cross-posted from: https://feddit.uk/post/7460553
A poster in the southern Spanish city of Seville that depicts a young, handsome Jesus wearing only a loincloth has unleashed a storm on social media, with some calling it an affront to the figure of Christ and others posting lewd remarks and memes poking fun at the image.
The poster by internationally recognized Seville artist Salustiano Garcia Cruz shows a fresh-faced Jesus without a crown of thorns, no suffering face and minuscule wounds on the hands and ribcage. It was commissioned and approved by the General Council of Brotherhoods, which organizes the renowned and immensely popular Holy Week processions ahead of Easter in Seville.
As soon as it was unveiled last week criticism of it went viral on social media and a debate erupted over how a resurrected Christ should be depicted. Many called it a disgrace, inappropriate, too pretty, modernist and out of line with Seville’s Easter tradition.
…
In another interview published by El Mundo daily, Garcia responded to criticism from conservative groups that the depiction of Jesus was “effeminate” or “homoerotic.”
“A gay Christ because he looks sweet and is handsome, come on! We are in the 21st century,” Garcia said.
You must log in or register to comment.
Don’t most churches already have a naked Jesus statue somewhere over the altar?
I doubt there’s a Catholic church without one.
Yeah but that one doesn’t have “fuck me” eyes
The eyes rolling back in the head you see on some of them is more of a “keep fucking me”
They aren’t rolling back in in his head. They are looking up at daddy.
The cropped pic in the article is useless; here’s a more illustrative one:
My gay ass doesn’t see an issue at all with this.
Then again it’s religion. And as we are currently experiencing, that is a shit show no matter what.
Straight here; I still don’t see how this is considered homoerotic. Is it because you can see the side of his legs? What’s next? His ankle will be visible? I’d like to see the people who look at it and say it is inappropriate.
Thank you I couldn’t understand at all the complaint. This makes a bit more sense but honestly still decently tasteful?
A body is a body
It’s one thing finding the image to be erotic, but what confuses me more is how it could be specifically homoerotic. Is that finger thing he’s doing a secret homo pick up sign that I don’t know about (but presumably conservative christians do…)? Were male christians aroused but not female ones?
IDK looks like all the other catholic imagery I saw growing up.
Maybe if you’re upset about stupid sexy Jesus, you have some introspection to do
I think the problem is that some men look at hot Jesus and feel… Funny. But they are Christian men… So it MUST be the image that’s not just erotic but homo-erotic. It is the image that’s giving them a semi, nothing to do with them, at all.
Yes, it’s very gay.
Wait until they find out he isn’t a white conservative.
Fanboys. Happens everytime a new marvel movie launches.
On the other hand: Nobody complained about the very light skin color?
That’s normal.
IRC before Constantine there was still a bit of a religious taboo of portraying Jesus (a god), due to the whole bible being against idolatry thing. So it was mostly metaphorical images of a buff shephard, if there were pictures at all, because Jesus was a shephard to his followers, and buff because why wouldn’t you make him buff?
After Constantine converted, Christianity was romanised. So the image of Jesus was partly inspired by images of Apollo and Dionysus (hence white, fit and feminine) then later Zeus (hence the authoritative beard). It’s not actually inspired by actual Jesus, whose appearance was (perhaps deliberately) not described properly in the New Testament.
The Church is quite good at doing market research and adapting its product for local markets and tastes, basically. See also the whole Christmas tree and Saturnalia gift giving thing, which became Christian traditions.
I’d argue against the “good at market research” thing - for centuries individual participation was all but was mandatory, there was no sanctioned competition, and generally the church fought any change until outside actors (see: Constantine, Tyndale, Luther, etc) shifted the reality beneath them, or co-opted nascent and foreign pagan/religious elements that were popular. The original Bible doesn’t prescribe the feasting and celebration that the Christian calendar is now known for
In that era “market research” was not targeted at laypeople. They were simply expected to obey.
Meanwhile, Jesus in 20 centuries of art:
Effeminate? That’s the problem? In comparison to your manly, butch, hairy Jesus You usually see?
Edit: Not to mention, that a supposedly middle eastern man is white as a sheet with rosy, very kissable, lips.
TBF I’d love to see a Wolverine style, totally ripped, bear sized Jesus covered in hair with a snarl, the broken bits of cross still being nailed to his hands and feet.
EDIT: I wouldn’t go as far as to get some AI image creator just for this but if any of you peeps have one, I’m curious what it would come up with.
Wait till those Über-Christians find out his skin was most probably - you’ll have to be strong now - not white.
Or that he was naked as shit while being crucified. For aaaaaaall the dudes to see.
Sounds kinda gay to me.
It’s only gay if you push back.
In his hands, I saw a great golden spear, and at the iron tip there appeared to be a point of fire. This he plunged into my heart several times so that it penetrated to my entrails. When he pulled it out I felt that he took them with it, and left me utterly consumed by the great love of God. The pain was so severe that it made me utter several moans. The sweetness caused by this intense pain is so extreme that one cannot possibly wish it to cease, nor is one’s soul content with anything but God. This is not a physical but a spiritual pain, though the body has some share in it—even a considerable share.
Girlfriend had a wet dream and really tried to make it holy because somebody probably heard her several moans.
Reported for being NSFW.
Not Spiritual For Work?
It’s wackos all the way down
Oh my!!! 😤
I mean, what do expect? The guy lured other dudes to give up their lives and follow him around, saying he was making them “fishers of men.”
Fisters*
King of kings. Pimp of pimps.
And yet Jesus as a symbol represents ALL people, not just straight, masculine, or white people. Why can’t he be represented this way? Also I beg to differ that there is anything “erotic” about this picture, other than his having a nice chest. His face is weird, and far too feminine to represent any kind of ideal to gay people (at least not to me. As a gay man, I’m not much interested in feminine men).
I don’t understand worshipping s dude who lived 2000 years ago who preached love by your fellow man, but you twist it to be the most bigoted philosophy. Mr. Rogers, despite his immense kindness and ability to forgive would be ashamed to call you a Christian.
I hope they don’t find out about this annual event
Is was there the year the Pope came second. Julio came first like usual.
I’m sorry… are depictions of Jesus not supposed to be erotic?
And just to add to the discussion
deleted by creator
