Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
Posted on 07/02/2024 12:53:54 PM PDT by Morgana
CV NEWS FEED// A controversial, explicit statue of the Blessed Mother giving birth was decapitated only four days after it was displayed in the “New Cathedral,” in the Austrian city of Linz.
The statue depicted the Blessed Mother in the moments before birth, with her abdomen and lower body completely exposed.
The statue was part of an exhibition celebrating the New Cathedral’s 100th anniversary, the news agency Kronen Zeitung reports. Completed in 1924, the cathedral is the largest in Austria, and it can fit up to 20,000 people.
Theologian Martina Resch explained during the exposition that the statue “is a strong commitment to the Incarnation of God. The story of salvation does not begin with Jesus, but with the Annunciation, and becomes vivid at the moment when new life is born.”
The artist, Esther Strauß, said she created the statue because she thought the moment was missing in the artistic history depicting the Blessed Mother. “Perhaps Mary is the woman in the world of whom there are the most paintings, drawings and sculptures. The majority of these depictions were made by men,” Strauß said.
“Why does the image that is missing stand out among them? The Nativity, which millions of people celebrate on December 24th, is not depicted in any painting or sculpture. When we talk about the birth of Christ, we imagine a child in a manger, but not his mother giving birth to him,” she added, justifying her sculpture.
In her personal website, Esther Strauß (1986) describes herself as “a performance and language artist.” “In 2015, Strauß slept and dreamed on Anna Freud’s psychoanalytic couch in the Sigmund Freud Museum in London. In 2016, she dug up her grandfather’s grave with her hands and washed herself with the earth that was his home.”
The news agency reported that the people responsible for the exhibition had thought the image “would cause discussion, but not the act of vandalism.”
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you.
On the one hand I get Miss Strauß, and yes the Virgin Mary did give birth to Jesus the same way every other woman has ever given birth. There is nothing wrong with this.
On some level I find this image to be pro life.
On the other hand, I don't think the BVM would want her lady part on display for all the world to see.
I had to laugh when I read this article because it remind me of a kid I remembered in Sunday School once. The teacher said to draw a picture of the Nativity with Mary, Joseph and Baby Jesus. So this one girl drew Mary actually giving birth to the baby Jesus. Mary was lying on her back in labor in a stable with the animals and Joseph around. Mary's face was screaming in pain and you could see baby Jesus coming out from under her dress. Just the look on Mary's face was priceless and the fact a young child drew it makes you think.
Yes, and Jesus took a dump every morning after his first cup of coffee. What about it? I fund such justifications to be a promotion of despair and a form of post-modern cynicism.
Is focusing on the profane going to get us into heaven?
Giving birth is not profane.
abortion is.
Tell you want I’m going to do, as the BVM’s self appointed obstetrician I’m going to lay a sheet over her body from waist down.
We still have the beauty of child birth and yet the BVM still has her modesty.
Don't confuse the subject. You posted the article, after all. A statue of the Virgin Mary, legs spread, giving birth, placed in any Church claiming to be Christian IS most certainly profane.
My mother and your mother, who did not give birth to the Son of God, would not want photos of their birth pangs posted on the internet. So why is it relevant here? This does not subtract from the holiness of motherhood, but this should not need an explanation
Exactly.
And this artist sounds like a disturbed individual.
The guy who created this needs to be treated like Muslims would treat someone who desecrated or defiled one of their holy symbols.
Yes, she’s a nut. One of her “artworks” was digging up her grandfather’s grave with her bare hands and spreading the dirt over her naked body.
Strauss, who designed the statue and commissioned Limberger to create it, said, “Whoever removed the head from the sculpture was very brutal.”
Repeating typical feminist, pro-abortion talking points, she added that “this violence is an expression of the fact that there are still people who question women’s right to their own bodies.”
In one of Strauss’ “performance artworks” featured on her website, she excavated her grandfather’s grave with her bare hand, undressed, and “washed” herself in the earth, which she described as her “grandfather’s home since 1993.”
The story of salvation does not begin with Jesus, but with the Annunciation, and becomes vivid at the moment when new life is born.”
The story of salvation began even before God spoke about it to the Old Testament Prophets. Salvation certainly did not begin with Mary.
Entirely disrespectful, IMHO. Nor do the legs look like those of a teenage virgin-- more like a MMA fighter.
Disgusting.
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.