Marianne Faithfull, The Master and Margarita and Faust.

It's funny how A leads to B and onto C in a serendipitous way.

Listening to Bob Dylan's Visions of Johanna on Spotify, I discovered that Marianne Faithfull had recorded the song in the early 1970s, after she had broken up with Mick Jagger and was living on the streets. Reading the wikipedia article on her, I learned that Jagger's song Sympathy for the Devil was partly inspired by a novel Faithfull had given to Jagger - The Master and Margarita  by Russian writer, Mikhail Bulgakov. I began researching the novel and quickly decided to add it to my list of books to read this year. It is considered by some critics to be one of the best novels of the 20th century, as well as the foremost of Soviet satires. Fortunately, I was able to locate a translation of the novel, in pdf format, which I was able to download and convert to mobi.

I'm 1/3 of the way through The Master and Margarita.  The novel has lead me to Charles Gounod's opera, Faust and La damnation de Faust by French composer, Hector Berlioz.

Unable to speak French, I searched the Internet for copies of the librettos for both operas which would include both the original French and an English translation. There were English translations available without the French included, but it is more difficult for me to follow the thread of the opera without the original language juxtaposed to the translation.

I was able to locate such a translation on the website naxos.com. Sadly, the libretto published there is less than perfect. The website does not provide a downloadable pdf. I managed to get around that, however, by "printing" each page of the libretto using CutePDF Writer. Although the website publishes all 5 Acts of the opera, it lists these 5 Acts as being only 4...... Acts 1 and 2 being listed as Act 1. Also, there are one or two portions where the lyrics sung by the Chorus isn't included. I am able to follow along, while listening to the opera, even though the libretto isn't up to par.

The libretto for La damnation de Faust is also available on the same website. I'm hoping they've done a better job with that one.

Would Jesus Insult Islam?

In the 1990s, WWJD became a popular phrase and motto for a number of Christians who rightly believed that, before performing an action, we should ask ourselves, "What Would Jesus Do"? We don't see the bracelets very often these days, and although the phrase isn't as wide spread as it once was, I'd like to think that most Christians would still ask themselves that question today rather than act without thinking of the sinfulness of the action.

Today, it appears that "Draw Muhammed Contests" are becoming all the rage in the U.S.. One such event was planned for Friday, outside a Phoenix, Arizona mosque by "former Marine" Jon Ritzheimer who was encouraging folks to "utilize there [sic] second amendment right at this event just incase [sic] our first amendment comes under the much anticipated attack." Ritzheimer was quoted as saying, "This is purely 100% a Freedom of Speech Rally. Stand Tall and show that we can PEACEFULLY protest our rights that are under attack. That is the sole cause for this Rally and Islam wants to silence us."

Personally, I fail to see how bringing firearms to an event that intentionally insults a religious group can be call "peaceful". I'm also wondering how we Christians should react to this. Does Jesus ask us to stand outside a mosque wearing a "F**K ISLAM" T-shirt ?

Over the years, non-Christian's have displayed anti-Christian works of "art", such as the infamous "piss Christ" without fear of violent retaliation from the followers of Jesus. We Christians have, instead followed Christ's command to "turn the other cheek" and to forgive, "not seven times but seventy-seven times".

Obviously, Muslims will have a far different reaction. Are we permitted to insult Muslims because they fight back?

I am not asking these question out of fear of Islam or Muslim extremists. I hope that, should the time come, I'd be able to face death for Christ. I'm simply saying that we should treat Muslims the way we would like to be treated.

Homeless Jesus in the News Again.

Last April, I posted an article about Canadian sculpture Timothy Schmalz's statue Homeless Jesus. [Statue Provides Opportunity for Catholic-Bashing.] There was a mini-controversy surrounding the statue at the time. There were a number of reports that Schmalz had attempted to give the statue to two prominent Catholic churches, St. Michael’s Cathedral in Toronto and St. Patrick’s Cathedral in New York, only to have his statue rejected by the two cathedrals.

Liberal blogs & news sources had a field day bashing the Catholic Church with stories how Homeless Jesus had no home.

The truth was, St. Patrick's had to refuse the statue, not because the work too controversial, but because the Cathedral was undergoing extensive restorations at the time.

The Toronto archdiocese had even tried to help Schmalz find an alternative location, eventually finding a home at Regis College at the University of Toronto.

Fast forward to November, when it was reported that the statue was presented to Pope Francis. An article written in December reports that the statue was blessed by Pope Francis and returned to it's home at Church of Saint Stephen-in-the-Fields, in Toronto.
Now, the Christian Post is reporting that, after its trip to the Vatican, the statue was stolen.

Not being willing to leave the story there, I went to the Church of Saint Stephen-in-the-Fields website. I was surprised to discover that the church is not a Catholic church, but Anglican. The church's pastor is a female priest, no less. I was a bit confused as to why an Anglican church would want their statue blessed by the Pope. Wouldn't it have been more appropriate to have it blessed by the Archbishop of Canterbury?

Looking further into the website, I come across the church's report on the the theft of the statue. As it turns out, their statue was not the Homeless Jesus  statue blessed by Pope Francis, but an entirely different one called Jesus the Panhandler .

Not quite certain what to make of all this. Perhaps it's just another case of poor Internet news reporting.

Statue Provides Opportunity for Catholic-Bashing.

The headline was certainly provocative - Sculpture of Jesus the Homeless rejected by two prominent churches .

According to an article from thestar.com, Canadian sculpture Timothy Schmalz's statue entitled Homeless Jesus was "rejected" by two prominent Catholic churches, St. Michael’s Cathedral in Toronto and St. Patrick’s Cathedral in New York.

The artist claims that, while loved by the cathedral rectors, the work was rejected by "higher-ups in the New York and Toronto archdiocese".

Although the face of the figure is covered by a blanket, we're told that it's obviously Jesus because of the wounds in the feet. I suppose it could just as likely be a statue of St. Francis after he had received the stigmata....but I digress.

Naturally, anti-Catholic Progressives had a field day when news of the rejections hit the Internet; the implication being that the two cathedrals found the work too controversial, and of course, the Catholic Church doesn't really  care about the homeless.

This was the perfect opportunity for non-Christian to post "Amen, I say to you, what you did not do for one of these least ones, you did not do for me." in com-boxes, although one such commentor mistakenly claimed the quotation comes from Matthew 24:25 instead of Matthew 25:45. I suppose there's not always enough time to do your homework when engaged in Catholic bashing.

With a little effort, the real reason for the rejection of the statue by St.Patrick's Cathedral can be found in an article from the New York Daily News,

" Kate Monaghan, a spokesperson for St. Patrick’s told the New York Daily News that the cathedral had to refuse because the building is undergoing extensive restorations.
'But we loved the statue,' Monaghan said. 'When the time comes, we’ll certainly take another look.'"

This isn't the first time one of Schmalz's sculptures was rejected. Schmalz had planned to build a 100ft tall statue of St. Patrick atop Ireland's Croagh Patrick mountain. Plans were aborted after 70 percent of respondents to an online poll said they were not in favor of the statue being placed on the 2,510-foot-high pyramidal peak of the mountain, where the St. Patrick is said to have spent 40 days and nights fasting in 441AD.

I suppose it's because the Irish actually hate St. Patrick.

The Buddha Abandoning His Family.

I love the picture posted to the left. It is, to the best of my recollection, the only painting I've seen of a rarely discussed episode in the life of Siddhartha Gautama - AKA the Supreme Buddha -. This image depicts the Buddha, darling of Progressives everywhere, as he abandons his wife and infant son.

I've been told, by one American Buddhist-wannbe, that we can't really call the Buddha a deadbeat dad because, being a Prince, he left his family financially well off when he wandered off into the forest to seek Enlightenment.



Tell that to children whose fathers left them when they were babies.

Michelle Antoinette.

A recent image of Michell Obama as Marie Antoinette has been called a right-wing media smear, and racist. Is it?
 This isn't the first time  someone has seen a resemblance. I've also come upon a similiar portrayal here and here. No word yet from the Liberals on the political correctness of comparing Marie Antoinette to Dick Cheney,George Bush or Mitt Romney.
 

Easter Sunday

Thoughts on the Censoring of Art Works.

In a case that is becoming so common place as to be cliché, the Patterson Gallery in the School of Visual Arts at Penn State University has refused to exhibit Joshua Stulman's series of paintings entitled Portraits of Terror, which the artist says explores the terrorist culture found within areas of the Palestinian territories and how radicalized Islam attempts to legitimize terrorism.

Penn State claimed the work violated the University's "Zero Tolerance policy for Hate". Gratz College in Philadelphia canceled plans to exhibit the paintings out of fear of violence being committed against the institution.

One has to wonder if Penn State would censor the paintings of Enrique Chagoya. Chagoya's "The Misadventures of the Romantic Cannibals," - a lithograph which includes an image of Jesus receiving oral sex- has been on display since Sept. 11 at the tax-funded Loveland Museum Gallery in Loveland, Colorado.

The lithograph has provoked protests; a 56 year old woman is accused of using a crowbar to break glass over the so-called "art" and subsequently ripping the lithograph.

Chagoya told The Associated Press that he was shocked and saddened that his work was attacked.

"My intention has never been to offend anybody," he said.

If that was, indeed, his intention, Chagoya has failed.

Chagoya's work may have been the recipient of a violent attack, but it's unlikely that Chagoya will need to go into hiding because of reaction from Christians. Ironically, Chagoya may very well have to go underground (as cartoonist Molly Norris was advised to do, after her creation of "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day".) if word gets out that the lithograph also contains a panel showing Mohammed kneeling before dancing, transvestite pigs. Equally ironic is the fact that it's the section with Mohammed - not the one of Jesus - which would, in all likelihood, keep the work from being shown at Penn State.

Maurizio Cattelan's Sculpture.

The BBC calls the sculpture 'disgusting' . Naturally, there is some controversy surrounding this particular work by Italian artist Maurizio Cattelan, which is on display in the Piazza d'Affari outside the Milan stock exchange.

The BBC article suggests that the middle finger is anti-capitalist - showing contempt for the financial kingpins inside the building. The folks at designboom.com (which has several photos of the sculpture on the website) are of the same opinion, saying Cattelan is "giving the finger to bankers".

From the way I see it, the message given is quite the opposite. As we see, the palm of the hand is facing the building.....those of us looking at the statue are seeing the back of the hand. From this angle, it is the bankers who are giving us the finger.

If, by chance, the good people in Milan wish to have the sculpture removed, I'd like to see it moved to Washington, D.C.......placed in front of the White House. We have to be sure, though, that it's turned the right way.