…and this is a 
My sweet lord
Category: Art • Humor • Kooks • Religion
Posted on: March 30, 2007 9:41 AM, by PZ Myers
Bill Donohue is hopping mad again — he's got another wild hare up his butt and is fuming over another insult to his very Catholic sensibilities:
Catholic League head Bill Donohue called it "one of the worst assaults on Christian sensibilities ever".
The latest affront is a life-size sculpture of a naked man on a cross, made out of 200 pounds of chocolate, on display in New York just in time for Easter.
Come on, Bill, get over it. Shouldn't Abu Ghraib have been "one of the worst assaults on Christian sensibilities ever"? How about the injustice of our war in the Iraq? What about the ongoing denial of civil rights to homosexuals? There are a lot of horrors in the world that might prompt a good Christian man to unleash his righteous fury, but a giant chocolate Jesus really isn't one of them.
Besides, the only real dilemma here is which piece you're going to start nibbling on first.
Aww, somebody already ate the big bunny ears!
Comments
Posted by: bc | March 30, 2007 9:55 AM
Maybe the problem is that it shows "Jesus without a loincloth"? I mean, these conservative Christians really have a hard time thinking of Jesus having naughty bits.
Posted by: andyo | March 30, 2007 9:56 AM
Oh, man I'm cracking up here, thanks for that. I remember a few years back when a catholic brother was talking to me and some friends about some theater burnings in Brazil at the re-opening of The Last Temptation of Christ. We were saying how zealots are crazy, when he surprised us with the argument: "it's understandable, imagine if someone insulted your mother, wouldn't you be as pissed?" Oh I was just a stupid teenager, but what would I have told him now...
By the way, last word I heard from that brother (and this may be apocryphal, but its potential for hilarity if it were true is just too much to avoid telling) is that the congregation sent him to Rome, I guess the Vatican, to run some errands or something, and the guy never came back. Damn those Italian women (my best guess, come on, what else could it be?).
Posted by: Bob ryuu | March 30, 2007 9:58 AM
Didn't Piss Chirst cause a huge ruckus? It looks really interesting though..
Posted by: dorid | March 30, 2007 10:03 AM
so, no chocolate Lamb for Easter this year?
Posted by: zadig | March 30, 2007 10:03 AM
I don't see the problem here... Christianity is forever munching on bits of their Lord, including His body and blood, not to mention all of the symbolism of eating lamb at Easter. So now it's chocolate... big deal.
Posted by: Dutch Vigilante | March 30, 2007 10:04 AM
Bill Donohue wouldn't be half as angry if they had used white chocolate.
Isn't it silly to make this when it is going to be summer pretty soon? I mean doesn't it melt... well -I- hope it does, I'd pay to see that.
(My sensibilities would be under assualt since most chocolate is made from cacau(sp) which is produced by slave labour in Africa.)
Posted by: Andrea | March 30, 2007 10:04 AM
This has to be "one of the worst assaults on CHOCOLATE ever". I'm deeply offended...
Posted by: Rebecca Watson | March 30, 2007 10:06 AM
Mmmmm, sacrilicious . . .
Posted by: tristero | March 30, 2007 10:08 AM
What makes it so offensive to Donohue is that it depicts a black Jesus.
Posted by: Frank Anderson | March 30, 2007 10:10 AM
This was my first thought, too. For a bunch of people that claim to believe in transubstantiation, I don't see what the big deal is. Apparently chocolate just isn't as serious as unleavened bread...?
Posted by: Krystalline Apostate | March 30, 2007 10:12 AM
Will from hereon in be known as the Ghirardelli Heresy, & the Willy Wonka Transubstantiation.
Posted by: Caledonian | March 30, 2007 10:16 AM
It's the similarity to actual practices that's causing the offense in the first place.
People tend to reject violently concepts which are almost, but not quite, the same as their own sociopolitical identification tags. If they're too different it doesn't register as competition/conflict and there's no reason to respond.
