# To cover up or not?



## Alcalaina (Aug 6, 2010)

There's a big hoohah going on at the moment about a new statue of Christ and whether his family jewels should be covered when he is processed round the streets during Semana Santa.










TVE1 had a reporter interviewing people on the streets about it last night, and the results were surprisingly mixed. Most people seemed to think it was perfectly natural the way it was. But one old girl said "well, it's not very big is it - I'd cover it up!"

But the church has decided to cover it during the procession - with a discreet "wisp of gauze" as Pete & Dud might say.

So perhaps this country isn't as devout as it used to be??


----------



## mrypg9 (Apr 26, 2008)

Alcalaina said:


> There's a big hoohah going on at the moment about a new statue of Christ and whether his family jewels should be covered when he is processed round the streets during Semana Santa.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Hmm. This subject requires many hours of focused thought. It involves spiritual, aesthetic and biological issues.
Personally, I find the public parading of the human genitalia whether sacred or profane rather offputting. I wouldn't like to be perchance eating a hot dog when the statue was being processed past my dining room window, for example.
Since Jesus was the Son of God and made in his image,if all should be revealed, he must be depicted with the largest genitalia .....what's the point of being divine with insignificant bits?
Spiritually.....well, there's 'Blessed are the eyes that see the things that ye see' (Luke 10, v23) or 'that the world should behold my glory' (John 17, v22)
OH and I will have heated and lengthy discussions on this topic.
(No footie on tv tonight...)


----------



## country boy (Mar 10, 2010)

Jesus Christ was a Jew y'know, alot of people won't accept that!


----------



## mrypg9 (Apr 26, 2008)

country boy said:


> Jesus Christ was a Jew y'know, alot of people won't accept that!


Well no, you don't expect a statue of Jesus with a bit cut off, so to speak, do you....


----------



## MaidenScotland (Jun 6, 2009)

And there was me thinking the thread was about wearing the hajab


----------



## JoCatalunya (Mar 16, 2011)

I personally cannot get my head round all this idolotry, it is just not cricket.


----------



## mrypg9 (Apr 26, 2008)

JoCatalunya said:


> I personally cannot get my head round all this idolotry, it is just not cricket.


Both involve balls.....in this case, at least.


----------



## thrax (Nov 13, 2008)

mrypg9 said:


> Both involve balls.....in this case, at least.


Ha ha!! Well, of course, that is the difference between snowmen and snow women - snow balls....


----------



## mrypg9 (Apr 26, 2008)

thrax said:


> Ha ha!! Well, of course, that is the difference between snowmen and snow women - snow balls....



My favourite quip along these lines is that of Michael Heseltine when commenting on some obscure point Gordon Brown had made in a speech, something about 'endogenous growth theory' ...Heseltine said 'That's not Brown, that's Balls'.


----------



## jojo (Sep 20, 2007)

Just cover it up!!! No one knew how big his genitalia were and no one needs to know! 

Jo xxx


----------



## mrypg9 (Apr 26, 2008)

jojo said:


> Just cover it up!!! No one knew how big his genitalia were and no one needs to know!
> 
> Jo xxx


Sorry, duplicate..


----------



## mrypg9 (Apr 26, 2008)

jojo said:


> Just cover it up!!! No one knew how big his genitalia were and no one needs to know!
> 
> Jo xxx




God only knows, as my old Gran used to say (on other topics).
I think you are right, there should be some suitably respectful drape to cover up the bits so as not to frighten the horses.
Although thinking of horses......no, best not to go there....


----------



## Joppa (Sep 7, 2009)

jojo said:


> Just cover it up!!! No one knew how big his genitalia were and no one needs to know!


Interestingly, in Roman crucixions the victims were stripped completely naked, so nothing to hide their modesty (they didn't crucify women naked). So presumably Jesus was also totally naked, but in Christian iconography, he is always shown with a loincloth out of respect. It has been argued that the Romans, out of deference for Jewish sensitivity about public nudity, did allow minimum clothing but we aren't sure. 
Michelangelo made a wooden carving of crucified Christ for the Church of Santo Spirito in Florence shown completely naked:
File:Santo Spirito, sagrestia, crocifisso di michelangelo 05.JPG - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The artist was only 17 when he executed this work, which used to hang above the High Altar but is now displayed in a sacristy, presumably out of public respect.


----------



## jojo (Sep 20, 2007)

Joppa said:


> Interestingly, in Roman crucixions the victims were stripped completely naked, so nothing to hide their modesty (they didn't crucify women naked). So presumably Jesus was also totally naked, but in Christian iconography, he is always shown with a loincloth out of respect. It has been argued that the Romans, out of deference for Jewish sensitivity about public nudity, did allow minimum clothing but we aren't sure.
> Michelangelo made a wooden carving of crucified Christ for the Church of Santo Spirito in Florence shown completely naked:
> File:Santo Spirito, sagrestia, crocifisso di michelangelo 05.JPG - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> The artist was only 17 when he executed this work, which used to hang above the High Altar but is now displayed in a sacristy, presumably out of public respect.



But did the artisist actually know how big (or not) Jesus' genitals were?? I doubt its documented in the bible!

Jo xxx


----------



## jojo (Sep 20, 2007)

mrypg9 said:


> God only knows, as my old Gran used to say (on other topics).
> I think you are right, there should be some suitably respectful drape to cover up the bits so as not to frighten the horses.
> Although thinking of horses......no, best not to go there....


Foal!!!!

Jo xxx


----------



## Alcalaina (Aug 6, 2010)

jojo said:


> But did the artisist actually know how big (or not) Jesus' genitals were?? I doubt its documented in the bible!
> 
> Jo xxx


You could say that about his nose, too. But that doesn't stop them depicting his face.


----------



## mrypg9 (Apr 26, 2008)

Alcalaina said:


> You could say that about his nose, too. But that doesn't stop them depicting his face.



That amused me....


----------



## jojo (Sep 20, 2007)

Alcalaina said:


> You could say that about his nose, too. But that doesn't stop them depicting his face.


Good point and I very often look at pictures/portraits of "Jesus"!! Is that really what he looked like?? blondish long hair? Blue eyes? Normal sized nose???? Personally I'd have thought he'd have looked a little more Jewish and dark features, as his fellow countrymen????

Who knows?? But his tackle doesnt need to be paraded about!

Jo xxx


----------



## Alcalaina (Aug 6, 2010)

jojo said:


> Good point and I very often look at pictures/portraits of "Jesus"!! Is that really what he looked like?? blondish long hair? Blue eyes? Normal sized nose???? Personally I'd have thought he'd have looked a little more Jewish and dark features, as his fellow countrymen????
> 
> Jo xxx


Interestingly, his appearance varies according to which culture produces the images. Sometimes he is black, sometimes blue-eyed and fair-haired, sometimes even American Indian. - but as you say, it is most likely that if he actually existed, he looked like someone from the Middle East.


----------



## dunmovin (Dec 19, 2008)

to cover or not???? is he displaying a sexual organ, or what nature gave him as route out for an overpressured bladder? What ever your opinion, even the most puritanical, will admit that without the way out..all the fluid he consumed would make him the size of Australia by the time he was 8.


----------

