FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Pope Francis's Sacrilegious Nativity Scene
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
(12-23-2017, 07:56 PM)Florus Wrote: [ -> ]I think this new Vatican one was definitely inspired by this style. I fail to see how either are blasphemous. 

You are joking right?

Just pursue Ann Barnhardt's blog for all the details.
(12-23-2017, 07:56 PM)Florus Wrote: [ -> ]Sure makes the Vatican one look much less crazy and radical eh?
If the Vatican's is sacrilegious because the Lord is hard to spot, what would you all say about the above Nativity scene?

I don't think the Vatican Nativity is blasphemous because Our Lord is hard to spot, I think it's blasphemous because it contains a figure of a nude dude, with sexy five o'clock shadow, who looks as if he forgot his clothes after a porn photo shoot or had them stolen at the gay gym!

Of course, I'm no longer surprised. If you haven't read this, you should.

Vatican’s ‘Sexually Suggestive’ Nativity Has Troubling Ties to Italy’s LGBT Activists
(12-23-2017, 09:49 PM)jovan66102 Wrote: [ -> ]
(12-23-2017, 07:56 PM)Florus Wrote: [ -> ]Sure makes the Vatican one look much less crazy and radical eh?
If the Vatican's is sacrilegious because the Lord is hard to spot, what would you all say about the above Nativity scene?

I don't think the Vatican Nativity is blasphemous because Our Lord is hard to spot, I think it's blasphemous because it contains a figure of a nude dude, with sexy five o'clock shadow, who looks as if he forgot his clothes after a porn photo shoot or had them stolen at the gay gym!

Of course, I'm no longer surprised. If you haven't read this, you should.

Vatican’s ‘Sexually Suggestive’ Nativity Has Troubling Ties to Italy’s LGBT Activists


Listen, I am definitely not a fan of nudes in religious art, but if it's always blasphemous to do so, then the Vatican has been covered in blasphemous art for centuries, yet only now it's bad? Ever since the Renaissance have artists been projecting their fascination with the human body onto religious art and even figures, just look at the Last Judgement, you can't even count how many fully or nearly nude figures adorn it, certainly makes this nativity scene look tame.
(12-23-2017, 10:36 PM)Florus Wrote: [ -> ]
(12-23-2017, 09:49 PM)jovan66102 Wrote: [ -> ]
(12-23-2017, 07:56 PM)Florus Wrote: [ -> ]Sure makes the Vatican one look much less crazy and radical eh?
If the Vatican's is sacrilegious because the Lord is hard to spot, what would you all say about the above Nativity scene?

I don't think the Vatican Nativity is blasphemous because Our Lord is hard to spot, I think it's blasphemous because it contains a figure of a nude dude, with sexy five o'clock shadow, who looks as if he forgot his clothes after a porn photo shoot or had them stolen at the gay gym!

Of course, I'm no longer surprised. If you haven't read this, you should.

Vatican’s ‘Sexually Suggestive’ Nativity Has Troubling Ties to Italy’s LGBT Activists


Listen, I am definitely not a fan of nudes in religious art, but if it's always blasphemous to do so, then the Vatican has been covered in blasphemous art for centuries, yet only now it's bad? Ever since the Renaissance have artists been projecting their fascination with the human body onto religious art and even figures, just look at the Last Judgement, you can't even count how many fully or nearly nude figures adorn it, certainly makes this nativity scene look tame.

For centuries art was the primary "media" and every work of art has a message.

Christmas is time for reflecting on the innocence and purity of Mary and the Christ Child coming into our fallen world.

That is not the message coming through on this nativity scene.

Nude art is not blasphemous unless the message conveyed is blasphemous or sinful.

There is a time and a place for nudes in art and the message communicated by their presence in the work.

This is neither the time nor the place.
Okay, this is outrageaous!

I hate to post this but y'all must know what is going on and we need to DO SOMETHING!
Ann Barnard pointed out at her blog:
https://www.barnhardt.biz/2017/12/22/vat...ave-bewbs/

THEY MADE MARY A TRANSVESTITE!