Posted by: windy | March 30, 2007 10:18 AM
Remember the miraculous chocolate Virgin Mary - no one thought that was offensive. What's the logic here? Chocolate Jesus is a product of intelligent design and chocolate Mary was a chance product of physical processes, shouldn't religionists like the first one better? :)
Posted by: Elliott | March 30, 2007 10:18 AM
It is certainly more tasteful, in several senses of that word, than Andres Serrano's Piss Christ.
Posted by: tintenfisch | March 30, 2007 10:27 AM
Anybody remember the Tom Waites song "Chocolate Jesus"?
Posted by: Scott Hatfield, OM | March 30, 2007 10:33 AM
(with apologies to Hank Azaria)
Mmmmmm.....chocolate Jesus.....(drool)
Posted by: Carlie | March 30, 2007 10:33 AM
Oh, how could you leave the title of the sculpture out? I've been listening to a lot of George Harrison lately, so I thought "My Sweet Lord" was especially amusing.
Posted by: Carlie | March 30, 2007 10:35 AM
And of course, the real question is how many calories are in that thing?
Posted by: Francesco Franco | March 30, 2007 10:41 AM
Yes, yes. Saw this one posted in all the Italian newspapers for some reason. Hmm...Italy, Catholicism...I wonder why??
Anyway, it was encouraging to note that the "artist" (if that's the right term in this case) and provocateur turns out to be an Italian-American or Italian-Canadian or whatever. The
Vatican has yet to comment; too busy organizing anti-gay "Family Day" manifestations and trying to keep at least Italian politicians firmly under control.
Posted by: Rey Fox | March 30, 2007 10:47 AM
Scott: Dan Castellaneta is the voice of Homer.
Posted by: Ray S | March 30, 2007 10:47 AM
I was given to understand that Jesus was without sin, thus how could he have had naughty bits? Perhaps there's some endowment jealousy at work here. But given that the Y chromosome would have come from God . . .
Posted by: Uber | March 30, 2007 10:49 AM
This Donohue fellow is a loon, plain and simple. In my view he is worse than the Dobson's of the world by far. He is offended by anything other than total acceptence of his version of anything. You can't offend his sensibilities simply because he is far from sensible to begin with. He is a parody of himself in the world's fastest dying religion.
Posted by: Paul | March 30, 2007 10:49 AM
I had much the same thought as PZ, only my first example was the holocaust - they may have been Jews, but ultimately they were all God's children (I'm told), and to kill 6 million of them would seem like a pretty big insult.
Posted by: rrt | March 30, 2007 10:52 AM
Seems to me Donohue took the bait hook, line and sinker. Or am I wrong to think that at least part of the purpose of this thing is to (somewhat eccentrically) challenge Christian grumbling over the pagan symbolism (chocolate bunnies, etc.) so heavily associated with Easter?
Posted by: John | March 30, 2007 10:55 AM
This is not something worth getting mad about, but then again, we're talking about Bill Donahue here.
Posted by: Cogito | March 30, 2007 10:56 AM
Heh heh. Thanks for those awful, awful Easter puns, PZ.I like Caledonian's point. I will never forget an experience in ninth grade, when I was still Catholic. Our science teacher gave a presentation on prehistoric man, and mentioned there were indications of ritualistic cannibalism. After we all went, "Ew!" he tossed in the notion that that is exactly what modern Catholics participates in every Sunday. My mind was blown. I didn't become an atheist till about twenty years later, but I'm sure that planted a seed that was part of the process.
Posted by: Eamon Knight | March 30, 2007 10:58 AM
(Damn. Someone beat me to the joke about "Eat my body" ;-)
I don't get the problem with this: what's special about stone, wood, bronze etc. that makes it OK to make crucifixes out of them, but not out of milk chocolate? (But white chocolate, now that would be blasphemous).
Art is largely a mystery to me, but I suppose this sculpture could be taken as a statement (perhaps even a protest) on the conflation of the Christian significance of Easter with the cute-bunny-chocolate-eggs side of it.
Posted by: The Science pundit | March 30, 2007 11:00 AM
In all my years of Catholic school I was never even once told that you couldn't eat chocolate on Lent. I don't see the problem here.
