CHRISTIANOPHOBIA IN ITS WORKS
"Nevertheless, the enemy is not satisfied with these denials. It is not enough for it to have intimidated the Church ... It must humiliate Christians. Such humiliation comes through derision, provocation and blasphemy.
"Derision is the spirit manifested in trendy broadcasts with regard to Catholicism ... It is the pitying commentaries in the international press about George Bush beginning his work sessions with a prayer and invoking the name of God in public. It is more generally the tone of mockery adopted by hosts whenever they treat of Christianity on the air: Christianity is square, it is a thing for sour old maids, hypocritical seniors or neurotic adolescents.
"Provocation ... is manifested in advertising campaigns that utilize Catholic imagery to attract attention through scandal. Christianophobia finally culminates in blasphemy. In the eighties we witnessed a tremendous buildup in the matter, with a spate of films that kept going further and further."
Michel De Jaeghere adds: "For a long time I wondered what these people who do not believe in God are seeking by profaning the Cross of Christ (and all Christian values)... In reality, they are bearing witness in favor of the greatness of God and the magnificence of the Church: they must really be pervaded with them to go on insulting enemies who, humanly speaking, seem doomed to disappear in the trash cans of history. It is as if the survival of a diminished marginal Christian community is unbearable to them. As if, at all costs, they have to offend the last of the Christians by trying to defile whatever they hold most dear and thus corner them into a choice where they have everything to lose.
"Should we react? But by that very fact, wouldn't this demonstrate the Catholic Faith's implacable attitude when confronted with a pluralistic democracy? Wouldn't the only result be that of having contributed to casting discredit on Catholicism?
"Should we just let it go on? Reckon that these insults defile only those who proffer them? That at any rate, it is not worth challenging the status quo, and at least we will spare ourselves open persecution? But then the Christianophobes will have succeeded in making us accept the idea that decidedly we do not have the means to revolt, even if we are offended in what we hold most dear, what we consider most holy. Then they will have succeeded in degrading us by making us consent to their blasphemies by our passivity. They will have made us their accomplices. Having permitted them to insult our God, our Christ, even upon the Cross, what could possibly make us react tomorrow?
"React? ... Let it go on? ... In France, the first choice has been that of a handful of the faithful --- insulted, defamed, dragged through the mud by the press, some even sent to jail for it. The second choice has been that of a hierarchy which for twenty years has dissociated itself from every demonstration, protest or lawsuit opposing these outrages against God or religion: they say it is because it would give publicity to their enemies, or because they are afraid of being associated with the extreme right, or because the moment does not seem opportune. (This reminds us of one of Anouilh's characters whose wife is called a hooker; when she asks him to react and hit the man who insulted her, he replies, 'My dear, I'm waiting till he exaggerates.')"
THE NEXT PART CAN BE ACCESSED BY CLICKING THE FORWARD GEM BELOW OR BY GOING BACK TO THE TOP OF THE FIRST PAGE FOR THE LINKS.