Religious Freedom in the West Faces Renewed Opposition
Is the West’s commitment to religious freedom under threat? Several recent cases implicating Christians provide an affirmative answer to that question.
First, the Alliance Defending Freedom International observes that Finnish politician Päivi Räsänen recently appealed her conviction to Europe’s top human rights court, seeking a reversal of a criminal conviction in her home country. She had been convicted of “hate speech” for supporting the biblical view on the question of sexuality.
Second, the Fort Worth, Texas, police department admitted that one of its officers made a constitutionally unprotected claim when she suggested that a Christian street preacher used offensive language at a Pride march, a claim she alleged could support his arrest.
Third, this year, Canada passed Bill C-9, which removed the “good faith religious expression defence” from convictions for criminal hate speech. This means Canadians can be more easily convicted of “hate” if they quote scripture. This law was justified because it is already unlawful to incite hatred by “communicating statements in any public place (that) incites hatred against any identifiable group where such incitement is likely to lead to a breach of the peace.”
Meanwhile, a San Diego-based preacher, Uthman ibn Farooq, associated with the One Message Foundation, declared that Islam will dominate the West through dawah. Dawah can be viewed as both an invitation and a possible threat. In one widely circulated lecture, he contends that “America will be a Muslim country; Islam will enter every house. They can be as mad as they want. I don’t care. Europe will be Muslim. We’re not apologetic.” Doubtlessly, Nigerian Christians, facing ever-present danger, are well positioned to explain to Westerners what ibn Farooq means by dawah.
These cases confirm that the West's commitment to religious freedom is under increasing threat. Disdain for Christians stems from the merger of an increasingly totalitarian state with a woke mind-set that often defies notions of reality. Consistent with this intolerant impetus, at a Berlin community vigil meant to mourn the victims at last month’s attack, at a Pride event, one speaker—propelled by both her tolerant assessment of Muslims in Germany and her distaste for Christians—expressed hope that the person who engaged in the attack was a white Christian.
Reality is quite different. The German police identified the attack as a form of Islamic terror. No evidence has surfaced showing that the Lebanese-German perpetrator had any ties to Christianity.
Emerging from this intolerant and complex stew—led by new authoritarians, which includes state and non-state actors—myriad difficulties confront Western Christians. Writing for the Christian Post, more than three years ago I argued that anti-Christian “Wokeness” has assumed center stage in the United States and much of the Western world.
Wokeness exposes Christians to a rising tide of authoritarianism that disrespects and dishonors our faith. More than seventy years ago, The Authoritarian Personality was first published. This book remains a landmark of political psychology. The book’s major achievement was its exposition of the rise of fascism not merely as a politically dangerous phenomenon but as the manifestation of the dispositions that lie at the core of the modern psyche. Its most significant achievement was a study showing that the potential for tyranny lies not at the periphery but at the heart of the postmodern experience that currently infects the West.
In Great Britain, for instance, the new authoritarians have targeted Christians. Britain’s anti-terrorism efforts apply a double standard by treating actual Islamic terrorism simply as a mental illness. At the same time, the government has asserted that people who read Chaucer and the literature of Christian traditionalists such as G. K. Chesterton are potentially part of a dangerous “far right” movement that must be stopped.
In light of the ever-expanding increase in Authoritarians who are driven to punish people of faith, Christians need to consider several things.
First, Christians must acknowledge that the rules of societal engagement have changed. Commentator Aaron Renn observes that the West has moved from seeing Christianity as a positive good to accepting Christianity on purely neutral terms, and now they see Christians in a negative light.
Second, as Nancy Pearcey notes, the authoritarian ideologies that bloodied the twentieth century were inspired by 18th-century writer, Jean Jacques Rousseau. Rousseau sought to strip humans of all social relationships, morals, laws, customs, and traditions. He argued that “Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains.” His focus was not political oppression. Instead, he sought to eliminate all oppressive personal relationships like marriage, family, church, and the workplace.
Third, Jordan Peterson notes that the West and its justice system developed out of specific morals and traditions. Those traditions favored a judicial ethic that made truthfulness a matter of eternal consequences. These traditions were part of a society wherein the leadership was prepared to stand up for and protect the vulnerable.
Peterson observes that centuries of pursuing righteous justice produce high-trust societies, a shift that contributes to complacency as trust becomes an excuse for being naïve. This shift became an incautious invitation to exploitation.
Against this backdrop, Christians must recognize that we wrestle not with flesh and blood but with spiritual powers that often preach freedom but seek to impose slavery. Christians must do more than hope that tolerance and empathy can quench the darkness that floods the West. Instead, they must be prepared to speak out.
Otherwise, they are likely to reap George Washington’s brilliant prophecy: “The freedom of speech may be taken away and dumb and silent we may be led like sheep to the slaughter.” Western Christians must prepare to engage in a fight they have not asked for. They must fight, speak out, and stand their ground despite the cost.