±«Óãtv

Well said, Will. It's an attack on freedom of speech. Religious bullying.

Like Will and David, I despise the Catholic League for what I would also categorise as religious bullying. I don't understand what's offensive about it in any case; because it's made out of chocolate? What makes chocolate an offensive material to build a sculpture of Christ from?

But this was a fine and rightful decision by the hotel who displayed the sculpture. As I wrote in my blog late last night upon discovering that it had been banned:

"The Roger Smith Hotel where High-Calorie Jesus was on display is a private business. It was their own voluntary arrangement with the artist that permitted him to display his curious confectionary crucifix in their lobby. If Cavallaro wants to buy some property, open his own art gallery and create an entire nativity scene out of marshmallows and fudge like some kind of Willy Wonka utopia, that's his own right, and he should be entirely free to do that.

"It wasn't the Catholic League that removed the sculpture. (Although I wouldn't have put it past any of them to come in with a Bunsen Burner and torch the thing to the ground if all else failed.) It was a hotel, which concluded that they were losing business over it. This is the perfect place to define rights, and to define freedom:

"The artist is free to create his art. The hotel is free to display it in their building. The Catholic League is free to moan about it. The hotel is free to kick him out when they find that they're losing business over it. And the artist is free to apply elsewhere for display, or to open his own gallery. Incredibly, the government in this case appears to be blame-free from a libertarian perspective. They've simply allowed free people to make free decisions in this free country.

"Now. Isn't freedom a wonderful thing?"

The Roman Catholic’s are a bit peeved with Cosimo because they didn’t think of the idea first it could have made them a lot of money along with all their other inventions instead of buying Easter eggs they could be buying a chocolate Jesus with a splash of colour a sacred heart and with a blessing from the Pope. Then who would be protesting?

Christian hippy, do you have to turn everything into a stupid sectarian comment? Give us a break, mate, we've had enough of that rubbish in Northern Ireland. Try to keep focused on the question: free speech. Otherwise, people simply won't take YOU seriously.

Exactly free speech free speech for who.

I think in the annals of censorship, this will go down as a minor league event. Is it any worse than ±«Óãtv not publishing anything bad I send about their kidnapped collegue? It's the same thing really. It's their site, it offends their sensibilities, they have a right to withhold it. (You'd think it was a matter of life and death.) I could just as easily have it published on countless other sites. Same for the hotel and the artist. Maybe they felt that since it had offended so many people, it was bad for business. I will frankly admit the artist's motives were probably a lot less malicious than mine but that hardly matters, the effect is the same. None of this can compare with the censorship and self censorship now surrounding cartoons offensive to Moslems. I'm very disappointed this happend in Denmark and not in the US. If anyone should have offended them to the point of them killing each other, it should have been America. Wouldn't that be a lot better than us having to kill them ourselves? Ready....aim....sketch!

I understand the Vatican is believed to have the largest collection of pornography which it calles "erotica" in the world stored in its basements. Too bad we won't get a peek at it, only those who are holy enough to withstand the temptations of the flesh are allowed near it, us mere mortals haven't got a chance. After all, it is for our own good (isn't it always?)

Christian Hippy, I had exactly the same idea you did. A chance to make money. What was an affrontery could be turned around to become an icon advertising Christianity, a "sweet reminder." Of course the commercial version would have to be slightly less "anatomically correct." Here in America, our culture is slightly less "earthy" than it is say in France. I think the problem is that the sculptor himself would probably have already protected the legal rights to this particular image. In the US, copyright infringement can have real penalties. Breaking God's law is not a crime here. Breaking Federal law is an entirely separate matter. Render unto Ceasar, that which is Ceasar's.

Who introduced the adoration of the cross, images and relics A.D.788 was it not the Roman Catholic Church, so what is the difference from genuflecting in front of a stone crucifix or a chocolate one NONE you can’t pick and choose what is idolatry Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, no..... Idolater, hath any inheritance in the
Kingdom of Christ and of God. Wherefore, my dearly beloved, flee from idolatry, But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

Cardinal J H Newman in his book The Development of the Christian Religion admits that images are of pagan origin. (Page 359)

I think the problem with a lot of modern art is that people, like me, dont understand it. I dont think he can realisticaly expect the general public to engage with it on the level he wants. so its impact is mainly sensationalist.

to me its just chocolate

as far as being offensive, most people gobbel the odd easter egg without worrying about the theological implications! why not lick a chocolate jesus?

mabey god is more offended at the large hole we are all making in the o-zone layer

re 7
chipy
Does it please you to know that rants like that only encourage atheists in their unbelief and drives away those who may be considering becoming a Christian?

If you find it offensive don't look at it,don't go to the exhibition, if you see something offensive on the telly switch it off...etc

I really wish these Holy Joes would get exercised about things that really matter.

Alan re: post 9 Just give him enough rope...

why didnt the church authorities come out against this pressure group and defend the artists right to free expression?

Chocolate Jesus? Doesn't look like that to me in this photograph. He looks more like a dark skinned man in some kind of battle camouflage body suit poised to jump off a diving board or walk a tightrope. Guess a lot of people walked a tightrope on this one. In a few days it will be all but forgotten...when the next inconsequential news item which captures our attention comes along. I wonder if the artist will try to exhibit it again, store it, destroy it or sell it maybe at auction. Would he apply a new coat of chocolate first or sell it "au naturel?" I Wonder what the market is for chocolated Jesuses right now...with half its chocolate gone. I'm a Toblerone man myself.

For those with an interest in performance art.

The Angel of light turned up at St Peter’s Basilica for some performance art of the supernatural kind which was reported in yesterday's Daily Mail which can be viewed and no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light.

If this mottled Jesus were found floating in Iraninan waters, do you think the Iranian government would take it hostage? Do you think they'd get a confession out of it? When the chocolate camoflage melted off, do you think they'd conclude it was actually a CIA spy in disguise as a British Royal Navyman? Could it be equipped with a listening device and a radio transmitter inside? Hmmm, Jesus as a CIA spy, I like it.