Statue Defaced with Black Paint
University officials discovered last week that the statue of the Blessed Mother on Copley Lawn had been defaced, prompting several students and religious groups to plan an all-day vigil.
Unknown perpetrators painted the face of the statue black, but there were no other signs of damage, according to university spokesperson Julie Bataille.
“[The incident] took place sometime overnight Thursday — either late Thursday night or early Friday morning,” Bataille said.
Bataille reported that the Department of Public Safety is investigating the incident.
In an e-mail to the university community, Rev. Phillip Boroughs, S.J., vice president for mission and ministry, Todd Olson, vice president for student affairs, and Fr. Kevin O'Brien, S.J., executive director of campus ministry, jointly condemned the incident.
“All acts of vandalism on campus are troubling because they undermine the mutual care we try to foster in our university community,” the e-mail stated. “That the target of last week's vandalism is a sacred statue makes the act even more troubling.”
Boroughs said that the statue will be rededicated after it has been fully repaired.
“The initial layer of paint has been removed, but there is more to do to bring it back to its original state,” he added.
O’Brien said that the cleaning process is time-consuming because of the nature of the damage. “It is a delicate process to care for the stone during the renovation,” O’Brien said. “No plans are set for the rededication, as we don’t know when the renovation will be completed.”
The incident has motivated concerned members of the religious community to organize an all-day vigil to venerate the desecrated statute. The Georgetown Catholic Daughters, Georgetown Knights of Columbus and the Catholic Student Association of Georgetown will lead the vigil.
Matthew Brennan (COL ’10), a member of the Knights of Columbus and a Mass coordinator, said that the vigil is an appropriate response to the vandalism.
“This act of vandalism is an attack on one of the most profound images of the Catholic faith,” Brennan said. “[It is] also an attack on all who practice religion, no matter the faith. This act concerns me and unsettles me.”
According to Brennan, the vigil will begin at 5:45 p.m. on Thursday and continue for 24 hours. The vigil will begin with silent meditation and continue with prayers and the 20 mysteries of the rosary.
“[We will be] meditating and praying on one mystery per hour, with at least two students praying at any given time,” Brennan said.
An e-mail signed by Lauren Funk (SFS '10), the regent of the Georgetown Catholic Daughters of America, Andrea Pittaluga (SFS '10), chair of the Georgetown Interfaith Council, Kevin Kuehl (SFS '11), president of the Catholic Student Association of Georgetown, and Joseph Kapusnick (SFS '10), grand knight of the Georgetown Knights of Columbus stated that the event is open to everyone.
“[The organization of the vigil] effectively makes a human rosary, a chain of prayer that emphasizes our unity in Christ and our Blessed Mother,” the e-mail stated. “It is so vitally important that we draw support from all corners of our diverse campus, and show the university community what it means to respond in love and in faith to an act of such negativity and destruction.”
According to O’Brien, the desecration of religious sites is not unprecedented on campus. Recent acts of vandalism have also taken place at neighboring universities.
Earlier this month, a member of the College Democrats at the George Washington University was expelled for defacing several crosses in a pro-life club display. In December 2004, the Hanukkah menorah was stolen from Red Square, and in 2001, the Muslim prayer room at Georgetown was vandalized.
Boroughs said that the university would work to prevent similar occurrences in the future.
“There is no absolute way to ensure that this type of act doesn’t happen in the future, but as a Catholic and Jesuit university committed to interreligious understanding,” Boroughs said, “we will continue to educate our community to value and respect the variety of religious symbols and sacred spaces on our campus.”
Feb 24 2009 at 6:41 p.m.
I didn't receive the University's email, so I can't fairly discuss what the administration is saying, but I'm curious why The Hoya is reporting this as an act of "vandalism" as opposed to a hate-crime or "bias-related" incident? Had this been the Red Square menorah or Muslim prayer room, I'm sure "no tolerance for intolerance" would have been sprinkled liberally. Catholics have after all faced a history of bias in America.
Feb 24 2009 at 8:04 p.m.
I am not by any stretch a good, or even practicing, Catholic, but I agree with Juan. This is as obviously a bias-related hate crime as any other I've heard about. This needs to be called out for what it is, which is an unbelievably serious attack on a major world religion. It's offensive to the school, its tradition, and many of its students. The Hoya shouldn't hesitate to condemn this the same as it would condemn a swastika in Red Square.
Feb 24 2009 at 10:55 p.m.
Why was The Hoya slow on the draw to cover this story? The vandalism was very apparent last Thursday....
When the Muslim prayer room was vandalized our past president called is a “deplorable act of intolerance.” http://thehoya.com/node/6292 />What has our current president said about this act? Nothing publically as of yet....
It is argued that Catholicism is the last accepted form of bigotry (or prejudice) in the United States. Philip Jenkins (an Episcopalian) wrote a very insightful book titled “The New Anti-Catholicism: The Last Acceptable Prejudice.” Everyday I’m starting to believe more and more that Jenkins knew what he was talking about.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_Anti-Catholicism:_The_Last_Acceptable_Prejudice
Feb 24 2009 at 11:09 p.m.
