[Land of the Irish]

Please spare yourself the indifferentist argument that all human nakedness is pornographic

Why don't you post pictures of the naked Blessed Virgin or a naked St. Joseph and call it holy?

[Romulus]

That's a truly disgusting suggestion.

To do so would be unscriptural and -- for that, as well as for other reasons -- theologically disordered. Mary and Joseph's marriage of unreserved mutual gift of self did not require a sexual dimension to be fully authentic.

The images you propose would convey nothing but the trivial and negligible point that from time to time human nature requires all of us to be naked. The fact that Mary and Joseph in their humanity were not exempt from these exigencies is not theologically meaningful. Being fully human, Our Lord also made himself subject to these demands, but there too his nakedness is not "interesting" unles it conveys a theological truth, as in the iconography of his infancy, baptism, or yes, crucifixion.

[BlackVeil]

Why don't you post pictures of the naked Blessed Virgin or a naked St. Joseph and call it holy?

I don't know about St Joseph, but there have been depictions of Mary which used to be considered holy enough for the churches, but got thrown out in the 19th century. In the south of France, ancient statues of the Virgin Mary in childbirth were destroyed, and those of her breastfeeding were hidden away.

Personally, I don't like nudity in art, especially religious art. But there is a long tradition of it in very celebrated religious places. Maybe it helps to look at images as always being symbolic.