Blasphemy

Definition

The concept of blasphemy as defined by the dictionary Larousse is “a word or a speech which insults the divinity violently”. It acts, from the point of view of the religious institutions, an insult, or a Injure, towards the divinity. The concept is defined in the 16th century by the Spanish theologist Francisco Suárez like “ any word of curse, reproaches or disrespect pronounced against God ”. As recalled by the catholic Encyclopedia, the blasphemy relates to only the field of the religion: “ while the blasphemy, étymologiquement, can indicate a lack of respect due to a creature as well as with God, in its strict meaning it is used only in the last direction. ” It is the word, used by the monk, to indicate an attack with its deity.

The blasphemy defined by the theologists and men of the church can be of three kinds:

1 - it is Hérésie when the insult contains a declaration against the faith, such as in the assertion " God is cruel and injuste" , or " God is the most marvellous creature of Homme".
2 - it is a imprecation when it is a question of expressing a curse towards Being supreme for it such as the assertion " we remove from Dieu"
3 - it is simple a disrespect at the time which it is entirely made of contempt or indignation with regard to God, the such expression of Julien the Apostate " You overcame, O Galiléen"

Can be, for example, regarded as blasphemies:

to deny a divine attribute, even the existence of the God,
to adapt an attribute or a devoted object,
to penetrate in certain places,
to insult or damage a representation of the god,
to lie, parjurer.
to represent a Icon (religion), when the religion from where it is resulting the interdict, and a fortiori in the form of caricature. (See Aniconisme)

The word was used in a metaphorical direction by Francis Bacon, founder of the applied science, when it refers to Caton Old the: And ace to the judgment off Cato the Censor, He was well punished for his blasphemy against Learning, in the same kind wherein He offended , - quotation which could be translated (freely) by “and as for the judgment of Caton the Old one, it was well punished for its blasphemy against sciences, and punished by it in what it had fished”.

Importance of the social context

A word (or an act) is not blasphématoire in the absolute. Its character blasphématoire and the gravity of this blasphemy can be evaluated only compared to what a religion defends, in the particular context where it is posed, and according to the way in which it is interpreted like an aggression by the offended believers.

For example, a Moslem can deny the divinity of Jesus in a mosque, or a Christian to deny that Mahomet received the revelation of Coran directly of Allah, in a theological publication. Such assertions, in these contexts, are only of “healthy theology” for the public which receives them, and their free expression (in the respect of the law and order) takes part of the freedom of the worship. In this case, one awaits State which it defends the freedom of thought and of expression of this thought, including as regards religion.

Conversely, if a Moslem came in a mosque to deny the divine revelation of Coran, or a Christian to deny the divinity of Jesus in an assembly of prayer catholique : such assertions, in these contexts, would be blasphématoires from the point of view of the religions concerned. Their author would certainly be put at the round of applause of his community, following such a Apostasie, at least, if its mental health is not questioned. In such cases, it is the author of the blasphemy which poses a problem intern at his community. One awaits State which it protects if necessary the apostate against vindication from his community.

So now a Moslem group came to deny the divinity of Jesus in a Catholic church, or a Christian group in a mosque to deny the divine revelation of the coran : dimension blasphématoire - real is only secondary compared to the provocation. In such a case, the blasphemy translates especially an intercommunity conflict, to which he adds an additional violence and an “unforgivable” character to the eyes of the believers. One awaits State which it ensures a civil peace, allowing the communities to cohabit in peace.

Through these examples, one sees that the blasphemy takes its direction only through what it reflects at the same time from the point of view of the monk and social: a heresy, an apostasy, or a provocation. In the same way, the intervention to preserve the law and order proceeds of logics différentes : the State sanctions the apostasy and the heresy only in the modes of official religion (when the State defends God), while the incentive with the religious hatred perhaps considered as a disorder of the law and order in certain States, and sometimes sanctioned as such (when the State defends the practitioners).

In the laic states, the political power is indifferent to the apostasy and the heresy, but can intervene to sanction blasphemies insofar as they bring a disorder to the law and order.

