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."
BTTT
I hate that new BCE and CE baloney. It's a blatant attempt to disavow that humans mark years based on the birth of Christ (even if off a few years). Pure political correctness. Thankfully, no matter what it is called, the dating will still remain as the first century beginning when Jesus was born.
Prove He existed? Isn’t that asking just a bit much?
How would anyone prove that a man existed 2,000 years ago if that person was not a high level official, priest, renown artist or at least rich? I have never heard of a database existing so long ago that contained every citizen. Even if the name Jeshua ben Joseph of Nazareth appeared, how would it be proven it was the Christ?
"The fool has said in his heart, There is no God" Ps.14:1
The classical self inflected wound in the foot.
So, if this guy wins, will the Pope be sued next?
BCE stands for "Before Christ's Emergence" and CE stands for "Christ's Emancipation", I thought everyone knew that.
Belief in God is too historically established & pervasive to make any kind of case that the priest is lying or committing some kind of fraud. The better strategy is to confront people with the fact that they would never accept such claims of magical beings found in a collection of self-serving histories of a persecuted religion from 2000 years ago - if these histories weren't referring to the religion that they happen to have faith in. (Why don't more Christians accept the literal truth of the Holy Quran? It's a literal transcription from the mouth of the angel Gabriel to the hand of Mohammed. Isn't it obvious? ;-)
Better men than this latest fruitcake have pulled this stunt before. Proving He was who He said He was is almost as easy as proving He existed at all. That should be a walk in the park for anyone with a historical, theological background.
I hope the ACLU lawyers and cohorts get good views of all the symbols of faith displayed....unless they repent of their wicked doings there wont be ANY such symbols in the hellish afterlife in store. They think they are kicking out God but sadly the reverse is true for them.
You mean Socrates. Plato wrote about the defense of Socrates in his dialogues. Aristotle was a student of the Academy that Plato founded. Aristotle was the teacher of Alexander the Great, so there are historical records that note Aristotle and Plato.
Indeed. Has this idiot ever heard of the historian by the name of Josephus? We know from numerous other sources that much of what is written in Josephus' histories really occured, so why would he write stuff about a Jesus from Nazareth (including a physical description) if he never existed? And why the hell should it even matter to an atheist if some Jewish reformist started his own religion?
At least he was honest at that moment, though I'm sure he didn't mean to be.
That's the problem with most athiests. They're not really athiests, but antithiests.
It's been my experience that "misery does enjoy company". I say, let them be miserable in their constant quest to erase, in their feeble way, the Truth. Some know the Truth, and there is no harm that will come to us that we can't endure. When we leave this world, well, we will go to a better and perfect place.......that is what their fear is and why they rant against Truth. Faithless people have little to live for except to drag us into their own faithlessness...it's what they (heh heh heh)...live for.
FMCDH(BITS)
[gogogodzilla:] He'll stand there, cover his eyes, and scream, "I can't see you!" over and over again.
So, have you seen God? In the flesh I mean - not just in your mind's eye?
Wouldn't that then be the ICLU?
";^)
It sounds personal. He comes across as a bully who has some long-standing problem with an old classmate (the priest). Probably taunted and bullied him (the priest) when they were kids in school and is doing so yet today by bringing up a frivilous lawsuit.
I suppose you've heard or read: "I won't dignify your question by giving you an answer". Well, it's the same with atheism. If something doesn't exist there's nothing to be gained by addressing the illusion of existence of "something" when "it" is nothing. Atheists dignify that which doesn't exists.
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.