Italy Appeals Crucifix Ban

CrucifixBefore his election as Bishop of Rome, Pope Benedict wrote a good deal about the soul of Europe.  He was and is concerned that Europe will lose its identity because Europe will reject the Christianity which is at the very core and foundation of its history.


Italy Appeals Crucifix Ban

ROME, FEB. 5, 2010 ( The Italian government is appealing a November ruling by the European Court of Human Rights that crucifixes in public school classrooms are a violation of freedom.

The Italian appeal defends the crucifix as "one of the symbols of our history and our identity."

"Christianity represents the roots of our culture, what we are today," the text of the appeal states. "The display of the crucifix in schools should not be seen so much for its religious meaning but as reference to the history and tradition of Italy[Well… it is more than that, isn’t it.  It takes more than beautiful monuments and buildings and things hanging on a wall to make a culture.]

"The presence of the crucifix in class remits also to a moral message that transcends secular values and does not infringe the right to adhere or not adhere to a religion."

The European Convention on Human Rights foresees that the Grand Chamber can consider an appeal if a case raises "a serious question" on the interpretation of the convention.



About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Our Catholic Identity and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.


  1. Magpie says:

    I think the time has come for us to say ENOUGH OF THIS ALREADY!

    If we want to put Crucifixes in our schools, we shall do that. If we want to teach our catholic faith in school or Church, we must do that. If the government wants to start prosecuting or jailing us for hate crimes, discrimination, or crucifix putting-up, fine. We need a few courageous martyrs to prove our point, that all this silliness has gotten way out of hand, and that we shall live our faith, regardless of EU dictats.

  2. pewpew says:

    Great that Italy dares to stand up to these attacks. Sadly, most of Europe, especially The Netherlands has totally given in.

  3. mvhcpa says:

    From the original post:

    “Christianity represents the roots of our culture, what we are today,” the text of the appeal states. “The display of the crucifix in schools should not be seen so much for its religious meaning but as reference to the history and tradition of Italy. [Well… it is more than that, isn’t it. It takes more than beautiful monuments and buildings and things hanging on a wall to make a culture.]

    That’s the sad thing–just like with the motto “In God We Trust” on U.S. coins, the only argument for keeping them (motto on the coins, crucifixes in the classrooms) is to deny these things their real meaning, and put forth that they are only historical or cultural statements. Consequently, we keep these things, but lose the meaning anyway. Either way, the secularists win.

    Michael Val
    (who thinks it’s about time that we say to these other people “Yes, it’s full of religious meaning, and we’re keeping it ’cause we want to–tough stuff for you!”)

  4. jlmorrell says:

    Sadly, the battle has already been lost because we (the western world) have granted the Masonic premise that all religions are equal and none should be supported explicitly by the State. This is why Italy is reduced to arguing in favor of crucifixes on purely historical/cultural grounds, which in the end is a losing argument.

    Only when the Church and society begin to proclaim the doctrine of the Social Kingship of Christ again will a truly coherent and intellectually adequate case be made for the acceptance of Catholic symbols and patrimony in the public square and the exclusion of all others. Absent this renewal in Catholic thought, things will only continue to get worse.

  5. Jason Keener says:

    This is ridiculous. The European Court of Human Rights should also be concerned for the legitimate rights of those in Italy who WANT the crucifixes to be present in the schools. Why is it that the religious liberty police these days so often feel they can strip the rights of what is often the majority to please just a few malcontents? Do not the traditionally Catholic people of Italy have a right to express their own religious and cultural beliefs in their own country? Religious liberty means that people have a right to be tolerated or to be free from coercion in matters of religion, within due limits. Religious liberty does not mean that people can no longer express their religious or cultural beliefs through outward public symbols because some people might not like it.

  6. Jason Keener says:


    I think that Catholics living in their respective countries have to get serious about spreading the Social Kingship of Christ in both the private AND public spheres. You are right that we have not heard about the Social Kingship of Christ these days, but it is difficult for a government or political authority to submit to Christ the King and favor the Catholic Religion when individual Catholics have become so lukewarm in all of the European countries and in other places. For example, how can the government of France favor Catholicism when the country and political leadership of France consist of mostly non-practicing or totally lukewarm Catholics? The formerly Catholic people of Europe have deposed Christ the King on their own. Sadly, the stance of the European governments towards the True Religion are merely a reflection of the attitudes and lives of the people those governments represent.

