The work was composed of relics the artist had collected since high school, items that he grew up with as well as objects that reflect society and the nation.
[1][2][3][4][5][6] In August 2011, Cruz and ten CCP officials faced criminal complaints accusing them of violating the Revised Penal Code's Article 201 on obscene exhibitions and indecent shows.
The ten CCP officials—namely Emily Abrera, Raul Sunico, Florangel Rosario-Braid, Jaime Laya, Isabel Caro Wilson, Zenaida Tantoco, Maria Cristina Turalba, Antonio Yap, Carolyn Espiritu, and Karen Ocampo Flores—also faced administrative complaints alleging their violation of the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standard for Public Officials and Employees (Republic Act 6713).
[7] Novelist F. Sionil Jose lambasted Cruz's installation in his column in The Philippine Star with a piece titled "The CCP Jesus Christ exhibit: It ain't art".
Pablo Tiong, agreed with Archbishop Palma, and informed the panel that the exhibition was not a project of the university and emphasized the fact that Cruz was once a student of the institution but did not earn a degree there.
Our obsession with the RH bill, divorce, same-sex marriage, and other issues that are somehow related to sexual intercourse is a betrayal of the Christian message, which has to do with feeding the hungry, visiting the sick and imprisoned, and helping the poor.
"[11][1] Fiction writer Butch Dalisay, in his own Philippine Star column and also in answer to Sionil Jose's judgment of the artist, wrote: "Cruz's maturity is beside the point.
What seems to me more immature is banning movies, books, and other works of art—especially if you have the power—because you don't like them, because you think they're bad or you can do better, because they run counter to your own beliefs and values, or because they point an annoying, accusing finger at you.
The CMFR chastised XXX for falsely linking Cruz's installation art piece to the divisive debate then going on around what was then still the reproductive health (RH) bill.
In its chastisement, CMFR reported that the program did not mention the larger exhibit and described Cruz's work as the artist's statement on the pending bill that the Church was strongly opposing.
"It has since become clear that the program took the tack it took for its controversial value," CMFR wrote, describing how the XXX episode on the issue began with footage of anti- and pro-RH advocates.
The report's lead included the line, "Eksklusibo: Art exhibit sa CCP minatyagan ng XXX.
The CAP also expressed alarm over President Benigno Aquino III's reported call to the CCP Board and his public "there is no freedom that is absolute" statement.
[5] Similarly, artist Leonilo Doloricon, a former dean of the UP at Diliman College of Fine Arts, disagreed with the notion that free expression is "a gift of the state to the people out of compassion".
Are we addressing the issue to the board of trustees of the CCP, to the Church people, or to the Aquino government who were also believed to be behind this closure?”[5] Raul Pangalangan, dean of the University of the Philippines College of Law and a columnist of the Philippine Daily Inquirer, said in an interview with Bulatlat that a lot of "fallacies" were peddled by Cruz's conservative critics, among which was that Poleteismo is free to be displayed in a private gallery but not at the CCP, which is a state instrumentality.
But a publicly-funded gallery is bound by a document called the Philippine Constitution, which requires it to respect 'freedom of speech and of expression' (Article III, Sec.
4 of the Philippine Constitution) and 'foster … a Filipino national culture … in a climate of free artistic and intellectual expression' (Article XIV, Sec.