Paris, France, Jul 11, 2019 / 07:01 pm (CNA).- Vandalism, theft, arson and other increasing attacks on churches in France have led to debates about their causes, amid shock to the community, questions bout the perpetrators, and debates over what the attacks might mean about French culture and the place of Christianity.
“Those downplaying the vandalism, which include most leading newspapers and politicians, point to evidence that the attacks are the small-bore crimes of small-time miscreants. Those concerned that the attacks pose a more serious threat expressly dismiss that perspective,” American journalist and author Richard Bernstein has said in an essay for RealClearInvestigations titled “Anti-Christian Attacks in France Quietly Quadrupled. Why?”
Bernstein sees merit in both perspectives, putting them in the context of pressing French questions about populism, national identity, immigration, tradition, authority, and power.
At the same time, he acknowledges the deep concern of Christian communities which suffer such attacks and vandalism, even when they are not “hate crimes” properly speaking.
“Still, even if many anti-Christian acts are not hate crimes intended to intimidate a community of believers, the fact is that there are a large number of attacks on Christian sites that are sacred to many people,” he said. “Communities are shocked and made to feel vulnerable, in part by the sense that the incidents have proliferated so dramatically over the past few years, and they are taking place in virtually every corner of France: urban and rural areas, large towns and small villages alike.”
The Conference of French Bishops said there were 228 “violent anti-Christian acts” from January to March 2019.
In 2018, French police reported 129 thefts and 877 incidents of vandalism at Catholic sites, mostly churches and cemeteries. The French Minister of the Interior counted slightly fewer numbers of anti-Christian incidents that year.
Such attacks quadrupled in number from 2008 to 2019.
While France has suffered more attacks than any other country in Europe, their numbers have increased across Europe.
Some leaders downplay the attacks.
“We do not want to develop a discourse of persecution,” Archbishop Georges Pontier of Marseile, the head of the French Bishops Conference, told the magazine Le Point. “We do not wish to complain.”
In June vandals toppled more than 100 tombstones in the main Catholic cemetery in Toulouse. The incident received little national press coverage, but locals too did not want to give it attention.
In Normandy in 2016, two men who professed allegiance to the Islamic State group murdered Father Jacques Hamel while he was celebrating Mass. That same year in Paris, police thwarted Muslim extremists who attempted to blow up a car near the Cathedral of Notre-Dame. Some feared anti-Christian sentiment was behind another Islamic State group sympathizer’s gun and knife attack on a Christmas market in Strasbourg in 2018.
The backdrop of these and other major terrorist incidents have heightened fears that Christians would be more directly targeted.
The April 15 fire at the Cathedral of Notre-Dame shocked the world as the 19th-century roof and spire were destroyed, though the structure was saved from collapse.
As soon as the fire was reported, social media influencers and others with no presence on the scene spread speculation, rumors and even hoaxes claiming that the fire was an act of terrorism. Anonymous internet accounts as well as right-wing activists, nationalists, and white supremacists used the event to fan anti-Muslim sentiment, NBC News reported in April.
In June investigators said they had been unable to determine the cause and there was no evidence the fire was intentional. They said they would consider the possibility of negligence, including electrical malfunction or a poorly extinguished cigarette, as a cause for the fire.
Vandalism and attacks on Christian churches often appear to lack any organized coordination or shared motives.
Earlier this year, when six churches were set on fire or vandalized in one week, the perpetrators of one incident were two youths. The perpetrator in another was a 35-year-old homeless man.
Of identified perpetrators of anti-Christian attacks, more than 60 percent are minors. Many perpetrators “appear to be disaffected young people, or the psychologically disturbed or homeless, rather than members of organized groups advancing a political agenda,” Bernstein said.
“Virtually none of the reported attacks have been against people; they are all against buildings, cemeteries or other physical objects,” he added.
About 60% of vandalism incidents involved graffiti like satanic inscriptions, anarchist symbols, swastikas, or nationalist or neo-Nazi slogans. In Bernstein’s view, this “would seem to represent a kind of ugly desperate social fringe than a general growth of anti-Christian hatred.”
For Bernstein, the evidence shows attacks by Muslims “account for a small fraction of anti-Christian crimes.”
