I Vienna,a city long lauded for art and beauty, the Roman Catholic Cathedral's’s Museum had decided to permit a homoerotic image of the Last Supper. This image was not only put on display but was part of a featured presentation that also included an image of the flagelated Jesus being masturbated.
Art can and should press the boundaries of expression but pillar such as the Roman Catholic Church should stand by its own teachings. It is tasteless of the Church to permit such a display.
A Communist andAtheist, Alfred Hrdlicka(Creator of the painiting) even admits that he was surprised of the museum’s choice!
The church has taken a stance on the definition of the art that is to be observed… in the Church’s domain.
“The Church needs art.”
“12. In order to communicate the message entrusted to her by Christ, the Church needs art. Art must make perceptible, and as far as possible attractive, the world of the spirit, of the invisible, of God. It must therefore translate into meaningful terms that which is in itself ineffable. Art has a unique capacity to take one or other facet of the message and translate it into colours, shapes and sounds which nourish the intuition of those who look or listen. It does so without emptying the message itself of its transcendent value and its aura of mystery.
The Church has need especially of those who can do this on the literary and figurative level, using the endless possibilities of images and their symbolic force. Christ himself made extensive use of images in his preaching, fully in keeping with his willingness to become, in the Incarnation, the icon of the unseen God.”Pope John Paul II Letter to Artists,1999.
Art, especially art in the Church, is a representation of an event or person… The art, is never to be worshiped, but is to be recognized as a window into a situation and to guide prayer.
“The honor which is paid to the image passes on to that which the image represents, and he who reveres the image reveres in it the subject represented… ”Council of Nicaea 787A.D.
“…images of Christ, the Virgin Mother of God, and other saints are to be held and kept especially in churches, that due honor and reverence are to be paid to them, not that any divinity or power is thought to be in them for the sake of which they may be worshiped, or that anything can be asked of them, or that any trust may be put in images, as was done by the heathen who put their trust in their idols, but because the honor shown to them is referred to the prototypes which they represent… adore Christ and honor the saints whose likeness they bear….’ Summa Theologica
It is one thing to think that Hrdlicka should be permitted to represent people in such a manner, but to represent Christ in such a manner and display it in a cathedral’s museum? Hrdlicka has the right to present his art to the world. He can create any image he wants… But the Church should not propagate it.
This entire experience is also being likened to the kickback of anger from Mel Gibson’s 2004 film “The Passion of the Christ”… I’m sorry, it is true that Jesus was beaten almost to the point of death. It is actually more accurate to have him crucified naked on the cross. But, to have a drunken homosexual orgies in the Upper Room and have it displayed on Church property by the Church is completely insane.
