At only first glance, this artwork of Andres Serrano is seen to be very provocative and blasphemous. This controversial artwork is a photograph of a 13-inch crucifix being submerged into a yellow liquid, which is implied to be urine as the title would suggest, and it is most likely to be his own. For many, the Piss Christ became a symbol of the secular assault and hatred against the Christian faith as it is said to be an act of dishonoring their Lord. Many viewers were outraged when Serrano was funded by the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA), which is in turn funded by the taxpayers, for that particular artwork. In fact, Serrano received $15,000 from the NEA in 1987 and the artwork was exhibited in some art galleries. Serrano received several death threats after the Piss Christ work, and it was widely condemned, maligned, and censored by authorities. On the other hand, some claim that the art world was being attacked by Christians who had rarely seen art as having importance. There was a campaign to ban the artwork from acceptable art as it may inspire other artists to p
ush the limit even further. What was their main idea and motivation for Serrano? That question was actually being asked to him and he responded by saying that Piss Christ was meant not meant to be merely provocative, but an act of devotion. The message that he tried to convey is he, a Christian artist, is making a religious artwork based on his relationship with Christ and The Church (Moore, 2017). The crucifix is a tarnished symbol that has lost its meaning. In simple words, it is a symbol of the crucifixion of a man who was tortured and left to die for several hours until all of his bodily fluid come out of him. The urine is not what Serrano did to Christ, rather it is what Christians did to Christ over centuries of commercialization of religion to make money. People may agree or disagree with him, but how can anyone find his artwork as merely obscenity and disrespectful? By perceiving it from the right angle, maybe there is a moral value that could be seen and could be regarded as good Christian art. The question that remains is; to what extent is art relevant in religion?