So the major NJ paper recently carries a story about the archbishop of Newark who allegedly knew about…well you know what…and didn’t do anything about it. This post is not about that. That’s old, albeit seemingly perpetual news these days.
What struck me about the article was the photo of the archbishop. On quick glance, it looks like it should have a bit of fog, fangs, blood at the corner of the mouth and a bat flying against the ‘full moon’ background with the haunted castle in front. I’m thinking, surely they didn’t do this on purpose.
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
No, it’s just a really bad 184th post.[/quote]
Haha What can I say? I’ve got a life, that’s all.[/quote]
The fact that you have the time to analyze this picture and post your assessment of it, along with the picture itself, would indicate otherwise. Besides, it would have been a bad 184,000th post or a bad 1st post.
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
No, it’s just a really bad 184th post.[/quote]
Haha What can I say? I’ve got a life, that’s all.[/quote]
The fact that you have the time to analyze this picture and post your assessment of it, along with the picture itself, would indicate otherwise. Besides, it would have been a bad 184,000th post or a bad 1st post.[/quote]
You must excuse him, he has not been officially notified of your ability to condemn someones post as bad. I bet he’ll think long and hard (that’s what she said) next time he posts!
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
No, it’s just a really bad 184th post.[/quote]
Haha What can I say? I’ve got a life, that’s all.[/quote]
The fact that you have the time to analyze this picture and post your assessment of it, along with the picture itself, would indicate otherwise. Besides, it would have been a bad 184,000th post or a bad 1st post.[/quote]
You must excuse him, he has not been officially notified of your ability to condemn someones post as bad. I bet he’ll think long and hard (that’s what she said) next time he posts!
[/quote]
[quote]Sweet Revenge wrote:
So the major NJ paper recently carries a story about the archbishop of Newark who allegedly knew about…well you know what…and didn’t do anything about it. This post is not about that. That’s old, albeit seemingly perpetual news these days.
What struck me about the article was the photo of the archbishop. On quick glance, it looks like it should have a bit of fog, fangs, blood at the corner of the mouth and a bat flying against the ‘full moon’ background with the haunted castle in front. I’m thinking, surely they didn’t do this on purpose.
[/quote]
I don’t get it, why is it a bad picture? Catholics are down with the Gothic style, have been since we created it. We after all do put gargoyles on our Cathedrals still today. And I wouldn’t say it’s haunted…it’s actually quite nice inside if that is the Cathedral I am thinking about.
First, my apologies. I should have posted this in Get A Life. It’s got nothing to do with World Issues.
Anyway, the photo just seemed really dark (sinister) to me. Maybe because it was part of a decidedly sinister story. I forgot that the Catholics invented dark, gothic. That explains it.
I attended a wedding in that Basilica several years ago. All I really remember about it was that it was HUGE. There was a good size crowd there for the wedding, but the cathedral dwarfed everything.
