A planned exhibition of a nude, antomically-correct chocolate sculpture of Christ's crucifixion was condemned last week by Cardinal Edward Egan. The Catholic leader called the sculpture "a sickening display . . . one of the worst assaults on Christian sensibilities ever." The midtown Manhattan hotel that houses the gallery received angry phone calls and emails including death threats! The gallery's creative director, Matt Semler, said the "My Sweet Lord" sculpture display was cancelled because the hotel and staff "couldn't continue to be supportive because of a fear for their own safety."

Hmmm? This prompts several questions:

1. What did Egan and those protesting—and threatening death—find most offensive? That the sculture was chocolate? (Sculpter Cosimo Cavallaro has also worked in cheese, candy and ham.) Or that it was nude? (Keep in mind, despite all the crucifixion portrayals of Christ with the loin cloth, most men were crucified naked. And since Jesus was circumcised, we know that He was anatomically correct.)

2. Has Cavallaro intentionally tried to provoke a response from the Christian community? In 1999, his painting "The Holy Virgin Mary" included elephant dung as a medium—and got a strong reaction. If so, the protestors bit on "Chocolate Jesus."

3. Is this similar to the kind of thinking that prompted the riots and killings over the cartoons of Mohammed? (Obviously, the degree and distribution of protest was very different, but there was apparently enough hate to elicit a threat to kill!)

4. Finally, is this the kind of thing Jesus would want us to protest against? Or does His list in Matthew 25 of the treatment of the poor, hungry, homeless and prisoners provide a better list of causes to champion?

Hmmm? What do you think?