I have only one word to describe this story: sacrilegious.According to the Inland Daily Bulletin,
Nativity scenes have a few standard elements: a manger, swaddling clothes, happy parents, sheep, maybe the Three Wise Men. They don’t generally include Trayvon Martin.But there he is, wearing a hoodie, a stream of blood pouring from his chest onto the straw-covered floor of the scene outside Claremont United Methodist Church, the holy family around him. “Easter and Christmas should be tied together. It’s all the same story,” artist John Zachary says.
However, that’s not the point — it’s the idea of equating Martin to the birth of Jesus Christ. Is Zachary’s underlying message that Trayvon Martin came into the world to die for our sins?
Apparently Zachary has been creating controversial Nativity scene displays outside his church for quite awhile, as the Daily Bulletin reports:
He has portrayed Joseph and Mary as a homeless couple in a ghetto neighborhood, as Iraq War refugees and as Mexican immigrants. Zachary has been attending the church for 15 years. When church leaders asked him to build a Nativity scene in 2007, he decided to focus on people who don’t have the “privilege” to enjoy typical Christmas traditions, he said.
Is this about how far we can push the envelope and the level of sensationalism? Zachary has succeeded in getting us to discuss his artwork. Should we demand this be taken down before the January 5th scheduled date? After all, it’s been up since early December. Is this part of the freedom of expression in America? Absolutely. Is it in poor taste? Certainly.
My question is, what kind of church is this? Being from down South, I can attest that this would likely never find acceptance.So what do you all believe, should we just dismiss this and not give it attention or is this further proof that we are not just “Slouching towards Gomorrah,” but we’re on a full accelerated high speed “progression” towards it?