[Image: Very-stange-little-angels-and-strang-Mar...413_55.jpg]

and

Vatican GayTivity: Um, the Flying Baby Angel Heads Have… BEWBS.

[Image: IMG-20171222-WA0002.jpg]
From Ann Barnardt:
Close-up of the two winged angels at the foot of the Blessed Virgin in the Vatican Nativity Scene. Note the cleavage, and the rouged coloring of the “pushed-up” bosoms.  There are two other winged angels, like this, with the same protruding “bosoms” surrounding the Holy Family.


If you look at the faces of the baby angels, first, they have extremely disturbing facial expressions, and second it seems to me that they are little boy baby angels.  So, yes, it seems that not only is this a winking nod to the transvestites (and the word folks is TRANSVESTITE, not transsexual – there is no such thing as a “transsexual” because no one can change their sex, the entire notion is utterly irrational and detached from reality), and it also definitely enters into the domain of pedophilia and the sexualization of small children.  And yes, I know that some people will look at that and say that the “bosoms” are a double-entendre of sorts for butt cheeks, which at this point, I wouldn’t put past these perverts.

Remember, ALL SODOMITES ARE, BY DEFINITION, A CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER TO CHILDREN. INCLUDING FIRST-DEGREE BLOOD RELATIVES. PERIOD.

So, once again, this monstrosity needs to be torn down.  A group of Catholic men need to muster – preferably in a group of at least one thousand, notify the Italian police and the Swiss Guards that they will be arriving at St. Peter’s Square in the wee hours of the morning so as not to disrupt traffic, and that they will quietly and quickly dismantle this blasphemous manifestation of the satanic powers now occupying the Vatican, and then all kneel and pray the Rosary in reparation to the Immaculate Heart of Mary and the Sacred Heart of Jesus, and then leave. And tell them that they are all, every one, willing to be arrested.

But, of course, no one will do this, because this would require virility and potency, and a willingness to suffer.  Better to just let the God-hating sex perverts have their blasphemous fun and not be inconvenienced ourselves, right?
Well, as the LifeSiteNews article I linked above shows, this display does have disturbing connections to the Italian LGBTXYZ%$# movement. And, of course, this just happened as well, Vatican Hires LGBT Activist Company to Create and Run New Internet News Platform.
(12-24-2017, 03:51 AM)jovan66102 Wrote: [ -> ]Well, as the LifeSiteNews article I linked above shows, this display does have disturbing connections to the Italian LGBTXYZ%$# movement. And, of course, this just happened as well, Vatican Hires LGBT Activist Company to Create and Run New Internet News Platform.

Here's something even more horrifying.

Quote:This year’s Christmas crèche also features a reproduction of the ancient and beautiful icon of Our Lady of Montevergine. The original icon, housed in a chapel of the mountain shrine, measures 12 feet high and six feet wide, and depicts the Blessed Virgin seated on a throne with the divine Infant Jesus seated on her lap.

[Image: Our_Lady_of_Montevergine_Icon_-_1_645_430_55.JPG]

Our Lady of Montevergine has a particular significance for homosexuals and transgenders in Italy.  According to a legend, Our Lady of Montevergine saved two homosexuals from death in the winter of 1256. The couple had been beaten and driven by night from their city and brought to the mountain where they were tied to a tree and left to die of the cold or be eaten by wolves. According to the legend, Our Lady of Montevergine had pity on them and ‘miraculously’ freed them [What's not mentioned is Montevergine used to be a place for pagan worship where eunich pagan-priests would dress up in women's clothes and sodomize each other]. In 2017, La Repubblica called it “the progressive miracle of a gay friendly Madonna.”

More commonly, she is known as the mother “who grants everything and forgives everything.”

Sorry I didn't post it last night; was too tired to write.  This folks, this is why it is blasphemous and downright evil.  I would rejoice if local Italian Catholics mustered up the courage to tear down that evil monstrosity.
Ugh. Can it get any worse? I think I am going to be sick.

ETA: I don't really have a problem with nude religious art, just bad and blasphemous nude and religious art.
I e-mailed the Vatican and told them the figure supposed to be the Blessed Mother look's like a transvestite, the nude man look's homo-erotic, the Angels are horrifying, and the corpse is ghastly. I then added Remove it now ! This is sick !