Derived blasphemies

The religions sometimes tolerated - with the difference in the capacities - derived blasphemies which had been neutralized by substitutions of syllables or words: Jarnibleu! for I disavow God! (the confessor of Henri IV, the abbot Cotton, had obtained all the same that he says Jarnicoton! ), Palsambleu! for By the blood of God! . Certain provocations have a more ambiguous direction: a cross is the upside down a blasphemy or a recall of the torment of the apostle Pierre ? Three crosses side by side constitute a diversion with the manner of Andy Warhol, or a notation symbolic of Golgotha, etc

Quotations

" That which will blasphémera the name of the Eternal will be punished of death, all the assembly will lapidate it. That it is foreign or indigenous, it will die, to have blasphemy the name of God. ”

Lévitique, 24.10-16

" I love best the atheist who blasphemy that the skeptic who ergote! "

Gustave Flaubert (1821-1880) - Bouvard and Pécuchet (1881)

" I entreat you, my brothers, remain faithful to the Earth and do not believe those which speak about superterrestrial hopes. Formerly the blasphemy towards God was the greatest blasphemy. But God died; and with him the blasphemers died. What there is the worst now, it is the blasphemy towards the Earth, it is to estimate the entrails of the " Impénétrable" more than the direction of the Earth… "

Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) - Ainsi spoke Zarathoustra

" One of my greater pleasures is to swear God when I bandage; it seems to me that my spirit, then thousand times more exalté, detests and mistakes well better this disgusting chimère."

Marquis de Sade (1740-1814) - Philosophy in the boudoir (1795)

Blasphemy and law and order

Repression of the blasphemy

Being regarded as an aggression, against a stake essential with the eyes of the religious institutions, the blasphemy tends to cause violent answers which the laws of the modern countries condemn. Historically, the penal repression of the blasphemy has existé (see for example will infra , section on the legislation). In the modern societies, the repression of the blasphemy as a blasphemy by the authorities is largely non-existent, the State and the religion being regarded as two distinct spheres, while it can be considered to be illegal in certain cases (executions, persecutions) by the legal authorities of the democratic countries.

Articles 166 and 167 of the local penal code of the Alsace-Moselle punish the blasphemy and the obstacle with the exercise of the 3 years worships of imprisonment to the maximum. These articles made debate recently when they were still used against militants of Act-Up. The Ministry for the interior and town and country planning with confirmed on June 1st, 2006 that these articles were maintained and always applicable in Alsace and the Moselle.

In the religious companies where the religion occupies a function of government of the company, can be regarded as a blasphemy very freethinking which is not subjected to the dogma that the religious authorities want to make respect. The Libertines, within the meaning of the XVII° century, is the free thinkers, illustrate in the history of the Chrétienté the concept of what the Catholic church could regard as concerning blasphemy. The figure of Don Juan of Molière illustrates this " particularly; challenge with the ciel" and this refusal of the religious authorities in the name of the reason, the only profession of faith of Don Juan being summarized by " I believe that two and two make quatre" when is asked to him by its servant, if he believes in a God. At the time where the belief as a God is obligatory, such a declaration is blasphématoire. The reaction horrified at Sganarelle, with the idea that Don Juan believes neither in God neither with devil, neither with the sky nor with the hell, expresses it well.

In other forms, that can be still the case today in some Théocratie S where the religious rule is observed. The case of the Islamic Republic of Iran in is an example, where the blasphemy can be repressed by the capital punishment, or in Saudi Arabia, where to have on oneself a Bible is penally repressed. In this case the laws of the State are directements inspired by the laws of the religion and must be in conformity there. In fact, the Charia or Islamic religious law.

Independently, or against any legislation and to straight conferred on any human being, the transgressions of the religious interdicts can cause violent reactions and spontaneous on behalf of the religious communities. In the recent examples, one can quote the case of the women burned alives as regards regarded as " impudicité" by their religious community, when they refuse to wear the Islamic veil by deciding some by themselves, i.e. by exerting their right to be free of their person, whether it is in Iraq or in the French suburbs. These violent reactions vis-a-vis what is regarded as blasphemy are sanctioned by the laws of the democratic countries.

