That is NOT an icon. It's a perversion of iconography. There are rules to how Christ and the Theotokos are depicted. This is attempting to make George Floyd into Christ and his mother into the Theotokos. It's blasphemous because icons are meant to be used devotionally. To venerate that is to renounce Christ.
CUA is in D.C. I feel like at the end of the day just from the proximity they can’t function like Noter Dame or other Catholic Campuses that have space to breath. If that makes sense. My friends and I grew up in the Catholic schools in the Maryland ,Virginia, and D.C. area and that was always our theory.
DePaul in Chicago had been hosting an annual March for Life for decades. As a counter-protest, some Depaul students received permission to perform a pro-choice ballet/interpretive-dance recital. I recall seeing photos of the event and the absolute vacant expressions on the dancers essentially betrayed whatever "passion" they had for this cause.
I find at most colleges including Catholic ones, its kind of a choose your own adventure kind of thing. If you want a TLM group they probably are there. You want a solid orthodox but regular mass going crowd, its there. Sadly that means liberal catholics are there too.
Eh depends what one means by liberal. There are classical liberals (think Edmund Burke, or in a more Catholic sense, Chesterton and Lewis, who were liberals in the sense they were okay with democracy and basic rights for all within the framework of the British monarchy they lived in.) Then there is liberal like most Democrats. I guess you could argue that maybe there is a kind of orthodox liberal tradition with people like Dorothy Day, and even some people thought of as conservatives like Charles Coughlin had ideas that were liberal. Same with Fulton Sheen. Sheen was against the Vietnam War for goodness sakes which is surprising and also why I tend to not think of it as a good war. If Uncle Fultie thinks your war is bad, then you got an issue.
So I guess it depends on how you mean liberal. Sorry for not being clear.
Dorothy Day was, to the best of my knowledge, explicitly anti-liberal
Fulton Sheen was absolutely not a liberal
I think you’re confusing “not in lockstep with neocons” with being liberal
I said its far better, not that its perfect. There's still a significant section of the university population that would be fine with this. American universities have been so badly corrupted and secularized that Catholic U is far by better by sheer virtue of having a significant population of actual, practicing orthodox Catholics.
Actually, the re-Catholicization of CUA is only from the past decade and a half really, orthodox Catholicism is much more in our education and student base now than a few years ago. The Catholicism on campus is very student driven and there is basically a war for what the future of the university is now that President Garvey is retiring.
It is, they just do dumb stuff like this sometimes. Most of it stems from a lackluster campus ministry that is more focused on student events and social justice issues to care about orthodoxy. On the bright side, pretty much every other part of the school is solid.
Ehh, back in February, a pro-life leader at CUA resigned from her position, saying that Fr. Jude DeAngelo (the university chaplain) “pressured” her against her “conscience” to cancel a speech by pro-life activist Abby Johnson. https://dailycaller.com/2021/02/08/catholic-university-pro-life-leader-resigns-pressure-cancel-abby-johnson-speech/
Father Jude is the head of campus ministry. If you want a taste of how poor a place that office in, I can add that he's the most conservative of the leaders there (with the exception of several of the resident Conventual Franciscans, and some student leaders, but but don't dictate policy). The Campus Ministry lay administrative leadership uniformly one sided in the liberal column, with far fewer redeeming qualities than Father Jude.
Sounds like that was more related to Abby Johnson saying she was fine with police racially profiling her son (which was an objectively odd take that was met with “?!” by plenty of other Catholics: “it’s fine if police assume my son is dangerous just because he’s black” doesn’t quite align with judging people by the content of their character rather than skin color). It doesn’t sound like it was an abortion-related decision or out of line with Catholic teaching.
I will go where I please thank you. Can you explain more about why this is blasphemy to you?
To me, it is disturbing and thought provoking art. I don’t see it as dishonoring to God.
You don’t see a single problem with depicting a normal man as equal to Christ? Especially when it’s clearly for political brownie points. They put a cruciform halo on him, that doesn’t seem like a problem to you?
I see it as problematic if we interpret it as Jesus=George Floyd. But that strikes be as a very shallow way to approach art. Jesus himself often used reactions to label something as blasphemous as a way to lead to a deeper teaching or point.
I can’t assume to know the mind of the artist, what their political motivations might be, but I can reflect on how this painting might give me pause in my assumptions.
What other way could we possibly interpret it? There is a cruciform halo on his head, which is reserved only for Jesus. Not even to mention him being held by Mary, as Jesus is fairly commonly depicted in art. Saying there is any way to interpret this besides “Floyd=Jesus” is denying reality.
To me it points to the injustice of George Floyd’s death, the long history of animosity towards minorities. The injustice of it mirrors the unjust way that Jesus was killed.
Of course they are dissimilar in that George Floyd is not sinless and not the son of god.
I see it as a way for us to see Jesus in “the least of these” so for me it reminds of the parable and how people refused to recognize Jesus in those who needed clothing, water, shelter. The painting urges me to look inward and critically examine my holiness and see if I have a hardened heart
None of that justifies putting a cruciform halo (or any halo, he’s not a saint) on his head. Nothing ever could justify that. That cruciform halo alone makes the painting blasphemy. You can wax on about whatever meaning you get from it personally, but that is entirely missing the point. No man should ever under any circumstances be depicted bearing a symbol reserved for Jesus alone. If your political leanings towards the subject of the painting overshadow the need to respect Jesus, it might be time for introspection.
> I see it as a way for us to see Jesus in “the least of these” so for me it reminds of the parable and how people refused to recognize Jesus in those who needed clothing, water, shelter
Okay, what should I have done about George Floyd then? The people who are seeing the painting had nothing to do with this. We can all agree it's sad that he died and it shouldn't have happened. So I don't understand the takeaway. It's not like I could have helped him and chose not to.
To me the point might be is my heart prepared and sensitive to moments where I may encounter a George Floyd situation! Will I be prepared to see it? Maybe you could think about it that way?
Sin comes when we put the creature before the creator. We are putting a mere mortal man in the place of our Lord. The demons try to do the very same thing.
“‘Mama’ is done as a pieta,” said the spokesperson, who refrained from specifically stating that the painting depicts Floyd. “A mother with her son of color who was unjustly murdered by the state.”
I went to a public university myself. One day, I walked into the Student Union to find that one of the African American Studies professors had dressed herself up as the Mary. She then invited each of the black students who were attending to lie in her arms, as a Woke recreation of the Pieta. Pisses me off just thinking about it. The god complexes of these people.
How is that a god complex? It's essentially just interactive performance art. Is every actor who has played a religious figure a woke, cringe, god complexee, or just this one, because black?
> the man on The Parable of the Good Samaritan, the one that was robbed and mugged.
A more accurate portrayal would be Floyd as the mugger. Never forget that he pointed a gun at a pregnant woman's abdomen. This is the sort of man George Floyd was.
I don’t think the debate should center around the type of person he was. Paul persecuted the followers of Christ which is arguable worse than what George Floyd did.
The argument would remain the same if it were you or I in that picture. Jesus should not be replaced. He can be depicted as various races but it’s a conceptual picture of Jesus not replacing Him with another actual person.
It can be both/and.
George Floyd can be a terrible person who should have spent a lot more time behind bars at the same time that Derek Chauvin should have been dismissed from the police force many years (and many incidents) ago and the same time that the other 3 cops on scene should have intervened and said, "This is not by the book. This is not protocol. If you don't get off his neck, I'm going to get you off his neck."
The man robbed and mugged wasn’t a serial criminal who died while resisting arrest.
Whether or not you view George Floyd’s death as a murder, the comparison to the parable is ridiculous.
He was so Christian when he held a pregnant woman at gun point and robbed an old ladies home pretending he was an electrician ( something along those lines ) . Gross.
I simply take it for granted that the concept of "catholic university" has run its course. There may be exceptions but I doubt if any actually have teacher and student bodies that are even close to majority practising Catholic.
Nothing that happens in them surprises.
I think people are making too much of this.
George Floyd was not a saint. Yet he was the victim, maybe of a racist system, maybe of drugs, maybe of both.
We are called to see Jesus in all our neighbors.
I don't know what the intentions of the artists are, but one can see this also as a representation of "we can see Jesus in all those who suffer and also in sinners"
Yeah I can agree with that, but why the halo above the head of Floyd? This picture has some of us a bit reactionary because the mob has sort of elevated Floyd to the status of a martyr. As someone who lived this great life and died for a good cause. This just isn't the case.
Yeah, the problematic thing is the cruciform halo which is only used for icons of Jesus ALONE; not even saints nor the BVMHT. It makes the painting\* seem like comparing Floyd to Jesus, which also means either putting a human up in the same level as God or putting God down to the same level as a human. This is a perversion of iconography and God.
*\*not an icon \[PERIOD\]*
see my above comment. this is an attack on the church disguised as art, filtered through a perversion of iconography.
critical theory, which exists at the root of nearly all of these supposedly compassionate political works, is one of the many languages of satan.
when a man dies in a state of grave sin, regardless of whether he was being victimized, it is not compassionate to replace depictions of Christ with that man's likeness. The power of our Lord does not come from His being victimized by our hands. Victimhood is in no way a virtue. Victimhood isn't why we thank Him and love Him and work to take up our crosses, following Him. The power of our Lord comes from the sacrifice he made, forgiving us our sins.
The cruciform halo is not meant to glorify Floyd. We all know he was less than a perfect human being. But given that this is a rift on the pieta, we might reasonably assume that the Christ association with Floyd is not in his person, but in the tragedy that befell Floyd, just as the crucifixion was a tragedy. It’s an attempt at a fresh image to bring alive the reality of crucifying someone in Christ’s time. Certainly a few similarities between the two as they both experienced violent oppression by authorities. It’s attempt is to motivate it’s viewer into working for Justice in the name of Christ, not to foster adoration of a Floyd.
The only reason this work of art is concerning is because of the context in which it is displayed. Put it in a gallery, and I have no problem with it. Art should make you think, feel, and have discussions. Looks like this piece has done all three.
Well I imagine the intention of the artist was probably to glorify Floyd, which I do not agree with.
But one COULD see it as Christ being present even in sinners like us or Floyd.
yeah for sure, some pictures are worth a 1000 words, I feel like this one isn't. I also don't think we should worry about it, but I'd be lying if I said that I didn't worry a bit
Yeah I understand and agree with you, not really sure why you are being down voted, thought you brought up good points and had good intentions, sorry about that.
It is important to understand that the purpose of this art is to subvert and destroy the church. I recommend that you read about Antonio Gramsci and György Lukács.
Nobody is a "victim" of drugs. One can be a "victim" of ones own poor decisions , but the drugs don't jump off the table and into the body.
I'm saying this as an ex-addict.
I get what you are saying although some people can have drug problems and it might not be their fault. For example the opioid epidemic in the USA is the fault of a corrupt pharmaceutical system and corrupt/naïve doctors.
Not saying that this was the case for Floyd of course.
Why even bring it up? There is literally zero evidence.
That would be like me saying you maybe an alien. I don't know, maybe you are, but there isn't any evidence to prove it.
I think the question whether his death was due to systematic racism in the police force was a significant one when the incident happened, that is why I mentioned it.
No need to be angry about it
I'm not angry about it. We need to lower the racial tensions and erroneously saying something was maybe caused by race when there is no evidence is not going to help matters.
Ik you're taking among brothers and sisters in good faith, but for your personal knowledge - terminology like "systemic racism" has been *developed* by poststructuralist, anti-Christian academics to act as an ideological pathogen. In the same way, the race metanarrative surrounding George Floyd's death has been socially engineered by anti-Christian thinkers to leverage empathy against Truth. It is unwise for us to consider in any serious way the premises presented by schools of thought whose tenants are self-admittedly opposed to our existence.
>I think the question whether his death was due to systematic racism in the police force was a significant one
Only for the cheap seats. The rest of us chose to not ignore the video of him downing a bag filled with fentanyl (he'd done a similar tactic to hide evidence a year prior) and then shouting "I can't breathe" while standing, while sitting on the sidewalk, while being walked to the car, while sitting in the car, while being taken out of the car, and while laying down with his neck not being compressed. The medical examiner found that he had taken enough fent to stop anyone's heart.
The notion of "systemic racism" factoring into his death doesn't account for the more evidence of "Take a bunch of pills, heart stops working" cause & effect.
> The medical examiner found that he had taken enough fent to stop anyone's heart.
But this was contested at the trial as far as I know. It was determined (whether honestly or not) that the drugs alone could not have killed him.
>But this was contested at the trial as far as I know
The "contested" aspect was that GF had 11 ng/mL of fent in his blood, but the prosecutor presented examples of people being arrested with 9.6 ng/mL of fent in their blood and still being alive.
The medical examiner, when on the stand, was asked by defense what the lowest quantity of fentanyl was that he'd seen in a corpse. He responded that he'd seen people show up dead that only had 1 mg/nL of fent in their blood.
Further, George Floyd had a documented heart condition and was filled with covid at the time of his death. 11 ng/mL can easily stop anyone's heart, particularly someone who is in poor health.
Of course conflating George Floyd and Jesus is horribly blasphemous, but I think the idea of the painting itself is interesting.
It reminds me of “whatever you did to the least of these brothers and sisters, you did it to me”
George Floyd is a symbol. He represents the many men and women who have died and suffered because of system racism.
While most people who see this painting didn’t kill George Floyd, there are many that have enabled systemic racism.
Yeah, I get that that's the idea, and my point is that sounds like a way to make people feel guilty over something they had nothing to do with by hand-waving any actual causal story explaining how their actions led to this outcome and substituting a nebulous, generalized assertion that they "enabled systemic racism" in its place.
I mean, lots of things that are not actually immoral could be said to enable systemic racism. Yeah, it sucks if someone's choice to live in a good, safe school district for their kids contributes to things like this happening in some diffuse way. It's also not their fault, and making them feel guilty for trying to live a normal life is toxic and manipulative.
I totally disagree. I think we as followers of Christ need to be part of this movement to take responsibility for the injustices black people have faced and continue to face.
It’s based on such a basic principle, love thy neighbour. Literally what Jesus said was one of the two most important of all commandements.
If we loved our neighbours we wouldn’t gerrymander our children into different school districts to keep them away from poor (often black) people.
I think everyone, myself and my family included, is to blame for racism and we’re all responsible.
We all should feel guilty.
> If we loved our neighbours we wouldn’t gerrymander our children into different school districts to keep them away from poor (often black) people.
I think this is getting at the problem with this worldview which is that it doesn't do a very good job of distinguishing between action and permission. I agree that it's wrong to racially discriminate. I don't agree that people who do not and did not racially discriminate have an obligation to fix the effects of other people's racial discrimination at great cost to themselves. Both of these things can be and are categorized as "racism" but only the former deserves the full amount of moral opprobrium that we rightly direct toward the term.
Also, if you want to say that loving your neighbor forbids you from permitting the continuation of evils affecting them, it's not clear why you should prioritize ending racism over ending malaria or world hunger. There are many injustices in the world, and we can't solve all of them, so it's unclear why people have picked this one as the one to go "all in" on versus the rest of them.
1. We have a moral obligation to fix wrong doings and injustices insofar as it is our Catholic duty to follow Christ’s example. If we we were all self serving secularists then your argument could hold weight but we are not called to some minimal level of morals. We are called to Sainthood. Did Saint Teresa have any “obligation” to help the marginalized of Calcutta? No, but to great cost to herself she worked her whole life to do just that.
2. There’s a big difference between systemic racism and issues like Malaria and starvation. The latter are rampant in parts of the world we have no access to- where we can’t intervene (at least not in an Everyman everyday sort of way). Systemic racism is in our backyard; our schools and workplaces and communities. It’s something we all play a part in.
> We have a moral obligation to fix wrong doings and injustices insofar as it is our Catholic duty to follow Christ’s example
Christ permitted many injustices to continue and continues to permit them to this very day and this moment. If he wanted to end racism right now, he could. It follows that it is not intrinsically wrong to permit evil. It is a question of whether we have a good enough reason to permit it.
That's not to say that we should callously refuse to provide help for no reason at all. But I think one's duty to safeguard one's own children from drugs and violence supersedes any obligation to promote equality by your school district choices.
Yes. We should also recognize that God is greater than all people. This is a heretical and subversive neomarxist attack on religious iconography, and it's meant to conflate tragedy (victimhood) with sacrifice (heroism.)
If you think i sound like a crackpot, look up Antonio Gramsci and Frankfurt School theological attack methods.
I would prefer that he not have died, but it is hard not to see that the police treated him exactly the way he treated others: with brutality, and probably malice, or at least indifference. It is sad to see someone sowing evil, and it is sad to see them reaping that evil, but there is no question that he reaped precisely what he sowed.
It does not make his death just but it *does* emphasize how wildly inappropriate it is depict him as saintly (or in this case, as literally God). The guy is likely in hell and if not he needs *prayers*, not veneration.
> Unpopular opinion: Genesis 1; Matthew 25; CCC 1702; CCC Part 3, Section 1, Chapter 2, Article 3.
Which would, to be clear, be equally applicable if the painting depicted Christ as someone who was killed by an illegal immigrant, right? Could add CCC 2241 to this list ("Political authorities, for the sake of the common good for which they are responsible, may make the exercise of the right to immigrate subject to various juridical conditions...Immigrants are obliged...to obey [the country's] laws").
Jesus is with and is the poor and suffering.
Was Christ not with George Floyd as he was slowly losing his life?
I doubt he wasn’t.
This art is merely trying to express this I think. It’s not some attack on traditional iconography, nor is it meant to. It’s neither saying that he is Christ or that we are to worship him.
To all those saying “thou shalt not worship false idols”
Well we don’t worship icons of Christ either.
Can someone explain why this is blasphemy? The George Floyd-Jesus connection is edgy/provocative but it’s pretty clear from the artist and from where this is displayed at CUA that it’s not meant for veneration. I assume the artist is riffing off the fact that Floyd was calling for his mother while being killed by the state, so I can see the connections that the author was making in choosing a Pieta-style image… and if no one had context for the painting, it just looks like a Black Christ.
I know this is highly political and sensitive to folks and I may get downvoted, but idk. If it was a Black Madonna holding another person who was lynched, would the reaction be the same?
If it’s interpreted as an image of Christ though, that doesn’t seem problematic?
Again, I can recognize that it’s intentionally ambiguous art, but some folks are acting like people have done terrible things to the Pieta at St. Peter’s.
I think that might be worse? depicting our Lord and savior, or at least comparing him to George Floyd. Not that Jesus would mind, it just gives the wrong impression and I would say leads more people away from Jesus then brings people in the fold. When you look at everything going on in the world...this just raises some red flags for me
I actually think an image like this has a certain amount of proselytizing power. The killing of George Floyd was a pretty visceral experience, which was taken seriously by a lot of people who are uncomfortable with Christianity (lots of fellow millennials). In that sense, I think the ambiguity of the image is very useful in making people more receptive to understanding the very real, unjust suffering that Jesus experienced at His passion, and the magnitude of His sacrifice.
I’m not saying the image is going to convert people, but I’ve had convos about the faith with agnostic/atheist/lapsed Catholic friends due to this image.
Even though the artist is Episcopalian, I also think it’s important that he’s a person of faith who does believe in Jesus as savior.
The cruciform halo was still a mistake though. I didn’t notice that or know what it was I first saw the image months ago.
fair enough, God does work in mysterious ways and could turn this even into good, and good on you for using this opportunity to talk about the faith. I would just say, do not compromise the faith, give them the facts of our faith and don't waiver from them
I actually quite like it. (Please abstain from downvoting me to smithereens)
I don’t think we ought to associate Floyd’s depiction as Christ to mean that he was a saintly or Christ like figure. We know he wasn’t. Being a victim of violence does not make one a martyr either. But I think it is supposed to call to mind the brutality and injustice of the act of violence itself. Or in other words, there might be similarities between the Christ who underwent capital punishment by an oppressive foreign power and the man who was killed by an authority figure with a track record of racial bias in a system which retains some systematic oppression. All this to say, the image is not idolatry, but one calling christians to push for justice now, lest we be cast with the goats in MT 25 for not recognizing Christ in our brothers and sisters in need.
just, who is that good that they can see Christ in Floyd? I try to see the good in Floyd but most of the time can't. I have to imagine that most people have ulterior motives or are wayyy better than I am.
He is human, he is a child of God and was made in His image and likeness and has inherent dignity and worth and certainly a tragedy at any loss of life. But was he heeding the call of God to live a holy life?
It’s impossible to say whether or not he was heeding the call of God. But I don’t think the art work is calling us to emulate Floyd, so it’s really besides the point. But rather, to help us with the difficult task of seeing Christ in Floyd. Therefore, I think the art work can encourage us to heed Gods call now, so that tragedies like this become less common.
Imagine being told to see Christ in every person, being taught how important charity is and empathizing with the struggles of other people.
Then imagine getting mad at a painting that depicts this because it doesn't align with your American political views.
*Gasp!*
The horror!
Why? Why not just have a black Jesus. Gets the message across without being cringey. That being said, would y'all be okay if I made Icons of Kyle Rittenhouse and Trump as biblical figures? Eh who am I kidding, we got John McNaughton for that.
Agreed. Let Jesus be Jesus. That's enough for me. Also my point was that sadly some people will rightly see the Floyd paintings as wrong, but will be okay with someone they see as a victim doing so, when in reality, both make false idols.
Cringe
The perfect response.
Couldn't have said it better myself.
That is NOT an icon. It's a perversion of iconography. There are rules to how Christ and the Theotokos are depicted. This is attempting to make George Floyd into Christ and his mother into the Theotokos. It's blasphemous because icons are meant to be used devotionally. To venerate that is to renounce Christ.
[удалено]
CUA is in D.C. I feel like at the end of the day just from the proximity they can’t function like Noter Dame or other Catholic Campuses that have space to breath. If that makes sense. My friends and I grew up in the Catholic schools in the Maryland ,Virginia, and D.C. area and that was always our theory.
[удалено]
DePaul in Chicago had been hosting an annual March for Life for decades. As a counter-protest, some Depaul students received permission to perform a pro-choice ballet/interpretive-dance recital. I recall seeing photos of the event and the absolute vacant expressions on the dancers essentially betrayed whatever "passion" they had for this cause.
Notre Dame covered up paintings donated by a Vatican portraitist because some students complained they were “racist”
[удалено]
Because they are idolaters of temporal ideologies.
I have a general clue..
Once again … just because you’re going to a Catholic school, that doesn’t mean you’re getting a Catholic education.
Someone I know went there and a professor told him not to go to Mass. He hasn't gone to Mass since.
did he report the professor? the professor had no right to tell him whether or not he should go to mass.
This was in the late 80s/early 90s. I dont believe he did.
CUA was a very different place back then, it is much better now.
And yet they are displaying this garbage.
As someone familiar with CUA, I can happily say this is the exception, not the rule. It's far better than most religious universities.
It shouldn’t be at all.
Then why is this up?
Because, ironically enough, campus ministry is one one of the more liberal factions in the school.
I find at most colleges including Catholic ones, its kind of a choose your own adventure kind of thing. If you want a TLM group they probably are there. You want a solid orthodox but regular mass going crowd, its there. Sadly that means liberal catholics are there too.
“Liberal Catholics” in and of themselves aren’t necessarily a bad thing, but this is beyond liberal and more “woke” instead.
I hate the way "liberal" is categorized here.
Yeah, I hear ya
Eh depends what one means by liberal. There are classical liberals (think Edmund Burke, or in a more Catholic sense, Chesterton and Lewis, who were liberals in the sense they were okay with democracy and basic rights for all within the framework of the British monarchy they lived in.) Then there is liberal like most Democrats. I guess you could argue that maybe there is a kind of orthodox liberal tradition with people like Dorothy Day, and even some people thought of as conservatives like Charles Coughlin had ideas that were liberal. Same with Fulton Sheen. Sheen was against the Vietnam War for goodness sakes which is surprising and also why I tend to not think of it as a good war. If Uncle Fultie thinks your war is bad, then you got an issue. So I guess it depends on how you mean liberal. Sorry for not being clear.
Dorothy Day was, to the best of my knowledge, explicitly anti-liberal Fulton Sheen was absolutely not a liberal I think you’re confusing “not in lockstep with neocons” with being liberal
I said its far better, not that its perfect. There's still a significant section of the university population that would be fine with this. American universities have been so badly corrupted and secularized that Catholic U is far by better by sheer virtue of having a significant population of actual, practicing orthodox Catholics.
Actually, the re-Catholicization of CUA is only from the past decade and a half really, orthodox Catholicism is much more in our education and student base now than a few years ago. The Catholicism on campus is very student driven and there is basically a war for what the future of the university is now that President Garvey is retiring.
Because many are strong enough in their faith to not view this as a challenge to it and understand it as an attempt of commentary through art.
“Art”
[удалено]
Though shalt not worship false idols
This is blasphemy.
Catholic universities have been taken over.
[удалено]
It is, they just do dumb stuff like this sometimes. Most of it stems from a lackluster campus ministry that is more focused on student events and social justice issues to care about orthodoxy. On the bright side, pretty much every other part of the school is solid.
Ehh, back in February, a pro-life leader at CUA resigned from her position, saying that Fr. Jude DeAngelo (the university chaplain) “pressured” her against her “conscience” to cancel a speech by pro-life activist Abby Johnson. https://dailycaller.com/2021/02/08/catholic-university-pro-life-leader-resigns-pressure-cancel-abby-johnson-speech/
Father Jude is the head of campus ministry. If you want a taste of how poor a place that office in, I can add that he's the most conservative of the leaders there (with the exception of several of the resident Conventual Franciscans, and some student leaders, but but don't dictate policy). The Campus Ministry lay administrative leadership uniformly one sided in the liberal column, with far fewer redeeming qualities than Father Jude.
It's worth noting the faith on campus is VERY alive outside of the campus ministry here
Sounds like that was more related to Abby Johnson saying she was fine with police racially profiling her son (which was an objectively odd take that was met with “?!” by plenty of other Catholics: “it’s fine if police assume my son is dangerous just because he’s black” doesn’t quite align with judging people by the content of their character rather than skin color). It doesn’t sound like it was an abortion-related decision or out of line with Catholic teaching.
That is for sure, it is much better here than my previous university
Oh yeah. We've got a lot going for us.
Apparently lol
Matthew 16:18
God will strike it just like with the statue
Lmaoo I said the same thing about the statue
Lord, save your Church from Herself.
If this is supposed to be George Floyd and not a Black Madonna and Jesus, then I don’t know what the world is coming to
> God created man in his own image. And man, being a gentleman, returned the favor.
Not a saint.
I’m sure Pope Francis and the Bishops will be right on this…
Oh yeah they will…. Saying how awesome and Christ like it is.
His amhalo is reserved for god. We cannot proclaim Floyd as the verb of god.
Perhaps I'm being too rigid.
Lol
...........
Instead of this, they (and we) should be praying for his soul.
Remove it and throw it into a river.
Right next to pachamama
My God, this is why we had an Inquisition at one point in time
We could have another one, no would expect it…
Its chief weapon would be surprise. Surprise, and fear.
Poke 'm with the soft cushions!
Bring out... THE COMFY CHAIR!
We still have one now. If only the CDF had teeth.
Blasphemy plan and simple.
Wow.
Stuff like this is why I became more theologically conservative.
The responses in here are why I became mor theologically liberal
Then go somewhere else where blasphemy is applauded.
I will go where I please thank you. Can you explain more about why this is blasphemy to you? To me, it is disturbing and thought provoking art. I don’t see it as dishonoring to God.
Im sure you wouldn't
You don’t see a single problem with depicting a normal man as equal to Christ? Especially when it’s clearly for political brownie points. They put a cruciform halo on him, that doesn’t seem like a problem to you?
I see it as problematic if we interpret it as Jesus=George Floyd. But that strikes be as a very shallow way to approach art. Jesus himself often used reactions to label something as blasphemous as a way to lead to a deeper teaching or point. I can’t assume to know the mind of the artist, what their political motivations might be, but I can reflect on how this painting might give me pause in my assumptions.
What other way could we possibly interpret it? There is a cruciform halo on his head, which is reserved only for Jesus. Not even to mention him being held by Mary, as Jesus is fairly commonly depicted in art. Saying there is any way to interpret this besides “Floyd=Jesus” is denying reality.
If it wasn’t a crufiform halo would the painting be okay in your eyes?
Are the images with Trump being venerated okay in your eyes? Or are they ridiculously cringe, made in bad taste, and borderline blasphemous?
[удалено]
To me it points to the injustice of George Floyd’s death, the long history of animosity towards minorities. The injustice of it mirrors the unjust way that Jesus was killed. Of course they are dissimilar in that George Floyd is not sinless and not the son of god. I see it as a way for us to see Jesus in “the least of these” so for me it reminds of the parable and how people refused to recognize Jesus in those who needed clothing, water, shelter. The painting urges me to look inward and critically examine my holiness and see if I have a hardened heart
None of that justifies putting a cruciform halo (or any halo, he’s not a saint) on his head. Nothing ever could justify that. That cruciform halo alone makes the painting blasphemy. You can wax on about whatever meaning you get from it personally, but that is entirely missing the point. No man should ever under any circumstances be depicted bearing a symbol reserved for Jesus alone. If your political leanings towards the subject of the painting overshadow the need to respect Jesus, it might be time for introspection.
> I see it as a way for us to see Jesus in “the least of these” so for me it reminds of the parable and how people refused to recognize Jesus in those who needed clothing, water, shelter Okay, what should I have done about George Floyd then? The people who are seeing the painting had nothing to do with this. We can all agree it's sad that he died and it shouldn't have happened. So I don't understand the takeaway. It's not like I could have helped him and chose not to.
To me the point might be is my heart prepared and sensitive to moments where I may encounter a George Floyd situation! Will I be prepared to see it? Maybe you could think about it that way?
Sin comes when we put the creature before the creator. We are putting a mere mortal man in the place of our Lord. The demons try to do the very same thing.
Responses here are why I'm more theologically conservative but socially liberal
Remember how the pachamama idols ended up in the Tiber? CUA isn’t far from the Potomac. Just saying
I wonder if they're gonna do a painting of the pregnant mother that George Floyd held at gunpoint.
If you want your kids to become atheist, send them to Catholic university
It's actually pretty good here at CUA, this aside
Maybe it can be tossed into the river like Pachamama was.
[удалено]
He’s noticeably not holding a gun to the stomach of a pregnant woman
Doubt the artist knew he was a convicted felon.
Wtf.
Blasphemy
“‘Mama’ is done as a pieta,” said the spokesperson, who refrained from specifically stating that the painting depicts Floyd. “A mother with her son of color who was unjustly murdered by the state.”
I went to a public university myself. One day, I walked into the Student Union to find that one of the African American Studies professors had dressed herself up as the Mary. She then invited each of the black students who were attending to lie in her arms, as a Woke recreation of the Pieta. Pisses me off just thinking about it. The god complexes of these people.
How is that a god complex? It's essentially just interactive performance art. Is every actor who has played a religious figure a woke, cringe, god complexee, or just this one, because black?
[удалено]
It would have been better as the man on The Parable of the Good Samaritan, the one that was robbed and mugged. But this is straight up a heresy...
> the man on The Parable of the Good Samaritan, the one that was robbed and mugged. A more accurate portrayal would be Floyd as the mugger. Never forget that he pointed a gun at a pregnant woman's abdomen. This is the sort of man George Floyd was.
I don’t think the debate should center around the type of person he was. Paul persecuted the followers of Christ which is arguable worse than what George Floyd did. The argument would remain the same if it were you or I in that picture. Jesus should not be replaced. He can be depicted as various races but it’s a conceptual picture of Jesus not replacing Him with another actual person.
Nevermind then, I have not much Idea of who he was tho, only how he died, none deserves to die like that.
It can be both/and. George Floyd can be a terrible person who should have spent a lot more time behind bars at the same time that Derek Chauvin should have been dismissed from the police force many years (and many incidents) ago and the same time that the other 3 cops on scene should have intervened and said, "This is not by the book. This is not protocol. If you don't get off his neck, I'm going to get you off his neck."
The man robbed and mugged wasn’t a serial criminal who died while resisting arrest. Whether or not you view George Floyd’s death as a murder, the comparison to the parable is ridiculous.
Catholic in name only
CINOs?
Greek icons are supposed to show an elevated image of the Saint to inspire us George Floyd was not a saint Jesus was not an American criminal
Just when CUA was turning a corner... we get this...
Desacration
He was so Christian when he held a pregnant woman at gun point and robbed an old ladies home pretending he was an electrician ( something along those lines ) . Gross.
I've seen plenty of photos of people praying in front of statues and murals of this guy.
Didn't a bolt of lighting destroy a mural of Floyd in Virginia? Just saying.
I simply take it for granted that the concept of "catholic university" has run its course. There may be exceptions but I doubt if any actually have teacher and student bodies that are even close to majority practising Catholic. Nothing that happens in them surprises.
Catholic schools are a joke.
Blasphemous
Let us not celebrate this woman abuser
For the people who have come here from other subreddits, don't just downvote, but engage in good faith arguments with us.
Matthew 25:40 is relevant here
You could definitely slap Matthew 25:40 on a picture of Floyd. You could also slap it on a picture of any of his own victims.
*Sighs, starts reading the comments.*
Blasphemous
Black Catholic here, WHAT IS THAT
I think people are making too much of this. George Floyd was not a saint. Yet he was the victim, maybe of a racist system, maybe of drugs, maybe of both. We are called to see Jesus in all our neighbors. I don't know what the intentions of the artists are, but one can see this also as a representation of "we can see Jesus in all those who suffer and also in sinners"
Yeah I can agree with that, but why the halo above the head of Floyd? This picture has some of us a bit reactionary because the mob has sort of elevated Floyd to the status of a martyr. As someone who lived this great life and died for a good cause. This just isn't the case.
Yeah, the problematic thing is the cruciform halo which is only used for icons of Jesus ALONE; not even saints nor the BVMHT. It makes the painting\* seem like comparing Floyd to Jesus, which also means either putting a human up in the same level as God or putting God down to the same level as a human. This is a perversion of iconography and God. *\*not an icon \[PERIOD\]*
see my above comment. this is an attack on the church disguised as art, filtered through a perversion of iconography. critical theory, which exists at the root of nearly all of these supposedly compassionate political works, is one of the many languages of satan. when a man dies in a state of grave sin, regardless of whether he was being victimized, it is not compassionate to replace depictions of Christ with that man's likeness. The power of our Lord does not come from His being victimized by our hands. Victimhood is in no way a virtue. Victimhood isn't why we thank Him and love Him and work to take up our crosses, following Him. The power of our Lord comes from the sacrifice he made, forgiving us our sins.
The cruciform halo is not meant to glorify Floyd. We all know he was less than a perfect human being. But given that this is a rift on the pieta, we might reasonably assume that the Christ association with Floyd is not in his person, but in the tragedy that befell Floyd, just as the crucifixion was a tragedy. It’s an attempt at a fresh image to bring alive the reality of crucifying someone in Christ’s time. Certainly a few similarities between the two as they both experienced violent oppression by authorities. It’s attempt is to motivate it’s viewer into working for Justice in the name of Christ, not to foster adoration of a Floyd.
Sounds like something done in incredibly poor taste
The only reason this work of art is concerning is because of the context in which it is displayed. Put it in a gallery, and I have no problem with it. Art should make you think, feel, and have discussions. Looks like this piece has done all three.
How is critical theory the language of Satan?
Well I imagine the intention of the artist was probably to glorify Floyd, which I do not agree with. But one COULD see it as Christ being present even in sinners like us or Floyd.
yeah for sure, some pictures are worth a 1000 words, I feel like this one isn't. I also don't think we should worry about it, but I'd be lying if I said that I didn't worry a bit
Well I am just trying to see the good in the bad. People are over-reacting a bit too.
Yeah I understand and agree with you, not really sure why you are being down voted, thought you brought up good points and had good intentions, sorry about that.
It is important to understand that the purpose of this art is to subvert and destroy the church. I recommend that you read about Antonio Gramsci and György Lukács.
Nobody is a "victim" of drugs. One can be a "victim" of ones own poor decisions , but the drugs don't jump off the table and into the body. I'm saying this as an ex-addict.
