March 25, 2005

BEGGAR THY NEIGHBOUR

Church of martyrs (Anthony Browne, The Spectator, March 25th, 2005)

There is nothing unusual about the persecution of Iraqi Christians, or the unwillingness of other Christians to help them. Rising nationalism and fundamentalism around the world have meant that Christianity is going back to its roots as the religion of the persecuted. There are now more than 300 million Christians who are either threatened with violence or legally discriminated against simply because of their faith — more than any other religion. Christians are no longer, as far as I am aware, thrown to the lions. But from China, North Korea and Malaysia, through India, Pakistan and Sri Lanka to Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Turkey, they are subjected to legalised discrimination, violence, imprisonment, relocation and forced conversion. Even in supposedly Christian Europe, Christianity has become the most mocked religion, its followers treated with public suspicion and derision and sometimes — such as the would-be EU commissioner Rocco Buttiglione — hounded out of political office.

I am no Christian, but rather a godless atheist whose soul doesn’t want to be saved, thank you. I may not believe in the man with the white beard, but I do believe that all persecution is wrong. The trouble is that the trendies who normally champion human rights seem to think persecution is fine, so long as it’s only against Christians. While Muslims openly help other Muslims, Christians helping Christians has become as taboo as jingoistic nationalism. [...]

Dr Patrick Sookhdeo, director of the Barnabas Trust, which helps persecuted Christians, blames rising global religious tension. ‘More and more Christians are seen as the odd ones out — they are seen as transplants from the West, and not really trusted. It is getting very much worse.’

Even in what was, before multiculturalism, known as Christendom, Christians are persecuted. I have spoken to dozens of former Muslims who have converted to Christianity in Britain, and who are shunned by their community, subjected to mob violence, forced out of town, threatened with death and even kidnapped. The Barnabas Trust knows of 3,000 such Christians facing persecution in this country, but the police and government do nothing.

You get the gist. Dr Paul Marshall, senior fellow at the Centre for Religious Freedom in Washington, estimates that there are 200 million Christians who face violence because of their faith, and 350 million who face legally sanctioned discrimination in terms of access to jobs and housing. The World Evangelical Alliance wrote in a report to the UN Human Rights Commission last year that Christians are ‘the largest single group in the world which is being denied human rights on the basis of their faith’.

Part of the problem is old-style racism against non-whites; part of it is new-style guilt. If all this were happening to the world’s Sikhs or Muslims simply because of their faith, you can be sure it would lead the 10 O’Clock News and the front page of the Guardian on a regular basis. But the BBC, despite being mainly funded by Christians, is an organisation that promotes ridicule of the Bible, while banning criticism of the Koran. Dr Marshall said: ‘Christians are seen as Europeans and Americans, which means you get a lack of sympathy which you would not get if they were Tibetan Buddhists.’ [...]

To this day, while Muslims stick up for their co-religionists, Christians — beyond a few charities — have given up such forms of discrimination. Dr Sookhdeo said: ‘The Muslims have an Ummah [the worldwide Muslim community] whereas Christians do not have Christendom. There is no Christian country that says, “We are Christian and we will help Christians.”’

Perhaps those Europeans and North Americans who wish to prohibit Muslim immigration, or even expel them, on the grounds that we are “Christian” nations might tell us why such actions wouldn’t promote the persecution of hundreds of millions of Christians elsewhere and sell them down the river.


Posted by Peter Burnet at March 25, 2005 7:46 AM
Comments

"prohibit Muslim immigration, or even expel them"

Big leap from prohibit to expel. Doubtful that prohibit would lead to persecution, but if it did, to me that would indicate prohibit was the best decision.

You are actually arguing for admission to avoid persecution. To the less enlightened that would indicate bowing to intimidation.

Posted by: h-man at March 25, 2005 8:11 AM

Theresa Marie Schiavo is being murdered by our state; she is not allowed to follow her faith, nor are her parents allowed to follow the direction of the Most Holy Father who has stated that to withhold and/or remove food and water is a grave evil.

We don't need give examples from other sad countries--we are witnessing the first named martyr to our American culture of death--the millions of unamed--the unborn--cry out with her in one loud howl of indignation.

(Not to be a religious freak or anything--that would be too extreme for this terribly reasonable place where we have court-sanctioned executions of innocent people.)

Posted by: Paula Welter at March 25, 2005 8:31 AM

"Perhaps those Europeans and North Americans who wish to prohibit Muslim immigration, or even expel them, on the grounds that we are Christian nations might tell us why such actions wouldnt promote the persecution of hundreds of millions of Christians elsewhere and sell them down the river."

Of course. Why, just observe all the goodwill an open door policy has earned us in foreign lands.

Posted by: Cyrus at March 25, 2005 8:45 AM

Yep, because Muslims don't persecute Christiains now. Nothing like that happens across Africa where the two religions intersect, and the Saudis allow Christians to practice their faith.

Wouldn't want to rile those Muslims would be. Better give them what they want.

Posted by: Jim in Chicago at March 25, 2005 10:08 AM

Peter, you could start your campaign closer to home.

Some guy named Orrin Judd has argued that the Muslims should be allowed to drive the Christians out of Lebanon.

What he actually said, was, the Christrians should leave on their own. But since they do not want to leave, and the only reason they are leaving is that Muslims are driving them out, it amounts to the same thing.

The indifference of Christians to the persecution of Christians is one of the many puzzling things about this puzzling religion.

Anyhow, it does raise the question for us Unchosen who are being told we must rely on some sort of Christian commonwealth to organize our society: Why would we expect any better treatment from the Christians than they give to one another?

Contrary to Orrin's idea that the only way to organize a government/society is on Christian lines, the evidence is that it is, if not the very worst way, one of the worst.

Posted by: Harry Eagar at March 25, 2005 12:15 PM

Boxerism-Leninism, that is, the blind reaction of the pre-Christian world to Christianity, has been the curse of modern history. Nazism and Nipism, of course, were its mere variants.

Posted by: Lou Gots at March 25, 2005 12:28 PM

Boxerism-Leninism, that is, the blind reaction of the pre-Christian world to Christianity, has been the curse of modern history. Nazism and Nipism, of course, were its mere variants.

Posted by: Lou Gots at March 25, 2005 12:29 PM

I have to agree with the view that Christians are persecuted as much as is possible right now and any change in immigration policy will make no effective difference. It's like advising the Israelis to have restraint to avoid violence from the Palestinians. In fact, one might well make the argument that a show of strength might well improve the situation. It seems very unlikely to make it worse.

Posted by: Annoying Old Guy at March 25, 2005 1:32 PM
« BREAKING IN A NEW MITT: | Main | ZEN COHEN #4: »