Social problems

A religion always results in delimiting an exclusive crowned field of the profane field. The protection of this crowned field is characterized by a system of interdicts. Compared to these interdicts, the company, when it is about a theocratic company, can intervene for " to protect Dieu" or for " to protect the pratiquants":

In the States with official religion, when the religious fact is in the center founder of the company, the law protects the religion. In this context, the blapshème can be an offense, because it attacks the base even social order.
When the State is not based on the religion but on the right of the individuals, the blasphemy can constitute a damage for the faithful ones as citizens protected by the law which authorizes them to have their own beliefs. The blasphemy can engage the civil responsibility of that which utters it, which can be condemned if he contravenes the right of free belief. In this case, there is no judgment of blasphemy as tel.

In addition, the existence even of a blasphemy reveals a rupture in the religious unit. An involuntary blasphemy at least shows a lack of religious culture, which can endanger the possibility of cohabiting within the same religious order. A conscious blasphemy would betray, with the eyes of the religious institutions, a will of deliberated aggression, a rejection of the " autre" and of its values. For this reason, a theocratic State can be resulted in fighting against the blasphemy, while a laic State can sanction it, but independently of any religious consideration, in order to preserve social peace so necessary.

The prevention of the blasphemy tends to the installation of a Censure in the theocratic States which do not admit the freedom of belief, but this censure is not accepted in the democratic modern States, where freedom of expression is a basic right. According to its defenders, “the freedom of conscience implies freedom of expression besides. A freedom of conscience reserved for the interior for would be a show. Each one is thus free to be expressed, including on religious subjects (…) ” This principle led for the laymen to an extremely clear formula: freedom to think is absolute or it is not. The political answer that one can adopt vis-a-vis the blasphemy is finally the result of a double dilemma: on the one hand, arbitration to be found between freedom of expression and right with the respect of the religion; in addition, solution of appeasing to find to support the mutual respect between communities between which the blasphemy is an objective sign of hatred.

Protection of the communities

The concept of blasphemy can intervene when a religious community tries to defend itself against what she interprets like an aggression. Thus, in 1988 and 1989, the catholic episcopate tries to convince the courts of Germany to use the legislation antiblasphème against atheists who supported that “the Church was the largest criminal of the history of humanity”. Monseigneur Lustiger declares in the Barber of October 31st, 1991: Perhaps do others have a more ideological intention when they caricature - by ignorance? - what the Church believes and what she teaches. They turn into ridiculous, sometimes until calumny, of the men and the women who engaged their life there. Or they take for object of derision the account of the life of Christ and her episodes which the iconography popularized. This disrespect of others is an attack more serious than it does not appear to with it with the social pact of any democracy. Such practices could be liable to courts.

The variability of the importance of the blasphemy in right is due especially to the social context. Whatever the religion concerned, the recourse to this concept (to justify an unspecified action) is not possible that if the religious feeling which was wounded is sufficiently strong. When this feeling is majority, and in the companies characterized by a strong degree of authoritarianism and religious extremism, authorities which issue that there is blasphemy launch the charge and can thus justify with the eyes of the believers the executions or persecutions which follow. In these cases, the problem of “protection of the communities” is reversed, and become that of the protection of the persecuted minorities.

Secularity and legislation on the blasphemy

The criticism of the legislation on the blasphemy has a long story, which goes back to the Age of Enlightenment. At that time, Voltaire takes the case of the Chevalier of the Bar, last case of Torture and execution for blasphemy in France, like a demonstration of the obscurantism of the religious laws and need for freedom of thought. The assertion of freedoms of expression and thought by the French revolution is registered - in fact against what had been the position of the Church in this field; it puts an end to its historical role of base of the social order. The law on the freedom of the press of 1881 intervenes in a context of Laïcité and Anticlérical ism militants; it returns legitimate of press campaigns extremely violent (on both sides), which completes to break the idea of a natural bond between State and religion, and lead finally to the Separation of the Church and the State.

Since, this separation is guaranteed by the laws of the modern nations and entered manners, with the Human rights in general. Concept of Tolerance, - that is to say the acceptance and the respect of a plurality of ideas and beliefs within the same company -, guarantee and the protection of freedom of expression, and the recognition of pluralism in all the fields (policy and monk but also in the various sectors of the company) make unthinkable the overlap of the Church in the institutions, which translated the centrality of the religion in the company.

