http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/1979 A Rare Bird, A Strange Duck, One Funky Blog Fri, 29 Aug 2008 19:44:20 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/1979#comment-16751 SV2 Tue, 15 Aug 2006 18:12:52 +0000 http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/wordpress/archive/1982#comment-16751 Christusereignis -- Christ event -- is a phrase used quite unselfconsciously by Joseph Ratzinger. http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/1979#comment-3259 Steve Nicoloso Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/wordpress/archive/1982#comment-3259 The art doesn't sound too bad, when understood. But the better you understand Anglican spokespeople, the more you'd wish they'd get <i>their</i> funding pulled! their funding pulled!]]> http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/1979#comment-3260 jwt8 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/wordpress/archive/1982#comment-3260 That justification certainly makes me feel like I'd want to see it before dismissing it as simply shock art. http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/1979#comment-3261 EmilyE Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/wordpress/archive/1982#comment-3261 Well, as far as justifications go, that artist seems to have a completely reasonable point -- both art and religion are for sale nowadays. And if that's legitimately the point he's trying to make, that seems a bit different than the artist who smeared a depiction of the Virgin Mary with elephant dung a few years ago. I remember being very offended by that, and I wasn't even Catholic yet.<br /><br />Whether the artist was trying to offend anyone or not, though, I think it's reasonable for Christians to be offended by such a portrayal. To make light of crucifixion makes light of the very means of our salvation. <br /><br />"Jesus event" ? Our salvation was simply an "event"? The word choice speaks volumes about the state of Anglican theology.
Whether the artist was trying to offend anyone or not, though, I think it's reasonable for Christians to be offended by such a portrayal. To make light of crucifixion makes light of the very means of our salvation.

"Jesus event" ? Our salvation was simply an "event"? The word choice speaks volumes about the state of Anglican theology.]]> http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/1979#comment-3262 Tom Smith Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/wordpress/archive/1982#comment-3262 I think that we could very easily compile a list of terms and euphemisms, the overuse of (or simply the use of, with the rather egregious ones) which indicates heterodox theology and/or modernism. The phrase "Christ event" is just one example.<br /><br />Some others, listed alongside what they actually refer to:<br />- "Omega Point," rather than the Second Coming or End Times<br />- "Faith Community," rather than Parish<br />- "Gathering Space," rather than Vestibule or Narthex<br />- "Creator, Redeemer, and Sanctifier," rather than Father, Son, and Holy Spirit<br />- "Eucharistic Meal," "Worship Service," or "Communal Liturgy" rather than simply Mass<br />- "Faith Tradition," rather than Religion<br />- "Presider," rather than simply Priest<br />- "Table" rather than Altar<br />- "Pastoral Center," rather than Rectory or Chancery<br /><br />Most of them are kinda comical.
Some others, listed alongside what they actually refer to:
- "Omega Point," rather than the Second Coming or End Times
- "Faith Community," rather than Parish
- "Gathering Space," rather than Vestibule or Narthex
- "Creator, Redeemer, and Sanctifier," rather than Father, Son, and Holy Spirit
- "Eucharistic Meal," "Worship Service," or "Communal Liturgy" rather than simply Mass
- "Faith Tradition," rather than Religion
- "Presider," rather than simply Priest
- "Table" rather than Altar
- "Pastoral Center," rather than Rectory or Chancery

Most of them are kinda comical.]]> http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/1979#comment-3263 X Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/wordpress/archive/1982#comment-3263 Who is to say the artist is non-christian? Maybe he is a christian drawing on the strongest story from his upbringing - Jesus?<br />Judge not lest ye be judged yourself. Judge not lest ye be judged yourself.]]> http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/1979#comment-3264 Tom Smith Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/wordpress/archive/1982#comment-3264 X,<br /><br />The fact that he draws upon Star Wars above Christ kind of indicates that Christianity wasn't the strongest story from his upbringing.<br /><br />And I don't see how anyone's being judgmental; saying that his justification for the artwork is good enough for a non-Christian is hardly judgmental.
The fact that he draws upon Star Wars above Christ kind of indicates that Christianity wasn't the strongest story from his upbringing.

And I don't see how anyone's being judgmental; saying that his justification for the artwork is good enough for a non-Christian is hardly judgmental.]]> http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/1979#comment-3265 Peter Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/wordpress/archive/1982#comment-3265 What does it matter what it's called? "Christ event" seems perfectly reasonable to me. Isn't the whole point supposed to be that God was incarnated in a real, historical way (the "event") in order to redeem we wayward humans (the "Christ")?<br /><br />Also, seems like the Anglican fellow has a point when he mentions that Christians don't have a monopoly on crucifixion.<br /><br />Sounds to me like one of those interesting artworks that takes two conflicting ideas--pop culture on one hand and high religion on the other--and puts them together in such a way that makes us reflect whether they haven't already been put together in our collective consciousness. Has pop culture taken the place of religion? Has religion become as banal as pop culture? They seem like pretty good questions to ask, in my opinion.
Also, seems like the Anglican fellow has a point when he mentions that Christians don't have a monopoly on crucifixion.

Sounds to me like one of those interesting artworks that takes two conflicting ideas–pop culture on one hand and high religion on the other–and puts them together in such a way that makes us reflect whether they haven't already been put together in our collective consciousness. Has pop culture taken the place of religion? Has religion become as banal as pop culture? They seem like pretty good questions to ask, in my opinion.]]> http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/1979#comment-3266 Tom Smith Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/wordpress/archive/1982#comment-3266 Petey,<br /><br />The reason that it matters what we call the life of Christ is because we minimize it by calling it the "Christ event;" it's put on the same level as "sporting event" or "historical event." The phrase makes Christ's life something static and irrelevant, and, linguistically, puts it on the same level as a "sporting event."<br /><br />And I disagree that the Anglican spokesman's comment about the lack of a Christian monopoly on crucifixion is relevant. It's true that others were crucified, but it isn't true that it's the central focus of an entire religion. When someone utilizes crucifixion in art, it's pretty clear that they're not trying to get people to think of Buddhism, Islam, or Hinduism, don't you think?
The reason that it matters what we call the life of Christ is because we minimize it by calling it the "Christ event;" it's put on the same level as "sporting event" or "historical event." The phrase makes Christ's life something static and irrelevant, and, linguistically, puts it on the same level as a "sporting event."

And I disagree that the Anglican spokesman's comment about the lack of a Christian monopoly on crucifixion is relevant. It's true that others were crucified, but it isn't true that it's the central focus of an entire religion. When someone utilizes crucifixion in art, it's pretty clear that they're not trying to get people to think of Buddhism, Islam, or Hinduism, don't you think?]]> http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/archives/1979#comment-3267 Andrew Nichols Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://alesrarus.funkydung.com/wordpress/archive/1982#comment-3267 The term "Christ event" may seem a little odd, but the term in itself doesn't point to any flaw in theology. Whether or not you like the terminology he uses is irrelevant---what he means by them is what is important.<br /><br />Tom, with the exception of "Omega Point" (which simply sounds silly) I don't see any problem with any of the terms you mock. For that matter, it's not as if all of those specific terms are taken straight from the Bible.<br /><br />'Mass' certainly isn't, nor is 'Vestibule', 'Parish', or 'Narthex'.<br /><br />As for the art itself, he seems to have a pretty good point. My question is, when will the church get over itself and learn to accept alternative ways of worship? As long as the gospel message is not compromised, I don't care how someone worships or what terminology they use.
Tom, with the exception of "Omega Point" (which simply sounds silly) I don't see any problem with any of the terms you mock. For that matter, it's not as if all of those specific terms are taken straight from the Bible.

'Mass' certainly isn't, nor is 'Vestibule', 'Parish', or 'Narthex'.

As for the art itself, he seems to have a pretty good point. My question is, when will the church get over itself and learn to accept alternative ways of worship? As long as the gospel message is not compromised, I don't care how someone worships or what terminology they use.]]>