Posted by: thickslab | March 30, 2007 11:02 AM
Would it be wrong of me to say I want to suck Chocolate Jesus's cock?
Posted by: tacitus | March 30, 2007 11:05 AM
Sigh. Donohoe is showing off his Muslim-envy again.
Posted by: Molly, NYC | March 30, 2007 11:05 AM
Bill Donohue is hopping mad again . . .
Bill Donahue not only gets hopping mad for a living, but he figures that if he gets sufficiently and publicly pissed-off over the right trivialities, Christ will personally welcome him into heaven.
He's old enough, and Catholic enough, to have participated in the Feast of the Circumcision, which was a celebration of Jesus's bris, and by extension, an acknowledgement that He had a willy. (His foreskin was also considered an important relic; up until the last century or so, Catholic lore held that the body parts of saints and Supreme Beings' offspring didn't deteriorate after death, so they figured it was still around, someplace.) So Donahue shouldn't be worked up about the anatomical correctness, but I'm sure that's a huge part of it--especially since Chocolate Jesus has a considerable package.
(BTW--wasn't that a Tom Waits song?)
Posted by: J-Dog | March 30, 2007 11:05 AM
So is Donohue pissed because Little Jesus is bigger than Little Bill's or smaller?
I think Pope Sturbanfurher Benedict needs to put Bill in the cooler. Maybe even send him to the "showers", if you know what I mean?
Posted by: Vitis01 | March 30, 2007 11:09 AM
There is a fantastic Tom Waits song on the Mule Variations album called Chocolate Jesus.
excerpt-
Don't go to church on sunday
Don't get on my knees to pray
Don't memorize the books of the bible
I got my own special way
But I know jesus loves me
Maybe just a little bit more
I fall down on my knees every sunday
At zerelda lees candy store
Well its got to be a chocolate jesus
Make me feel good inside
Got to be a chocolate jesus
Keep me satisfied
Posted by: CalGeorge | March 30, 2007 11:11 AM
I hope they are going to make an 8 oz. version. They could call it the "Word Made Chocolate Bar" or the "Take, Eat, This is My Body Bar."
Mommy, mommy, look, I bit off Jesus's peepee!
Posted by: aiabx | March 30, 2007 11:13 AM
I guess Bill suffers from the same temptation that I do; sneaking in late at night, breaking off Christ's head and eating it. I was never an "ears-first" kinda guy.
I also thought of the Tom Waits song. I wonder if this Jesus would make a nice parfait?
Posted by: Will E. | March 30, 2007 11:16 AM
Wondering about calories? Check it out: http://www.esquire.com/the-side/opinion/chocolatejesus032807
Posted by: Jyotsana | March 30, 2007 11:16 AM
Is it hollow or solid? As a kid I always felt ripped-off by all the hollow chocolate bunnies... :)
Posted by: Observer | March 30, 2007 11:25 AM
Yeah, and they don't like being laughed at or parodied, although there's tons of stuff out there, be it soap or other objects, that do this. It's another "attack the art exhibit in Manhattan" brouha for attnention, I'm gathering.
Posted by: spugbrap | March 30, 2007 11:25 AM
On the subject of what happens when Chocolate Jesus melts... I remember seeing candles shaped like Jesus and angels, in a store, a long time ago. I couldn't help but think that it just seemed wrong (at least for a Christian) to burn these things.
You can't really even consider transubstantiation, in the case of a Jesus candle, because it's not even food. It's wax melting into a puddle, and that sure seems like a waste of perfectly good Jesus goo.
Posted by: Greg Peterson | March 30, 2007 11:26 AM
Choco-Jesus is hung. I just hope he doesn't get wood.
Oh, dear. I hope that's not in bad taste. I definitely want Jesus to taste good.
Posted by: Blake Stacey, OM | March 30, 2007 11:26 AM
Damn the Internet for making all of my jokes first! About all I have left is a memory of Bill Hicks's Rant in E-Minor.
