Posted on 06/29/2015 6:07:43 AM PDT by MNDude
The decision by the Milwaukee Art Museum to acquire and prominently display a controversial portrait of Pope Benedict XVI fashioned from 17,000 colored condoms has created outrage among Catholics and others who see it as profoundly disrespectful, even blasphemous.
Many suggest that if a piece were as offensive to other faith traditions or communities it would not be tolerated, much less embraced.
Milwaukee Archbishop Jerome Listecki blasted the decision as insulting and callous. The museum acknowledged it has fielded about 200 complaints. A handful of patrons dropped their memberships; one longtime docent tendered her resignation; and at least one donor vowed never to support the museum financially again.
Museum officials said an equal number of people have voiced support for the piece and that memberships and pledges in general are growing. They said they regret that the portrait, by Shorewood artist Niki Johnson, has elicited such enmity. But they insist it was not their intent — nor the intent of the artist — to offend Catholics or anyone else. And they said they continue to enjoy the support of people of all faiths, including Catholics.
"This was never intended to be derisive, mocking or disrespectful of the pope," said museum board of trustees president Don Layden. "It was to have a conversation about AIDS and AIDS education. And my hope is when the piece appears in the museum that will be the focus of the discussion."
Jerry Topczewski, chief of staff for Listecki, called that explanation "a smoke screen."
"What's at play here is either an intentional attack on a faith tradition and its teachings or a publicity stunt for the artist," he said. "And we would be opposed to any faith tradition or religious leader being attacked in such a way."
(Excerpt) Read more at jsonline.com ...
I’ll be the first to say it... when is their condom made portrait of Mohammed going to be?
How can you say that with a straight face?
You won’t. And not just because artists are afraid of the repercussions from Muslims.
Might as well make a Mohammed picture out of Vodka bottles or bacon.
didn’t the Obamas decorate the White house Christmas Tree with condoms one year ???
“Who am I to judge?”
Pope Benedict? Why did the artist choose Pope Benedict? Pope Francis is the..........nah, I can’t say it.
They agreed to get the “portrait”. They knew what they were doing. It was intentional and deliberate.
They would never do one of the middle eastern death cult leader.
Ha haaaa!!! I hope The Catholic Church isn’t hoping the Men Seeking Men mediums are going to rush to its defense.
i think that was the Clinton’s.
I thought we were supposed to condemn offensive art.
The question coming to mind: How much tax dollars were used to create and then for the museum to acquire this “art”.
I presume the “artist” got grant money without having to link the effort to glowBull warming or mudslime outreach.
No doubt. Big business is foisting social upheaval on us, and Christianity stands in its way.
“...people have voiced support for the piece and that memberships and pledges in general are growing. “
That’s right! FOLLOW THE MONEY!
It’s very tasteless and seems to have only shock value, and was no doubt intended by the “artist” to insult Catholics. However, unless it’s paid for by public monies (tax dollars at some level), it’s probably going to stay there - as a monument to the bigotry and bad taste of the museum curators, if nothing else.
That said, I can’t imagine that the museum doesn’t take tax dollars.
This country is doomed. There is only a remnant now.
If it had been anti-gay, the number of dropped memberships would have been hundreds, not a “handful”. These incidents illustrate how much the country has changed in the secular direction.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.