Announcements: Introducing INK, the Writer's Currency » RPG's New Design Team » Now Open: RPG Staff Applications » 10 Years of RPG: Share Your Story » Can't Send PMs? Need Your 10-Forum Posts NOW? » A (Friendly) Reminder to All Romance RPers. » The Newbie's Guide to RolePlayGateway: Read This First! »

Ridiculous

a topic in Main Lobby, a part of the RPG forum.

If you have something you want to present to the entire community, post it here.

Ridiculous

Tips: 0.00 INK Postby Esca Styles on Thu Apr 05, 2007 11:13 am

How many have heard about the Chocolate Jesus statue and artist made for Easter Time? It was suppose to be put on display, but instead, the Catholic Church made such a large out cry towards the fact it was a sin to think of Jesus as Chocolate!?! So, as usual, made a big deal out of the statue and it cannot be shown as of right now. I am sorry, but art is art. If you choose to not see it, I can't see why that is fine? But to ruin something someone worked hard on is about as bad as someone criticizing the Bible. Art to an artist is sometimes their way of coping with life. I am sick and tired of how the Catholic Church makes a big deal out of things they shouldn't. If they want to change the world, they should start with the bigger problems in society, rather then small, and leave the books, and art work for last. It makes me angry when an artist can't show off a piece of art work, that really is not offensive in any where necessary, though I am sure it may seem so. We paint Jesus, we draw Jesus, we even supposedly "eat" Jesus in church. The Eucharist?! I just want to know what some opinions are on this.

I am not writing to start a fight or make a big controversy over this, however, I am interested in gaining a better understand of what others think, and if in fact anyone else thinks the same thing as I do about this situation.

Thanks much guys!

Tip jar: the author of this post has received 0.00 INK in return for their work.

User avatar
Esca Styles
Member for 12 years
Conversation Starter Conversationalist Friendly Beginnings

Tips: 0.00 INK Postby bouncingcrow on Thu Apr 05, 2007 11:24 am

Having been raised Catholic, yes, I do think they have a tendency to overreact about rather trivial matters.

A chocolate Jesus, I would think, is not offensive. After all, people who love Jesus might also love chocolate and vice versa. Why not mix two loves? Besides, if someone made a chocolate statue of me, I would be flattered.

It seems abusive of rights, too. Freedom of expression is what keeps artists alive sometimes, if you think about it.

Tip jar: the author of this post has received 0.00 INK in return for their work.

User avatar
bouncingcrow
Member for 11 years
Conversation Starter Conversationalist Friendly Beginnings

Tips: 0.00 INK Postby Esca Styles on Thu Apr 05, 2007 12:01 pm

Exactly! Its abusing what America stands for. Mixing two loves. They wouldn't understand. I wish I could find out who was in charge of that so I could send them a letter explaining my outlook on the statue and what I think. I was raised Roman Catholic as well, and I think its ridiculous to over react on a matter like this. It makes me wonder what they really do with their time there in the Vatican and at the Diocese.

Tip jar: the author of this post has received 0.00 INK in return for their work.

User avatar
Esca Styles
Member for 12 years
Conversation Starter Conversationalist Friendly Beginnings

Tips: 0.00 INK Postby Remæus on Thu Apr 05, 2007 12:17 pm

I, as a Protestant, saw nothing wrong with it. But part of the core belief of (most) Catholics is transubstantiation, and perhaps this has something to do with why they were opposed to the matter?

Tip jar: the author of this post has received 0.00 INK in return for their work.

User avatar
Remæus
Architect
Member for 13 years
Contributor Progenitor Author Promethean Conversation Starter Inspiration World Builder Conversationalist Friendly Beginnings Builder Greeter Beta Tester Arc Warden Party Starter Codeweaver Group Theory Person of Interest Streamwatcher Helmsman Recruiter Maiden Voyager Tipworthy Salesman Property Buyer Visual Appeal Concierge Cult Leader

Tips: 0.00 INK Postby HAL on Thu Apr 05, 2007 12:17 pm

That's good information: Eric said he as a Protestant saw nothing wrong with it.

