The European court ruling this week declaring the presence of the Cross in Italian schoolrooms as a violation of human rights is not directly related to the Holy Father, but it is such a landmark event in the de jure secularization of Europe - against which Benedict XVI has been the most persistent paladin for decades - that I am posting here the L'Osservatore Romano commentary on it. I first posted news of the ruling - and the complete English text of the court's announcement - in the ISSUES thread on Tuesday, and the first Vatican reaction in the CHURCH&VATICAN thread.
The Crucifix, the judges
and Natalia Ginzburg
by Giuseppe Fiorentino and Francesco M. Valiante
Translated from
the 11/05/09 issue of
The judgment issued yesterday by the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg - which would prohibit the display of the Cross in Italian schoolrooms because it would violate the right of parents to educate their children according to their convictions as well as the right of children to religious freedom - has struck the symbol that most represents the great tradition, not simply religious, of the European continent.
"The Crucifix does not generate any discrimination. Say no more! It is the image of the Christian revolution which spread throughout the world the idea of equality among all men which had been absent until then".
That was written by Natalia Ginzburg [1916-1991, Italian Jewish novelist] on March 22, 1988, in the pages of
L'Unita, the newspaper founded by Antonio Gramsci as the organ of the Italian Communist Party.
The words of the writer, from a distance of 20 years, express a sentiment that continues to be widely shared in Italy, made evident by the many reactions to the judgment of the court in Strasbourg.
While the Italian government has said that it will appeal the judgment, the political world has almost unanimously condemned the lack of common sense shown by the court, in pointing out that the secularity of institutions is something other than negating the role of Christianity in European history.
"Surprise and sorrow" were expressed by the press director of the Holy See, Fr. Federico Lombardi, in a statement first transmitted on Vatican Radio and on state TV's TG-1.
"It is a serious matter," he said, "to emarginate from the world of education a fundamental symbol of the importance of religious values in Italian history and culture."
He continued: "It also is surprising that a European court is intervening so heavily in a matter that is deeply tied to the historic, cultural and spiritual identity of the Italian people. It is not the way to make the idea of Europe [as a political entity] more attractive and shared, an idea that Italians have always supported from the very beginning".
It is sad that it is being considered a sign of division, exclusion or limitation of freedom. That is not what it is and that is not the common feeling of our people."
The Italian bishops' conference (CEI) denounced the court's 'biased and ideological view', saying the decision "ignores the multiple meanings of the Cross, which is not only a religious symbol but also a cultural sign".
it must be remembered that in Italy, the Council of State declared legitimate in 2006 all norms that provide for the display of the Crucifix in Italian schoolrooms, saying it did not represent discrimination against non-believers because "it represents values which are civically relevant and more important, values which underlie and inspire our constitutional order".
In effect, the judgment by the Strasbourg court, which claims to protect all human rights, places into question the roots on which those same rights were based, denying the importance of the role of religion - of Christianity, in particular - in the construction of European identity and in affirming the centrality of man in society.
Seen another way, the decision of the seven judges in Strasbourg seems to be inspired by an idea of state secularity which would marginalize the contribution of religion to public life.
One can thus foresee a not-too-distant future with a public environment devoid of any religious and cultural reference for fear of offending someone's sensibility.
In fact, it is not in the negation but in the acceptance and respect for diverse identities that one defends the idea of a secular State and one can favor integration among various cultures.
"The Cross represents everyone," wrote Ginzburg, because "before Christ, no one had ever said that all men are equal, and brothers, rich and poor, believers and non-believers, Jews and Gentiles, black and white."
The newspaper also carried a brief reaction from Cardinal Bertone:
Cardinal Bertone:
'A true loss'
Translated from
the 11/05/09 issue of
Rome, Nov, 4 - "This Europe of the third millennium leaves us only with the pumpkins of Halloween and would take away our dearest symbols".
This was the comment of Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, Vatican Secretary of State, on the ruling from the Strasbourg court on the presence of the Cross in Italian schoolrooms.
"This is truly a loss. We should strive with all our powers to conserve the symbols of our faith for believers as well as non-believers," he continued.
[The statement does not make sense. In declaring it 'a true loss', he seems to be accepting it as immutable fact - and how does one conserve 'the symbols of our faith' even for non-believers?]
After expressing 'appreciation' for the initiative of the Italian government, which announced it would take action against the decision, the cardinal said the Cross "is a symbol of universal love, a sign of acceptance and not of exclusion".
"I have to question whether this judgment is a sign of reasonableness at all," he concluded.
[Rather weak words for a first reaction from the #2 man at the Vatican!]
Avvenire has a good roundup of reactions, which I will post when translated, but first, Reuters has a wrap-up in English:
Italy and Vatican in uproar
over court crucifix ruling
By Philip Pullella
ROME, Nov. 4 (Reuters) – The European Court of Human Rights ruled on Tuesday that crucifixes should be removed from Italian classrooms, prompting Vatican anger and sparking uproar in Italy, where such icons are embedded in the national psyche.
"The ruling of the European court was received in the Vatican with shock and sadness," said Vatican spokesman Father Federico Lombardi, adding that it was "wrong and myopic" to try to exclude a symbol of charity from education.
The ruling by the court in Strasbourg, which Italy said it would appeal, said crucifixes on school walls -- a common sight that is part of every Italian's life -- could disturb children who were not Christians.
Italy has been in the throes of national debate on how to deal with a growing population of immigrants, mostly Muslims, and the court sentence is likely to become another battle cry for the center-right government's policy to restrict newcomers.
"This is an abhorrent ruling," said Rocco Buttiglione, a former culture minister who helped write papal encyclicals.
