The Guardian: Spanish artist faces prison over 'how to cook Christ' film

[cosmicaug]

A leading Spanish artist faces up to a year in prison after being prosecuted for "offending religious feelings" in relation to a short film he made more than 30 years ago that claimed to show "how to cook Jesus Christ".

Javier Krahe, who has been a popular and provocative figure in Spain for nearly half a century, made the film in 1978 but it was only shown on Spanish TV in 2004 as a backdrop to an interview with its creator. The little-known charge – comparable with but not identical to Britain's blasphemy law, remains part of the penal code despite never having been applied before in Spanish legal history.

It's from http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2012/may/28/spanish-artist-cook-christ-film





Basically, he & some friends got together and made a short film in Super8 called "Ten Commentaries". One episode in there was "About Christophagy". It was was really just something between friends for fun --though it was sent to one small film festival but and rejected (censored --it was only a couple of years after Franco died) and never shown.

In 2004, some TV program made a tribute segment to Javier Krahe and they somehow managed to snag this film clip and slipped it in there (Krahe did not even know it was in there). Stemming from this incident, the Juridical Society of Thomas More (which appears to be some sort of Roman Catholic Christian Right organization) charged him with violating this law against offending religious sensibilities, article 525 of the Revised Criminal Code, which had to this date never been applied before:

Artículo 525.
1. Incurrirán en la pena de multa de ocho a doce meses los que, para ofender los sentimientos de los miembros de una confesión religiosa, hagan públicamente, de palabra, por escrito o mediante cualquier tipo de documento, escarnio de sus dogmas, creencias, ritos o ceremonias, o vejen, también públicamente, a quienes los profesan o practican.
2. En las mismas penas incurrirán los que hagan públicamente escarnio, de palabra o por escrito, de quienes no profesan religión o creencia alguna.

A very, very quick and dirty translation to English follows:

Article 525.
1. The penalty of a sentence of eight to twelve months will be incurred by those who, in order to offend the feelings of the members of a religious confession, publicly, orally, in writing or by any type of document, engage in the derision of dogmas, beliefs, rituals or ceremonies, or ill treat, also publicly, those who profess or practice.
2. The same penalties will incur on those who engage in derision publicly, orally or in writing, of those who profess no religion or belief.

[dimbear]

1. Goya is lucky that he's dead. n/t

[cosmicaug]

2. Falangism

To be fair, this is, apparently, the only time anyone has tried to apply that law. Nevertheless, it's about time we got rid of all the remnants of that atavistic, falangist linked, Roman Catholic Church influence in government over there (of which I would assume this law to be one example --though I have not looked up the history of it).

[dimbear]

3. Franco absolutely destroyed literature in Spain. Writers who could fled to South America.

Franco had his mellow side, tho. He instituted annual masses for Adolph Hitler.

[bahrbearian]

4. k&r

[backscatter712]

5. This thread inspired me!

It'd be a shame to post linkage to this in the Religion forum without getting the jury results...

[awoke_in_2003]

6. medium rare. nt

[cosmicaug]

7. Absolved!

http://www.cadenaser.com/espana/articulo/krahe-absuelto-video-cocinar-crucifijo/csrcsrpor/20120608csrcsrnac_6/Tes
http://www.20minutos.es/noticia/1504472/0/javier-krahe/absuelto/cocinar-a-cristo/
http://www.madridiario.es/2012/Junio/suceso/sucesos_madrid/218155/javier-krahe-juicio-cristofagia-como-cocinar-crucifijo-absuelto-montserrat-fernandez-loplus-ofensa-r.htmlml

Good guys won!

Both Javier Krahe and the producer were absolved of the charges. The charges were separate and Krahe has maintained all along that he didn't even know ahead of time that the piece was going to be broadcast (the magistrate agreed that it can't be shown otherwise).

It appears that the judgment (which is available somewhere but which I have not bothered to read) appeals to lack of intent to offend. In the case of Krahe, the magistrate considered it the "legitimate exercise and broadcast of an artistic expression which, with a comical component, created a criticism of the religious phenomenon in our society" and thought that "it has not been proved that any of the accused had the intent to belittle, humilliate, or hurt the religious feelings of third parties". The judgment also explains that the intent of the producer was to conduct an interview with a figure of public relevance, like Krahe, who in making his commentary was responding to the "request formulated by the presenters of the segment that he describe that which, without his previous control and lacking his foreknowledge, was being shown".

The judgment also appeals to satire and resorting to irreverence being legitimate and allowable forms of expression and notes that religion has traditionally been associated with power "and has therefore been object of legitimate criticism".

Of course, the law is still ridiculous.

[2ndAmForComputers]

8. Links forwarded to Religion.

You know, to twist the knife in. I'm evil like that.