There Is A Line, Nor Is He This Side Of It
Here at ErosBlog we’ve had some spirited discussions surrounding the use of religious imagery and its intersection with eroticism. Although it can be hard to distinguish genuine religious hostility to sexuality from its much-more-common companion, culturally-conservative hostility as expressed by religionists who aren’t interested in clarifying the distinction, there can be little doubt that conflating sex and religion is a handy (even lazy) method for culture warriors on both sides to generate a lot of noise and heat with minimum expenditure of effort.
The ErosBlog editorial line is opposed to sex-negative cultural conservatives and warily neutral about organized religionists. Religious objection to erotic expression is most often risible, but if the expression in question seems mostly aimed at poking thumbs in eyes to generate cheap outrage, my sympathy for it does sometimes wane.
And that strikes me as the spirit behind the photographs linked from Spanking Blog, in which the photographer invaded a working-but-unattended church and arrayed schoolgirl-attired models in a variety of naughty poses, even unto the extremity of conducting simulated lesbian sex on the altar:
I suppose I would be untroubled by this if the artist had laboriously simulated the background for these photos in his studio. But I’ve enough of a respecter of property and civility to be sympathetic to the annoyed priest who took umbrage at this. An enormous amount of sweat and treasure went into the preparation of that altar as a space sacred to those parishioners, and it seems pretty dickish to disregard that so utterly in the pursuit of some artistic and sexy photographs.
Similar Sex Blogging:
Shorter URL for sharing: http://www.erosblog.com/?p=4166
I’m no christian, but my first thought on looking at that picture was “get your dirty shoes off the alter cloth!” It would be as tacky to put your feet up on the furniture if you were visiting a friend’s house, after being invited. To go into a space that’s valued by others, without invitation, and defile their property (certainly symbolically, but perhaps literally) is just wrong. Tacky. Classless.
I’m in two minds about this. Christianity appears to be largely passive aggressive to me, what with their “all sinners are welcome” mantra, immediately followed by outraged finger pointing of the hell-inducing activities of everyone. Your local church is probably somewhere in between these extremes.
So, despite the local parishioners feeling violated about “their” church being desecrated, I see the building and it’s contents more like a public domain. They may have created it, paid for it and worshipped it, but ultimately they have set it free for others to enjoy regardless of their religion, background or intent.
It would be inappropriate to interrupt a service. I’m not sure how this photo shoot harms anyone, aside from setting a few tongues clucking.
To the annoyed priest, I would think it would be helpful to him, as it would provide many new sermons to him to preach.
An enormous amount of sweat and treasure went into the preparation of that altar as a space sacred to those parishioners, and it seems pretty dickish to disregard that so utterly in the pursuit of some artistic and sexy photographs.
Amen.
I’m with you on this one Bacchus.
“They may have created it, paid for it and worshipped it, but ultimately they have set it free for others to enjoy regardless of their religion, background or intent.”
Uhhh no. They didn’t. They open their doors to the public for the express purpose of practicing their specific religious faith, not to have people doing what they consider desecrating it. Denny’s is open to the public 24 hours a day, but if you go in there to do a schoolgirl bondage shoot instead of ordering food, there’s a pretty good chance your ass is going to jail. The photographer is a douchebag.
That said, the pics are hot :)
you don’t have to agree with someone’s sincerely held beliefs in order to respect those beliefs
this is, in a sense, an affront to the believers free speech
No, it’s really not — the believers’ abilities and opportunities to speak are not affected by this.
What it is, is an offense to property rights, plus incivility and lack of respect for other people.
it is an attack on a symbolic space like a war memorial, or a grave might be considered a symbolic space
you’re right it’s not exactly about free speech and I don’t think it’s about property rights either. It is incivility and a lack of respect for other people. It seems so pointless. No statement is being made that I can see — “if the artist had laboriously simulated the background for these photos in his studio” it would have cost money and this was the cheap option. I just imagine a group of elderly parishioners who have never really hurt anybody having what they would regard as a sacred space violated. It’s tawdry.
I was reminded of Tony Harrison’s poem V http://plagiari...5618/
To me, it’s like well-done graffiti on the side of a building – the art is beautiful, yes, but the artist didn’t ask permission before painting.
Would you consider two (or more) consenting adults having sex in a church offensive? Would it be acceptable if they loved the specific site and each other and meant to do something they ultimately considered meaningful and beautiful? Would it change if they did it to be profane, as a deliberate act of sacrilege for whatever reason? Is this tawdry because someone is doing it just to make a buck? How does this relate to the artist who has women strip naked in Art museums twenty feet away from nude statues and paintings? Museums are not churches but they are considered by some to be temples of Art.
I’m not personally for this, I’m someone who is bothered by tattoos because it’s hard for me to see them and not think of the holocaust–a purely personal leap of imagination that very few tattoo artists or consumers make, I’m sure, but I’m a little curious about the slope it implies.
“So, despite the local parishioners feeling violated about “their” church being desecrated, I see the building and it’s contents more like a public domain. They may have created it, paid for it and worshipped it, but ultimately they have set it free for others to enjoy regardless of their religion, background or intent.”
That’s kind of like saying, “because you invited me into your home, I can take a shit on your carpet.”
As someone involved in church, and involved with a preacher’s child, I know how much effort goes into making the building of a good church place where parishioners and visitors feel safe and loved. So despite anyone’s feelings about the religion practiced inside, that doesn’t make it okay for a photographer to trespass* and shoot images that would make the owners of the space feel uncomfortable.
This is similar to, say, a blog’s comment policy: Bacchus has graciously opened this space for discussion, but that doesn’t mean we can say nasty things about him or each other here. He’s within his rights to delete any comments that violate the spirit of his forum.
Granted, some of these images are beautiful and thought provoking. But a lot of them are a cheap way to get a rise out of the viewers.
*though one should hope that such trespasses will be forgiven. /lame joke
“Would you consider two (or more) consenting adults having sex in a church offensive?”
I know this is an old post, but I felt it useful to point out that Canon Law specifically allows a married couple to engage in sexual intercourse in a Catholic church, although not during worship services. The permission is qualified, of course, requiring that there be nowhere else they can reasonably do it — one imagines that this would occur, say, if the townsfolk have taken refuge in the church due to flooding, or if newlyweds are being hunted by angry relatives. (Romeo & Juliet, anyone?)
As an ordained Minister, I must say I would not object, generally speaking, if 2 People were sexual with each Other in Our church. Granted, We would prefer They have permission first (absent extenuating circumstances which would preclude such permission being obtained).