The French government itself downplays anti-Christian actions for fear of stoking anti-Muslim reaction and retaliation, though there have not been any known incidents of retaliation.
While some commentators wonder why attacks on other groups draw more attention than attacks on Christians, Bernstein attributes this to the relative historical security of Catholics, especially in comparisons to Jews who were persecuted by French collaborators with Nazis in the Second World War.
Philosopher and cultural commentator Pierre Manent suggested that many churches are targets of opportunity, telling Bernstein, “This vandalism is drawn to Christian sites because they’re less defended and present little risk, and there are a lot of them.”
Church attendance has declined and the scandals about sexual abuse of young people and children by clergy make the Church “seem a weak and easy target,” Bernstein said.
Jean-Francois Colosimo, a historian and theologian who is general director of the Editions du Cerf publishing house, said it is not “Christianophobia” but “a loss of the sense of the sacred” that is to blame.
Bernstein’s essay cited an attack in the southwest France town of Lauvar. Two teenage boys sneaked into the town’s 700-year-old Cathedral of St. Alain, set the altar on fire, turned a crucifix upside down, threw another crucifix into the nearby river, and deformed a statue of Christ.
Mayor of Lauvar Bernard Carayon told Bernstein the attack was far different than misbehavior like bathroom graffiti. He blamed “Christianophobia.”
“The two boys who set fire to the altar and defaced the statue of Christ weren’t just drunk; they carried out their attack purposefully, taking their time, and then, after they left to tell their friends what they’d done, they went back inside, no doubt to check the results,” the mayor said, contending that the Catholic Church had wrongly prioritized inter-religious dialogue and working “to avoid conflict.”
There has been vandalism and theft at the church, its pastor, Father Joseph Dequick said, but the police do not distinguish which is which. This means it is difficult to distinguish criminal theft from vandalism based in hostility to the Church.
“But when somebody turns a cross upside down, that’s an anti-Christian expression,” he said. “That represents a society that no longer transmits respect for values. It’s a loss of the sense of the sacred. It’s consumerism. Young people can do whatever they want now, have whatever they want. Where are the limits? Where are the parents?”
According to the priest, professions of atheism are fashionable and there is “a mood against the Church, against faith”
“The media are anti-Catholic. There a discourse against the Church. In France, in particular, there’s an anti-clerical feeling that goes back a long time,” the priest told Bernstein. “It’s not so much a religious argument as a political one. It’s a reaction against the moral limitations that the Church represents.”
Manent told Bernstein there is a cultural attitude that the Church is “an obstacle to contemporary life,” and this attitude “nourishes a certain hostility.”
[…]
The Vatican’s Response: “A day late and a dollar short.”
My advice to the Vatican: Don’t bother; the People of God are already on it.
The dollar short being: this was primarily an offence aimed against God; it was a Luciferian anti-liturgy.
In 2024 and of Paris we read: “…there should not be allusions ridiculing the religious convictions of many people.”
In 1938 and in Munich Chamberlain said it was ‘Peace for our time’ and Hitler said he had ‘No more territorial demands to make in Europe.”
At all levels civilization is up for grabs, and we delineate the limits to “freedom of expression.”
Yes, and “many” people is actually several billion people, which is not a small thing.
Kudos to Bishop Barron for getting on this without waiting for everybody else to go first.
True that!
I’m not sure how this letter can be characterized as coming “from the Vatican” — i.e., from the pope’s administration.
The story says that the signatories were “led by Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke,” who was expelled from his Vatican apartment and denied his Vatican paycheck by Bergoglio just this past November.
If the letter originated from the Vatican hierarchy, I hardly think that Cardinal Burke, who is viewed with such contempt by Bergoglio, would be among the signers.
brineyman, please take note that this piece emanated from CNA. For me, that explains all. If you peruse so many of the “news stories” of CNA, they pretty much all make reference in one fashion or another to “the Vatican” – as if the Catholic Church was synonymous with the Vatican.
Not the same letter, but TWO totally different letters (the first was an “open letter” on July 30, and the more recent was an email(!) from “the Holy See” as the home base of the Church but also a sovereign state like the nation-states participating in the Olympics.
