I Am 1000% Certain These Statues Would NOT Be Called Beautiful By Bishop Morlino

Every so often you come across a couple of posts on various blogs where 1 just seems to be intended to compliment the message in the other 1. Today was 1 of those days.

1st I came across a post by LarryD @ Acts of the Apostasy about some new statues installed by the pastor at his parish. (Church Art Shouldn't Make You Say "Blech!") The 2 statues (below) were put there to replace 2 others. 1 was a lifesize depiction of the Pieta. The other was actually a shrine to the Blessed Mother. The statue of Mary was painted, traditional, beautiful. A bank of votive candles stood before her. Larry said that he was told that the pastor felt the Pieta "disturbed" children because it depicted such a sad scene. YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING!!!!!!!!!!!!! Although I suspect that is the PC excuse the pastor used, the real person who was "disturbed" was probably the pastor who didn't like to be reminded that Jesus died for our sins since that reminds him that there ARE some actions that are sin that he doesn't want to admit are sin. (& yes Larry, I'm just as sure as you are that "it's just a matter of time before the crucifix is replaced with a "Resurrection Jesus" superimposed upon a cross.")

But this, what I can only call an "INFAMITA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!", gets worse. What until you hear what they are called. The female one, alledgedly the Blessed Virgin Mary, is called "Starving Palestinian". What the. . . . . . . . ????????? That title makes absolutely no sense at all. Additionally, it reminded me of the 1st halk of the Romulan salute in the original Star Trek. I think that says it all.

The other 1, alledgedly St. Joseph & the child Jesus, goes by something along the lines of "Bedouin". When I 1st saw it I wanted to know who broke St. Joseph's neck.

Larry is right when he says "Those unholy statues have no business being on consecrated ground." Used as a sorce of fuel for a campfire, yes, in a Catholic Church, NEVER. & I was not at all surprized to find out from Larry that the wife of the person who took 2 good pieces of wood & ruined them (I can't call him an artist) runs reiki sessions out of their studio.
Larry was also right when he said: "And when it comes to art in churches - statues, iconography, stained glass images - well, it ought to both reflect and project beauty. It ought to reflect the beauty, truth and goodness of God, creator of all things, as best presented by the artist's hands and imagination. And it also ought to project the blessed beauty of our final end - heaven, and eternal union with God. It ought to be beautiful, as well as draw us towards Beauty.
If the work of art fails to do either of those two things, then it should not be anywhere near a church."
This leads me to the 2nd post, this time by Dad29 @ his blog (Bp. Morlino Hits Another Home Run). In it he shares a part of a column Bishop Morlino wrote for the Madisan Diocesan newspaper. While the focus of Bishop Morlino was The beauty of our worship in the liturgy, what he had to say could be applied just as well to the art & decor of a Church building as well. Compare the above to what Bishop Morlino has to say about what is beautiful.

1st of all the good Bishop deals with the argument those who would approve of alledged art like the above. He points out how our country & our culture would respond to any criticism of these statues as being ugly (at the least with the response “but beauty is in the eye of the beholder,” or, “everything is beautiful, in its own way.” Bishop Morlino doesn't buy that. He explains exactly what is wrong with the claim when he says "Just as our culture has sought to relativize everything important to human nobility, asserting that it is human nature not to have a nature, so too is this the case with beauty itself." Bishop Morlino is absolutely right to say this is another symptom of the problem of "relativism" that Papa Benedetto has continually condemned as wrong.
Bishop Molino goes on to add: "Beauty is not, in fact, simply in the eye of the beholder, from the viewpoint of reason. For reason tells us that beautiful, good, true, and one are interchangeable; therefore, whatever is beautiful is also good and true, and expresses unity and harmony.
Beautiful can never be mistaken as an indicator of what pleases some majority of people somewhere. The fact that our parish likes to sing a particular song at the liturgy cannot, of itself, make that song beautiful. To be beautiful, indeed, is to be good and is to be true. As much as some people may enjoy the musical antics of Lady Gaga, these cannot honestly be described as beautiful.
Beautiful means, in the first place, embodying the truth. . . . . Being true is necessary before anything can be beautiful." (emphasis mine)
By the absolute standard that Bishop Morlino states of what is beautiful, those statues fail miserably. There is nothing good or true in them.
But Bishop Morlino doesn't stop there. He goes on to talk about the fact that for something to be beautiful it must be good as well as true. "But, it is equally important for something to be good so that it also might be judged beautiful. The truth, which is clothed by beauty, must be such as to ennoble the human person in terms of bringing out his or her very best, both of intellect and of will. The beautiful must embody that which is true, but also ennobling to our human nature as made in the image and likeness of God. Whatever is beautiful must fix our minds and our hearts on the things above, according to St. Paul (Phil 4).
When one realizes that to be authentically beautiful, something must be both true and ennobling of our human nature, that tells us a great deal about what exactly is appropriate at the liturgy." (emphasis mine) Again, it is clear that the above fails that standard as well. This stautues do anything but fix our minds & hearts on that which is above.
Bad liturgy & bad art & decor in a Church usually go hand in hand. I say usually because sometimes you have n new pastor come in & starts doing liturgy right but can't clean up the environmental polution immediately. It is the same false "Spirit of Vatican II" gang that has promoted both. & it has done so to get the focus off of God & onto man. Bishop Morlino makes it clear where the focus should be, why both should be done right, to put our focus where it belongs, on Christ, not man.
"Thus, everything that we will be doing in the days, months, and years ahead, since it will be aimed at reverent Christ-centeredness in liturgical celebrations, must be nothing less than beautiful, reflecting the perfect beauty, unity, truth, and goodness of the object of our worship and adoration Themselves, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit." (emphasis mine)
Bishop Morlino has made it clear to us what the standard is. Yes, there will be those who will oppose what he is saying. What the Bishop is saying is basicly what Papa Benedetto has been saying as well. (& in his post, Larry as well.) Where this standard is not being upheld, those of us in the pews must stand up & demand what is simply our right, that it be done right.