Tip jar: the author of this post has received 0.00 INK in return for their work.

User avatar
HAL
Member for 13 years
Conversationalist

Tips: 0.00 INK Postby bouncingcrow on Thu Apr 05, 2007 12:56 pm

I think part of my opposition comes from the fact that I lost my faith in the Catholic Church.

It comes down to how I view the church and its decisions...

1) The church manipulates things for its followers
2) The church manipulates things for its non followers
3) The church has a very direct agenda, control
4) The church honestly does not care about what/why/when/how/where...it cares only for itself

Now, I have no problem with someone being personally offended by art. I DO have a problem when the church that I so long prescribed to be a member of TELLS its congregation that it cannot go see a certain piece of artwork. I do not care for institutions which regulate what I can and cannot see.

I should also note that while I am no longer a practicing Catholic, I do respect those who are truly devout. My grandmother was a Secular Carmelite (a woman who is married but does the duties of a nun) and I still pray to saints when I feel the need, but institutional religion is not for me.

....all that's to say, I don't think the church should ban artwork.

Tip jar: the author of this post has received 0.00 INK in return for their work.

User avatar
bouncingcrow
Member for 11 years
Conversation Starter Conversationalist Friendly Beginnings

Tips: 0.00 INK Postby Teh Andy on Thu Apr 05, 2007 3:53 pm

*Bites the head off a chocolate Jesus and grins like an idiot*

Tip jar: the author of this post has received 0.00 INK in return for their work.

User avatar
Teh Andy
GWC Veteran
Member for 13 years
Progenitor Conversation Starter Conversationalist Friendly Beginnings Beta Tester Contributor

Tips: 0.00 INK Postby faeriexdecay on Thu Apr 05, 2007 4:16 pm

I read this and was rather amused, considering I found this site ages (maybe years) ago, and actually considered getting some of these chocolate deities. I was surprised to find the site still existed.

Tip jar: the author of this post has received 0.00 INK in return for their work.

User avatar
faeriexdecay
Member for 11 years

Tips: 0.00 INK Postby Kouketsu on Thu Apr 05, 2007 8:38 pm

faeriexdecay wrote:I read this and was rather amused, considering I found this site ages (maybe years) ago, and actually considered getting some of these chocolate deities. I was surprised to find the site still existed.


You completely just decided next year's round of gifts all my friends will be receiving for the religious holiday season.

Anyway, my personal feelings on an issue like this should be pretty obvious for those who know my adamant defense of free speech and expression, although I believe at the same time it's a bit silly that anyone aside from the fundamentally devout would even comply with the banning of a chocolate likeness of their Lord and Savior anyway. I mean, that sort of offense wouldn't mean the suffering of fire and brimstone in eternal damnation manifest as the ninth circle of Hell, would it?

[Physically harmless] self-expression is a pretty good thing, seriously. One need not require some divine edict to tell them that they shouldn't look at a chocolate carving of Jesus; that sort of choice can be made well enough on their own, right?

Tip jar: the author of this post has received 0.00 INK in return for their work.

User avatar
Kouketsu
Member for 12 years
Promethean Conversation Starter Author Conversationalist Friendly Beginnings

Tips: 0.00 INK Postby Esca Styles on Fri Apr 06, 2007 8:46 am

Wow... Choco Deities! Thats nifty! think I am going to buy some for Easter and hand them out at school to some friends... I got to a private school mind you all. I can't wait to see what is said about me then. You guys are going to hear about some kid from St. Joseph High School in Kenosha, Wisconsin that is being sued or kicked out of school for passing out Choolate Deities! HAHAHAHA!

See. The point I was tryin to make is. We live in America. The land of freedom and opportunity. The right to do as you wish as long as its not calming harm. I sikc of the catholic church laying down and pretending that something is causing them harm. Oh dear! Harry Potter strikes again. Another some body has had a nightmare that Voldermort is coming to get them. This book can cause seizures. God. Make a big dela out anything and everything that makes someone smile or happy. I thionk the Catholic church is jelaous because they didn't write that damn book. Thats exactly what I think.