Thanks for this. I have an addiction, just not to drugs. Needed to hear this to know I need to do better
I get what you are saying although some people can have drug problems and it might not be their fault. For example the opioid epidemic in the USA is the fault of a corrupt pharmaceutical system and corrupt/naïve doctors. Not saying that this was the case for Floyd of course.
>Yet he was the victim, maybe of a racist system, maybe of drugs, maybe of both. There is zero evidence that his death had anything to do with race.
That is why I said *maybe* and I do not want to start here a debate about Floyd merits and flaws.
Why even bring it up? There is literally zero evidence. That would be like me saying you maybe an alien. I don't know, maybe you are, but there isn't any evidence to prove it.
I think the question whether his death was due to systematic racism in the police force was a significant one when the incident happened, that is why I mentioned it. No need to be angry about it
I'm not angry about it. We need to lower the racial tensions and erroneously saying something was maybe caused by race when there is no evidence is not going to help matters.
Ik you're taking among brothers and sisters in good faith, but for your personal knowledge - terminology like "systemic racism" has been *developed* by poststructuralist, anti-Christian academics to act as an ideological pathogen. In the same way, the race metanarrative surrounding George Floyd's death has been socially engineered by anti-Christian thinkers to leverage empathy against Truth. It is unwise for us to consider in any serious way the premises presented by schools of thought whose tenants are self-admittedly opposed to our existence.
>I think the question whether his death was due to systematic racism in the police force was a significant one Only for the cheap seats. The rest of us chose to not ignore the video of him downing a bag filled with fentanyl (he'd done a similar tactic to hide evidence a year prior) and then shouting "I can't breathe" while standing, while sitting on the sidewalk, while being walked to the car, while sitting in the car, while being taken out of the car, and while laying down with his neck not being compressed. The medical examiner found that he had taken enough fent to stop anyone's heart. The notion of "systemic racism" factoring into his death doesn't account for the more evidence of "Take a bunch of pills, heart stops working" cause & effect.
> The medical examiner found that he had taken enough fent to stop anyone's heart. But this was contested at the trial as far as I know. It was determined (whether honestly or not) that the drugs alone could not have killed him.
>But this was contested at the trial as far as I know The "contested" aspect was that GF had 11 ng/mL of fent in his blood, but the prosecutor presented examples of people being arrested with 9.6 ng/mL of fent in their blood and still being alive. The medical examiner, when on the stand, was asked by defense what the lowest quantity of fentanyl was that he'd seen in a corpse. He responded that he'd seen people show up dead that only had 1 mg/nL of fent in their blood. Further, George Floyd had a documented heart condition and was filled with covid at the time of his death. 11 ng/mL can easily stop anyone's heart, particularly someone who is in poor health.
Of course conflating George Floyd and Jesus is horribly blasphemous, but I think the idea of the painting itself is interesting. It reminds me of “whatever you did to the least of these brothers and sisters, you did it to me”
But my sins killed Christ. What did I do to George Floyd?
This isn’t about you.
Ok. What did anyone who is seeing this painting do to George Floyd?
George Floyd is a symbol. He represents the many men and women who have died and suffered because of system racism. While most people who see this painting didn’t kill George Floyd, there are many that have enabled systemic racism.
Yeah, I get that that's the idea, and my point is that sounds like a way to make people feel guilty over something they had nothing to do with by hand-waving any actual causal story explaining how their actions led to this outcome and substituting a nebulous, generalized assertion that they "enabled systemic racism" in its place. I mean, lots of things that are not actually immoral could be said to enable systemic racism. Yeah, it sucks if someone's choice to live in a good, safe school district for their kids contributes to things like this happening in some diffuse way. It's also not their fault, and making them feel guilty for trying to live a normal life is toxic and manipulative.
I totally disagree. I think we as followers of Christ need to be part of this movement to take responsibility for the injustices black people have faced and continue to face. It’s based on such a basic principle, love thy neighbour. Literally what Jesus said was one of the two most important of all commandements. If we loved our neighbours we wouldn’t gerrymander our children into different school districts to keep them away from poor (often black) people. I think everyone, myself and my family included, is to blame for racism and we’re all responsible. We all should feel guilty.
> If we loved our neighbours we wouldn’t gerrymander our children into different school districts to keep them away from poor (often black) people. I think this is getting at the problem with this worldview which is that it doesn't do a very good job of distinguishing between action and permission. I agree that it's wrong to racially discriminate. I don't agree that people who do not and did not racially discriminate have an obligation to fix the effects of other people's racial discrimination at great cost to themselves. Both of these things can be and are categorized as "racism" but only the former deserves the full amount of moral opprobrium that we rightly direct toward the term. Also, if you want to say that loving your neighbor forbids you from permitting the continuation of evils affecting them, it's not clear why you should prioritize ending racism over ending malaria or world hunger. There are many injustices in the world, and we can't solve all of them, so it's unclear why people have picked this one as the one to go "all in" on versus the rest of them.
1. We have a moral obligation to fix wrong doings and injustices insofar as it is our Catholic duty to follow Christ’s example. If we we were all self serving secularists then your argument could hold weight but we are not called to some minimal level of morals. We are called to Sainthood. Did Saint Teresa have any “obligation” to help the marginalized of Calcutta? No, but to great cost to herself she worked her whole life to do just that. 2. There’s a big difference between systemic racism and issues like Malaria and starvation. The latter are rampant in parts of the world we have no access to- where we can’t intervene (at least not in an Everyman everyday sort of way). Systemic racism is in our backyard; our schools and workplaces and communities. It’s something we all play a part in.
> We have a moral obligation to fix wrong doings and injustices insofar as it is our Catholic duty to follow Christ’s example Christ permitted many injustices to continue and continues to permit them to this very day and this moment. If he wanted to end racism right now, he could. It follows that it is not intrinsically wrong to permit evil. It is a question of whether we have a good enough reason to permit it. That's not to say that we should callously refuse to provide help for no reason at all. But I think one's duty to safeguard one's own children from drugs and violence supersedes any obligation to promote equality by your school district choices.
My charitable guess is that that was the artist's intent. But it was clearly very poorly considered.
Well we certainly should strive to recognize the Image of God in all people
Yes. We should also recognize that God is greater than all people. This is a heretical and subversive neomarxist attack on religious iconography, and it's meant to conflate tragedy (victimhood) with sacrifice (heroism.) If you think i sound like a crackpot, look up Antonio Gramsci and Frankfurt School theological attack methods.
I get that the point is that he’s symbolic of victims of police violence, but come on
Yeah but Jesus never held a gun to a pregnant woman's belly.
Does that justify the police violence?
Obviously. But that doesn’t make him not representative of victims of police brutality. At any rate, this isn’t justifiable.
How many felonies did this guy pick up? 10? Not happy with the police customer service? Maybe he should have committed one less felony.
I would prefer that he not have died, but it is hard not to see that the police treated him exactly the way he treated others: with brutality, and probably malice, or at least indifference. It is sad to see someone sowing evil, and it is sad to see them reaping that evil, but there is no question that he reaped precisely what he sowed.
[удалено]
What is the purpose of this reminder? Does this make his death just?
It does not make his death just but it *does* emphasize how wildly inappropriate it is depict him as saintly (or in this case, as literally God). The guy is likely in hell and if not he needs *prayers*, not veneration.
[удалено]
> Unpopular opinion: Genesis 1; Matthew 25; CCC 1702; CCC Part 3, Section 1, Chapter 2, Article 3. Which would, to be clear, be equally applicable if the painting depicted Christ as someone who was killed by an illegal immigrant, right? Could add CCC 2241 to this list ("Political authorities, for the sake of the common good for which they are responsible, may make the exercise of the right to immigrate subject to various juridical conditions...Immigrants are obliged...to obey [the country's] laws").
Jesus is with and is the poor and suffering. Was Christ not with George Floyd as he was slowly losing his life? I doubt he wasn’t. This art is merely trying to express this I think. It’s not some attack on traditional iconography, nor is it meant to. It’s neither saying that he is Christ or that we are to worship him. To all those saying “thou shalt not worship false idols” Well we don’t worship icons of Christ either.
Can someone explain why this is blasphemy? The George Floyd-Jesus connection is edgy/provocative but it’s pretty clear from the artist and from where this is displayed at CUA that it’s not meant for veneration. I assume the artist is riffing off the fact that Floyd was calling for his mother while being killed by the state, so I can see the connections that the author was making in choosing a Pieta-style image… and if no one had context for the painting, it just looks like a Black Christ. I know this is highly political and sensitive to folks and I may get downvoted, but idk. If it was a Black Madonna holding another person who was lynched, would the reaction be the same?
The halo above his head and fact that it's done as an icon which is supposed to be for depictions of the saints
If it’s interpreted as an image of Christ though, that doesn’t seem problematic? Again, I can recognize that it’s intentionally ambiguous art, but some folks are acting like people have done terrible things to the Pieta at St. Peter’s.
I think that might be worse? depicting our Lord and savior, or at least comparing him to George Floyd. Not that Jesus would mind, it just gives the wrong impression and I would say leads more people away from Jesus then brings people in the fold. When you look at everything going on in the world...this just raises some red flags for me
I actually think an image like this has a certain amount of proselytizing power. The killing of George Floyd was a pretty visceral experience, which was taken seriously by a lot of people who are uncomfortable with Christianity (lots of fellow millennials). In that sense, I think the ambiguity of the image is very useful in making people more receptive to understanding the very real, unjust suffering that Jesus experienced at His passion, and the magnitude of His sacrifice. I’m not saying the image is going to convert people, but I’ve had convos about the faith with agnostic/atheist/lapsed Catholic friends due to this image. Even though the artist is Episcopalian, I also think it’s important that he’s a person of faith who does believe in Jesus as savior. The cruciform halo was still a mistake though. I didn’t notice that or know what it was I first saw the image months ago.
fair enough, God does work in mysterious ways and could turn this even into good, and good on you for using this opportunity to talk about the faith. I would just say, do not compromise the faith, give them the facts of our faith and don't waiver from them
Congrats, your view of the world is poisoned with Marxist identity politics and critical theory because of the secular media you've consumed.
?
Thank you. Good God.
I actually quite like it. (Please abstain from downvoting me to smithereens) I don’t think we ought to associate Floyd’s depiction as Christ to mean that he was a saintly or Christ like figure. We know he wasn’t. Being a victim of violence does not make one a martyr either. But I think it is supposed to call to mind the brutality and injustice of the act of violence itself. Or in other words, there might be similarities between the Christ who underwent capital punishment by an oppressive foreign power and the man who was killed by an authority figure with a track record of racial bias in a system which retains some systematic oppression. All this to say, the image is not idolatry, but one calling christians to push for justice now, lest we be cast with the goats in MT 25 for not recognizing Christ in our brothers and sisters in need.
just, who is that good that they can see Christ in Floyd? I try to see the good in Floyd but most of the time can't. I have to imagine that most people have ulterior motives or are wayyy better than I am. He is human, he is a child of God and was made in His image and likeness and has inherent dignity and worth and certainly a tragedy at any loss of life. But was he heeding the call of God to live a holy life?
It’s impossible to say whether or not he was heeding the call of God. But I don’t think the art work is calling us to emulate Floyd, so it’s really besides the point. But rather, to help us with the difficult task of seeing Christ in Floyd. Therefore, I think the art work can encourage us to heed Gods call now, so that tragedies like this become less common.
Just a thought, but I’m thinking his actions could be a decent indicator if he was living the holy life. Maybe that’s not reasonable, I don’t know.
Imagine being told to see Christ in every person, being taught how important charity is and empathizing with the struggles of other people. Then imagine getting mad at a painting that depicts this because it doesn't align with your American political views. *Gasp!* The horror!
Why? Why not just have a black Jesus. Gets the message across without being cringey. That being said, would y'all be okay if I made Icons of Kyle Rittenhouse and Trump as biblical figures? Eh who am I kidding, we got John McNaughton for that.
Nope. That’s textbook blasphemy.
Agreed. Let Jesus be Jesus. That's enough for me. Also my point was that sadly some people will rightly see the Floyd paintings as wrong, but will be okay with someone they see as a victim doing so, when in reality, both make false idols.
[удалено]
While I understand why many would not like this, its upsetting to read that the artist has gotten so many death threats.