Vatican “Nativity Scene” A Monstrosity – An Image of the Church Under Francis… 

Nativity scene from Saint Peter’s Square


ROME — The Vatican uncovered its 2020 manger scene in Saint Peter’s Square Friday, leaving onlookers scattered, scandalized, and scornful.

Observers shoveled abuse upon the unfortunate spectacle, rivaling each other to come up with the most appropriate epithets to describe the appalling scene.

“Mummified Mary,” “Weeble Jesus” (after the ovate children’s toys launched by Hasbro in the 1970s), “Martians,” “toilet paper rolls,” and “astronauts” were some of the comparisons made to the cylindrical figures meant to represent the Holy Family, the Magi, and the shepherds at Bethlehem.

Others saw in one ominous figure the helmeted image of “the Mountain” from the Game of Thrones television series, while another conjured up memories of the Robot from Lost in Space:

As one irate Italian wrote on social media of the Vatican manger scene, “Ugliness is the first thing you notice, followed by a lack of familial warmth and the distancing guaranteed by the cylindrical figures. If you wish to judge harshly, the cylinders call to mind the sacred poles of Satanic cults condemned in the Bible.”

Traditionally, a manger scene is intended to evoke feelings of piety and devotion — not pity and revulsion — over the birth of Jesus in Bethlehem, and thus this particularly regrettable work offends not only aesthetic sensibilities, but also the religious reverence of the faithful.

The Vatican said the Nativity scene exhibited in St. Peter’s Square was created by the students and faculty of the FA Grue Art Institute, a state-run high school for design, which in the decade of 1965-1975 devoted its scholastic activity to the theme of Christmas.

“We believe that this year’s experience of a Nativity scene donated by an Artistic High School is really a powerful summons for everyone to invest more in the training of the new generations both at the level of middle and high schools and for the university world,” said Bishop Lorenzo Leuzzi in a statement guaranteed to garner broad consensus.

Elizabeth Lev, an American art historian living and teaching in Rome, told Breitbart News she thinks the choice was a poor one: “The Nativity celebrates the Incarnation, God who comes into the world as flesh, not in a totemic form,” Dr. Lev declared. “At the end of this extremely difficult year people are looking for beauty, for something to elevate, inspire, and unite them, and the scene offered in Saint Peter’s Square gives them something else altogether.”

“The misshapen figures in the Nativity scene lack all the grace, proportion, vulnerability, and luminosity that one looks for in the manger scene,” she said. “The entire point of this holiday is the second person of the Holy Trinity taking human form, born as a baby of flesh and blood, and there is nothing particularly human about the forms we see before us.”

“Context is also important and these works are surrounded by Bernini’s majestic colonnade, capped with the monumental figures of the saints, with Saint Peter’s Basilica in the background containing a thousand years of beautiful statuary,” Lev continued.

“It has been a dark year and many have had their faith challenged. Perhaps it would have been better to give them a symbol to rally round rather than an object of mockery,” she said. “This scene leads people to heap derision upon an icon representing the Holy Family. It is unfortunate we couldn’t find something to inspire at least tenderness if not full-on reverence.”

Moreover, Lev concluded, “In the context of last year’s polemics over the Pachamama statue, it seems ill considered to use images that will confuse people and further a sense of division.”    Source

Comment: 

This latest scandal from Rome – the hideous, to put it mildly, “nativity scene” in St Peter’s Square, is a metaphor for the state of the Church today, under this horrendous pope.   I’m not a trained artist, of course, so maybe I’m missing something but I can see nothing beautiful or uplifting about this disgraceful “nativity scene” – can  you?  “Blasphemous” springs to mind. I see it as a monstrosity, ugly. Prove me wrong…

49 responses

  1. Editor

    You just beat me to it – I came on to post a link and comment about this. Talk about hellish! I use hellish in the true sense, for that array of mock figures is straight from Hell proper. How much more will the prelates of the Church take before finally speaking out about this awful Pope.

