The Deacon's Bench

The Deacon's Bench


Not too sweet: “pregnant nun” used to sell ice cream

posted by jmcgee

A series of jaw-dropping, eye-grabbing ads for ice cream are leaving some people in Europe cold.

Details:

article-0-0AECFFD9000005DC-235_233x371.jpgTwo ice cream adverts, one showing a pregnant nun and the other two male priests about to kiss, are facing a ban by the advertising watchdog after offending Roman Catholics.

The provocative slogan ‘immaculately conceived’ appears on the image of the nun eating from a pot of Antonio Federici Gelato Italiano.

Meanwhile, the picture of two men in cassocks and clerical collars, embracing with their lips inches apart, bears the words ‘we believe in salivation’.

The Advertising Standards Authority received complaints that the adverts, which have appeared in Grazia, Look and The Lady, are offensive to religious believers.

It has indicated the image of the nun is likely to be banned and is still investigating the advert featuring the priests.

Check out the rest, and other images from the campaign, here



Advertisement
Comments read comments(9)
post a comment
ds0490

posted August 29, 2010 at 1:02 am


We need to be vigilant against Muslims imposing Sharia law throughout Europe, restricting our freedoms in the name of their false religion. They will take over our media, our press, and our way of life.



report abuse
 

Gerard Nadal

posted August 29, 2010 at 9:38 am


Just as all evil begins with a lie, we see what Satan spits upon. The malevolent always needs to tear down that which is a powerful witness for God.
Chastity in Religious Life, Priesthood, Deaconate, and marriage must at all costs be denigrated, as the proper context for the use of human sex is marriage and reflects the inner life of the Blessed Trinity. Those who willingly forego that exercise for the sake of the Kingdom do so in imitation of, and at the invitation of Jesus.
Europe is dying a long and agonizing suicide. If these ads are pulled it won’t be because they stab at the heart of European civilization, Catholic Christianity. It will be over the rights of constituent groups in the EU not to be offended, but will have a higher bar to clear than other constituent groups’ concerns.
As with the Seven Letters to the Seven Churches in the Book of Revelation, Europe’s Lampstand is being removed because of its infidelity. Its loss of faith has led to the loss of a sense of the sacred and wonder at new life. They’ve simply stopped reproducing. The true enigma is why, after giving birth to the Enlightenment Era, did Europe turn its back on its own Enlightenment and pursue a Hobbesian and Nietzian model of existence/suicide?
These ads are the fruits of that poisonous tree.



report abuse
 

Gerard Nadal

posted August 29, 2010 at 10:00 am


Also, this from the article:
“Only a tiny proportion of those who have seen the ads have made complaints. They seem to be upholding the views of a bigoted minority over the majority.”
How is it bigoted to decry the defamation of our Religious and Clergy? If the ad producers would risk truth in advertising, they wouldn’t show two priests about to kiss one another. They would show the true objects of affection by the homosexual minority that have infiltrated our priesthood, and which constitute 81% of the pedophilia victims.
It is galling in the extreme to have the portrayal of our clergy and religious as sexually out of control by the very cadre of narcissists who desire a hedonistic culture. Less than 4% of our clergy have ever been ACCUSED of any wrongdoing. It’s far higher in marriage with adultery, incest, pedophilia, pornography, etc. In the aggregate, our Clergy and Religious are paragons of virtue. The true bigots are those who tear at the Church with such hate-filled poison.



report abuse
 

BobRN

posted August 29, 2010 at 10:44 am


Gerard,
I think your thoughts are very insightful, and I agree wholeheartedly.
Having said that, I’m not sure if banning the adverts is the best way to go. I’m not a big fan of government restricting speech, even offensive speech. My thoughts are similar to the Ground Zero mosque: yes, they have the right and should have the right to build their mosque near Ground Zero, but morally, it’s the wrong thing to do, and I have no problem letting them know that.
It sounds like the adverts are exclusively showing up in magazines. Perhaps a better action would be to write the advertising board of the magazines and protest. Then, of course, refuse to buy the magazine and the ice cream, and tell them why.
If they were on public billboards, that would be different. The government certainly has a place in protecting the citizenry from offensive adverts and these, in my mind, are soft porn (especially the one with the “priest” ripping his shirt off in front of the “nun”!).



report abuse
 

graymatter

posted August 29, 2010 at 11:12 am


The world gone banana… Christians should be offended by this ads because it represents arrogance, disrespect and the mockery of the sacrifices real nuns have done and still doing throughout the world. Liberal people will attack anything that goes against their twisted belief at any cost and couldn’t care less for people who have live life of poverty to help others.
In United States the next great upheaval (civil war) is between liberalism against conservatism………… believers vs non-believers
I’m confident that the non-believers will be defeated because none of them would be willing to fight with their life on the line. why? Because for them life is now and no afterlife….
I don’t know about you non-believers but when my time is up, I have the heaven waiting for me…. I’LL HAVE THE CAKE AND EAT IT TOO…YUMMY..