Some of the previous acts of vandalism that you mention -- the Red Square menorah, as an example -- were blown out of proporiton. Yes they were unintentionally offensive , but in the case of the menorah it was a simply a stupid joke carried out by a few drunk students. Sometimes society is over-protective of underrepresented or minority groups (I say this as a Jew myself). I think it's refreshing to see this incident taken in stride.
Feb 24 2009 at 11:27 p.m.
and sometimes MRS, society fails to protect groups in which the hope to further minoritize.
Feb 25 2009 at 1:46 a.m.
"“[The incident] took place sometime overnight Thursday — either late Thursday night or early Friday morning,” Bataille said."
See, this is blatantly false. I definitively heard about this from multiple people and later physically saw the defaced statue on Thursday evening, which clearly implies that it happened before then. Either the university is trying to ameliorate the fact that they took so long to respond by lying about when it happened, or they were too ignorant to notice it.
And I agree with Juan. How can this be anything but a hate crime, and be reported as such?
Feb 25 2009 at 6:06 a.m.
Guys, Hate crime status is determined subjectively by a jury. It is not appropriate for a news article to call what happened here a "hate crime." Safer, and more accurate, to say vandalism, especially since hate crimes often happen to people, not statues. This eliminates confusion.
Gregg
Feb 25 2009 at 6:45 a.m.
"A hate crime, also known as a bias crime, is a criminal offense committed against a person, property, or society that is motivated, in whole or in part, by the offender’s bias against a race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, or ethnicity/national origin."
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/offenses_reported/hate_crime/index.html
Just because hate crimes happen more often in certain ways (against people) does not mean we can ignore the hate in the crime against property.
Also, the statue was "vandalized" much earlier than Thursday night because Campus Ministry was aware of the situation no later than Thursday afternoon.
Feb 25 2009 at 7:39 a.m.
Again, though, you do not know this was motivated by bias. It could have been an intoxicated college student messing with university property. A jury would need to decide for it to really be a hate crime. Also, the article pretty clearly outlines that this is a sacred site. Remember that it is priests and members of campus ministry that used the word "vandalized." This is a bizarre non-issue, honestly.
As far as the timing, we got the information from two university sources. If it's determined it was definitely earlier than Thursday evening then there can be a correction.
Gregg
Feb 25 2009 at 7:47 a.m.
Also, I am curious what it means to "report an incident as a hate crime." What in your view should this article have said? Would you be happy if the article stated that "unknown perpetrators conducted an assault on the Catholic faith out of malice and students here have lost their way"? That's editorializing, and possibly not true, which is why we let concerned students and administrators voice that opinion themselves in the numerous quotes in this article.
Gregg
Feb 25 2009 at 2:00 p.m.
Maybe we're looking at this the wrong way...maybe this is the beginning of a pro-black catholic movement?
Feb 25 2009 at 2:59 p.m.
This statue of the Blessed Mother was paid for by the Class of 1950,
primarily with the paid receipts of a musical called HOYA SHOWBOAT staged at Holy Trinity Theater and directed by William Peter
Blatty. Is this a case of Satanic revenge being served cold?
Feb 25 2009 at 3:05 p.m.
An email was sent from campus ministry to some of their club leaders Thursday afternoon regarding what had happened.... do some digging (like scratching the surface)and you will uncover the same information.
Feb 25 2009 at 8:49 p.m.
Greg Re:
Would you feel the same way if a Menorah was defaced or a Muslim prayer room was trashed. Maybe those arent hate crimes either.
Saxon Gillis
Feb 25 2009 at 9:14 p.m.
They're crimes, but not necessarily hate crimes. Killing a gay man is simply murder. Killing him for being gay is a hate crime. Similarly, Defacing a statue is vandalism. Defacing it for its religious significance is a hate crime. As this case is still being investigated, it would be inaccurate to conclude that this crime was motivated by hatred of the religion. Maybe it was hatred of the school, or of the priests, or something personal.
Gregg
Feb 25 2009 at 9:31 p.m.
I agree with your principled distinction, but sadly its not a distinction that is drawn when the crime is against a more preferred group (in the hoya or elsewhere).
Saxon Gillis
Feb 25 2009 at 9:40 p.m.
Greg:
The fact that the statute was defaced by being painted shows that this was motivated by "bias" and a blatant attack on the Catholic community at Georgetown and not some random drunkard(s) stumbling around and looking to get his kick. He/she/they took the time to plan their attack (unless a bucket of paint was just laying around Copley lawn at the time and our drunkard's first thought was to dump paint on the statue). Had this been someone just knocking down the statue, I would concede it could be just a stupid drunk act. The fact that someone planned this out shows it is not.
