BlackChampagne Home

In association with Amazon.comBuy Crap! I get 5%.
Direct donations to cover hosting expenses are also accepted.

Site Information
--What is Black Champagne?
--Cast of Characters & Things
--Your First Time.
--Design Notes
--Quote of the Day Archive
--Phrase of the Moment Archive
--Site Feedback
--Contact/Copyright Info

Blog Archives
--Blogger Archives: June 2005-
--Old Monthly Archives: Jan 2002-May 2005

Reviews Section
Movie Reviews (153)

Ten Most Recent Film Reviews:
--Infernal Affairs -- 5.5
--The Protector/Tom Yum Goong -- 6
--The Limey -- 8
--The Descent -- 6
--Oldboy -- 9.5
--Shaolin Deadly Kicks -- 7
--Mission Impossible III -- 7.5
--V for Vendetta -- 8.5
--Ghost in the Shell 2 -- 8
--Night Watch -- 7.5

Book Reviews (76)
Five Most Recent Book Reviews:
--Cat People -- 4
--Attack Poodles -- 5
--Caught Stealing -- 6
--The Dirt, by Motley Crue -- 7.5
--Harry Potter #6 -- 7

Photos Section
--Flux Photos
--Pet Photos (7 pages)
--Home Decor Photos
--Plant Photos
--Vacation Photos (12 pages)

Articles
See all 234 articles here.

Fiction
Original horror and fantasy short stories.

Mail Bags
Index Page

Features
--Links
--Slang: Internet
--Slang: Dirty
--Slang: Wankisms
--Slang: Sex Acts
--Slang: Fulldeckisms
--Hot or Not?
--Truths in Advertising

Band Name Ratings
(350 Rock Bands Listed)
FAQ -- Feedback
A -- B -- C -- D -- E -- F -- G -- H -- I -- J -- K -- L -- M -- N -- O -- P -- Q -- R -- S -- T -- U -- V -- W -- X -- Y -- Z

Hellgate: London
--The Unofficial HGL Site
--The Hellgate Wiki

Diablo II
--The Unofficial Site
--Flux's Decahedron
--Middle Earth Mod

Locations of visitors to this page

Powered by Blogger.

BlackChampagne -- no longer new; improvement also in question.: Jesus Chocolate Christ



Sunday, April 08, 2007  

Jesus Chocolate Christ


You've probably seen the furor over the life-size, chocolate Jesus Christ they were going to display in a hotel in NYC on Easter. It's been in the news for a few days, and after chuckling and ignoring it, I finally gave it some thought today. And it has me puzzled. First of all, here's the Cadbury Cremeâ„¢ Lord and Saviour himself:



And here's how various senior Catholics reacted:
Cardinal Edward Egan, archbishop of New York:

"It is a scandalous carving of Jesus Christ allegedly made out of chocolate. What the Roger Smith Hotel (where the gallery is housed) would hope to achieve by this sickening display, no one seems to know. The Catholic community is alerted to this offense against our faith and sensitivity. This is something we will not soon forget," he said.

Bill Donohue, president of the Catholic League for Civil and Religious Rights, also wants blood.

"It's an all-out war on Christianity," he said. "They wouldn't show a depiction of Martin Luther King with genitals exposed on Martin Luther King Day and they wouldn't show Muhammad depicted that way on Ramadan. It's always Christians, and the timing is deliberate."
You can pretty well disregard anything Bill Donohue says; he's just a kook who runs around screaming about this and that trying to get attention. He's not affiliated with any part of the actual Catholic Church anyway. But the Cardinal's words have some weight and value, and they're what puzzle me.

These guys are aware that a substantial percentage of the world's greatest art (Michaelangelo, for example: one, two, three) features Jesus Christ on a crucifix, right? And that in those paintings, statues, murals, stained glass windows, etc, he's frequently naked, and usually dying in agony? On top of that, every Catholic church on earth has statues of Jesus on the cross, wearing a loin cloth at best. Not to mention the whole Eucharist thing; a religious ceremony in which believers eat bread and drink wine, snacks that are meant as literal representations of Jesus' flesh.

