Matthew Hazell on the Fishwrap’s defense of the Parisian Blasphemy

Matthew references the piece at the Fishwrap.  It is deeply crass.  Here’s a quote:

Da Vinci’s painting is not a religious object anyway, and is part of the cultural public domain.

The dopey writer cites other examples of appropriated of Christian symbols, some disgusting.  I, also, thought of moments in TV or movies when there was a clear visual reference to da Vinci’s Last Supper, such as a scene near the end of the movie Larry Crowne.  However, they were sugar and spice compared the dreck and bile of the Olympics.

BTW… “da Vinci” isn’t Renaissance Banksy.  He painted his Last Supper in the refectory in a religious convent (for readers of the Fishwrap, that’s a place where people like nuns and friars live… remember them? You might have heard of Friar Tuck, right?  And Tuck is not short for Tucker, which in Australia can mean “food”.  Your version might be older women with short hair who belong to the LCWR).  Moreover, it was painted in the convent’s refectory, where the professed religious took their meals, one of the vital areas of the convent, where it was important… now pay attention, Fishwrappers… important to relate even the taking of food to the salvific work of Christ and not focus on mere bodily satisfaction.  Foreign notions, I know, but bear with me a moment.  The Last Supper is not merely “part of the cultural domain”.  It is also a profoundly religious object, both by intention and by historical-cultural significance.

 

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Sin That Cries To Heaven, What are they REALLY saying?, You must be joking! and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Comments

  1. Pingback: MONDAY MID-DAY EDITION | BIG PULPIT

  2. Sportsfan says:

    The Last Supper mockery in the movie M*A*S*H was equally blasphemous. It was covered in several layers of filth starting with a priest breaking the seal of confession.
    Things are less nuanced now than they were in 1970.

  3. TonyO says:

    in a religious convent (for readers of the Fishwrap, that’s a place where people like nuns and friars live… remember them?…The Last Supper is not merely “part of the cultural domain”. It is also a profoundly religious object,

    Hooeee! Well said!

    One might point out that being part of the “cultural domain” not only doesn’t as such exclude being religious, in this case it is part of the cultural domain by being religious. In fact, being religious is also importantly the ground of the cultural domain. Remember “cult”? Our culture came from our Christian worship.

    They defeat their own thesis by the very words they use.

  4. JustaSinner says:

    With the blasphemous Last Supper mockery at the Olympics, we’re like in the Tom Cruise Jack Reacher movie where the bad guys are all arrayed against him and he says, “well, at least we know who’s who now”. Funny thing is a massive rear end kicking happened right afterwards. St Michael, defend us in battle…give us the strength to kick Satan’s butt, we humbly beseech thee.

  5. David G.-W. says:

    Dopey writer does not understand that Da Vinci is not a surname, but just means “from Vinci.” The correct way to refer to him is as Leonardo.
    To think that the NCR used to be a well-informed and even occasionally Catholic newspaper.

Comments are closed.