Come on y’all, if the word Playboy wasn’t behind it, it could be considered a nice, art photograph. It is less nudity than one would see in many images of the Virgin Mary that are considered classical deceptions.
It is not the nudity (or lack thereof) which is the question.
Classical paintings of the Blessed Virgin Mary nursing her Son were painted to depict her motherhood and devotion, Playboys images are designed to sexualize her (and realize that Catholicism teaches that the Virgin Mary REMAINED a virgin and was therefore nonsexual). There is a huge difference.
Baloney!
I found the entire issue online (PDF) and am downloading it now. I will see just how “immoral” it is (probably not that bad)...
I agree.
Playboy is behind it. Playboy is a magazine that plays on lust by using women as sexual objects. They are mocking Jesus and his mother by turning her into a sexual object, especially when the Bible says lust is wrong.