Militant atheism

The antireligieux militancy remains active, and is favorable to the distinction legal, political and cultural modern which returns the concept of blasphemy to the only sphere of the monk and that of the particular beliefs. With the freedom of thought which founds the democratic society, the idea that the Church can continue like blasphemers the incroyants and the atheists ready to smile. However, it is a recurrent theme in the militant speech. Groups exist in England which deal specifically with fight against the repression of the blasphemy. There existed nothing similar on the continent. This is why, fascinating in consideration the Rushdie business but also and initially, chronologically speaking, the continuations against the German atheists, a group was constituted in Belgium in 1989, the League for the Abolition of the laws repressing the Blasphemy and the right To be expressed Freely (LABEL). declared anticonstitutional the prohibition of short-measuring The Miracle of Roberto Rossellini, a film judged " cheap, wounding and blasphématoire"

The first Moslem elected with the American congress, Keith Ellison, lent oath to the Constitution of the United States on the Coran. Traditionally, the elected officials lend oath by holding the hand on the Bible. This oath on Coran made say to the religious and preserving right-hand side which it is about one “blasphemy to the Constitution”.

Muslim world

Violences against the marked people of blasphemies are recurring in certain Islamic countries.

; Pakistan Among the countries with Moslem majority, Pakistan has the most strict laws anti blasphemy. In 1982, the president then in exercise, Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq introduces into the penal code the section 295B punishing " the vilification of the Coran" Saint; by a perpetual sorrow of imprisonment. In 1986, the section 295C is introduced applicant the capital punishment for the use of remark insulting the person of the Prophet Islam.

In 2004, the Pakistani Parliament approves a law reducing the range of the laws anti blapsphème. The police force must moreover make sure of the founded good of the charges of blapshème before translating into justice the person. It should be noted that these laws are used against political adversaries or personal enemies, by fundamentalist Moslems against Christians, Hindus, of Sikhs. The members of the Moslem current Ahmadiste are particularly aimed by these procedures also and see themselves prohibiting the use of the Moslem vocabulary, whereas they claim Islam.

According to évèques the Pakistani, 650 people were wrongfully accused of blasphemy and decrees since 1988. 20 people would have been carried out in the same amount of time for the same reasons. In July 2005, one would count 80 marked Christians in prison of blasphemy.

The Christians of Pakistan, supported by the Moslems, protested against the book of Dan Brown the Da Vinci Code. June 3rd, 2006, Pakistan prohibited the diffusion of the film Da Vinci Code drawn from the novel by using the laws against the blasphemy. The minister Gulab Amal Gandoo had these words Islam teaches the respect of all the prophets of very powerful God and a degradation of any prophet has as much range than the slandering of all the others .

; Iran

Europe

Freedom of expression is guaranteed by the universal declarations of the human rights to which refers the European Convention of the human rights. However in many countries, laws prohibit and repress the blasphemy, not as such, but when it disturbs the law and order, fact reached with the property, or encourages with hatred.

; Germany Article 166 of the penal code, known under the name of Gotteslästerungsparagraph , punishes the blasphemy up to three years of imprisonment, if there is disorder of civil peace.

(1) Wer öffentlich oder durch Verbreiten von Schriften (§ 11 ABS. 3) den Inhalt of the religiösen oder weltanschaulichen Bekenntnisses anderer in einer Weise beschimpft, die geeignet STI, den öffentlichen Frieden zu stören, wird put Freiheitsstrafe (a) zu drei Jahren oder put Geldstrafe bestraft.

(2) Ebenso wird bestraft, wer öffentlich oder durch Verbreiten von Schriften (§ 11 ABS. 3) eine im Inland bestehende Kirche oder andere Religionsgesellschaft oder Weltanschauungsvereinigung, ihre Einrichtungen oder Gebräuche in einer Weise beschimpft, die geeignet STI, den öffentlichen Frieden zu stören.

What is sanctioned is the disorder with civil peace, not the blasphemy.

One finds of it a translation in the penal code of Alsace and the Moselle:

“public blasphemy against God”:

That which will have caused a scandal while blasphémant publicly against God by remarks outrageants, or will publicly have insult one of the Christian worships or a religious community established on the territory of the Confederation and recognized like corporation, or the institutions or ceremonies of these worships or which, in a church or another place devoted to religious assemblies, will have made abusive and scandalous acts, will be punished of a three years imprisonment at the maximum.

