Europe has nothing to fear from Christianity
In an increasingly secular Europe, I thought most of today’s religious-centred debates revolved around matters of religious liberty. Can Christian bakers in Northern Ireland refuse to bake cakes for same sex couples? Should Italy banish crosses from the walls of public classrooms? Is France justified in imposing a burkini ban? The list goes on.
Yet, in Oscar Yuill’s article ‘Christianity is not the answer to Europe’s problems’, Yuill advocates a position that should unsettle the peace of mind of not only Christians, but all who believe in the importance of religious liberty and the value of individuals who hold faith.
A serious threat awaits church goers when people view Christianity as a problem to be dissolved. Commenting on Douglas Murray’s quote that “the only thing worse than religion is its absence,” Yuill goes on to say that Murray should have chosen what he calls the “lesser of two evils”—the absence of religion.
To support his claim, Yuill cites a narrow selection of examples. His selection includes what he believes to be Christianity’s blighting science and sex education, intolerance of homosexuals and those of other faiths, and his fear of European Christian revivalists emulating an Islamic theocracy. The skeleton of his argument seems to take bones from different species, let alone different bodies. And the ligaments holding it all together have been omitted entirely.
Ultimately, Yuill seems to deny any possible positive influence Christianity may impart. This leads him to bemoan the idea of increased Church attendance. Yuill fails to distinguish a desire to “refill the pews” from a call for an integralist state.
Perhaps Yuill forgets Christians’ support for charitable causes. The Catholic Church, for example, routinely contributes to a country’s social safety net, provides a vast array of social services, and gives billions of pounds each year to charity. In fact, Christians enact the virtue of charity globally, nationally, and locally. St. Thomas Aquinas held that “the habit of charity extends not only to the love of God, but also to the love of our neighbour.” The Golden Rule, as found in the Gospel of Matthew, emphasises care of neighbour: do unto others as you would have them do unto you. Such a notion manifests itself in the many soup kitchens, homeless shelters, elderly care initiatives, and endless other movements which help alleviate suffering across the world.
Perhaps Yuill also forgets Christianity’s emphasis on having regard for one’s enemies. As March 29th draws nearer, talk of Brexit continually reminds us of today’s polarising politics. Politicians lament the fact that families became divided, often bitterly, over such an issue. Today’s culture of intolerance for dissenting opinions repeatedly draws an ‘us’ and ‘them’ mentality, fuelling hate speech in the process. Yuill falls prey to this intolerance. As far as Yuill is concerned, Christianity espouses archaic views antithetical to what he holds dear. Rather than hope for a settlement in which Christians and non-Christians co-exist, he seems to prefer the absence of religion entirely. If I were to be optimistic, I would say this places Christians as an endangered species. Alas, I doubt Christians would be afforded the protection such a categorisation usually brings.
Yuill expresses distress at Poland’s Catholic resurgence. Unfairly, he conflates increased piety of the Poles with anti-semitism and homophobia. This seems a little bit of ‘testing on the dependent variable’, as his attribution to Catholic piety fails to account for the cases of anti-semitism found on our doorstep in England, and across other parts of the world. The same can be said for cases of homophobia. Instead, perhaps we should speculate as to the sorry state Poland might face today had it not been for the role of Catholics in the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Finally, Yuill’s comparison with Islam bears little on his case against Christianity. The idea that a revival of Christianity in Europe would lead to an imposition of blasphemy laws is, quite frankly, ridiculous. Today’s ‘big tent’ protestant churches preach little fire and brimstone from the pulpit. The Second Vatican Council of the Catholic Church emphasised religious liberty as a right of the human person. And Archbishop Justin Welby recently said that he doesn’t “really care whether it’s the Church of England or Rome or the Orthodox or Pentecostals or the Lutherans or Baptists” that draws members. One hardly senses an imminent Christian spearheading of a campaign against liberty.
Pope John Paul II once said during a visit to Poland “Let the Spirit descend, and renew the face of the earth, the face of this land.” This reflects an understanding of our world as imperfect, and the role Christian devotion can play in overcoming some of the ills that afflict us. The fruits of the Holy Spirit include charity, joy, peace, and goodness. I hope all strive for such things. When Yuill calls for the abandonment of Christianity and the Christian heritage of Europe, he belittles the positive impact of those attributes listed. We kid ourselves if we believe the state of citizenry and government would not benefit from more individuals cultivating such traits. We kid ourselves if we believe ourselves to be worse off among Christians. And we kid ourselves if we think Yuill fairly portrays Christian influence today.