Posted by: Jeff | March 30, 2007 11:27 AM
Hellfire would be especially useful here - Jesus fondue! I'll bring the strawberries.
Posted by: CalGeorge | March 30, 2007 11:29 AM
Be there or be square...
March 29, 2007
ARTIST WANTS PUBLIC TO EAT JESUS FIGURE
The Catholic League has learned that artist Cosimo Cavallaro has invited the public to show up at midnight on April 1 to take a bite of his 6-foot tall chocolate sculpture of a crucified Jesus with his genitals exposed; it is scheduled to be shown during Holy Week, from April 1 to April 7.
http://www.catholicleague.org/07press_releases/quarter_1/070329_artist_wants.htm
Posted by: Rey Fox | March 30, 2007 11:32 AM
That first picture threw me for a loop, it looks more like Zombie Jesus.
You know, one of the really nice things about being an atheist is not being slavishly beholden to symbols. Have to wonder how Bill would react if someone told him that.
Posted by: tim gueguen | March 30, 2007 11:34 AM
Seems to me having a bunch of chocolate sit unwrapped in an open area for an extended period is unhygenic even if one assumes it hasn't been touched by the "I never wash my hands, ever" crowd. I'll pass.
Posted by: Eric | March 30, 2007 11:38 AM
Abu Ghraib as one of the worst assaults on christian sensabilities? PLEASE. What a stupid idea. Abu Ghraib was a frat prank compared to things people have done to each other in the name of religion. Go study a history book about the crusades in the middle ages.
The chocolate jesus figure thing is in poor taste, but thats about it. Frankly I think its irrelevant.
Posted by: Blake Stacey, OM | March 30, 2007 11:39 AM
You know, I've been looking for an excuse to visit New York, but Tim Gueguen has a point. I might be more in the market for bite-sized Chocolate Jesus figurines. Little. . . figurines. . . with their tiny. . . little. . . heads. . . {chomp) (mmrrgf) (mmmmm).
Posted by: Babs | March 30, 2007 11:40 AM
I don't know why he's so concerned about this - Jesus and the Virgin Mary show up in food all the time! He's even shown up in a fish stick. If I were Jesus, I'd be happy to be in chocolate instead of frozen cod.
http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/WolfFiles/story?id=307227&page=1
Posted by: Peter McGrath | March 30, 2007 11:42 AM
That'll be Jesus chocolatebar Joseph.
Posted by: Sonja | March 30, 2007 11:44 AM
Isn't the really offensive thing that a major religion has a tortured, dying, naked man as its symbol?
Whether made of solid gold or solid milk chocolate, it's the subject matter itself that's grotesque.
Posted by: Richard Harris | March 30, 2007 11:48 AM
Bob ryuu, (#3), I thought piss was associated with Muhammad, not Christ - you know - the prophet Muhammad, piss be upon him.
Posted by: Mike Haubrich | March 30, 2007 11:49 AM
"I don't care if it rains or freezes
Long as I got my chocolate Jesus..."
Sweaty Hand Luke
Posted by: Ithika | March 30, 2007 11:57 AM
Peter McGrath:
Go and sit in the corner and think about what you've done. That was awful ;-)
Posted by: Jud | March 30, 2007 11:59 AM
Wouldn't it be the navel rather than the schlong that causes doctrinal problems?
Posted by: Theo Bromine | March 30, 2007 12:06 PM
You can't really even consider transubstantiation, in the case of a Jesus candle, because it's not even food. It's wax melting into a puddle, and that sure seems like a waste of perfectly good Jesus goo.
Speaking pedantically: there *is* transubstantiation (well, actually it's chemistry) when a candle burns. The wax is consumed as it reacts with the oxygen in the air, producing light and heat (and buckyballs). Notice that the amount of wax left after a candle has "burned down" (ie when the wick is no longer able to conduct liquid wax to the flame) is nowhere near the amount that was in the original candle.
Posted by: Hank Fox | March 30, 2007 12:11 PM
...
...
If it's life-sized, and weighs 200 pounds, it's probably pretty much solid, not hollow like the chocolate Easter bunnies.