So then, how or why is a chocolate Jesus an outrage? If they baked a giant bread Jesus, would that be bad? What about hundreds of holy wafers glued together in the shape of Jesus? What if they'd had chocolate galore in the Middle East 2000 years ago, and (in the apocryphral Last Supper story) Jesus had passed out dark chocolate morsels, and the tradition had been continued? Would Catholic children have spent the last few centuries looking forward to communion a lot more eagerly than they do for a bit of cracker?

Seriously though, why is a chocolate statue of Jesus such an outrage? It's thematically tied to the chocolate aspect of modern Easter celebrations, it's hardly any different than the art we see on the wall of every church on earth, it's not much different than the symbolic Eucharist ceremony, etc. Some of the complaints were about the anatomically-correct aspect of the statue, but honestly, do you think the prudish, professional outrage merchants would have been any quieter if the chocolate Jesus had been draped in a loincloth? He could have worn a suit and tie, or robe and sandals, and they would have bitched just the same. It's all part of reinforcing the ongoing media narrative that Christians (who make up something like 80% of the US population and 99% of US elected officials) are perpetually under attack by the evil, scheming forces of secularism.

And it works; look at the media coverage this most recent bit of stupidity garnered...

Labels: ,

Comments:

I'm going to guess that pen*s = bad, mmmkay?

Speaking of which, last week's South Park had a brilliant satire on the connection of the Easter Bunny to the Christian holiday.


 

I suspect the outrage came from the Catholic Church's accusation that the sculpture of Jesus in the chocolate medium was out of mockery and lack of respect. No one can say the sculpture isn't art, but one can definitely say its not tasteful (har har.) I'd expect the same reaction from the American public if someone sculpted George Bush out of dog shit; a bunch of us would be outraged, a bunch of us would laugh our asses off, and a few thousand people would claim it to be the most awesome piece of avant-garde art the world's ever seen.

I think what it really comes down to is the message the artist was trying to convey. Was he/she being cynical about the juxtaposition of the religious Easter holiday and the custom of chocolate, egg-laying rabbits? Were their overall intentions good? Or is this a work of pure sacrilege?

Then again, sometimes the artist's opinion is worthless, and its the public's reception of it that really counts. I'm sure the Catholic Church's worst fear is of someone walking up to the statue and taking a big bite out of Jesus's holy penis. As a Christian, I find that both hilarious and mortifying all at once. Oh well. :)


 

I don't particularly recall a completely naked Jesus though there are many just covering the full frontal spot.

But maybe, just maybe, what they're really pissed off on, is not that he's naked, but as the son of God, shouldn't his appendages be more of a God like size?

besides Americans were spawn from the puritan stock. We're always uptight about something.


 

I was way, way off on this one. I saw the picture and thought for sure that it had been commissioned by a church. An effort to illustrate how the supposed death and resurrection of Christ was being turned into a meaningless candy-fest.

Now instead of thinking that the church was trying to make a statement about losing sight of the meaning of the holiday, I have to think that they are offended by holy, chocolate Johnson. The Church should really consider getting someone who isn't insane to handle their P.R.


 

Post a Comment << Home

Archives

May 2005   June 2005   July 2005   August 2005   September 2005   October 2005   November 2005   December 2005   January 2006   February 2006   March 2006   April 2006   May 2006   June 2006   July 2006   August 2006   September 2006   October 2006   November 2006   December 2006   January 2007   February 2007   March 2007   April 2007   May 2007   June 2007   July 2007   August 2007   September 2007   October 2007   November 2007   December 2007   January 2008   February 2008   March 2008   April 2008   May 2008   June 2008   July 2008   August 2008   September 2008   October 2008   November 2008   December 2008   January 2009   February 2009   March 2009   April 2009   May 2009   June 2009   July 2009   August 2009   September 2009   October 2009   November 2012  

All site content copyright "Flux" (Eric Bruce), 2002-2007.