The Danish Cartoon Controversy and the Recent Desecration of the Eucharist

First an update on this sad saga.

Now there are arguments that the Prof should be fired see Rod's piece Should P.Z. Myers be fired?

Rod Dreher had a good piece up on this controversy at "It is finished." No, it's just beginning.

He quotes a person that commented at his blog and I think it hits it right on. Here is a part:

But I just had to point out that this afternoon he's posted a picture of a communion host with a rusty nail poked through it, along with a banana peel, coffee grounds, a ripped page of the Koran and a page from Richard Dawkins' "The God Delusion" dumped in the trash (it's beyond pathetic that Myers seems to think that by including this last bit, it somehow ameliorates what he has done). Paul Zachary Myers begins his post with the intentional words, "It is finished." The comments thread on Myers blog is stunning in its volume - as it is in the sheer ferocity of hatred spewing forth from Myers' fellow atheists. Here's one of the milder comments: "What a hollow god they serve! How delicious a treatment of their sacred relics!"

I don't think I need to expand on this much, except to note how demonic all of this seems. It's gone beyond smarmy atheist "freethinkers" with a bone to pick against faith in general. Now the snarling rage is there for all to see, and it is very focused against one faith, against one figure in history. I'm not sure I was prepared for the sick feeling in the pit of my stomach I would experience at witnessing Myers photo. As I've noted here before, I'm not a Catholic and I don't believe in transubstantiation. But what Myers has done is far, far beyond that. He seems trapped in his own version of magical thinking; in other words, he seems to believe that the "symbols" of Christianity are what gives the faith its power. And that is precisely what one under the oppression of the prince of this world would believe.

Myers seems unaware of the consequences of so gravely and deliberately sinning within his own heart. As he himself put it, he did this joyfully and with much laughter in his heart - thus he has committed an act of purposeful desolation, distancing himself from God nearly as far as one poor soul can be. Others will now follow him with far worse, I fear.

Myers has crossed a boundary, and the hatred of aggressive atheism has been loosed. It is no longer the province of folk songs, pithy bumper stickers or amusing droll commentary. It is now what it has always been - the domain of pure hatred. Pray for them, pray for peace, pray that you yourself can simply forgive them for what they do. And pray for the strength to walk in a manner worthy of Christ in the days ahead.

I very much agree with that last part. It should be noted that even some atheists are saying enough is enough. This atheist blogger noted in part commenting on this situation:

I don't believe in God, I guess, in any conventional terms, and I'm non-religious. But Jeezy Chreezy, the public face of atheism turns my stomach. It is an unrelenting, never ending foray into self-aggrandizement, debasement of one's opponents, and ridicule of things one doesn't believe in. If someone was a political commentator, and operated the way Meyers, Richard Dawkins, or Christopher Hitchens did, would anyone listen to them? No. As much as the success of the Ann Coulters of the world suggests otherwise, we largely understand that a basic level of decorum, mutual respect, and the assumption of good faith should under gird our national dialogue. Indeed, without these assumptions, the dialogue is not worth having.

But then there is atheism, where it is apparently the case that you can always come closer to righteousness by expressing still-greater contempt for those with which you don't agree. Now, this is all very strange; though growing, the atheist minority is stilled dwarfed in this country and in this world by the religious. And how can you possibly change people's minds if you're constantly ridiculing them? Doesn't make much sense.................

But atheism has expelled me. It has expelled me because it has in its heart contempt and loathing and fear of the other. So I reject it. I don't reject all atheists; many atheist are uninterested in ridiculing the religious-- they simply want to be left in peace, and not have religion forced on them or on the law. That, to me, is a principled atheism, and one I am happy to coexist with. But this new atheism, this anti-theism, has only contempt at its heart, and I reject it as thoroughly as it has rejected me.

I think we are in for a rough time ahead. That being said my thoughts went back to the Danish Cartoon controversy a couple of years back that enraged the Muslim world. I did agree that the riots and threats were too much by some segments of the Muslim world. However I became very uncomfortable by some reaction on the right and on conservative forums. I was not thrilled to see a never ending contest to see who could by photo shop could degrade Islamic symbols more. I think a line was crossed there by many and people were not thinking how perhaps that feeds in some small part what we see today.

Even though as Catholic we find Islam to be false I do think that some of what we saw, no doubt by many serious Christians, was an occasion of sin in SOME cases.

There was a interesting thread on VOX NOVA about this and what the Catholic Church view is on the subject

They quoted the Vatican Press release on that controversy which said:
1. The right to freedom of thought and expression, sanctioned by the Declaration of the Rights of Man, cannot imply the right to offend the religious sentiment of believers. This principle applies obviously for any religion.

2. In addition, coexistence calls for a climate of mutual respect to favor peace among men and nations. Moreover, these forms of exasperated criticism or derision of others manifest a lack of human sensitivity and may constitute in some cases an inadmissible provocation. A reading of history shows that wounds that exist in the life of peoples are not cured this way.

3. However, it must be said immediately that the offenses caused by an individual or an organ of the press cannot be imputed to the public institutions of the corresponding country, whose authorities might and should intervene eventually according to the principles of national legislation. Therefore, violent actions of protest are equally deplorable. Reaction in the face of offense cannot fail the true spirit of all religion. Real or verbal intolerance, no matter where it comes from, as action or reaction, is always a serious threat to peace.

I am sure that sound horrific to American ears and I might add I am not too comfortable with it.

Pope Benedict even touched on this concept on a very hard hitting column on Europe when he said:
The last element of the European identity is religion. I do not wish to enter into the complex discussion of recent years, but to highlight one issue that is fundamental to all cultures: respect for that which another group holds sacred, especially respect for the sacred in the highest sense, for God, which one can reasonably expect to find even among those who are not willing to believe in God. When this respect is violated in a society, something essential is lost. In European society today, thank goodness, anyone who dishonors the faith of Israel, its image of God, or its great figures must pay a fine. The same holds true for anyone who dishonors the Koran and the convictions of Islam. But when it comes to Jesus Christ and that which is sacred to Christians, freedom of speech becomes the supreme good.

Now of course on can agree or disagree with the Holy Father for what appears his view toward "religious hate crime legislation". What might work in Europe might not be what is best here. However I do think one can follow the spirit of what the Church is saying even if one has concerns about it being legislated.

I am not saying that the Danish Cartoon controversy and some misguided reaction was the cause of this. However it does not help our case that so many perhaps stayed a tad too quiet and did not police their own on how to handle it.