Yes, but what public morality - didn’t I already address this question?
"[W]e can no longer stand it if a priest as much as uses the word “truth.” If we have even the smallest claim to integrity, we must know today that a theologian, a priest, a pope, not merely is wrong in every sentence he speaks, but lies—that he is no longer at liberty to lie from “innocence” or “ignorance.” The priest too knows as well as anybody else that there is no longer any “God,” any “sinner,” any “Redeemer"—that “free will” and “moral world order” are lies [does “everybody else” really know this? Does everybody else have at least a modicum of intellectual integrity?]: seriousness, the profound self-overcoming of the spirit, no longer permits anybody not to know about this… All the concepts of the church have been recognized for what they are, the most malignant counterfeits that exist, the aim of which is to devalue nature and natural values; the priest himself has been recognized for what he is, the most dangerous kind of parasite, the real poison-spider of life [by whom?]… We know, today our conscience knows—, what these uncanny inventions of the priests and the church are really worth, what ends they served in reducing mankind to such a state of self-violation that its sight can arouse nausea: the concepts “beyond,” “Last Judgment,” “immortality of the soul,” and “soul” itself are instruments of torture, systems of cruelties by virtue of which the priest became master, remained master…”
[AC 38.]
Who is this “we” that Nietzsche is talking about?
“Everybody knows this: and yet everything continues as before. Where has the last feeling of decency and self-respect gone when even our statesmen, an otherwise quite unembarrassed type of man, anti-Christians through and through in their deeds, still call themselves Christians today and attend communion?..”
[ibid.]
Why should these anti-Christians still call themselves Christians? Is it not for the sake of power? But in a democracy, the power is to the people; therefore, these anti-Christians still call themselves Christians because public morality demands that of them!
Nietzsche is essentially calling people to honesty:
“Granting that as a theory this [the will to power] is a novelty–as a reality it is the fundamental fact of all history: let us be so far honest towards ourselves!”
[BGE 259.]
What would happen if a statesman told the truth - if he said in public that he was only into politics for the sake of power? - Fact is that public morality was in Nietzsche’s time, and still is now, Christian, all too Christian.
The Antichristian is a Revaluation of All Values. In the last section, Nietzsche even suggests that one should no longer reckon time from the beginning of Christianity, but from its end - that the year 0 should be reckoned the year -1888. When Nietzsche says, in the first proposition of his Decree Against Christianity, that “[e]very type of anti-nature is depraved”, that is a revaluation of the Christian idea that every type of nature is depraved. In Christianity, the least depraved man is the priest; against those who teach nature, one doesn’t use arguments, but the penitentiary (or the stake); every non-participation in divine service is an assassination attempt on public morality; one should be more severe toward Protestants than toward Catholics, more severe toward liberal Protestant than toward the orthodox, because they approach knowledge, not because they are Christian; the philosopher is the criminal of criminals because he has attained knowledge, nihilistic knowledge; the “blessed” places in which Christianity has hatched its eggs should be maintained or restored, and revered as holy places; the sermon on unchastity, being a public instigation to naturalness, is something contemptuous; sexual love is despised as “dirty”; one should prefer, one should be honoured to eat with a priest at one’s table; etc. etc.
Now how hard is this to appreciate!