Posted on 01/22/2006 3:10:37 PM PST by Cornpone
Rome - Lawyers for a small-town parish priest have been ordered to appear in court next week after the Roman Catholic cleric was accused of unlawfully asserting what many people take for granted: that Jesus Christ existed.
The Reverend Enrico Righi was named in a 2002 complaint filed by Luigi Cascioli after Righi wrote in a parish bulletin that Jesus did indeed exist, and that he was born of a couple named Mary and Joseph in Bethlehem and lived in Nazareth.
Cascioli, a lifelong atheist, claims that Righi violated two Italian laws by making the assertion: so-called "abuse of popular belief" in which someone fraudulently deceives people; and "impersonation" in which someone gains by attributing a false name to someone.
Cascioli says that for 2 000 years the Roman Catholic Church has been deceiving people by furthering the fable that Christ existed, and says the church has been gaining financially by "impersonating" as Christ someone by the name of John of Gamala, the son of Judas from Gamala.
Gospels 'full of errors'
He also asserts that the Gospels - the most frequently cited testimony of Jesus' existence - are inconsistent, full of errors and biased, and that other written evidence from the time is scant and doesn't hold up to scholarly analysis.
Prosecutors, who in Italy are obliged to investigate such complaints, initially tried to have the case dismissed, saying no crime could be verified.
But Cascioli challenged them, and Judge Gaetano Mautone set a hearing for next Friday in Viterbo, north of Rome, to discuss preliminary motions in Cascioli's bid to have the court appoint technical experts to review the historical data and determine if Jesus really did exist.
Cascioli, 72, said in a recent interview that he decided to pursue the case against Righi, a priest in the village of Bagnoregio, near Viterbo, because the cleric had written in the parish bulletin that Jesus existed.
Cascioli is quick to stress that he has no problem with Christians freely professing their faith.
Righi argues that the existence of Christ is "unmistakable" because of the substantial historical evidence - both pagan and religious - testifying that he indeed lived.
"Cascioli maintains that Christ never existed. If he doesn't see the sun at midday, he can't denounce me just because I do.
"He should denounce all believers!" Righi wrote.
Born 'against Christ'
Cascioli says he fully recognises that his case has a slim chance of succeeding in overwhelmingly Catholic Italy, but not because his argument is lacking.
"We aren't optimistic - unless the Madonna makes a miracle, but I don't think that will happen," he joked.
Cascioli says he is merely going through the necessary legal steps in Italy so he can ultimately take the matter to the European Court of Human Rights, where he intends to pursue the case against the church for "religious racism".
"I was born against Christ and God," he said.
"I'm doing it (the complaint) now because I should do it before I die."
Thanks for Parrot Post. Made my laugh for the day!
Same here ! So, who cares whether they existed or not? It's the way of life that works for me!! and millions of
others. Sorry it doesn't work for so many others and that is their problem, not mine. Jesus only told us to "Love One Another". What's wrong with that?
BUT: their "Jesus" is supposed to return, support the Madhi's subjugation of the world for Islam, and PERSONALLY lead the slaughter of the Jews and Christians who still will not accept Islam.
According to them, He is NOT The Son of God; He did NOT die on the cross; He was not resurrected, but instead, "he was 'translated' alive to Paradise, and Judas was decietfully crucifed in His place".
After "he" returns, "he" will "finish" living "his" life by first destroying the Jews and Israel, then marrying, fathering children, and then dying 40 years after "his return".
Like everything else "thier Jesus" is a Satanic deception.
It's a way to confound those who want to take Christ out of our calendar.
So yes, it is a joke, and it is also a way to subvert the effort to change our calendar. Imagine some school principal, so proud that his kids no longer use the horrid Before Christ annotation, then he finds out that they think they are saying Before Christ's Emergence!
To atheist: Prove you exist.
Sorry. You are correct.
Got it! Sorry to ask for the explanation.
The true/real/historical story of the whole BC/AD calendar is quite fascinating actually. And it has nothing to do with Jesus himself, either.
But you knew that.
The Jehovah Witness, have have been using the nomenclature for years.
There are CONSEQUENCES to being wrong.
If I, as a Christian, am wrong...and I face only oblivion when I die...what have I lost? Nothing. Sure I've denied myself a few sinfull pleasures, but my life is good. I won't ever know if I was wrong.
If However the atheist is wrong, he faces eternity in Hell.
Hell is a lake of fire. There is no shore, no islands, no shallow end, no discos...just an eternity of being burned alive...you'll never get used to it, and it'll never stop.
No one rules in Hell. It was made for satan and his fallen angels. It just happens to be big enough for those who choose to go there.
All in all, right or wrong, I feel I chose...wisely.
Pach, you completely misunderstood my point. I'm actually in agreement with YOU. I think this guy is an ass (as is Newdow) for pursuing something so.
If you are an atheist, I would say that you don't get a lot of things, especially the *big* things.
He frightens them.
Excelent, ap.
As they say in mathematics, QED!
Exactly! However, the calculation of those consequences is much more difficult to carry out than you assume. (See for example #98.)
I've never seen evidence for the progress in which humanists place their faith. I'm more inclined to agree with those who think that man is in fact devolving, morally and spiritually, given his "progress" of the last century. Sadly, there are very few left, even among Catholics, who still believe that man is born in a state of Original Sin.
Because, in their minds, he obstructs human progress.
More likely because he represents sacrifice, the enemy of the ego.
Furthermore, progression assumes some final goal, something to progress to, which in turn implies an absolute standard, which in turn implies a higher authority who put that standard into effect--all ideas that are repulsive to this group of people.
Reminiscent of C.S. Lewis' _Mere Christianity_.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.