    The teachings of Vatican II do not mention the explicit words “Social Kingship of Christ,” but the essentials of Christ’s Social Kingship are found in the Council’s documents:

    Dignitatis Humane #1: “Therefore it leaves untouched traditional Catholic doctrine on the moral duty of men and SOCIETIES toward the True Religion and toward the One Church of Christ.”

    Apostolicam Actuostitatem #13: “The apostolate in the social milieu, that is, the effort to INFUSE A CHRISTIAN SPIRIT into the MENTALITY, CUSTOMS, LAWS, and STRUCTURES of the community in which one lives, is so much the duty and responsibility of the laity that it can never be performed properly by others.”

    Gaudium et Spes #76: “The Church and the political community in their own fields are autonomous and independent from each other. Yet BOTH under different titles, are devoted to the personal and social vocation of the same men. The more that BOTH foster sounder COOPERATION between themselves with due consideration for the circumstances of time and place, the more effective will their service be exercised for the good of all.”

    We can see that Vatican II called for societies to recognize the True Religion and for there to be a close cooperation between the Church and State where possible, but unfortunately, few are implementing the true aims of Vatican II.

  7. Mitchell NY says:

    I pray this appeal is successful. This is an attack against Catholics in every part of the world. Everyone has a stake in this outcome. If allowed to go forward the reprocussions will be felt throughout the EU and soon will lead to the next attack. Don’t think that someday someone walking down a street will not be offended seeing a crucifix atop a Church building and demand to have them removed from public view. Sounds farfetched today, but in 10 years?

  8. Supertradmom says:

    This is an attack against Christ, the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity. There has never been a complete separation between Church and state taught in the Catholic Church, despite liberal interpretations, as noted above and in the excellent teachings of 19th and 20th century popes, some of whom are saints. Persecution in the name of political correctness is so deceitful…

  9. wanda says:

    Not far-fetched, Mitchell. Scene..Georgetown University, 2009..POTUS is coming, photo op.
    Cover up that Crucifix, will ya? Can’t have that in the background. Yep, they covered up the Crucifix so it wouldn’t detract from the lovely photograph of Pres. Obama. Yep, Georgetown ‘Catholic?’ University, right here, USA.

  10. TonyLayne says:

    We can only hope and pray that the Grand Chamber exercises some common sense and rules that the Court of Human Rights exceeded its authority. Or, if that hope is denied, that the Italian government grows a backbone, refuses to pay the fine and “votes with its feet”.

    We can also hope and pray that this episode serves as a reveille to the people of Europe, and makes them realize that, no matter how good it looked on paper, the European Union is not a representative government but rather an instrument of secular materialist domination.

    Closer to home, I have read speculation by liberal legal theorists that any law whose roots could be traced to a religion’s traditional moral teachings–read “Christianity”, albeit in its most inclusive (and least specific) sense–would be in violation of the establishment clause of the Constitution. Of course, it should be obvious that this theory is not for the current SCOTUS but for a future, liberal-packed Court that may or may not be within Pres. Obama’s reach. (I don’t know why we insist on calling our worst enemies “liberals” when most of their ideology is a betrayal of classical liberalism, or “humanists” when much of what they preach as good policy is inhumane … even inhuman.)

    We do need to stand up and be counted, regardless of personal cost, remembering that the Greek word for “witness” is also the root of the word martyr. But more than that, we need to establish a mission to the First World, which is in danger of falling back on a barbarism far worse than that which afflicted Europe in the Dark Ages … a barbarism assisted by high technology. This has been Pope Benedict’s message for many years now, and it’s past time that we took it to heart.

  11. jlmorrell says:

    Jason Keener,

    You are right. The Social Kingship of Christ will never be recognized by a country consisting of non-Catholics and lapsed Catholics. Therefore, the desire to see the Social Kingship of Christ recognized again ultimately means we have to convert: cities, regions, and nations.

    What is so disappointing is not that non-Catholics reject the Social Kingship of Christ, but that Catholics do. This failure of the Church is directly related to the ambiguity of Vatican II and those who purposely took advantage of this. One example is Dignitatis Humanae: You correctly cite the passage reaffirming the traditional teaching of the Church; however, this teaching is not defined in the document. Furthermore, another section of the document positively states that a “right” exists which would allow for proponents of false religions to worship in public – an absolutely novel concept which can find no support in Catholic tradition.

    Only when the Pope unequivocally and authoritatively proclaims the Social Kingship of Christ again will true renewal in society begin; because only then will the foundation of society be restored.

Comments are closed.