About the possibility of the second communication from, say, the pope, yours truly made this earlier comment:
“Or, maybe NOT a direct response from Pope Francis or from any pope? Would such an action be twisted to confer a kind of equivalence and legitimacy to a tribe of lunatics floating through Paris or wherever?
“Another proposition is that the Holy Spirit already works in subtle but concrete ways…
“The demand for an apology [the first letter] comes from bishops from around the world (just as the Olympic Games include nations from around the world). And the demand was possibly fostered by Cardinal Burke who, by incoherent circumstance, no longer lives in the Vatican. And, therefore, now is more free to say what must be said without engaging in an historic pissing contest between the perennial Catholic Church and moral mutants feeding on what’s left of the West.
“The brief letter also evangelizes clearly and concisely, in only a few sentences, rather than in thousands of unread words on Vatican letterhead. The only fly in the ointment (fly, so to speak), is the earlier Vatican blessing of irregular “couples” under Fiducia Supplicans… butt surely pairs of drag queens are not to be excluded.
“Better that oblique harmonizers of “polarities” stay out of this.”
Paolo below references a release from the Vatican Press Office. NO ONE apparently signed the release. No office of the Vatican is identified. Not only that. It does not mention Francis. NO names are mentioned. In its entirety (Italian followed by English translation)
olympiques de Paris 2024
Created: 03 August 2024
Hits: 19
Holy See Press Office Bulletin
Le Saint-Siège a été attristé par certaines scènes de la cérémonie d’ouverture des Jeux Olympiques de Paris et ne peut que se joindre aux voix qui se sont élevées ces derniers jours pour déplorer l’offense faite à de nombreux chrétiens et croyants d’autres religions.
Dans un événement prestigieux où le monde entier se réunit autour de valeurs communes ne devraient pas se trouver des allusions ridiculisant les convictions religieuses de nombreuses personnes.
La liberté d’expression, qui, évidemment, n’est pas remise en cause, trouve sa limite dans le respect des autres.
© http://press.vatican.va/content/salastampa/it/bollettino.html – August 3, 2024
The Holy See was saddened by some scenes of the opening ceremony of the Olympic Games in Paris and can only join the voices that have been raised in recent days to deplore the offense caused to many Christians and believers of other religions.
At a prestigious event where the whole world unites around common values, there should be no allusions that ridicule the religious beliefs of many people.
Freedom of expression, which is obviously not in question, finds its limit in respect for others.
This CNA piece is confounding as it appears to be reporting on more the press release. This CNA news piece appears to conflate the earlier open letter with Burke, Barron, etc.
I would like to see the whole document. If anyone has a link to it share it please.
https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/Gioacchino-Genovese.pdf
I apologize, the provided web address is not relevant. Here is the correct one I could access:(https://www.ilcattolico.it/catechesi/documenti-catechesi/communique-du-saint-siege-pour-les-jeux-olympiques-de-paris-2024.html)
Thank you!
A perfectly secular statement which could be done by any bureaucrat. (The objective reality i.e. blasphemy is swapped with “hurt feelings” which “nice people” should not cause.)
“Saddened”? Why not outraged? Among the episcopal signatories, I trust that the name Jorge Mario Bergoglio stood out as prominently as John Hancock’s on the Declaration of Independence. Then again . . .
Yes. If Francis put his John Hancock there, it’s in invisible ink. Perhaps the magician will come out from under the white cloak and call the ‘nothingness’ into objectively sensible, visible being. We dream.
It took 10 days, this statement is really nothing, and we still have yet to hear from the Pope himself.
…who is he to judge?
Curious….first al Azhar university in Cairo condemns then President Erdoğan of Turkey and finally The Holy See….curiouser and curiouser Your Holiness.
Or maybe not in the Vatican Wonderland.
The plot thickens…
About Al-Azhar, it was the grand imam Sheikh Ahmed el-Tayeb of Al-Azhar who co-signed with Pope Francis the Abu Dhabi Declaration (2019), which affirmed: “The pluralism and the diversity of religions, colour, sex, race and language are willed by God in His wisdom, through which He created human beings.”
