BESTEMMIA. – Etymologically, b. (from βλάστιο = I injure and φήμη = voice) means “injurious word.” In Sacred Scripture this term denotes the utterance of an insult either against God or against creatures (II Sam. 21:21; II Reg. 13:28–35; 19:10, 13, 22; Ez. 20:27; Tob. 13:16; I Par. 20:7; I Cor. 4:13; 10:30; Tit. 3:2); but according to the observation of St. Augustine: «blasphemia non accipitur nisi mala verba de Deo dicere» (PL 32, 1354), by b. is understood an insulting expression against God.
It is customary to distinguish b. cordis, operis, oris: the first consists in an offensive thought against God; the second takes concrete form in an equally offensive external action (e.g. an insulting gesture toward heaven); the third, to which the term b. properly ought to be reserved, consists in an insulting expression against God. Hence, in theological language, b. is vitium linguae, although the sin and the crime of b. may also be committed in writing, since the written word has the same significance as the spoken word. Given these meanings of the term b., both in the moral and in the juridical order, it follows, for the interpretation of penal laws and of the reservation of sins (if in a given territory b. were a reserved sin), that both the reservation and the penalty can refer to b. only in the proper sense, that is, ore aut scripto prolata.
(from F. Charrière, Son Ex. Mgr. M. Besson)
BESSON, MARIUS — Portrait.
contrary to the faith (e.g., God is the cause of sin), or, without containing heresy, contain insulting expressions against God. The latter is usually distinguished into simple and imperative blasphemy: the former consists in a simple insult (in this sense the Jews blasphemed: «Vah, qui destruis templum Dei et in triduo illud reedificas; salva temet ipsum» [Mt. 27, 40]); the latter consists in an expression by which one would wish evil upon God. With regard to its object, blasphemy may be immediate or mediate, according as the blasphemer in his utterance addresses himself directly against God, or directly against the saints and sacred things insofar as they have a particular relation to God. This, however, does not bring about a differentiation of species, because «blasphemia quae fit in sanctos, ex consequenti in Deum redundat»: Blasphemy directed against the saints consequently also redounds to an offence against God (Sum. Theol., 2ᵃ-2ᵃᶜ, q. 13, a. 1 ad 2; P. Ballerini, Opus theologicum morale, II, Prato 1890, pp. 366-80).
For blasphemy to be imputable, moralists require two conditions: 1) that truly blasphemous words be spoken (or written)—which is inferred from the meaning of the expressions, from the sense commonly attributed to them in a given place, and also from the manner in which they are uttered [*Sum. Theol., 2ᵃ-2ᵃᶜ, q. 72, a. 2]); 2) that the person uttering them possess the necessary awareness both of the act itself and of the morality of that act. This latter condition, especially in the case of uneducated persons, may be absent, for example, because of the subject’s emotional states or because the expressions are uttered out of habit. In such a case, the principles applicable to the human act performed in emotional or passionate states, or through habit, must be applied. What may be said here briefly regarding habit (v.) can be summarized in the following rule: whoever has acquired the habit of blaspheming must make every effort to free himself from it; otherwise, the blasphemous expressions are imputable to the subject even if he is unaware of his acts, precisely because the habit is voluntary. It should be added to the first element (namely, that the expressions be blasphemous) that merely uttering the name of God, of the saints, or sacred things vainly, but not insultingly (vana assumptio nominis Dei*), unless there is a danger of scandal, does not properly constitute blasphemy, although it may be a sin against the virtue of religion.
Objectively, blasphemy is a mortal sin that admits no smallness of matter, since it directly opposes charity toward God (Sum. Theol., 2ᵃ-2ᵃᶜ, q. 13, a. 2). The gravity of the sin, as noted above, may be diminished when either awareness or deliberate consent is lacking, these being the subjective conditions for assuming full responsibility for one’s acts. In the Old Testament blasphemy was judged so grave that it was punished by death: «qui blasphemaverit nomen Domini morte mortatur» (Lev. 24, 16), and St. Thomas declares: «omnium peccatorum ex genere suo gravissimum est» (Sum. Theol., 2ᵃ-2ᵃᶜ, q. 13, a. 3).
ITALIAN LAW. — Blasphemy was treated as a criminal offense in Italy until the Penal Code of 1890, which no longer considered it such. Penalties for blasphemy (a fine of up to
(from Gazette des Beaux Arts, 1889)
BESTIARI - Stag and roe deer. Arab bestiary (14th century). New York, Morgan Library.
(fines up to 2,000 lire) were reinstated by the public-security law (R.D. 6 Nov. 1926, no. 1848, art. 232); and consequently the 1930 Penal Code (art. 724) punished with a fine (currently from 8,000 to 24,000 lire) “anyone who publicly blasphemes, with invectives or insulting words, against the divinity or the symbols or persons venerated in the religion of the State.” If the act is committed intentionally, the more severe penalty established for contempt of the religion of the State (art. 402) shall apply, when the requisite conditions are present.