Please freepmail me if you want on/off this list
Posted on 03/27/2008 5:42:17 AM PDT by NYer
VIENNA, March 26, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - The Dommuseum in Vienna, the art gallery attached to the historic Catholic cathedral of St. Stephen, is running an exhibition of works by a self-avowed Marxist atheist, titled "Religion, Flesh and Power", that includes depictions of explicit homosexual sex acts in "religious" themed art. Prominent among the works is a rendition of the Last Supper with Christ and His Apostles depicted as homosexuals engaged in an orgy. Another work depicts Christ on the cross without a face but with uncovered genitals. The Last Supper rendition is displayed in a prominent place near the entrance to the exhibition.
Vienna sculptor and painter Alfred Hrdlicka is said to be very pleased that his works are being displayed in a museum associated with the Church.
The director of the Dommuseum, Mr. Bernhard Böhler, said that visitors have asked "in a more or less emotional way," why the Apostles are depicted copulating. According to the director, the artist responded, "There were no women around".
Gloria Television made a short video of the works that shows Hrdlicka's depiction of the flagellation of Christ with a nude Roman soldier performing a lewd act on the Lord's body. The video relates that one visitor to the exhibition said, "Our country can do without scribblers and agitators like Hrdlicka."
Vienna's Cathedral and Diocesan Museum was founded in 1933, and describes itself as "one of the exquisite gems amongst the many museums in Vienna". It is located adjacent to the Archbishop's Palace of Christoph Cardinal Schönborn, O.P.
The church museum boasts on the website that it offers special tours for school children saying they "learned a lot" about the Cathedral patron St. Stephen and the Christian faith.
To contact the Archdiocese of Vienna:
Wollzeile 2, A-1010 Wien, Oesterreich
Telephone: (01)515.52.3229
Fax: 515.52.3760
Cheers!
Ping for later
So, is the museum run by the Church, by the government or is it a private entity?
I wouldn’t be surprised at this in the Taj Mahoney, but I thought that Cdl. Schonborn, the Austrian cardinal, was somewhat conservative. I really am surprised, and I think he should have some serious questions for the director of the diocesan museum - after removing the exhibit, of course.
I visited this beautiful cathedral in ‘99. It’s sad and disgusting to read about this taking place there.
What would any normal person expect from the community that has a sexual preference for same sex and children to exhibit as “art?” This exhibit comes as no surprise to me.
As you know, Cardinal Schonbern was a primary editor of the catechism. There is an inconsistency here, and I sense that some important fact has been omitted from this story.
I'm not sure what LifeSite news means when they say "attached to the Cathedral." The implication, intended or not, is certainly that the Cathedral is in some way responsible for this abomination.
The "dommuseum" seems to be not physically attached to the Cathedral... a quick visit to Wikipedia turned up floor plans which indicated no such museum, or any attached structure.
Although they are a great resource, LifeSite can be a bit sensationalistic. The lack of explanation as to how the museum is attached to the Cathedral is problemmatic; certainly if it were directly managed by the diocese, LifeSite would commented directly commented on Cdl. Schoenborn. Is the museum "connected" only by historical and thematic ties?
NYer, you do fantastic, tireless work on FR, so please don't take this as a general criticism of you, but there are many people around here who use this forum as a means of making scandal against the Catholic church. In such cases as this, I'd suggest you might do a little research before posting stuff which could be misleading and scandalous: Lifesite aims its content at people who would perfect the church; this site has too many people who would simply tear it down. Please beware of context.
I'm checking in confirm my assertions, and to see if the Vienna diocese is victim or perp of this abomination.
Now that was funny!
ping
Don’t get me wrong, I am not suggesting a link to the Cathedral. The link is to homosexuals and their promotion efforts.
I wasn’t criticizing you (or especially not NYer!), just the article. It may just be that the dommuseum is run by the diocese. I found one source that said the dommuseum was “next to and run by” the Cathedral, but this was in specific reference to this issue, and from a non-professional, non-authoritative, undocumented site... so someone could’ve just picked up on the LifeSite news story. (it was an ameteur’s video blog.)
In fact, this might be the diocese whose seminary Pope Benedict XVI shut down because they were all a bunch of homosexuals and pedophiles... which indicates both a local hierarchy steeped in perversion or wicked toleration of perversion, and a reasonable chance of resentful nose-thumbing going on.
Thank you for advising caution. Please let us know what you discover.
That web site looks completely deranged, like something created by a cross between Ellen Gould White, Jack Chick and the author of the Da Vinci code.
And it’s interesting how the only place that has discovered such things charges you 99 cents for a peak.
OK, you can officially put me down as downright skeptical of “embedded images” which “come to life through motion graphic extractions.”
Doesn’t pass the smell test.
The first example I could find without contributing financially to those fanatics is of a hymnal by an artist whose work I I personally detest:
Can you spot the "pornography"? See those rolls of water (I guess that's what they are; I'd be more apt to suggest the artist was being scatological by portraying the dancer as farting) on the right? That web site thinks that's to make an "S". And the fold next to her left foot (our right) is to make an "E". The author can't make out whether than place where the fold crosses the seam just next to the same calf is an "X" or a swastica." That's the pornography: the letters "S," "E," and "X" exist on the same page.
But as if to offer proof, the page presents the image I posted, showing after and before shots of the artwork being censored, as if church officials had become convinced of his assertion. That artwork was on missalettes which appear in thousands of parishes. Hundreds of those parishes routinely tape prayers to the covers of those missaletttes. The practice is so common partly because the missalettes themselves used to be published with prayers there.
Here is what I have from the English Language version of their website:
“The Dommuseum – Your Museum in Vienna.
Vienna‘s Cathedral and Diocesan Museum, founded in 1933, is regarded as one of the exquisite gems amongst the many museums in Vienna. Its permanent collection comprises fine art from a period of more than a thousand years. The main accent is on sacral works of art from St. Stephen‘s Cathedral, and other churches in Vienna and Lower Austria. The most precious treasure is the portrait of Duke Rudolf IV, painted in the l4th century, which is said to be the oldest portrait in the West.”
Can’t we leave displays like this to the government funded museums where we would, quite sad to say, expect to see them? Only groups hostile to Christ’s church and Christianity in general would exhibit such things...and a diocesan museum shouldn’t be hostile to....itself.
“No women around.” — perhaps Mr. Artiste should put down his Karl Marx and pick up a Bible every once in a while...and then he would learn that his statement is false.
We need to pray for these people. And have faith that a good servant like Cardinal Schönborn will put an end to nonsense like this.
Here’s some discussion regarding the “embedded images” issue:
http://athanasiuscm.blogspot.com/2006/11/rape-of-soul-what-you-cant-see-can.html
I did come across that article, but I have to say this:
For the life of me, I cannot understand what the author is talking about. Firstly, as is typical, the saints are pointing towards each other, two have their heads tipped slightly up, two slightly down. Contrary too the assertion that they are all staring at the “porn feature,” only one is facing towards it at all.
Secondly, I cannot for the life of me see what the author claims to see. The area below the navel is roughly a circle with a line down it... a bit abstract seeming, but in no way suggestive of what the author claims. As for the “seam” that most people don’t recognize because it’s on the underside of what the author describes: I double-checked myself. I don’t even have a seam there. (If other people do, I’m gonna wish I didn’t post this publicly. :^D) I wonder if the author is just playing with the minds of nuns who can’t exactly double-check as easily as I can.
Frankly, the strangest thing about Christ’s torso is that there seems to be a faint outline of a thumb.
(My overall take on that blog site: Catholic “restorationists” are by definition conspiracists. Some are far more insane than others.)
Der Verein der Freunde des Erzbischöflichen Dom- und Diözesanmuseums unterstützt das Museum in ideeller und materieller Weise, vor allem in dem Bemühen, mit zusätzlichen Veranstaltungen kunstsinnige Menschen für das Museum zu begeistern.
The Museum is supported "ideeller und materieller" (in policy and finances) by the "Friends of the Diozesanmuseum."
Here's the bottom line:
"The museum took down the Last Supper piece at Cardinal Schoenborn's request (not his "command," since the Abp does not own or control the Museum) just over a week after the 'Religion, Flesh and Power' exhibition opened, leaving a blank black wall at the entrance to the display.
"This has nothing to do with censorship, rather corresponds with the understood "reverence for the sacred," the Cardinal's spokesman said in a statement...
"People have said the Catholic Church has become a lot more liberal," she [Curator Martina Judt] said. "But in the end, the reactions show this perhaps isn't the case."
In other words, Cardinal Schoenbon was not responsible for booking this disgraceful exhibit, but he WAS responsible for pressuring the museum to take it down.
Which is not exactly the message highlighted by the Reuters article. Then again, they published their story under the category of "Entertainment," and there's nothing the secular enemedia finds more entertaining than the public villification and mockery of Christians.
Deranged? Possibly. The site, and the film it's hawking, are the product of "embed art expert" and film producer/director Michael A. Calace. Calace is billed as "a devout, practicing Catholic" and as the founder of Silver Sword International, which distributes his film "The Rape of the Soul. Here's a quick summation of why "The Rape of the Soul" was made:
What inspired the making of “Rape of the Soul” in the first place was the discovery of the specific requisition, approval, promotion and execution of satanic pornography in the artworks by the Archdiocese of Toronto’s high profile Director Suzanne Scorsone, under the guise of Cardinal Ambrozic and Monsignor John Murphy.
Yah, and by satanic pornography, the author means being able to find curls, crossing diagonal lines and three horizontal lines in the same image. Which, to the author’s paranoid-schizophrenic mind spells out an S, an X, and an E, which spells out SEX, which is “Satanic pornography.”
I’ll grant you that, after looking more deeply into the creation of this, it is possibly we’re dealing with an SSPX-type guy, but if so, he is being manipulated by mainstream-media types.
The whole thing reminds me of similar claims made re Disney animated features. And some of those claims turn out to be true. I have little doubt that at least some of the "Satanic pornography" that Calace has found is really there, and was put there intentionally by whatever artist created it. As to whether such art constitutes a spiritual "raping of the soul", whether it violates (and renders null) the sacred space it occupies, or has any effect whatsoever, is one that we might(?) disagree on (FWIW I would say it has virtually no effect myself, but my understanding of sacred and profane space differs from the Catholic view AFAIK).
I’ll grant you that, after looking more deeply into the creation of this, it is possibly we’re dealing with an SSPX-type guy, but if so, he is being manipulated by mainstream-media types.
I've little doubt that you are correct, especially after reading the interview at the URL in post #22. Given how Traditionalists view the legitimacy of the current Mass and the Popes since Pius X(?) and the reasons they believe apostolic succession were broken, the claims of the "Rape of the Soul" make more sense if viewed from the POV of Traditionalism as I understand it.
We’ll see if Schorborn is truly offended by whether he fires the museum curator in the most publicly humiliating way possible.
That, to me, is the real issue here. Not that Cardinal Schönborn removed it, but that Cardinal Schönborn had to be the one to remove it. It is pretty much clear as day that something like this should never had been within 100 feet of a Church-owned place of exhibition, let alone featured inside one.
So let me get this straight: Because SOME claims of subversion against a secular movie company, well-known for its hatred of Christianity, turn out to be true, then we must accept that some claims by the silliest of sources against a church must also be true? That’s the death of all reason and discourse, there Alex.
Incidentally:
The claims of subliminal art against Disney have almost all turned out to be false. Even in this case, the only verified real incident was subliminal only in that it was presented so fleetingly: an actual, undeniable porno shot was inserted in a few frames by a disgruntled employee.
This is what homosexuals do to any person or organization that challenges their deviant behavior. This is just one more manifestation of the mental illness of many types of sexual deviants.
In addition to not knowing jack chick about traditional iconography, these people are seriously warped.
Do they have any kind of psychiatric back-story?
>> not knowing jack chick <<
LOL!
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.