Although I'm generally hesitant to use "bias" because it's a rather imprecise word, in the context in which Georgetown uses it, this is a pretty clear cut case. A jury is not needed, and indeed, there is no jury when the University decides an act was a hate-crime or bias-related.
Feb 25 2009 at 10:34 p.m.
Saxon: People are sensitive sometimes to some religions more than others, especially in a Catholic-dominated university. Not fair and should be avoided but is understandable.
Juan: Well the university cannot call something a "hate crime." Do not conflate hate crime with "bias related incident." A hate crime is much more specific, and really only applies when there's a criminal complaint that tries to show motivation (which is very hard). A bias related incident does not involve a jury and is open to much more interpretation. It would be reasonable to say in this article that this is a bias related incident, and though it is not explicit, I think it is pretty well conveyed. We have quotes from people saying so, in addition to other incidents of similar bias incidents (e.g. Muslim center and menorah).
Feb 27 2009 at 11:45 a.m.
Personally, I think everyone is over-reacting in the comments here. This was an act of provocation, not hate. By making such a show of being offended, you're making this a succes de scandal. You've been provoked, as intended. Hate, you say? Duchampian flair, I say!
The guy who did this almost certainly doesn't hate religious people; rather, he probably thinks--quite rightly, in my humble opinion--that religion is a harmful illusion, harming most of all the people tormented by indoctrinated ideas of hellfire. Also, the mealy-mouthed ecumenism of the Knights of Columbus representative quoted in the article, is both ignorant and ahistorical. “This act of vandalism is an attack on one of the most profound images of the Catholic faith,” Brennan said. “[It is] also an attack on all who practice religion, no matter the faith. This act concerns me and unsettles me.” Has he heard of iconoclasm? Calvinists consider the worship of images blasphemous and during the Reformation destroyed many works of art far greater than this third rate statue of the Virgin. How could one possibly feel a hint of spirituality in front of such a dull, academic work of art? Bad taste, I suppose. Just like this vigil: therapeutic kitsch. Please stop posturing and start living.
Mar 03 2009 at 4:17 a.m.
Robert - that was a weak argument which was clearly derived from ignorance. First off, it is not iconoclasm – protecting objects which represent your faith is not unreasonable. Being detached from Earthly goods is fine but having acknowledgement or value for those which are related to life is not crazy. Secondly, yes, many far artistically superior works were destroyed throughout history but that does not mean we should overlook this vandalization? With any crime there is sure to have been a more extreme of its kind– does that make the more recent crime excusable?
Finally, “How could one possibly feel a hint of spirituality in front of such a dull, academic work of art?” Wow, your ability to relate, imagine or see beyond your personal bubble is shockingly feeble. How can one possibly feel a hint of patriotism in front of their country’s flag, even if it is a little worn? Or when they hear their nation’s anthem? Okay, you try telling a solider or maybe even an Olympian that the joy they feel from seeing their nation’s flag raised is in bad taste. There is nothing crazy about respecting an image of something which is important to you. Oh, and why do people hold memorial services? Is that just a therapeutic kitsch? Come on now, let’s be a little bit more open minded.
Mar 12 2009 at 8:02 a.m.
Whit- you said:
'How can one possibly feel a hint of patriotism in front of their country’s flag, even if it is a little worn? Or when they hear their nation’s anthem? Okay, you try telling a solider or maybe even an Olympian that the joy they feel from seeing their nation’s flag raised is in bad taste. There is nothing crazy about respecting an image of something which is important to you.'
One can feel anything as a response to anything else. And what they will feel will obviously depend on the specific circumstances. I accept this, yet-
your argument brings up nationhood. National boundaries ought to be eliminated,both you and I and everybody else knows this very well. In today's world, it is a well known fact that there is nothing that links any individual to the 'random flag' or nation that happened to be waved in the sky above his or her head in the place and time that they were born. National boundaries are constructs. Nothing more. They were implemented by the hegemon, in its attempt to further divide and conquer, and manipulate marginalized populations all over the world. Nationalism is not a necessary part of the human being, yet it is easy to make one a nationalist, simply by marginalizing them on the basis of where they live.
Therefore nationalist feelings of any sort (like 'feel[ing] a hint of patriotism in front of their country’s flag, even if it is a little worn?'...) ought to be deconstucted to the point where all could see clearly through their shallow bigot-essence.
Robert - your comment is as truthful as the holy 'moment' itself, experienced by all, simultaneously, at all times, NOT ignorant, but all pervasive, a work of art in and of itself.
Similarly, I praise this act of 'defacement' as an act not of vandalism, but of truth-seeking, and consciousness-spreading.
And lastly, the Olympian, the original Olympian, was not interested in his nation, or his family or even himself, he was interested in truth, the game, FAIR game. Clearly, an Olympian nowadays is mostly interested in money and fame; your ignorance incessantly amazes me. Nationalist fervor is disgusting, and it ought to be a wretched joke of the past.