Tip jar: the author of this post has received 0.00 INK in return for their work.

User avatar
Esca Styles
Member for 12 years
Conversation Starter Conversationalist Friendly Beginnings

Tips: 0.00 INK Postby miyumi on Fri Apr 06, 2007 3:58 pm

Esca, might I suggest you edit your last post? That was a ton of typos...

I would be interested in seeing where you heard about this story, and where the decree is written. I have heard plenty of stories dissing the Catholic Church that turned out to be a load of crap. Not saying this is or isn't one of them, just want to know the source.

For the time being, I will take it as true, and write my thoughts as a Catholic Convert (ten years now).

The first thoughts are questions: what did the person who made the statue have as his intention for making it? Was it simply to make money? Was it made because of his love for Jesus? The intention behind it would definitely influence my opinion over whether or not it should have been made. Eric, your point about transubstantiation... I'm not sure if that is coming into play here. I've seen other edible representations of Our Lord outside the Eucharist, and have not heard of any outcry over that.

I would have to say that if there is any art form in which Jesus has not been expressed (aside from pornographics; yes, yes, I know He's been depicted there too...), I say "Let them draw/paint/mold/sing him!" Frankly, I would rather give children a chocolate Jesus or Cross than a chocolate Easter Bunny...

Usually, when the Catholic Church tells us not to view something, it is because it is something that goes completely against our faith, something that stands a good chance of making many become weak in their faith. It is more of a "viewing this could be hazardous to your spiritual health", not a "We don't like it, so you shouldn't either".

Tip jar: the author of this post has received 0.00 INK in return for their work.

User avatar
miyumi
Member for 13 years
Conversation Starter Author Conversationalist Friendly Beginnings

Tips: 0.00 INK Postby Esca Styles on Sat Apr 07, 2007 6:32 am

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11669242/

Go check it out. I can see where the Catholic Church would have a problem with this statue. However, as I have pointed out before, and so have many. This is America we live in. A land of opportunity and freedom of speech and expression. This artst should have the rights to show off a piece of art work, whether Catholics like it or not. Of course its going to be in dis-taste to them. However, he is expressing himself. There are so many different ways Jesus has been protrayed through out History. I don't know whats worse now. A porno with Jesus in it, or a Chocolate Statue, that won't even last for a whole lifetime.

Tip jar: the author of this post has received 0.00 INK in return for their work.

User avatar
Esca Styles
Member for 12 years
Conversation Starter Conversationalist Friendly Beginnings

Tips: 0.00 INK Postby miyumi on Sat Apr 07, 2007 3:27 pm

hmm...

The six-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."


I would be interested in knowing what the intention was. Wouldn't they have KNOWN that it would cause controversy?

Tip jar: the author of this post has received 0.00 INK in return for their work.

User avatar
miyumi
Member for 13 years
Conversation Starter Author Conversationalist Friendly Beginnings

Tips: 0.00 INK Postby HAL on Sat Apr 07, 2007 3:28 pm

Studies show that 99%25 of people spell Hmm with 2 M's.

Tip jar: the author of this post has received 0.00 INK in return for their work.

User avatar
HAL
Member for 13 years
Conversationalist

Tips: 0.00 INK Postby miyumi on Sat Apr 07, 2007 3:28 pm

hmm...

The six-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."


I would be interested in knowing what the intention was. Wouldn't they have KNOWN that it would cause controversy?

(Questions not directed at anyone here, since I don't expect you guys to know what the intentions and/or knowledge was... then again, speculation is fun!)

Tip jar: the author of this post has received 0.00 INK in return for their work.

User avatar
miyumi
Member for 13 years
Conversation Starter Author Conversationalist Friendly Beginnings


Post a reply

RolePlayGateway is a site built by a couple roleplayers who wanted to give a little something back to the roleplay community. The site has no intention of earning any profit, and is paid for out of their own pockets.

If you appreciate what they do, feel free to donate your spare change to help feed them on the weekends. After selecting the amount you want to donate from the menu, you can continue by clicking on PayPal logo.

 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest