The Catholic church has tremendously provoked by such “art expression” exhibited at the Cultural Center of the Philippines (CCP). Does art, really, limitless in its expression? Or does it enslave the artists’ imagination?
One of the art exhibits in CCP displayed an image of Jesus Christ with a man’s artistic organ (penis) attached to it with a crucifix. Such art expression by an artist outrightly insulted almost all visitors to the exhibit, including churchmen.
This is not an exaggeration. This is a reality that someday the society we are living in will be doomed to persecution against the corruption of minds, lusts, and crimes—someday would be attributed to just an art’s expression after all.
ART AS AN EXPRESSION
Arts as an expression are too deep an expression by an exclusive human imagination; so broad—by definition, by emotion (it displays), by perception (it expresses), and by common sense.
Artists are in their most liberal expression in portraying the shades of emotions and the meaning of its art as a masterpiece. At the very early on when art is known to man, it has become the freest creature ever lived. Does it mean so much to an artist’s “alibi” about his or her art’s expression? Considerably, yes.
THE DOGMATIC RELIGION
Religion is an institution that egocentrically subscribed to the foundation of moral and legal tenets either pedagogically or universally. It can not be denied how people influenced by their religion to respond, attack, rebut, and scrutinize issues, implications, code of conducts, and even laws based on the so-called dogmas or authority of their religious beliefs.
Universally, religion believes in moral aspect or tenet that is so reactive or dynamic that can persuade truths to lies or vice versa. Moreover, it has been generally accepted that an action that is moral is at all times legal. But an action that is legal can not always be moral. Because the former analogy has given, perhaps or almost, an absolute distinction that there is no such law as absolute as the law of God.
Ergo, morality has to be construed as the basis for every legal tenet, considering the absolute authority of the Divine Law. But, should it really mean “big deal” for the Catholics? It shouldn’t be. Why or why not?
In the case of the art exhibit at CCP, the main focus is the expression of an art; how its beauty or appreciation transcends from the abstract perception of human appreciation to an objective, material imagination. From anyone’s viewpoint, art is limitless in its expression; however, by the rule of common sense, art’s expression can be totally restricted.
Art expresses an authoritative expression based upon its broad definition and classification or interpretation. It also bears and stands by its discipline and principle of being an expression of freedom for art sake. Thus, it guarantees no restrictions as to how it expresses even if it becomes inconsistent with the absolute rule of the Divine Law.
Freedom of expression or the expression of art has a core issue against legality when it is viewed upon by its nature—being the “freest creature” ever lived.
We are all united that art shall be given its most liberality as far as its expression for the sake of art is concerned. Aren’t we? Then it has, therefore, its own parameter to control or simply restrict the extent of its expression. Otherwise, the common sense shall be the distinguishing factor whether the expression of art exceeds the definition of it based on moral tenets. Then, it follows that such art exhibited at CCP was not only a blasphemy to the sanctity of morality but also a condemning insult to one’s religious belief!▲