You say that porn is wrong and I agree. You Catholics then have a big problem explaining why there is porn materials on a Cathedral. Here is an example: youtube.com/watch?v=X6cowE_ywVU
Looks like someone crying into the lap of someone else, the mouth would be way too low. People got to get their minds out of the gutter. Even if it was something pornographic, it’s interesting to know that the artistic taste of one sculptor speaks for the entire Catholic Church. I guess this means Warren Jeffs speaks for all protestants, and Jim Jones before him.
I seriously doubt that is pornographic. It is probably someone crying into the lap of another person.
Regardless, there was no evidence in the video that this cathedral is Catholic. For another, we don’t even know the name of the cathedral. And for yet another, how do we know the video isn’t doctored? Also, even if it is pornographic and is a Catholic cathedral, one cannot make a statement of the whole Catholic Church based on one isolated incident.
Anyone aroused by that statue? No, then it’s not porn.
OP would have a stronger position linking to Sheila na Gigs or gargoyles on known churches and calling them.“satanic.”
There are threads about that here already…
I’m not even sure what that is showing, to be quite honest. :shrug:
I’m not discounting the possibility that some sicko artist or sicko person in charge could or would have something like that done before, but it is true that people will see what they will see in something. (I have been in the art world and I know there are a lot of perverted people out there) I’m an artist, and I’m ALWAYS amazed at what people think one of my works is supposed to be. Everyone has a different take. I remember being hurt when someone saw something perverted in one work of mine once. I truly meant it as innocent! (this was before my conversion, with not so much knowledge on the importance of modesty)
My take on that church you posted about is that it looks like someone is either trying to wrestle with another person, or trying to beg for forgiveness at their feet, or trying to stop someone from moving or going away. I don’t see any tongues, any skin on skin contact, any intimate body parts being connected to another person’s body part anywhere. There aren’t any details to really decipher anything at all.
If one wants to see a sexual act in that sculpture, they can and will, I suppose.
I feel like this thread is a joke…
Questionable imagery exists on Catholic cathedrals and churches. The work is hundreds of years old, and would be historical censorship to remove or destroy.