KEY POINTS:
PARIS - A French court is having to ponder the sex of angels and what is a reasonable size for bull's testicles.
These and other vexatious issues have been placed before judges at the county court in the southern town of Tarascon, where a priest is being prosecuted for destroying a wall painting that he considered the work of the lewd, not the Lord.
The huge fresco in the 11th-century Notre-Dame-du-Chateau chapel, in the village of Saint-Etienne-des-Gres, was the work of a prominent local artist, Jacques Descordes.
In 2005, invited by the village council, which owns the chapel, Descordes painted a 36 sq m mural in the chancel, showing apostles Matthew, Mark, Luke and John respectively symbolised by an angel, a lion, an ox and an eagle.
Father Michel Cicculo was outraged. The curate was particularly incensed by what he considered to be the provocative size of the ox's testicles and saw St Matthew's angel - a young naked girl with small breasts - as simply blasphemous.
He demanded major changes to the work. Descordes agreed to downsize the bovine pudenda but refused to touch even the shadow of a nipple. One dark night in February 2006, his anger spilling over, Cicculo got a bucket of whitewash and exorcised the whole mural, leaving nothing in sight.
It was now Descordes' turn to get angry. He has filed suit against Cicculo for intentional destruction of property - a charge that can carry up to two years' jail and a €30,000 ($60,000) fine - and is demanding €50,000 compensation.
"This mural was repugnant," Cicculo told the court. He had the right to determine what was displayed in his church. "No one has the right to paint such revolting things on the wall.
"I had been completely supportive of the idea of Mr Descordes doing a mural of the four apostles, provided it was in line with the genuine traditions of religious imagery, not a vision inspired by Walt Disney or something else."
Cicculo's lawyer, Vincent Clergerie, blasted Descordes as a "declining artist ... behaving like a tagger who gets angry when someone paints over his graffitti."
He called for Descordes to be prosecuted for waste of judicial time.
Descordes says the chapel belongs to the local council and the curate has the right to use it, but that's all.
"It's a work of realism but it's absolutely not blasphemous, otherwise by the same yardstick, the Sistine Chapel would be blasphemous," says Descordes. "This is a serious assault on freedom of expression."
The mural took six months and was approved by the council in the hope that it would bring tourists to the village. Descordes did it for free, although he says he forked out €40,000 in materials and equipment hire.
A verdict is due on November 16, and is more complex than it might appear. It has to untangle questions of religious propriety, artistic expression and the rights of a priest to determine what can be showed in a chapel that is not owned by the Catholic church.
"If the ruling goes in my favour, I will do the work again, on the same wall," says Descordes.