report abuse
 

Gerard Nadal

posted August 30, 2010 at 2:02 am


BobRN,
While we’re mostly on the same page, it seems that government not restricting free speech is always very tolerable when the Catholic Church is being skewered. There are some oxen in the west that are rather sacred and immune from being gored.
One does not skewer gays, lesbians, blacks, etc and fare very well. Just look at TV and radio advertising. Over 80% of the time the following rubric is followed:
All white cast: If someone needs to look foolish it is the male.
Mixed racial cast: The fool is the white person.
Mixed gender: The male is the clueless one.
Religion: The Catholic Church is lampooned.
Some might say that this is merely a correction for historical abuses in the other direction. To such a one I would counter by pointing out that women’s liberation and the civil rights movement were never intended to be a race to the bottom of the barrel. However, that’s what happens all too often in the second generation of revolutions. The idiot hangers-on to the luminaries have none of the intellectual or spiritual firepower of the first generation, so we end up with retribution instead of the hoped-for peace and harmonious accord. And then it starts all over again.
The more we have tolerated the tearing down of the Church in the public square, the more tearing down of the Church is demanded in the public square. It’s not a mistake. When our young see us take such a passive approach to the denigration of all that we hold sacred, why should they approach anything as sacred? There are no absolutes in free speech. There is a list of words one cannot utter on the public airwaves. One cannot broadcast pornography on the public airwaves using the electromagnetic media. Light waves emanating from billboards too are electromagnetic waves in the public domain, and too are regulated by decency statutes. The electromagnetic waves coming from billboards an land the owner in hot water if they show frontal nudity or porn.
So I don’t see where the denigration of what is sacred to others ought to be tolerated. These pics are soft porn with the actors in clerical and religious garb. If I want my children to respect our clergy and religious, then must teach them by example that such porn aimed at our clergy and religious is intolerable. Yes, INTOLERABLE.
As it ought to be.
God Bless.



report abuse
 

BobRN

posted August 30, 2010 at 5:08 am


Gerard,
In my previous comment, I made a distinction between a response to the adverts as limited to magazines and a response to adverts displayed in a public venue.
People, and children in particular, don’t have to be exposed to these images if they’re limited to magazines. Don’t buy the magazine. I’ve tried so many times to get grocery stores and drug stores to limit the type of magazines they display in check-out counters, however, and I think the government could be helpful there. But, by and large, the better response to these kinds of adverts showing up in magazines is to refuse to purchase the magazine, refuse to purchase the product advertized and refuse to shop at the stores that sell the magazines. Such would be an excellant example for one’s children, especially if one took the time to discuss the matter with them.
I’m very leery, however, of the government stepping in to ban or censure images unless it’s necessary to protect children or social mores, which means largely limiting government bans and censures to images that are displayed in public venues. The images for this advert campaign have no place on billboards, buses, buildings, etc… and it’s the proper role of government to ban them from those venues.



report abuse
 

pagansister

posted August 30, 2010 at 8:36 pm


Definitely in poor taste!



report abuse
 

DiscontiNEWS

posted October 23, 2010 at 8:46 am


At the end of the day, taglines such as your own or Pregnant Nun Banned from Eating Ice Cream has bought more publicity and free marketing to the product than they could hope to achieve through more traditional advertising about quality and taste so the manufacturers have achieved what they set out to, albeit in a contrived and clever marketing campaign.
However, the more relevant issue is that the imagery associated with marketing is generally becoming far more distasteful, provocative and even offensive (in some cases) yet it fails to raise anywhere near the reaction that this campaign has.



report abuse
 

Post a Comment

By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.



Previous Posts

This blog is no longer active
This blog is no longer being actively updated. Please feel free to browse the archives or: Read our most popular inspiration blog See our most popular inspirational video Take our most popular quiz

posted 10:42:40pm Dec. 12, 2010 | read full post »

One day more
A reminder: "The Deacon's Bench" is closed! Please enjoy the archives!

posted 11:26:20pm Dec. 11, 2010 | read full post »

Meet Montana's married priest
Earlier this week, I posted an item about Montana getting its first married priest. Now a local TV station has hopped on the bandwagon. Take a look, below.

posted 10:29:55pm Dec. 11, 2010 | read full post »

Big day in the Big Easy: 10 new deacons
Deacon Mike Talbot has the scoop: 10 men today were ordained as Permanent Deacons for the Archdiocese of New Orleans. This group of men was formally selected on the day the evacuation of New Orleans began as Hurricane Katrina approached. The immediate aftermath of the storm for this class would be

posted 6:55:42pm Dec. 11, 2010 | read full post »

Gaudete! And let's break out a carol or two...
"Gesu Bambino," anyone? This is one of my favorites, and nobody does it better than these gals: Kathleen Battle and Frederica von Staade. Enjoy.

posted 1:04:10pm Dec. 11, 2010 | read full post »




Report as Inappropriate

You are reporting this content because it violates the Terms of Service.

All reported content is logged for investigation.