    • Athanasius,

      Well, I would have missed it but for a reader who emailed the link to alert me. It’s truly disgraceful.

      As for your concluding question – you definitely speak for all of us, there.

  2. We don’t need to be trained artists to recognize crap when we see it. It’s hard to believe that this monstrosity is from the same Church that gave us da Vinci, Michaelangelo et al…

  3. I love Father Z’s reaction: “What the hell is this? Star Wars? He then elaborates:

    https://wdtprs.com/2020/12/the-2020-vatican-nativity-scene-cameo-appearance-by-the-mandalorian-and-baby-yoda/

    I’m wondering several things: one, what warped clerical perceptive could possibly consider this monstrosity not only Catholic, but representative of a Nativity scene? Two, what bizarre mentality created these characterless figures? Three, what in the world is the “FA Grue Art Institute,” and why was their work from 1965-1975 chosen, 50 years later?

    I just tried to find a link to this Institute, but it does not seem to exist online.

    One more interesting thing: the decade from 1965 – 1975 was probably the period of the worst post-Vatican II chaos. That is, until the present pontificate. No wonder these pieces were chosen from that period – got to promote more chaos, confusion and disaffection from Holy Mother Church! Got to replace the Church with the New World Religion!

    Not only has our hierarchy lost their Catholic Faith and identity, they have lost contact with reality.

  4. BTW, Ed, that image you posted is of these stick figures in a studio. The Father Z commentary shows them on location, and it’s even worse, if you can imagine that.

    • RCA Victor,

      I have never watched Star Wars but I got the idea, especially after listening to the suggested “hymn” – priceless. Sad but priceless. Under the video Fr Z said it all, perfectly: “To my mind this just about sums up the contribution of the Holy See to the world this year.”

      Never was “spot on” more appropriate.

  5. That is the most appalling sight I have seen today. Athanasius tells it as it is ‘For that array of mock figures is straight of hell proper’.

    Absolutely hideous. How dare they a produce that, in mockery of the Nativity of Our Lord Jesus Christ. It is bad enough that the faculty and students of the FA Grue Art Institute produced it. That was not art be any means of description.

    But, that it was allowed to be placed in Saint Peter’s Square is far worse. An appalling error was if ever there was one.

    • Theresa Rose,

      I agree – it really is an appalling sight. How anyone can see it in a good light, is just beyond belief.

  6. I think the key word here is “mockery.” I suppose, given last year’s display (was it last year, or before that?) of a homosexually suggestive half naked male should have prepared us for this, but really, is anyone ever really prepared for what hell has to offer?

    And speaking of mockery, we Catholics are all too familiar with the go-to dialectical tactic of hell when it comes to Our Lord and His Church.

    I’m probably skating on thin theological ice here, but it seems clear, and the evidence has been mounting almost daily since 2013, that this pontificate is straight from hell. Never mind the “smoke of Satan.” What about outright demonic possession?

    • RCAVictor

      Well, we have to ask ourselves where people stand in terms of their souls when they are attracted to ugliness. We see the beauty of the works of the great masters in the Vatican; Michelangelo, Raphael, Da Vinci, etc., created in a time of great faith, and compare them with that hideous display put on by the red Pope. Kind of tells its own story really.

  7. This “nativity” is the worst abomination imaginable. Sadly I can only say that I feel nothing but repulsion at this monstrosity….and it doesn’t surprise me in the least.

  8. Contrast this Christmas message and final carol verse from President Trump with the “message” coming from the Vatican via this obnoxious “artwork”.

    President Trump quotes the faulty translation (Our Lady being “most highly favoured” instead of “full of grace) but then he’s not a Catholic – the Pope is [supposed to be] one…

  9. Utterly shocking. I don’t imagine that many Italian children will be taken to see that so-called crib…it would give them nightmares! If Pope Francis approved that then he is even worse than I imagined.