This article served in the case of Manfred van H. and prohibition in 1994 of a Musical comedy ridiculing the Catholic church using in its setting in scene of the crucifiés pigs.

; Austria (Articles 188,189 of the penal code)

; Denmark Sections 140 and 266b of the Danish criminal Code. The article 14o stipulates:

that which publicly scoffs, or made insult with the doctrines of faith or the worships of a religious community legally established in this country, is liable to catch of body.

Denmark thus punishes any public mockery of a religion, and it is the same in Finland.

No jurisprudence is quoted.

; Spain Article 525 of the penal code, which prohibits " attacks carried to the religious dogma, beliefs or cérémonies". This article of the penal code was called upon by the Cristo del Gran Poder to continue the author of a Video game putting in scene characters carrying of religious and bearing clothing of the Christian crosses on which it is necessary to draw. ; Finland (Section 10, chapter 17 of the penal code)

; France Articles 10 and 11 of the Declaration of the human rights and the citizen of 1789 remove the concept of blasphemy of the French right, as long as there is neither abuse nor disorder with the law and order. The concept of blasphemy is re-established under the Restauration and is again repealed in the years 1830. The notion of blasphemy is definitively buried with the laws of July 29th 1881 on. However, the " provocation with the crimes and offenses " remain sanctioned (Article 23), just as the apology for crimes against humanity or the incentive with hatred or violence because of the religion (Article 24), or slandering against a religious group (Article 31). In addition, of the elements blasphématoires are prohibited in (Article 14).

However, the fastening of Alsace and the Moselle in 1918 reintroduced the concept of blasphemy, via the incorporation of article 166 of the German penal code in the French right. In Alsace the Moselle there is no separation between the Church and the State, and God profits there from a special statute (however God does not have the statute of anybody legal) just like the religion, which does not have either the statute of anybody legal.

In addition, the French Law of separation of the Church and the State does not apply in French Guiana. Guyana (then colony) was excluded from the field of this law because of an opposition on the one hand local politicians. It is not either under the mode of the Concordat, but under that of the royal decree of Charles X of August 27th 1828 which organizes the political institutions of Guyana. This ordinance recognizes only the catholic worship.

; Ireland (prohibited by the constitution)

; Italy These laws were called upon to condemn Oriana Fallaci. Oriana Fallaci was condemned for racism, not for blasphemy.

; Norway Law of 1930, ever used. However, the film satyric Monty Python: The Life of Brian was interdict there during one year (8 years in Ireland, 11 years in Italy, and 22 years with Jersey). The Swedish newspapers could titrate “ this film is so funny that it was interdict in Norway ”. The blasphemy itself escapes the law, since the authors were not punished.

; Netherlands (Article 147 of the penal code, used without success for the last time in 1968) ; Poland Recently, the artist Dorota Nieznalska is continued to have realized a sculpture representing of the genitals suspended with a Christian crucifix. ; the United Kingdom This law applies only to the Church Anglican E. At the time of the business of the book the verses satanic of Salman Rushdie, the Moslems of England wanted to make it condemn while being based on this law. but by judgment of April 9th, 1990 the Court rejected the request.

In 1977, Mary Whitehouse prosecutes and makes condemn for blasphemy the magazine Gay News to have published a poem of James Kirchup, who describes the homosexual loves of Jesus with a centurion. The court Européenne rejetta provides it in call in 1982, confirming the judgment of the House of Lords of 1979.

In all the cases one notes the absence of judgment for blasphemy.

; Swiss (Article 261 of the penal code) ; Greece Article 198 of the Greek penal code punishes that which, in public and with ill will, offense God in some manner that it is, and that which expresses in public, while blasphémant, a lack of respect towards the religious feeling.

This law was used to make condemn to 6 months of prison in abtentia in January 2005 the Austrian illustrator Gerhard Haderer for a judged Cartoon blapschématoire after having prohibited the publication in of it 2003. The Court of Appeal raised " prohibition; because the work is not blasphématoire" and under the pressure of the European Community.

The European Community does not recognize the blasphemy like a concerning offense right. What would be contrary with the principles guaranteeing freedom of expression.

Random links: