated in a chocolate-covered pee-pee and the Dung-Covered Madonna in faked naked outrage: Conservative political views are being cudgeled against the mainstream consciousness of the American Dream of freedom and artistic expression and dissent for political control and emotional repression.
Now we need to decide what to do with a Naked Jesus in Chocolate.
Do we:
- Melt him down into souvenir communion wafers
- Lick him like a lollipop
- Melt him into a proper, life-sized, wooden cross
- Nibble his fingers and toes
- Shave him into curls for ice cream topping
- Melt his private parts into a loincloth and baptize him as acceptable
- Fill his hollow body with peanut butter and feed him to the homeless
There are other, more important things in this world to be outraged over than a piece of chocolate.
I can’t say that I really like the idea of my Lord being potraied as a giant hollow easter candy but I do see your point. Both sides could have handled it better and there are more important things to put up such a stink about.
It really is an issue of worldview. Did the artist do it with the intention to offend Christians, or to make an artistic statement? Constantine (I think) made artists add pants to the naked bodies in royal art work, before then nudity was not a problem.
One thing we can thank the Greek’s for is the ability to look at the human body as art. Nudity is part of that.
When Jesus was being flogged and hung I do not think the loincloth was to much of a worry for the Romans, or for Jesus. He likely was naked. In our bid in the emergent church for authenticity this might have been an attempt at it.
Well, I’m glad the exhibition was cancelled, to be honest. Imagine the furore if the model had been of Mohammed… or even if it were an American war hero. Surely it’s a good thing that Christians sometimes stand up for Jesus, and point out that he’s not to be mocked or treated lightly. I don’t know what point the exhibitors had hoped to make, but it certainly wasn’t anything to do with Easter – apparently they hadn’t even realised it was Holy Week!!
Much ado about nothing. If only Christians spent so much time worrying about world hunger, the worldwide AIDS crisis, war, etc. These people need to re-evaluate what it means to be a Christian. Chocolate Jesus is the least of anyone’s worries (or at least should be).
Isn’t that what I said?
Yeah, but chocolate?! I can understand the sculpture itself – Scripture says that He was naked on the cross – but the chocolate aspect seems a bit over-the-top, if you ask me. That’s the part that I think is unnecessary. I don’t think it’s anything I would have pitched a fit over, but it does at least get a Spockian raised eyebrow out of me.
Yes, Amanda, you did say that. I was just reiterating your fine point.
Perhaps someone should come up with a list of acceptable materials when sculpting the figure of the big JC. We can have a huge symposium someday in the near future. I think it would be a fantastic use of time and energy.
Yeah, that was sarcastic.
Yes, there are many things to get more upset about, but I bet all of our lists would look different in priority if we listed all the evils of the world. It doesn’t make one person’s distress over something like this less valid. For the record, I wouldn’t pay much attention to this, but the people who do have every right to complain if they want. And…would their complaints be more valid if they could assure us that right behind Chocolate Jesus they were fighting to end world hunger and child abuse? (Personally, I find it more tacky than I do sacrilegious.)