                                   Vatican can be e-mailed here http://www.vatican.com/contact
From LifeSite, my emphasis:



DOROTHY CUMMINGS MCLEAN
BLOGSCATHOLIC CHURCH Fri Dec 22, 2017 - 5:27 pm EST
Vatican’s naked nativity character is a slap in the face to those who are really poor

December 22, 2018 (LifeSiteNews) – The garish Nativity Scene, or presepe, in Saint Peter’s Square disturbed me when I first saw the photos, but my colleague’s in-depth report for LifeSiteNews (LSN) broke my heart. Many viewers had complained that the nude muscleman representing the Corporal Work of Mercy of 'clothing the naked' seemed homoerotic; the LSN report confirms that it was meant to be. 

What a slap in the face for those who shiver through the winters because they, or their parents, can’t afford extra clothing. What a slap in the face for those who are so ill their clothes don’t fit. What a slap in the face for those youngsters trapped in the sex trade and made to display themselves in skimpy, degrading clothing. And what a slap in the face for men and women stripped of their clothing during sexual attacks. For all this is what nakedness implies today. 

Rome is rarely cold, so it may not have been apparent to the jokers who thought up this year’s presepe what nakedness means to people in cold climates. In northern countries like Canada, you almost never see naked people in public, but you occasionally see adults and children shivering in the cold. Their coats are thinner than other people’s coats. They wear shoes, not boots, or boots so cheap and flimsy, they are lined with newspaper. Their gloveless hands are painfully red, so red it hurts to look at them. The temptation to jump out of your car and thrust your own gloves upon them may be irresistible.  

And I don’t know if any of the jokers who pondered this year’s presepe have ever been the primary caregiver for a desperately sick person. From March until October I fought my husband’s inexplicable loss of appetite with all his favourite fatty foods--including Christmas recipes--as he got thinner and thinner. I pleaded with doctors, with eventual success, to have him taken into hospital. But before he was finally admitted, it was I who washed him once a week. One day I helped him into a warm bath and he yelled in pain because the tub was so hard on his bones. And he wore the same pair of sweatpants day after day because they were the only pants that fit. 

As for victims of the sex trade and sexual assault, I cannot even begin to imagine the terror and the feelings of violation that come from being stripped of clothing--peeled like a banana--by someone who doesn’t care how you feel about it--or even hopes you hate it. When victims of sex-related murders are found in fields or in the woods, the first human impulse is to cover the naked or partially naked body. 

In first-century Palestine, people were cruelly taxed, had no social safety net beyond the family, and certainly had no psychiatric help. It is easy to imagine how those the poor Jesus walked among might end up absolutely--and literally--naked and depend on their neighbors for enough clothing to readmit them to normal social life. Clothing, as every generation of western parents since 1963 has had to explain to their teenage children, gives public dignity to the human person.

To be naked, or under-dressed, is to be vulnerable, unprotected, prey for the hot sun of the Holy Land, or the cold air of the north-west, or an opportunistic germ, or a greedy john, or an evil rapist. Nakedness is not nudity; nudity belongs to art, a title for which the crude figures of the Vatican presepe do not qualify. 

“The English language, with its elaborate generosity, distinguishes between the naked and the nude,” wrote the great art critic Sir Kenneth Clarke. “To be naked is to be deprived of our clothes, and the word implies some of the embarrassment most of us feel in that condition. The word ‘nude,’ on the other hand, carries, in educated usage, no uncomfortable overtone.”

Nudity in art may indeed be a celebration of the human form, and Christ instructed us to clothe the naked, not the nude. Indeed, some have been defending the muscle-bound figure of the Vatican presepe by saying he echoes the nudes of the Sistine Chapel. 

However, the figure in St Peter’s Square isn’t supposed to be a nude. It’s not supposed to celebrate the beauty of the human form. We’re being asked to believe that the naked man, pink with health and bursting with muscles, represents the vulnerability of nakedness.   

And I say this is nonsense. This figure is a slap in the face of the naked.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11