What actually constitutes blasphemy?

have not gave a blasphemy law. Sorry.

I suppose sacrilege is different. That implies things like weeing on a memorial stone etc. Blasphemy is more written or spoken. The altar thing would be sacrilege.

Personally, when I use the phrase "Oh God!" something in the back of my mind tells me I am referring to Thor, just to be on the safe side.

Spitting out the wafer thing is sacrilege. Whiuch church wouldn't make any difference.

I sup[pose the Pope would have his reasons. I dunno. [shrug]




2

Why have I wasted so much Gransnet space there? #howdidthathappen

Scrawling obscenities on a religious item or building or using them for unintended and/or unsavoury purposes would be sacrilege. In Christianity, taking the name of The Lord (your) God in vain would be blasphemy. So would representations of eg Christ or the Virgin in obscene situations or poses. And I think most faiths would consider the same applied to equivalences. I'm not RC so I'll leave the detail of Papal infallibility to them as knows. But I believe it is very circumscribed and certainly doesn't apply to everything every Pope says. The Russians were very cross about Pussy Riot performing a rude turn in a church, weren't they?

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1942668/Blasphemy-laws-are-lifted.html

I think Lilygran explained it beautifully and I'm RC. Not sure what Papal infallibility has to do with it tho'. The teaching is, the Pope's infallibility only refers to matter of 'faith and morals' - is that any help?

Thank you, mrshat.

I think blasphemy constitutes of somone using Gods name in a negative manner..

So would the question, "Why does god allow earthquakes and famine and just let people suffer and die?" actually be blasphemous?

I think papal infallibility is on matters of doctrine. Is there anything more a matter a matter of doctrine than saints?

Don't Anglicans believe that the communion wafer is a symbol while Catholics believe it is the actual body of Christ? There is a big difference which has, of course, hugely affected the evolution of modern Europe.

Ps Does anybody know about the blasphemy law? Did they try to use that when there were objections to Jerry Springer, the Opera or had it already been repealed? (My objection would have been aesthetic and on the grounds of mindlessness rather than religious.)

It's fine to question God's authority, argue with God, complain to or about God. The Bible is full of people doing just that. Absent there's a link to a news item about the blasphemy laws a bit further back. Some Anglicans believe what Roman Catholics believe about the communion bread and wine. Some don't. Either way, they are treated as sacred. If you ask anything about what Anglicans believe, you will always get the answer, 'some do & some don't'. But the rituals and the liturgy are pretty similar.

The question isn't blasphemous.

Surely they all think it's a symbol. nobody's that thick

Yes, they are

If you dont believe that God is responsible for good things then why do you believe he is responsible for the bad

I always thought blasphemy was deliberately being offensive about a deity and or rituals & core beliefs of a religion, e.g making unpleasant pictures of jesus/mary etc. or perhaps putting rude words into prayers etc.

of course what causes offence to one person is a 'bit of a laugh' to someone else!

So would there be an issue if, for example, someone suggested that Jesus was gay? Suggesting that someone is gay in our society would not be considered offensive by that society (possibly by individuals but not by society as a whole). Would it be blasphemous to be literal about the "disciple that Jesus loved"? Btw who was it?

This question is beyond the limits of my theological knowledge. I don't think there can be anything offensive about speculation and discussion. God gave us inquiring minds.

If I believed in Her I would say She did!

It was John. And I don't know if that would be blasphemous or not. I personally find it offensive.

Why does God (if you believe) have to be of either or any sex?

I think there may be a problem with the translation from the Greek with the word love.
In Greek I think there are several words that we translate as love.

Caritas is one , I think some are
Caring
Amor
Favour
Like.

The fact is we should go back to the original text and look at that.

Incidentally,I find it it intriguing that we have suggestions that Yeshua was

1 gay

2 married to Mary Magdalene!

He doesn't need to be. He's not really. It's just a label. 'He' is just the historically accepted way of referring to God. But as he is seen as God the Father, it sounds daft to call him 'she'.

that was to Ana

I agree - that's what I meant really.

I don't think we can understand the love Jesus inspired in his followers.