Review: The Last Supper

May 18, 2026May 17, 2026 / rtrube54 / Leave a comment

The Last Supper

The Last Supper: Art, Faith, Sex, and Controversy in the 1980s, Paul Elie. Farrar, Straus and Giroux (ISBN: 9780374272920) 2025.

Summary: On controversial artists of the 1980’s, discussing the intersection of sexuality and spirituality in crypto-religious works.

The title of this book refers to the final work of Andy Warhol, one of the major figures chronicled in this cultural history of the 1980’s. But it also signifies the kind of book this is. Warhol’s “The Last Supper” is a series (totally about 100 works) of Warhol’s renderings of da Vinci’s work under the same title. Warhol, like many of the artistic figures on the pages of this book, is followed from his Catholic beginnings in Pittsburgh until his death in 1987.

Paul Elie traces the religiosity of Warhol, who after a near-death experience, attended Mass weekly. Furthermore, he explores what he calls the “crypto-religious” element in his art, most apparent in this final body of work. By “crypto-religious” he means hidden or unconventionally used religious symbols or references, sometimes offering an unconventional take on religion. Not only that, Elie portrays him as a “controvert,” one at odds with oneself on matters of belief. He explores Warhol’s closeted homosexuality and his efforts to reconcile his identity with the church’s stance on his sexuality

These themes run through the more or less chronological history of many of the controversial artists of the 1980’s. He opens the book with Bob Dylan’s “Christian” phase marked by the release of Slow Train Coming with it hit song, “Serve Someone.” He then follows the fan response and Dylan’s continued musical evolution and intersection with other artists through the 1980’s.

What follows is an exploration of the lives and work of artists in various media and the controversy their lives and work arouse. Much of this centers around a sense of alienation and yet longing for faith. It often reflects disillusionment with formal religious structures. The crypto-religious elements express both resistance, sometimes to the point of transgression and yet spiritual longing. Sinead O’Connor tears up a photograph of the Pope as she performs on SNL. Madonna dresses seductively and yet sings “Like a Prayer.” Leonard Cohen has many lovers but also writes “Hallelujah.”

Then in film, Martin Scorsese devotes fifteen years to the religiously motivated filming of Nikos Kazantzakis’ The Last Temptation of Christ. The book and movie arouse controversy because of the “alternate life vision” Jesus has on the cross of marriage to Mary Magdalene. Scorsese felt the work explored the deep humanness of Jesus in contrast to so many film portrayals of Jesus. But the critics thought it blasphemy.

Elie also considers writers including poet Czeslaw Milosz, Toni Morrison and James Baldwin, and even Salman Rushdie. The latter’s human portrayal of the prophet in The Satanic Verses resulted in a fatwa, which remains to this day. Rushdie, like other artists, represents those resisting a religion, that in its behavior contrasts with its highest ideals.

For many of the artists in this book who were raised Catholic, they wrestled with the contradictions in the Church’s response, first to homosexuality, and then to the rampant AIDS epidemic that burned through New York and San Francisco in the mid to late 1980’s. We see the contrast between figures like Daniel Berrigan, comforting the dying, and Cardinal O’Connor. Meanwhile, the first revelations of sexual abuse by priests and the coverups are coming out.

One of the more troubling aspects of the “controvert” character of some of the artists is the celebration of “transgressive sexuality.” For instance, we might consider some of the graphic photographic portrayals in Mapplethorpe’s X Portfolio. Is the response to hypocrisy, repressiveness or flawed understandings of the body to throw off all norms and boundaries? Are we to normalize whatever one would do with one’s body (perhaps with the proviso of “consent”)?

What these artists do reveal is the complexity involved in our sexuality and spirituality. Often, we refer to the “mash-up” of different religions as religious syncretism. I wonder if there is a kind of “sexual-spiritual syncretism” of those who identify as spiritual, or even with a given religion, yet pursue sexual practices at variance with the norms of that religion? It seems that at least some of the portrayals in Elie’s book fall into this category.

Paul Elie not only offers a fascinating cultural narrative of the 1980’s, a walk down memory lane for some. He also raises interesting questions about the controversial artists of this period. His exploration of “crypto-religiosity” challenges us to listen more closely to those we might too quickly dismiss. And he shows how artists of the 1980’s, aware of both bodily and spiritual longings, did not bracket these off from each other. It challenges religious thinkers and teachers to join artists and culture critics wrestling with the realities of our embodied lives.

Review: Confronting Old Testament Controversies

August 13, 2019August 12, 2019 / rtrube54 / 2 Comments

Confronting Old Testament Controversies: Pressing Questions About Evolution, Sexuality, History, and Violence, Tremper Longman III. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2019.

Summary: With a commitment both to the authority of the Bible, and pastoral concern for readers, the author addresses controversial questions about origins, historicity, violence, and sexuality.

This work took a certain amount of courage to write. I suspect there will be a number who read it who applaud what the author says in some places and vehemently disagree elsewhere. Throughout, the author seeks to offer a reading of scripture, particularly the Old Testament that engages the text as a whole and seeks to listen to its overarching message, that engages scholarship, including scholars, some friends, with whom the author disagrees, and seeks to exercise pastoral care, even for readers who may disagree.