Two points:
FIRST, the Sheikh was reported in 2019 as having a following of 150 million Muslims, but not the full 1.5 billion members of sectarian Islam as reported or implied now (but only ten percent).
SECOND, while the Declaration has been questioned on its ambiguity about a “pluralism” of (equivalent?) religions as “willed” rather than only permitted by God, it could also be questioned what, exactly, is meant by a pluralism of sexes? Only a ghostwriter editing oversight, or more like a “wardrobe malfunction” at an infamous Superbowl halftime?
About this fluidly inclusive term (plurality of sexes, as in gender theory?), was it this insane sin seen sailing the Seine scene?
Glad the Vatican was so prompt in responding to the Parisian disgrace. Guess they had to fit in the “Querido Jimmy” letter from “Francesco” first.
I don’t know and have no time to investigate. It seems, in this article, CNA confuses two different things. Imagine a cross of MSNBC with Fox, reporting truth.
CNA website seems to suggest that EWTN sponsors, operates or supports CNA in some manner. Can we trust CNA as a reliable news source? I wonder. Do they receive any funds from the Vatican? What editorial process is used to verify stories which writers at CNA put forth? Anyone?
Meiron, I do not understand the assumptions behind the questions. Catholic News Agency is owned by EWTN; the home page identifies them as a “service of EWTN News.” So that relationship has always been clear to me but maybe not to others? As far as I know, EWTN does not get funding from the Vatican, although they do seem to have a broadcasting agreement regarding Vatican events.
I have not seen a serious reason to doubt the basic integrity of CNA’s reporting. Some stories are better than others, and they may occasionally get something wrong but not at an especially high rate. Have you seen something suggesting that EWTN or CNA has an agends in the way they are reporting Vatican-related news? It is possible that I am misunderstanding your post so I wanted to ask.
Having read this 3x, I conclude:
The beginning of the article says “the Vatican… issued a statement.” The second paragraph states the statement was “e-mailed. Many folks may reasonably consider a statement transmitted by e-mail to equivocally refer to an “e-mail letter,’ an “e-mail,” or a “letter”. In fact, the Vatican Press Office released its statement and classified it as a Press Office Release.
The final three paragraphs refer to the distinct letter signed by Burke and other bishops. The ‘signatories’ to that letter are not signatories to the Press Release. NO signatories whatsoever occur on the Press Release.
The name of Francis? Notable by absence…like Biden at the debate….
I would boycott this olympics. But if you need an olympics “fix” watch the movie “The Boys in the Boat”. Based on a true story about a US Olympic Crew team from the 1930’s. Excellent and worth the time.
“Vatican deplores Olympic offense”. Could that mean the costuming and choreography weren’t done well?
Perhaps it’s time for Rome to reaffirm the complementary roles of apologetics and dialogue in spreading the Gospel.
Meiron above – That’s French, not Italian.
Just sayin’.
Thanks, Cleo. Next time, can you help spot my error before I make it? Très reconnaissant!
As a side note, I went looking for the entire text of the press release Sunday morning after catching up with the news because the reports seemed too fragmentary to understand. “Surely there must be more to it, at least more context,” I thought. (I was wrong.). Reuters reported that a statement in French (which is an unusual choice) had been emailed on Saturday night. That made me chuckle because it reminded me of the infamous Friday afternoon information dump practiced by many presidential administrations when they had to deliver bad news and wanted to attract as little attention as possible.
The statement was hard to find, perhaps because it was only in French at that point and I wasn’t looking on French-language sites. A quich search of the Vatican site came up empty. I finally found it later that day on the Italian site Messainlatino. Any confusion caused by this Vatican statement seems (to me) to come from the Vatican itself, not the news agencies reporting on it. There just isn’t much substance there.
John Allen credits the President of Turkey for the Vatican statement, as their prez announced ahead of time, publically to his cabinet, that he was calling Francis, and then did a release confirming the call and its contents, leaving the Vatican on hook to not leave the prez in the public breeze as a possible liar if him ignored, and the Vatican wanting good diplomatic relations with real a real power in the Muslim world…so, we get a note from the diplomats, Francis saying,”handleithandleithandleit.” And a note bemoaning only our poor precious widdle hurt feelings.