Yes, this hideous monstrosity is what the Vatican is using for a Nativity set this Christmas. It makes a horrible, mocking caricature of Our Lord's birth. See here for an analysis of the occultic symbolisms in the various creatures displayed in this scene.
The only positive thing I can say about it is that at least it doesn't smack of homosexual pornography, as did the artistic slop from 2017.
Disneyland litter receptacles from Disneychurch.ReplyDelete
I like it.ReplyDelete
I think it's important to look at this in the context of other "art" put forth by this pontificate: the weird animal light show flashed on St Peter's, the pachamamas, the 2017 nativity, for examples. This is part and parcel of an attempt to banalize the sacred.Delete
"Maybe the astronaut is holding a beautiful moon rock to give to Baby Jesus." - Sure.....Delete
And the reason it cannot be a moon rock is because....?ReplyDelete
Do you know how ridiculous you sound asking that question? Did you look at the Seinfeld clip...because that's you in a nutshell.Delete
Do you know how ridiculous you sound because that's you in a NUTshell also in the video.Delete
I'm just pointing out the absurdity of the Vatican's latest Nativity scene. The humor in the Seinfeld clip revolves around two pretentious "art" collectors giving ludicrous interpretations of the Kramer painting. I'm not surprised the distinction was lost on you...ReplyDelete
Maybe not everyone watched that show. I stopped watching the tube quite some time ago and never laid eyes on Seinfeld myself.Delete
I never watched that show at all and now I don't even have a TV... precisely because of shows like that.Delete
I would have been more impressed with the article on the occult symbolism if the author hadn't said, 'Jesus remains covered in red cloth for a while (not sure why)'. If they're so ignorant that they don't know that the Christ Child is not shown in a Creche until the First Mass of Christmas, what else did they get wrong?ReplyDelete
The Child isn't shown till Christmas morning? Since when is that a dogma? Given all that the author pointed out, I see no good in splitting hairs like that.Delete