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

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


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…

Comments (49)

  • Val

    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

    December 15, 2020 at 5:13 pm
    • Athanasius


      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.

      December 15, 2020 at 5:35 pm
  • Athanasius

    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.

    December 15, 2020 at 5:31 pm
  • Athanasius

    Oops! I see Editor already put this up earlier. Oh well, can’t get too much of a good thing.

    December 15, 2020 at 5:32 pm
    • editor


      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…

      December 15, 2020 at 8:44 pm
  • gabriel syme

    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.

    December 15, 2020 at 10:10 pm
    • Athanasius

      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.

      December 15, 2020 at 10:58 pm
  • RCAVictor

    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.”

    December 15, 2020 at 10:53 pm
  • Lily December 16, 2020 at 11:17 am
    • Athanasius


      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!

      December 16, 2020 at 12:10 pm
  • graeme taylor

    and Pope Francis enters St peter’s Square to bless this monstrosity. What a nightmare.

    December 17, 2020 at 12:37 am
  • Majernik

    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?

    December 24, 2020 at 10:29 pm

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: