Jesus Who?: Okla. Official Says Publicly Funded Statue Isn’t Necessarily Christ
“You cannot promote what is obviously a very specific religious image using tax dollars,” AU Executive Director Barry W. Lynn told the AP. “The city lawyers should have stopped this. This isn’t even close to the line. This is way over it.”
To some, maybe it’s just a sculpture of a middle-aged bearded man in shepherd’s clothing holding a baby and playing with children.
To everyone else, including the sculptor, it’s Jesus Christ.
Yet the Edmond Visual Arts Commission approved $3,900 in taxpayer funds to purchase this statue to display in front of a Catholic gift shop in Edmund, Okla. (See the statue here.)
That’s the same city that, a decade ago, was forced to pay $200,000 in legal fees after losing a court battle to keep a cross on its city seal. It’s the same art commission that wanted to spend $17,500 in public funds on a statue of Moses outside Edmond’s First Christian Church. That concept was squashed following a public outcry.
Now the commission thinks its okay to use tax funds to foot half the bill for a 26-inch-tall bronze sculpture of Jesus to place in downtown Edmond in front of the Sacred Heart Catholic Gifts. The store will raise the other half of the funding.
The sculpture, which follows traditional depictions of Jesus, is entitled “Come Unto Me,” a phrase the Bible quotes Jesus as saying to children.
But June Cartwright, chair of the commission, told the Associated Press that the sculpture was viewed simply as a piece of art and is not a religious endorsement.
“It’s a piece of artwork,” Cartwright said. “It doesn’t state that it is specifically Jesus. It is whatever you perceive it to be.”
Come on. How can this not be Jesus? Even sculptor Rosalind Cook says so. On her Web site where she describes her work, she writes, “I have depicted Christ more to show His character qualities.”
It’s quite clear that Edmond officials are begging to spend more money defending another lawsuit they will eventually lose.
“You cannot promote what is obviously a very specific religious image using tax dollars,” AU Executive Director Barry W. Lynn told the AP. “The city lawyers should have stopped this. This isn’t even close to the line. This is way over it.”
But constitutional law seems to be lost on many in Edmond.
In a letter to the editor published by the Edmond Sun, concerned citizen Helen Jackson said she is tired of people complaining about the statue and wishes everyone would just leave it alone.
“What do you people want her to have — a 6-foot cigar store Indian statue? That way the world visiting downtown would think they sold cigars instead of Bibles and crosses?” she wrote. “I worked in downtown Edmond for 20 years and I say if you can have a “Ham & Eggs” (a bronze statue of a pig and chicken) in front of a restaurant, you should have Jesus in front of a Christian gift shop.”
It seems the author of this letter misses the point. No one disagrees that Sacred Heart has every right to display the statue of its choice on its property—so long as the store uses its own money. Taxpayer funding cannot be spent on a religious sculpture that promotes one particular religion.
VICTORY UPDATE: The mayor of Edmund, Okla. announced the city will not go along with the Edmond Visual Arts Commission’s decision to fund this sculpture with taxpayer money, according to a report from the Associated Press.
“We’re not looking for a lawsuit,” Edmond Mayor Dan O’Neil said.
O’Neil said only private funding will go toward the statue.
“Clearly the city has felt some heat, and now they have seen the constitutional light,” Lynn said in the AP report.
A wise decision by Mayor O’Neil and another exciting victory for church-state separation!