I'll bet anything that somewhere out there is a devout Christian outraged because this son-o-god has a NAVEL.
...
I think the real sacrilege here is that it's obviously MILK chocolate, instead of heavenly, soul-satisfying DARK.
...
...
Posted by: BlueIndependent | March 30, 2007 12:16 PM
Man is this dumb. It doesn't even look like the common images of Jesus, save the posing of the figure in such a way that recalls Jesus on the cross. My guess is either chocolate is too difficult to form into a full head of hair and a beard, and that a loin cloth produces interesting technical challenges for the stuff.
This is lame. Probably an artist just looking for some attention. I am surprised however that *THIS* was targeted as "one of the worst assaults on Christian sensibilities ever". I would've thought the Virgin Mary smeared with feces and urine would've been moreso, but I guess that's why the religion is called Christianity, not Maryianity.
Posted by: Blake Stacey, OM | March 30, 2007 12:22 PM
No no no, it's Adam who didn't have a navel. Jesus was conceived by God-sperm but gestated inside a young woman's womb. He didn't pop out of God's thigh like a Jewish Dionysus, you know.
Posted by: Ginger Yellow | March 30, 2007 12:27 PM
You'd have thought someone like Donohue wouold be in favour of an artist bringing Easter back to the crucifixion. What the hell is there to be upset about? Seriously, what's his fucking problem? If I were a Christian I'd be proud to have it on display.
Posted by: The Unmitigated Gaul | March 30, 2007 12:30 PM
Who is to say that the statue is meant to represent Jeebus, anyway, and not one of the millions of other poor wretches who suffered this method of torture/execution under the Assyrians, Persians, Romans and others?
Christians seem to think that Jesus was the only person ever put to death in this manner. Sadly, that was not the case; it was an unfortunately common method of execution in the ancient world.
Bill Donohue needs to get a frickin' life, fer Chrissakes.
Posted by: Colugo | March 30, 2007 12:34 PM
How novel.
cigarette Jesus
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/collective/A1002268
Jesus in a toaster
http://tinyurl.com/3xlhyq
'forgive yourself' Jesus
http://www.londonist.com/archives/2006/02/review_gilbert.php
Jesus slingshot
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:ToMegaTherion.jpg
The Onion had a masterful take on this:
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/28377/print/
I would be more impressed if some of those now cackling over the choco-Jesus hadn't been so gushingly sensitive and respectful when it came to relatively mild caricatures of Mohammed.
(And if your rationale is that Christians are everywhere oppressors and Muslims are everywhere oppressed - but ask Southern Sudanese and Southern Thai Buddhists for a different opinion - recall that Muslims are also offended by disrespectful portrayals of Jesus. The playwright of gay Jesus play Corpus Cristi was the subject of a British Muslim death fatwah and Ramsey Clark had to apologize to the Muslim community when he said that Jesus would have been called a terrorist.)
Posted by: quork | March 30, 2007 12:41 PM
Amen.
Posted by: Don | March 30, 2007 1:02 PM
For all those who referenced Tom;
http://youtube.com/watch?v=1wfamPW3Eaw
Posted by: stogoe | March 30, 2007 1:02 PM
I'm glad someone corrected Scott Hatfield re: Dan Castellaneta.
Posted by: ice weasel | March 30, 2007 1:11 PM
These are same folks who find images of their holy mother on tortillas, right?
One has to wonder when people won't just respond to assholes like donohue with, "oh not that idiot again".
Posted by: James F. Trumm | March 30, 2007 1:17 PM
Does Bill Donohue travel around the country looking for things to be outraged about, or does he have a staff to do that for him?
Posted by: CalGeorge | March 30, 2007 1:27 PM
Is it hollow or solid? As a kid I always felt ripped-off by all the hollow chocolate bunnies... :)
Jesus was such a softy. He ought to have a marshmallow center.
That or a cherry cordial-type filling that would ooze out lusciously when he (it?) is poked in the ribs.
Posted by: Kseniya | March 30, 2007 1:29 PM
James, don't you have a sister named Tanith? I think she works for Donohue.
You know, for a religion that's not supposed to worship idols'n'stuff, its members sure do get worked up about the choice of medium when it's rendering time. (And, as others here have pointed out, very arbitrarily so. I mean, grilled cheese? Come on now.)
Posted by: Great White Wonder | March 30, 2007 1:30 PM
Chocolate Jesus is sinfully delicious.
Did you notice that his balls are Cadbury cream eggs? Nice touch.
Posted by: dustbubble | March 30, 2007 1:40 PM
A statue.
Huh.
There was me getting quite excited when I saw the pics.I thought they'd found another Oetzi.
Posted by: reboho | March 30, 2007 1:42 PM
Maybe he could make one out of the marshmallow stuff they use to make Peeps. Then we could stick it in the microwave and feed thousands.
Posted by: Chris Bell | March 30, 2007 1:54 PM
Don, thanks for posting the Tom Waits link. He's f*ing incredible.
Posted by: Carlie | March 30, 2007 1:56 PM
Why isn't he on a big peanut butter cross or something? (You got cross on my Jesus! You got Jesus on my cross!) Strange pose to be in if one isn't actually hanging from it.
As for my earlier comment, I see that it is actually the post title. My bad.
Posted by: Cheeto | March 30, 2007 1:58 PM
As a practical matter, I would eat the arms first. He takes up too much space, and would be easier to wrap up and store after the arms are gone. (Do they make refigerated coffins?)
Posted by: Dr X | March 30, 2007 2:01 PM
Donahue is a publicity hog and a nasty moral cretin in my book. I'm a Christian and I get what this piece is about. I find nothing objectionable about it. It's a little jarring for a moment, but it's meaning is clear almost instantly.
Donahue should be glad that the commercialization and typical treatment of the crucifixion and resurrection are being mocked, but he's too busy making sure his own loud-mouth defense of an institution is paramount instead.
How about someone making a big fat, dark bitter chocolate Donahue?
Posted by: Ginger Yellow | March 30, 2007 2:29 PM
"I would be more impressed if some of those now cackling over the choco-Jesus hadn't been so gushingly sensitive and respectful when it came to relatively mild caricatures of Mohammed. "
Cackling? I'm mystified as to how it's supposed to be disrespectful.
Posted by: Ted Powell | March 30, 2007 2:30 PM
Re being deeply offended:
http://www.jesusandmo.net/2007/02/08/race/
Posted by: Ebonmuse | March 30, 2007 2:30 PM
There's an unintentionally hilarious example of this in LaHaye and Jenkins' Kingdom Come, the sequel to the Left Behind books, which takes place in a literal heavenly kingdom on Earth. One of the very first things the authors take pains to emphasize is how Jesus has gotten rid of all that yucky sex stuff, so that everyone who remains only loves each other in a neutral, platonic, non-physical sort of way.
Posted by: rawbob | March 30, 2007 2:36 PM
Let's see.
Tasteless and tasty -- all at once.
Brilliant.
Posted by: Peter McGrath | March 30, 2007 2:42 PM
The chocolate is all wrong. The crucified Christ needs to be made from bread dough so that He can rise again on the third day.
Posted by: Krystalline Apostate | March 30, 2007 2:47 PM
Colugo:
but ask Southern Sudanese and Southern Thai Buddhists for a different opinion
Or the atheistic Tamil Tigers.
Posted by: Sonja | March 30, 2007 2:56 PM
Oops, I forgot. I'm American and I'm supposed to be FOR torture now.
Just not death by chocolate.
Posted by: Carlie | March 30, 2007 2:57 PM
Peter wins. Next Sunday a risen dough Jesus will be all I'll be able to think about.
Posted by: DragonScholar | March 30, 2007 2:58 PM
You know, whats odd is that this sculpture didn't make me belittle Christ or hate Catholics. It made me think about things - about the meaning of communion (I mean in a way, if the public ate it it would be a kind of weird communion), about the commercial aspects of Easter, etc. It made me think, in short, about interesting symbolism, culture, etc.
Donohue however sees attacks everywhere - because he wants to - and assumes what he sees is somehow literal fact. While me, a person he'd probably call an atheist, had a momentary pause to think about symbolism in people's lives.
This is a man berefet of both imagination, humor, and humanity.
Posted by: Missionary Position | March 30, 2007 3:03 PM
For laughs, check out the Catholic League's Annual Reports on Anti-Catholicism, which apparently involves any statement obliquely critical of the Church. The cartoons and anything involving Christopher Hitchens can be especially funny.
Posted by: The Physicist | March 30, 2007 3:10 PM
Tha't nothing compared to some of the depictions of Christ crucified in our churches. Me thinks he protest to much. I see the symbolism, though Ours are made out of wood, his is made out of chocolate, and really symbolizes the current cultures self absorbed fascination with a bunny and easter egg hunts rather than the risen Lord.
If he want's to be offended by something he should be offended by the culture within the Catholic church as well as the country which idolizes materialism.
Posted by: Colugo | March 30, 2007 3:13 PM
Tamil Tigers are mostly Hindu and fighting a Buddhist-dominated state. In Burma, Muslims and Christians are persecuted by the nominally Buddhist regime. Buddhists are currently oppressed in Communist atheist Vietnam. Bosnian Muslims were slaughtered by Orthodox Christian Serb forces in the 90s. And so on.
My point is, some fire-breathing atheists tend to become meek lambs when the faith in question is not Judeo-Christian - perhaps influenced, for all I know, by Liberation Theology.
Posted by: Satar Jabar | March 30, 2007 3:23 PM
Abu Ghraib was a celebration of Christian sensibilities:
This faithful soldier was just following Paul's directive from 2 Thessalonians 1:8-9:
He was also following the practices established by evangelical Christian General Boykin at Abu Ghraib. Abu Ghraib is in every way the face of contemporary American Christianity.
Posted by: Krystalline Apostate | March 30, 2007 3:48 PM
Colugo:
Ah, no on the former, yes on the latter.
I did a post on this recently.
I torch them all w/my heated halitosis.
Posted by: Pieter B | March 30, 2007 4:02 PM
Well, wouldn't you know . . . the Chocolate Jesus show has been closed.
Posted by: Thony C. | March 30, 2007 4:10 PM
"What makes it so offensive to Donohue is that it depicts a black Jesus."
So what's the problem? The only physical description of Jesus, from Josephus, says that he was a negro.
Posted by: Kseniya | March 30, 2007 4:14 PM
"The hotel and the gallery were overrun Thursday with angry phone calls and e-mails about the exhibit. Semler said the calls included death threats over the work of Cavallaro, who was described as disappointed by the cancellation."
Hypocritical fools!
Posted by: M. Derosier | March 30, 2007 4:15 PM
I can think of a particularly offensive place to start eating that... Because I'm pretty sure that the Christians would find it offensive if I, a male, went straight for his Peter, Paul and John. You know, with the homosexual overtones, and such. And the interracial thing, too.
Everyone else should find my pun offensive to the senses, and for that I apologize.
Posted by: su | March 30, 2007 4:26 PM
ill trade you a bite of my virgin mary grilled cheese sandwich for a bite of your chocolate jesus.
oompa loompa
Posted by: AnInGe | March 30, 2007 4:46 PM
Having read this blog yesterday, I looked for further news about this in today's (Fridays) paper. The only item I could find that was vaguely related concerned the Archdiocese of San Diego agreeing in their chapter 11 bankrupcy petition to a $94 Million pay-out to 118 victims of sexual abuse by priests. I notice that the Catholic League masthead contains their policy: "The Catholic League is the nation's largest Catholic civil rights organization. It defends individual Catholics and the institutional Church from defamation and discrimination." I wonder if they came to the defense of the abused children in San Diego (or elsewhere). Their Catholic sensibilities must have been absolutely shattered by those sexual assaults.
Posted by: Thr secret government rhubarb experiment | March 30, 2007 4:49 PM
Mmmm...Jesus