"It must be rejected with firmness. Italy has its culture, its traditions and its history. Those who come among us must understand and accept this culture and this history," he said.
The Vatican spokesman said it was sad that the crucifix could be considered a symbol of division and said religion offered a vital contribution to the moral formation of people.
Members of Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi's government bristled, weighing in with words such as "shameful," "offensive," "absurd," "unacceptable," and "pagan."
Foreign Minister Franco Frattini said the court had dealt a "mortal blow to a Europe of values and rights," adding that it was a bad precedent for other countries.
Condemnation crossed party lines. Paola Binetti, a Catholic in the opposition Democratic Party, the successor of what was once the West's largest communist party, said: "In Italy, the crucifix is a specific sign of our tradition."
The case was brought by an Italian national, Soile Lautsi, who complained that her children had to attend a public school in northern Italy which had crucifixes in every room.
Education Minister Mariastella Gelmini said crucifixes on the walls of tens of thousands of classrooms "do not mean adherence to Catholicism" but are a symbol of Italy's heritage.
"The history of Italy is marked by symbols and if we erase symbols we erase part of ourselves," Gelmini said.
Lautsi, the woman who filed the suit, said crucifixes on walls ran counter to her right to give her children a secular education and the Strasbourg-based court ruled in her favor.
"The presence of the crucifix ... could be encouraging for religious pupils, but also disturbing for pupils who practiced other religions or were atheists, particularly if they belonged to religious minorities," the court said in a written ruling.
"The State (must) refrain from imposing beliefs in premises where individuals were dependent on it," it added, saying the aim of public education was "to foster critical thinking."
At least one Muslim girl disagreed with the court.
"If the crucifix is there and I am a Muslim I will continue to respect my religion. Jesus in the classroom doesn't bother me," Zenat, a 14-year-old girl of Egyptian origin, told Reuters Television.
Two Italian laws dating from the 1920s, when the Fascists were in power, state that schools must display crucifixes.
[These norms were upheld as recently as 2006 by the Italian Coucnil of State.]
Alessandra Mussolini, granddaughter of Fascist dictator Benito Mussolini, said rulings such as that by the court were leading to "a Europe without an identity."
Only a handful of politicians defended the court, including some members of the Democratic Party, as well as members of the communist party and atheist groups.
The story does not include the reaction from Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, who said the decision was "absolutely unexpected, unforeseen and unacceptable".
Berlusconi continued: "It is one of thoser decisions that maes one doubt if there is any common sense in Europe... Italy is a country where we cannot possibly say we are not Christian". [From the Avvenire report].
P.S.
Sorry... It tiruns out Reuters filed a separate story that leads off with Berlusconi's reaction.
Berlusconi says crucifix ruling
denies Europe's roots
By Stephen Brown
ROME, Nov. 4 (Reuters) - Italy's Silvio Berlusconi said on Wednesday a European Court of Human Rights ruling that called for crucifixes to be removed from Italian classrooms was a nonsensical attempt to deny Europe's Christian roots.
The Roman Catholic country has reacted with outrage to Tuesday's ruling from Strasbourg that the ubiquitous crucifixes on walls in Italian schools could disturb children who were not Christian.
The conservative prime minister, who draws much of his support from the Roman Catholic majority, told a television show the ruling was an attempt to "deny Europe's Christian roots. This is not acceptable for us Italians."
Berlusconi pointed out that Italy has so many churches that "you only have to walk 200 meters forwards, backwards, to the right or to the left, and you find a symbol of Christianity."
"This is one of those decisions that often make us doubt Europe's good sense," said the prime minister, confirming that Italy intended to appeal against the ruling once his cabinet has studied it at its weekly meeting on Friday.
The Vatican expressed "shock and sadness" at the court ruling, which was condemned across the ideological divide in a rare moment of unity among Italian politicians. Only some on the far left and atheist groups backed the ruling.
Mayors all over the country vowed to defy the ruling and there were angry reactions from Catholic strongholds abroad such as Poland. Thousands of people protested on social networking sites on the Internet.
"Europe in the third millennium is leaving us only Halloween pumpkins while depriving us of our most beloved symbols," said Vatican number two, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone.
Italy has been in the throes of debate on how to deal with a growing population of immigrants, mostly Muslims, and the ruling could become another battle cry for the government's policy drive to crack down on new arrivals.
Mara Bizzotto, a European parliamentarian for Berlusconi's anti-immigrant coalition partner, the Northern League, asked why the European court had taken action against the crucifix but did not ban Muslim symbols such as "veils, burqas and niqabs."
As I posted in the CHURCH&VATICAN thread yesterday, the absurdity and sheer ignorance of the Strasbourg court's ruling on the Cross was pointed out by Massimo Introvigne who says the original complainant, an Italian lady married to a Finn, should, by her own logic, go home to Finland and demand that her adopted country change its flag - I did the research to show how many countries in Europe have the cross as the main feature of their respective national flags:
Left photo, flag of Finland. In fact, the Nordic cross is the characteristic of all five Scandinavian flags.
Right photo, from left: Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark.
Other European flags with the cross: From left, Greece, the UK, Georgia, Slovakia, and Switzerland.
And what if some nut now lodges a suit with the Strasbourg court to question the crosses on all these flags? Will that court then compel them to revoke part of their national history and replace their flags???? This is absolute lunacy.
What the Strasbourg court demonstrates - besides its anti-Christian bigotry and bookish literalness in interpreting human rights - is ignorance of human history, in which after the circle, the cross has been one of the most universal signs even in pre-Christian cultures. Just consider the Egyptian ankh or even the Celtic cross!