Crucifixes in schools

We hereby publish the comments received by SIR Europe from some Bishops’ Conferences of Europe in response to the sentence issued by the European Court of Human Rights on 3 November following the appeal lodged by an Italian citizen of Finnish origin. The European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg ruled that the display of the crucifix in classrooms was contrary “to parents’ right to educate their children in line with their convictions and to the children’s right to religious freedom”.Italy: “a partial and ideological vision””The decision taken by the Court of Strasbourg is raising many concerns. Although a deeper investigation into the causes is required, from a first reading what emerges is the affirmation of a partial and ideological vision”. This is the position of the Italian Bishops’ Conference (CEI) on the sentence issued on 3rd November by the European Court of Human Rights according to which the crucifix in classrooms violates “parents’ right to educate their children in line with their convictions and children’s right to freedom of religion”. It is clear that “the manifold meanings of the crucifix are ignored and neglected, as the crucifix is not only a religious symbol but also a cultural sign”, explained the CEI in a note. According to the bishops, the sentence does not take into account that “the display of the crucifix in the Italian context is actually in line with the acknowledgement of the Catholic principles” as “part of the historic heritage of the Italian people” as defined in the 1984 Covenant. “In this way, we run the risk of separating the national identity from its cultural and spiritual roots”. On the contrary, concludes the note, “the hostility to every form of political and cultural relevance of religion, with particular regard to the presence of religious symbols in public institutions, is certainly not an expression of secularism but of its degeneration into secularistic attitudes”. The president of the Italian Bishops’ Conference Card. Bagnasco, for his part, spoke of “an ideologically-oriented sentence that does nothing but impoverish an already disoriented world”.Germany: “unilateral sentence”The German Bishops’ Conference (DBK) condemned through the person of his secretary, Fr. Hans Langendörfer, the sentence issued on 3 November by the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. “The sentence – explained the secretary – is very disappointing. It is unilateral. The cross is more than a religious symbol, it is a cultural sign. The sentence is intended to serve religious freedom but actually disregards the Italian situation, ignoring the real significance of the cross for society. It is true that negative religious freedom stipulates that no one must be conditioned by the religious symbols of others. But the cross and the crucifix are cultural symbols and signs of faith that belong to the lived faith and, therefore, to the positive religious freedom. Accordingly, the bishops’ conferences of Europe are always stressing that religious freedom does not mean ‘freedom from religion’ and that the negative freedom of religion cannot be turned into a general right to prohibit religion. The level of freedom in a community is also a reflex of its openness and of its attention to cultural traditions”.Austria: “simply unacceptable””Unacceptable”. Card. Christoph Schönborn, president of the Austrian Bishops’ Conference, condemns the sentence issued by the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg on the Crucifix. “The sentence of the Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg is simply unacceptable. In Austria the judicial situation is clear. In those schools in which the majority of students are Christian, there must be a cross in all classrooms. This is inscribed in our Constitution. The cross in the classrooms does not violate the freedom of religion, nor does it violate the free profession of different religious beliefs”, explained the cardinal. “On the contrary, this symbol is a sign that love is stronger than death. The European and Austrian identities are based on this very symbol. With this sentence, the Court did not render any service to Europe. This continent will have a future only if it does not deny its roots. The cross is the symbol of these roots”.Turkey: “they want to create emptiness””Perplexed and annoyed”: this is how mgr. Luigi Padovese, president of the Turkish Bishops Conference (Cet), receives the decree with which the European Court for Human Rights defined the presence of a Crucifix in a classroom as a “violation of the parents’ right to raise their children according to their own beliefs”. “Removing crucifixes – the prelate says – is against culture. I wonder why they want to enforce a law that discriminates against the majority, considering the Crucifix is not just a religious symbol, but the sign of a culture. It is also by the sacrifice of those who offer up their lives for others that this European civilisation was built up. The crucifix is a symbol of the sharing of, sympathy with and care for other people’s sufferings. It seems clear to me they want to create emptiness”. But mgr. Padovese is disappointed by something else as well, that is, the presence of a Turkish judge in the Court. The bishop explains: “we are well aware that in Turkey the teaching of religion is compulsory. We, as Catholic Christians, as a non-recognised minority, have the obligation to make our children attend the class of Islamic religion. I wonder what kind of religious freedom and respect of identity may we speak of, if the Court has a member in whose country religious freedom is not fully respected”. “I say to those who drew up this verdict – the president of Cet goes on – that they should realise that European reality is much more complex and there are more serious problems that that of leaving or removing a crucifix. There are situations of religious minorities that are discriminated against. We still reason in an excessively Eurocentric way, giving those who claim the right to be a minority things that some minorities, like us, in other countries, can by no means claim as their right”.Poland: “aggressive secularism”The sentence issues by the Court of Strasbourg is “incomprehensible” and raises serious concerns about the “future of religious freedom in Europe” declared card. Stanislaw Dziwisz, archbishop of Cracow, recalling that “the infringement of religious freedom paves the way to the dictatorship of relativism”. Bewilderment was also expressed by the president of the Polish Bishops’ Conference Mgr Józef Michalik who spoke of an “ever-growing aggressive secularism” in Europe that tends to “deprive the individuals of their spiritual and transcendental dimension and to confine religion to a personal sphere”. According to the president of the Polish bishops, Christians should wake up and speak up to defend the values of the European heritage. “We need to follow the example of Jews and Muslims in the defence of their respective religions”, said Mgr Michalik according to whom the sentence of the Court shows that Christianity in Europe is not menaced by Muslims but by “aggressive secularists”.