Chocolate Jesus.

Tweet

For those of you who haven't heard yet, which is almost impossible, artist Cosimo Cavallaro sculpted an anatomically correct depiction of Jesus, made entirely out of chocolate. Many religious people find this offensive. "This would rank as one of the worst, most vile, obscene and blasphemous assaults on Christian sensibilities that I have ever scene," says the president of the Catholic League, Bill Donahue. I'm not exactly sure what the Catholic League is, but I'm imaging it's like the Justice Leage for Catholics. If this is the case, not only should they embrace Chocolate Jesus, they should make him their lead hero. Say it out loud, "Chocolate Jesus," it kind of has a superhero sound to it, doesn't it? Over the last few days, as we've been bombarded by it in the news, I've pondered what exactly the fuss is. What is so offensive about this depiction? Everything I could think of so far is shot down by logical explanations. Let me explain. First I thought maybe people were mad because it was a Jesus made out of Chocolate. This doesn't make any sense though, it's really no different than making a Jesus out of wood, is it? So that can't be it. Then I got to thinking, maybe it's the fact that after he's done displaying it, Cavallaro said people can take hunks and eat it. I've actually heard people on the radio say that this is vile and offensive that they would eat a piece of a chocolate Jesus. Why? Every Sunday, hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people eat stale crackers, calling them the body of Christ, and nasty grape juice, calling it the blood of Christ. Is it so wrong to want to enjoy Christ's body? Not in that way, freaks. So this left me with one last thought. Perhaps it's the fact that he's naked. Yes, Chocolate Jesus has a chocolate dong. I've got one too. My dog has one. All males have one. Hell, even some women have one. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I never remember reading a passage about the crucifixon saying anything along the lines of "And when Jesus was hung, he wore a loincloth, so that his dong shall not be exposed." Really, the only thing I can see anyone being pissed about is the fact that he made his dong so small. I've never heard anyone comment on that, though. Perhaps the artist felt Jesus was probably a shower, not a grower. Don't preach about me going to hell, either. I'm sure Jesus is looking down from heaven right now saying "Damn, that's a good sculpture, but why did he make my dong so small. I'm so much bigger than that."