Gaudencio Cardinal Rosales has ordered that ‘prayer of reparation’ be recited in all masses in the Archdiocese of Manila from Aug. 21 to 28 (Screengrab from GMANews.TV)

MANILA, Philippines – Amid the mounting furor over artist Mideo Cruz's “Poleteismo” installation, the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines (CBCP)  has recommended the drafting of a law that will encompass “freedom of expression through art.”

During the Senate hearing last Aug. 16 about the various issues that had branched out from the highly-criticized artwork, Rev. Jose Palma, CBCP vice-president declared, “We respectfully suggest that the drafting of the law that covers freedom of expression through art include the corresponding responsibilities for the exercise of human freedom.”

Palma also stressed that “the exercise of artistic freedom for the sake of art is subject to moral criteria."

Several religious personalities and groups had condemned “Poleteismo,” which is one of the installations featured in the “Kulo” exhibit at the Cultural Center of the Philippines (CCP). These sectors deemed Cruz’s work as “offensive,” “desecrating” and “blasphemous,” as it includes religious images and relics of Christ mixed with phallic symbols as well as condom.

Due to the “increasing number of threats to persons and property,” the CCP closed the whole exhibit—comprised of works by 32 artists from the University of Sto. Tomas and installed in celebration of National Hero Jose Rizal’s 150th birthday— last Aug. 9.

The CBCP, through Palma, maintained that, “it is only the Mideo ‘Poleteismo’ exhibit that we are commenting,” and excluded the other installations in the “Kulo” exhibit.

On the phallic symbols incorporated to the image of Christ, Palma lamented, “the picture of Jesus is not just any picture; it’s the picture of God, someone we adore, someone we glorify.

“…please, nothing like that should be repeated again because of the religious sentiments.”

Despite their opposition to “Poleteismo,” Palma clarified, “We’re not against Mideo.”

“In the same way that we condemn sinful acts… we do not condemn the sinner. We condemn such artistic portrayal as objectively immoral, but we do not necessarily condemn the person or the artist who may not be aware of the objective immorality of his action. We do not question his motivation, it may be good,” he said at length.

CCP Chairperson Emily Abrera, who was also present during the hearing along with other members of the CCP board, related what may well be an artist’s point-of-view on “Poleteismo.”

For Abrera, Cruz’s installation is the latter’s “comment to society about how [it] has treated the different things we idolize.”

“These are the things that seem to matter so much to us today: power, authority, religion too… entertainment particularly, the pursuit of money and material things, all these are represented there. It’s always up to the viewer how to interact with it (artwork).

“Our own ways have defaced Christ. We have pursued material things…” she said.

Cruz was a no-show at the Senate hearing.

Go forth and repent

Meanwhile, Manila Archbishop Gaudencio Cardinal Rosales has declared Aug. 26 as a “Day of Penance” and urged the faithful to perform sacrifices as “an expression of remorse for the sins committed against God’s majesty” in relation to the “Poleteismo” exhibit.

In an article in CBCP's official website, the cardinal slammed Cruz’s installation, calling it “sinful” and “repulsive,” and its exhibition a “sacrilege” and “blasphemy.”

“For us Catholics and Christians, the offense goes beyond visual senses; it strikes into our souls,” Rosales stated.

He likewise ordered a week-long inclusion of a “prayer of reparation” to all masses in the Archdiocese of Manila from Aug. 21 to 28.

What is and what is not offensive?

Esteemed analyst Winnie Monsod gave her two cents on the whole hullabaloo in the “Hirit ni Mareng Winnie” segment of “Unang Hirit” on Tuesday.

The university professor deemed that nobody can really tell what is offensive or not.

“Sino ang magsasabi na ito’y puwede, iyan hindi puwede? Ito disente, iyan hindi disente? Ikaw ba, ako, sino ba? In other words, kung ayaw mo, wag mong tingnan. Simpleng-simple lang,” she said resolutely.

Various interpretations had already been given to “Poleteismo,” and Monsod also has her own.

“Nakikita natin ang statwa ni Jesus Christ, he is nakahubad, he is with crown of thorns, siya ay mocked, he was tortured, he was reviled. Hindi ba natin puwedeng masabi na ‘yung ginawa nitong artist na ito is his rendering of what he thought of the kind of torture and mockery and revilement that Jesus would suffer in this day?” she said.

It was cited during the same segment that prior to CCP, “Poleteismo” had also been installed in the University of the Philippines and the Ateneo de Manila University in 2002 and 2004, respectively.

However, Rev. Palma clarified during the Senate hearing that Ateneo didn’t exhibit “Poleteismo.”

Rev. Pablo Tiong of UST also stated in the same hearing that Mideo’s installation didn’t have their blessing and that the exhibit was not a project of the university.