The four issues the author addresses are the controversy of how we read the creation accounts of scripture in light of evolution; whether we can trust that the exodus and Canaanite conquest are historical events, despite claims that they did not happen; how we should think about the claims of divine violence in scripture; and what the Bible teaches about same-sex relations and the pastoral implications of this teaching. My brief summaries of the author’s responses to these controversy should not substitute for a careful reading of his responses, especially if one thinks one differs with the author.

On evolution, he both argues against “wooden reading that would lead us to think that it was the intention of the biblical author to provide us with a straightforward description of the how of creation” and equally against those who would deny “a historic fall and concept of original sin.” He contends that the Bible is interested in the who and why of creation while science addresses the how.
On history, he affirms the historical reality as well as the theological import of the exodus and conquest narratives.
On violence, he believes that attempts to claim God didn’t hurt anyone or that seek to minimize the harm, do not do justice to the biblical text, which, consistent with the New Testament portrays a God who fights against, and finally defeats evil. He actually suggests that the violence of the Old Testament, first against the nations, and later against Israel herself, stand as forewarnings of God’s final judgment.
On sexuality, he affirms the historic view of the church affirming sexual intimacy within the boundaries of a marriage between a man and a woman. He thoughtfully deals with key texts and alternative readings. While he holds to what is now called a “traditional” view, he contends he speaks only to the church here and that there are implications of the Bible’s teaching about sexuality that challenge every believer. He opposes crusades against same-sex marriage or the withholding of business services to LGBT persons offered to others.

What I most admired are the gracious ways in which Longman engages and charitably differs with scholars, including one who was a former student, and another who is a close friend. I affirm the ways he shows pastoral concern without compromising theological integrity, modeling a belief that love and truth, story and principle need not be at odds. Finally, I appreciate the thoughtful, nuanced yet concise, responses to four controversies, each of which have been the subjects of multiple complete books. What each have in common are that they represent shifts from historic understanding, arising both from scholarship and other cultural forces. Longman offers a thoughtful restatement of the biblical teaching that weighs the counter arguments and finds them inadequate to justify abandoning historic understandings shared by most of the church through most of its history.

The work serves as a good starting place for someone who wants to read a well-stated “conservative” view (although some conservatives and some evolutionists alike would be unhappy with Longman on evolution) on the four controversies addressed by this book. The documentation points people to the full range of scholarship on each of the questions. The discussion questions at the end of each chapter may help both with personal reflection and group discussion. Most of all, the work models a spirit in desperate need of recovery, that can both speak unequivocally about one’s convictions yet shows charities toward one’s opponents.

________________________________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received this book free from the publisher. I was not required to write a positive review. The opinions I have expressed are my own.

Why I Won’t Be Reviewing Fire and Fury

January 10, 2018January 9, 2018 / rtrube54 / 7 Comments

There has been a flurry of coverage this week about Michael Wolff’s Fire and Fury, which, from what I gather, is a largely uncomplimentary portrait of our current president. Questions have been raised about how the author gained such access, and the reliability of some sources. There has been a huge falling out between the president and a former adviser, who has had to step down from his leadership of Breitbart News. There was a “cease and desist” order which the publisher has ignored, selling out their first run of the book. [By the way, I think this is an unconstitutional attempt to abridge First Amendment press freedoms, to which the president, like all other citizens, is subject.]

While I fully support the right to publish this book, I won’t be reviewing it. Here’s why:

Fundamentally, I have to make choices about what I think is worth reviewing for the purposes of this blog, which is about what promotes the good, the true, and the beautiful. There are so many good books I want to read and review (some waiting to be read), and I honestly don’t think I have time for this “take down” book, whether accurate or not, which I will leave to others to debate.
This is the kind of book, no matter what I write about it, that will confirm the views of those who oppose the president and arouse the ire of those who support him. It’s not a book that will change minds. Frankly, I don’t want to host an argument about the book on this blog.
I think the more important discussions right now have to do with how we make this country work for all of its citizens, “red” or “blue.” I want to pay attention to voices articulating a bigger vision for our country. That’s why in the past year I’ve reviewed books by John Kasich and Ben Sasse, as well as by activists like Matthew Desmond and Bryan Stevenson.
I suspect that many people who care about this book are already reading it, long before it would be possible for me, and you already have your opinions and don’t need mine.
Finally, I don’t think this book will be part of our national discussion for very long. I have a sense that by the time I get to reviewing it (because of books already in my review queue), it will start turning up in the bargain bins at second hand stores.

For now at least, I’ve done all the reviewing of books on this president that I want to do in the one book I’ve reviewed bearing his name, Choosing Donald Trump. I like this book’s call for people of faith to exercise “prophetic distance” with this and all presidents. That’s different from unquestioning allegiance or hidebound opposition and calls us to a greater and more generous vision of our country and for our world. Those are the conversations I want to uphold.