  10. Dear Editor,

    What could I write to entice me out of my blogging hiatus, but disgust at this desecration of our loved nativity scenes?
    Then today our Holy Father and his acolyte Cardinal Turksen come out with a global warming diatribe which moves the Vatican even closer to the gates of hell right up there with our prime minister Boorish Corbyn .
    I am so tired of it all I cannot even begin to try and link to it over at Breitbart.com/europe.

  11. Here’s an interesting commentary on another Francis scandal – his book “Let Us Dream” which Dr Taylor Marshall categorises as “The Catholic Reset” – it’s just beyond belief. He uses Build Back Better, the World Economic Forum slogan (taken up by Joe Biden, and now Pope Francis). Thus, not least since Pope Francis has already said that there is no “Catholic God”, I feel no compunction is saying that clearly, self-evidently, we do not have a Catholic Pope! Talk about stating the blankety blank obvious!

    • Ed you have probably read this Revelation from Jesus Christ to Saint Bridget long before I stumbled upon it . The Revelation says that–Those Who Are Already Condemned–Prayers for THEM will not be answered .Now I hope and Pray to God that am not in that Category .But without a Doubt ( according to the scriptures and Saints ) this Man who would be Pope keeps good company with Soros and Sachs 2 of the most Evil Human Beings on Planet Earth . And one can tell lots about a Person by The Company He keeps . Soros himself has publicly said he is an ardent Atheistic Pagan, as for Sachs he is exactly the same . Two men who frequent the Vatican by invitation by The Man who would be Pope .The question now really is, what category does this Apostate Pope fall into .

  12. I thought I would try to soothe our bruised sensus fidelium by posting an image of what a real Nativity Scene should look like:

  13. Is this a Surprise from this terrible man who would be called Pope ,and don’t let Him come out and Lie and say he knows nothing about this Horrendous Hellish Garbage .Were I on another Site my Language to this Pagan THING would be a lot stronger, just how low is this Man who would be Pope going to stoop .Am certainly no Artist Either and neither are the ones who made this as a so called Nativity Scene . I personally look on it as being a Buddhist Nativity Scene and if am not mistaken Buddhists don’t celebrate Christmas. Neither it seems does this Non Catholic Pope .

    • Crofterlady,

      Watched the video and it is all very interesting, but I’m a little surprised that Michael Matt doesn’t appear to interpret the Great Reset claim to build back capitalism better (or however it’s phrased) as – in fact – Communism… It’s a diabolically clever ruse to use the term “capitalism” so none of us should miss the opportunity to call this “new” capitalism by its real name – Communism.

      I’m sure Michael Matt has said that in other videos, but I’m a little surprised he’s omitted it here.

      Pope Francis is an utter disgrace. I’d dearly love to see the terms of the agreement he’s (shockingly) signed with China. He really puts Judas Iscariot in the shade.

      Michael Matt seems to be struggling to remain “polite” about Francis… Can’t think why…

  14. Does anyone else find it odd – to say the least – that there is not the slightest trace of an “FA Grue Art Institute” anywhere on the internet? The only mention I can find is from the Vatican’s statement of where this abomination came from.

  15. The aim of postmodernist “art” is to demoralise us. All part of the marxist 4 part plan to bring down Western civilisation
    The late Yuri Beznemov , former KGB,describes ithis process in his you tubes.
    Ugliness lies and evil replacing Goodness Beauty and Truth
    Truly satanic.

    • Mary,

      That’s an excellent point. The same principle holds for modern classical music, which tried to embrace the grating ugliness of the 12-tone system as “high art.” Thankfully, that failed, but I think it has been replaced by what I would call “elevator music” – i.e. mindless repetition of small tonal patterns. This tends to have a hypnotic effect on the listener.

  16. I absolutely agree. Blasphemous and satanic. Unfortunately I didn’t expect anything better from this Pope…

    • Erika (& everbody)

      I agree, as well – that hideous crib is blasphemous and satanic, and I’ve come to not expect anything better from Francis. The headline is right – that crib is an image of the Church under this pope – a monstrosity. To think what he has done to the Spotless Bride of Christ, the Church.

