 |
| Police guard a Christmas market after a truck ran into the crowded Christmas market in Berlin, Germany, Monday. (AP Photo/Michael Sohn) |
Stemming
from the Enlightenment, religious liberty has been touted as the revolutionary
ideology that has saved the world from tyranny and chaos. Each person,
according to this ideology, has the strict right to believe and practice
whatever form of creed he chooses. “I have my religion, and you have yours. And
that is just great, as long as we focus on what unites us.” I have heard this
mantra repeated from a conservative radio host many times in the past few
years, and I have found myself shouting at the radio in disgust, “It’s NOT
great that we have different religions!”
The
post-Enlightenment popes have condemned the idea of religious liberty, teaching
that every person has the obligation and the freedom to choose the truth, and
if we choose er
ror, we offend God. But rather than concentrating on dogma, I would like to address the practical aspect of the negative results of religious pluralism in a culture. And at the root of the issue is that religion does matter, and what a people believe is important.
ror, we offend God. But rather than concentrating on dogma, I would like to address the practical aspect of the negative results of religious pluralism in a culture. And at the root of the issue is that religion does matter, and what a people believe is important.
Religion
is, at its base, a matter of utmost importance.
It deals with ultimate reality – God.
Ideas about God shape the fabric of a culture, and those ideas change,
the culture changes. I think I can say,
without any doubt, that civil society is shaped by what a people accept to be
true regarding the nature of the divine.
Just look at the difference in England before and after Henry VIII.
Charles
Dickens, writing during the Industrial Revolution in England, shows the effect
of Protestant belief about God on society. The poorhouse of Oliver Twist, the Gradgrind method of
education in Hard Times, and the
debtors prison in Little Dorritt are indicative
of the radical change that can occur in a society when a change of religious
belief occurs.
England,
before Henry VIII, was Catholic. Monasteries and convents served as places
where, however imperfectly, men and women attempted to live the Eight
Beatitudes. These monks and nuns saw Christ in their neighbor; hence the monasteries
served as hospitals, schools, and homeless shelters. Monks and nuns took care
of the poor, convinced that what was done for the poor was done for Christ.
They realized that St. Paul’s teaching on the Mystical Body of Christ was more
than just platitudes, and that heaven had to be earned, not just by faith, but
by prayer, penance, and love of neighbor. Thus, the Church in Catholic England
provided a social welfare net administered by people who, in theory, were truly
concerned with the physical and spiritual well-being of those who needed help.
This state
of affairs changed in the sixteenth century when King Henry VIII rebelled
against the Catholic Church and raided the monasteries. The lands and monies of
the monastic orders went to nobles as a way of purchasing continued support for
the religious revolution imposed on England. After all, the thinking went, if
England were to become Catholic again, the nobles would have to return the stolen
lands and monies. Henry VIII counted on the greed of the nobles to continue the
revolution. Thus, England was left without any institutions to care for the
poor and sick.
On top of
that, religion became an individual thing. Even though membership in the Church
of England was mandatory, under Queen Elizabeth, the last vestiges of Catholic
prayer, liturgy, and belief were discarded in favor of Protestant thought.
Religion was now about a person’s relationship with God, salvation was no
longer something that needed to be earned through prayer and good works, and
the sense of solidarity with others in Christ was replaced with and
individualistic sense of one’s relationship with God. With the self being the
focus of one’s religious actions, the self became all important in worldly
life: hence the poor were seen as burdens to be avoided. They were forced into
“charity” houses; nursing practices were abominable; education became something
of an imposition on the teacher rather than a vocation. The England of Charles
Dickens is an England that lost her humanity because she had lost her faith.
The real
problem of religious liberty is that those who adhere to it are blind.
Religious liberty closes the mind off to the possibility of objective reality
in the spiritual realm, thus leaving the material world the only possible arena
of knowledge. God then becomes an accidental. Once a mind is blind to God, it
is only a matter of course before the mind becomes blind to the natural law.
And on a pragmatic level, religious liberty renders a mind incapable of seeing
how religion influences the life and decisions of one who genuinely believes.
While history has shown that religions are mutually incompatible, we see today
that few also recognize that religion and pluralism are also equally incompatible.
The problem is that the pluralists are the only ones who do not recognize that
reality.
This
is why Islam has gained a foothold in Europe and is in the process of
establishing itself here in the United States.
In the name of religious liberty, western society is accepting of Islam,
welcomes the Muslims pouring into our cities, and excuses Islam whenever a
Muslim carries out an attack. “Islam is a religion of peace,” said President
Bush in September 2001, and the media goes to extreme lengths to hide the religious
motivations of terrorists.
But
the fact remains that Islam is the ideological inspiration for terrorism. a
casual perusal of the Koran and other texts of Islam show that the religion of
Mohamed breeds terrorists.
"And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from
where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief] is
worse than killing... but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and
merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief
and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. (Quran 2:191-193)
“I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve.
Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them.” (Quran 8:39)
“So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters
wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait
for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the
poor-rate, leave their way free to them.” (Quran 9:5)
The
actions of the Muslim terrorist in Germany was one fueled by religion, and
actions like this will continue for as long as this ideology is allowed in our
societies. We will continue to see attacks inspired by Jihad for as long as the
western world remains blind to the fact that religion defines how a people will
act. This is the first step in our defense. The second step is the lesson from
the Battle of Lepanto.
Europe
barely won the onslaught of the Ottoman Empire in the sixteenth century. Three
decisive battle were fought, and if European forces had lost any of the three,
Europe would have been subjugated to Islamic rule. In each of these three, Europe was apathetic
and the battles were almost lost. The
Ottoman Empire came close to winning at Malta, Vienna, and Lepanto. What gave Europe her victories was prayer, especially
the Rosary.
Before
Lepanto, Pope St. Pius V was desperately trying to put together a coalition for
the defense of Venice, and no country was willing to help. King Philip II of Spain eventually helped,
but only at the last minute. The pope, in a moment of desperation, proclaimed a
Rosary crusade. It was the Rosary which was the weapon needed to win. And not
just a simple victory; Our Lady’s intercession brought about the complete
annihilation of the Ottoman navy. Lepanto was a victory because of the Rosary,
and because of the Rosary, the present Islamic menace can still be defeated.
_______________________
Christopher Murphy is a teacher of history and literature at St. Thomas Becket Academy in Oregon. He is the author most recently of The Rising Storm: Volume One of the Lepanto Cycle.
Very good article. While it is true that Post-enlightenment popes condemned religious liberty; post-Vatican II popes did not.
ReplyDeleteTrue. At the best of times, the conciliar popes said nothing. Usually, they were actively promoting pluralism - enabling the loss of souls and contributing to the destruction of society.
Delete