  17. We all seem to agree, now let us all display and spread our displeasure by sharing this far and wide so that true Catholics can understand what is at stake.
    Stop supporting local archdiocese that are feeding this monster. Voice our outrage.
    Let us pray

    • Val

      Most of us here attend Mass at SSPX churches, so we are already making our Catholic voice of outrage heard to the local and national Modernist hierarchies. The problem is that most of the prelates are now deaf to divine truth and blind to their part in the evil unfolding all around the globe.

  18. President Trump’s Christmas message – first President in U.S. history to mention Our Lady. This man is more Catholic in spirit than the Pope.

    • Athanasius,

      Speaking of “more Catholic than the Pope,” remember this attack against the SSPX by Novus Ordo mouthpiece Patrick Madrid?

      (Or, to borrow from Barry Goldwater’s speechwriter, according to Madrid, “Traditionalism in the defense of Tradition is a vice.”)

    • Athanasius,

      Not wishing to outdo Michael Matt, but guess who posted this news on December 12, 2020 at 7:17 pm ? Michael is just a wee bit late, not complaining, though…better late than never, as they say…

    • Athanasius,

      I hadn’t see your sincere confession before I posted my “dig” 😀

      As you say, we can’t get too much of a good thing…

  19. The hideous figures used in this nativity scene are in a way fitting, given ugliness is one of the main marks of the modern Church.

    This is very stark, when you look at the Church before and after V2. Where the Catholic Church is naturally a thing of beauty – in its architecture, its music, its liturgy, its art and – of course – how and what it teaches, the Conciliar Church is downright ugly in those same areas.

    This is but one example, but there are many. There is an entire class of buildings which are so ugly they could only be Catholic Churches of the V2 era. You know the type, some resemble bizarre alien buildings left over from a sci-fi B movie, others would not be out of place among the concrete blockhouses the Nazis built to defend french beaches.

    In my younger days, I recall being at (novus ordo) masses and being generally distracted by how ugly and weird the Church building was. A blessing in disguise perhaps, to be distracted from the novus ordo.

    I have heard it said that this awful nativity was chosen on purpose to cause a distraction from other scandal and problems in the Church. I would not be surprised.

    However I feel that in some way it is also down to the needy modern Church and its desire to be liked, talked about and be “cutting edge” and modern in every way. An idiotic and vain goal it could never profit from.

    Assuming this scene was not created specifically to mock us, I suspect those misguided and needy motivations are what guided this years nativity, rather than a desire to nourish our faith and move our hearts by beautifully portraying the Infant Jesus in the manger.

    • Gabriel Syme

      You make a very good point in your second paragraph. It is precisely that ugliness in Church liturgy, architecture, music, etc., that speaks of the Satanic presence within the Church. The devil loves ugliness while God loves beauty. Same thing in the world today with modern styles of clothing, furniture, music, film, etc., it’s all ugliness in comparison with past generations.

  20. Here is St. Thomas Aquinas on beauty, from the Summa:

    “Good is the object of desire… Beauty, on the other hand, is
    the object of cognitive power, for we call beautiful things
    which give pleasure when they are seen; thus beauty rests on
    proper proportion, because the senses delight in things with
    proper proportion as being similar to themselves; for the
    sense and all cognitive power is a kind of reason, and
    because cognition takes place by means of assimilation, and
    assimilation pertains to form, beauty properly belongs to the
    concepts of formal cause.”

    • Lily

      It shows how daft this guy is that he actually refers to that garbage as “art”. The only artists they have at that studio are con artists – completely talentless. Imagine if any of these clows produced that kind of nativity scene to one of the old masters – they’d have left wearing it!

  21. Pope Francis himself said he will probably go down in history as the Pope who divided the church! Do you see who he really is?

<span>%d</span> bloggers like this: