Religion in Europe – fighting for or against social inclusion?

Cristina Pop, West University of Timisoara

Assignment on “Visions of Europe”
“Social Inclusion in Europe” Master Programme 2005-2007
 Religion in Europe – fighting for or against social inclusion?

Ask any statesmen in contemporary Europe and they will tell you we are all equal in front
of the law. Ask any Christian churchmen and they will tell you we are all equal in front of
God. At this first glimpse, our society has good premises to be an inclusive one. But
does reality confirm it?

Hundreds of years ago, human life – both private and public – was organized depending
on the law of God. In today’s Europe, the state and the church are formally separated.
What I will present in this essay are some of the points where these two institutions
influence each other regarding social inclusion, sometimes working for the same
purpose, other times taking colliding positions on social matters. The purpose of this
brief analysis is to find in which way religion can (and maybe even should?) still play a
part as a social actor with a benefic influence on society. Considering that the
development of European cultures is closely related to Christianity ([Die03]) and that a
large part of Europe’s population is Catholic, Orthodox or Protestant ([Hal05]), Christians
thus being a majority of the religious population, I will refer here to the Christian
traditional belief systems and institutions.

The essay is based not only on the mentioned reference, but also on an interview with
two priests from the Orthodox Cathedral from Timisoara. It was interesting and surprising
for me to see their reaction when I explained why I was asking for their help. One of
them looked at me in a suspicious and rather biting manner and gave me a quick reply
saying “There is nothing to discuss here”. The other priest waited until I finished the
explanation, made sure he understood the topic and then engaged in a conversation
showing both enthusiasm for his beliefs and a good cultural background to support the
information he gave. I decided to present this episode here as a metaphor of how I
perceive the image of the church: on one hand, a tendency to be closed and unyielding;
on the other hand, dedication for the enlightenment of humankind.

Looking back in time, we can see that religion (as a general term, not referring
specifically to Christianity) has had many social functions, besides the manifest one
which addresses salvation. As presented in [Wil81], these so-called “latent functions”
include: giving meaning to natural phenomena, justifying human actions through a set of
ethical norms, assuring social cohesion, expressing and adjusting emotions. To a great
extent, these functions are nowadays covered by other entities in the Western civilization
– science explains more and more of the universe in all its aspects, the state sets the
rules for what is acceptable and what isn’t, many kinds of associations create
communities based on shared characteristics of their members, arts and entertainment
give the setting for manifesting and refining emotions.

One important role still taken by the church belongs to the social services area. Be it the
elderly, the poor or the ill, they will find spiritual and, as much as possible, material
support from the church. The priest I interviewed mentioned several programmes
developed by the Romanian Orthodox church in order to help orphans, the elderly, the
severely ill or the victims of natural disasters. However, as he explains, much of these
activities are not promoted as interventions of the church, mostly because of the
Christian spirit of doing good without seeking praise or other reward for it.

The function of guiding believers to salvation still remains irreplaceable. When

confronted with the major (and usually frightening or painful) questions of life, science
can give us some answers which may be satisfying, as long as we are asking these
questions in a rather detached manner. But when confronted with their own suffering,

-2-
 Religion in Europe – fighting for or against social inclusion?

many people still feel the need of a response from a higher authority. The interview
revealed that a great number of the ones coming to talk to a priest at the Cathedral are
facing major difficulties in their lives and are asking for guidance or, even more, for an
immediate divine intervention, mediated by the church.

Also, there are a large number of people who, even if they are not usually practicing their
religion, call for a religious service for moments like births, marriages or deaths (this is
shown in figures in [Hal05] and was confirmed in the interview). Related to this matter,
we must also look at the presence of priests in hospitals, which can also be seen as part
of the social services assured by the church.

[Hal05] shows that, contrary to the wide spread impression of religion losing its
importance in contemporary Europe, religious beliefs are not weakening, they are just
becoming a more private matter, thus somehow separating from the church as we know
it. Because of this reason, I chose to focus more on the influence of religion and the
church on the ethical systems of their believers, therefore seeing them as a source of
education (informal and, in some countries, even included in the formal education).

In [Wil81] it is argued that the present Western civilization, tending to be rationalized in

all aspects of its organization, cannot give proper answers to the needs coming from the
irrationality of the human being. Moral values taught today are justified more by their
practical utility than by their intrinsic meaning. For a person searching for a deeper
meaning of life, religion may very likely turn out to be a better place to look in than the
secular education.

However, now when church is no longer such a strong presence in the relationship
between the European citizen and his or her God, what one learns about Christianity
relies more on voluntary study of the theological texts or the history of religions (in some
countries, like Romania, these subjects are taught in pre-university schools) and the
information got through mass media (not only documentaries but also interviews with
churchmen or news about the implication of the church in current social matters).

So we must first look at the texts of the Bible, as it is the primal source of explicit
teachings about the Christian values. When reading the Charter of Fundamental Rights
of the European Union, it is easy to see that it corresponds very much to one of the most
well known quotes from the Bible: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male
nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians 3:28).

Yet, one of the biggest issues in the criticism of traditional Christianity is the gender
differentiation that, in some points, suggests that woman is inferior to man. When asked
about this topic, the Orthodox priest explained that, although women and men are seen
as different given their natural differences that make each of them more suitable for
certain roles, this does not mean one is in any way better than the other. Even more, the
worship of Virgin Mary places her in one of the most important positions among the
central figures of Christianity.

On one hand, valuing the woman predominantly as a mother can be seen as an attempt
to direct women to a certain kind of choices in life and this is not exactly consistent with
the equality between genders as promoted by secular laws. On the other hand, one
cannot deny that gender differentiation is a fact of nature, so “equal” cannot have here
the meaning of “identical roles”, but rather that of “identical value” in the context of

-3-
 Religion in Europe – fighting for or against social inclusion?

complementary roles. My personal view on this is that even feminism, in its not extreme
forms, accepts gender differences and fights against discrimination of women, not for
creating a common identity for both genders; in a world where I so often hear about the
woman manager, the woman scientist, the woman police officer or, at the opposite end,
the woman victim of abuse, and at the same time in a world where divorce rate is rising
and more and more children can’t spend much time with their career driven parents, I
find it quite necessary to sometimes be reminded of the woman mother.

Still, there are some passages in the Bible that very explicitly set the woman under the
control of the man or suggest the impurity of women as greater of that of men:
- “Wives, submit yourself unto your husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband
is the head of the wife even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the
savior of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives
be to their husbands in everything" (Ephesians 5:22-24)
- "The head of every man is Christ, and the head of every woman is man." (I Cor.
11:3)
- "Speak to the children of Israel, saying,'If a woman conceives, and bears a male
child, then she shall be unclean seven days; as in the days of her monthly period
she shall be unclean." (Leviticus 12:2) "When a woman gives birth to a girl, she
will be unclean as in her monthly period. However, she will be unclean for two
weeks. Then she must stay at home for 66 days in order to be made clean from
her bleeding." (Leviticus 12:5)

As a response to these quotes, one can bring many others in which gender equality is
clearly stated or the husband is also given responsibilities towards his wife:
- “Submit to one another out of reverence for Christ.” (Ephesians 5:21)
- “Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up
for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the
word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or
any other blemish, but holy and blameless. In this same way, husbands ought to
love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves
himself.” (Ephesians 5:25-28)

Moving from the theoretical aspect of religion to its practice, there are two more issues
about women’s discrimination. One of them is not accepting the ordination of women –
with the exception of the Anglican church (and other religions not relevant here as they
are part of the new ones). Arguments against ordination of women are based mainly on
continuing the tradition (all 12 apostles of Jesus were males) and sometimes on other
passages from the Bible which show the man as the proper one to lead or teach others. I
was quite shocked to hear, during the interview, that physical reasons are also
mentioned, meaning that the woman is still consider impure during the menstrual period.
From my point of view, all these arguments relate very closely to the image of a closed,
not flexible church; it is, of course, not always positive to be flexible, especially when
moral values are at stake, but I believe that in this case traditional Christianity somehow
fails in delivering its core message by stumbling on technicalities.

A second issue is that of women not being allowed access to Mount Athos, those who
break the rule being punished by imprisonment up to two years. This is considered by
some as discriminating towards women and there have been two demands from the EU
parliament to the state of Greece to abolish this rule; both demands were rejected. The
arguments regarding monks’ avoidance of temptations and the (more secular) reason

-4-
 Religion in Europe – fighting for or against social inclusion?

that the territory is property of the self-governed "Monastic State of Aghion Oros" (thus
breaking the rule can be assimilated to violating private property) are convincing enough
for me.

Still, for both of these last two issues, my main concern is not for the rules themselves.
After all, today’s European woman is free to choose her religion and is not forced to
remain in a religious community where she feels discriminated (although in more
traditional societies such a change might also have some negative impact on her social
status). Furthermore, I believe that if there is ever a change to happen regarding these
two rules, it must come from inside the chruch and not imposed by secular authorities. In
[Nak86] it is shown that, out of the approximately 120 new religions born after the
Second World War, 48 were started by women, which gives a clear sign that women
were already taking their life, including their religious beliefs, in their own hands. What
does this say about the future of traditional religions, which are seen as “profoundly
patriarchal” by all feminist scholars of religion, according to [Vou02]? My interlocutor
keeps a positive mind, saying that the chruch has resisted many and difficult threats and
has survived so far. I myself can’t help wondering if survival is enough for such an
institution.

What could (and my view is that it should) be changed is the way of presenting these
two matters to the wide public. For the common modern believer, “comfortably spending
all free time in front of the TV” – as the priest described, not reading much theology and
being constantly bombed by various information from various fields, it is very easy to
justify negative attitudes through religious ideas (usually ideas taken out of context,
incomplete or misinterpreted), Not only a misogynist can claim that Christian beliefs and
practices show man’s superiority on woman, but I have also met young women who, on
the basis of the Christian tradition they have been brought up in, considered themselves
as inferior human beings.

To add some more examples of misinterpreted religious concepts, I will name a phrase I
keep hearing from antisemitic Christians: “they have killed our Lord, Jesus Christ”. The
Orthodox priest assured me that this has nothing to do with the official position of the
church, even if the two religions, both monotheistic, can be seen as rivals.

Another sensitive spot is the one regarding homosexuality. Fortunately, homosexuals

nowadays do not have to face punishments based on religious or secular laws. The
church does not exclude them, but, as the priest said, tries to help them – meaning that
their sexual orientation is seen as a disease that can be cured. From a sociological
perspective, this attitude is integrating, which differs from including – it says the
homosexual is not “normal”, but can become “normal” by changing themselves. While
science is still debating about the factors causing sexual orientation, homophobia takes
part of its substance from the conviction that homosexuals could very well be “straight” if
it were not for there refusal to change, sometimes taking it further to the idea that some
persons become homosexuals by their own will, in order to draw attention upon
themselves or “be in the fashion”.

What I see as a potential important contribution of the traditional church to a more

inclusive society is not changing its values and habits, but making the central Christian
message, that of love for God and for our fellow beings, more visible than those related
to tradition and, like already said, dogmatic technicalities; also, very clearly promoting its

-5-
 Religion in Europe – fighting for or against social inclusion?

positions on topics as those mentioned above, in order to reduce discriminant attitudes

falsely based on religion.

Besides, as an institution that supports morality, I think it is important for the church to
set visible examples. Social services assured by the church are one of the many and I
believe they should be made more visible to the wider population (without crossing the
lines of decency, of course, but there is still a long way to that point). Also, given the
individualism and exclusivism favoured by any monotheistic belief system in its earlier
stages, the present ecumenical movement sends a benefic message of reciprocal
acceptance (on this matter, we can observe the influence of the secular world’s
development on the church as an inclusive institution; as stated in [Tur06], multicultural
environments are making religions more aware of each other’s value and more tolerant
towards each other).

Since the believer’s relation with the church shows to be weakening, the public discourse
of the church gains more weight in transmitting its message and this depends a great
deal on the relation of the church with mass media, as the present rush for sensational
news brings high odds that the message will be transmitted incompletely or incorrectly,
or even intentionally biased in order to sell well.

Teaching religion in schools is also a good way to promote the Christian values. In
Romania, pupils may choose between studying their own religion and studying the
history of religions, so religion based discrimination in schools does not get encouraged.

At this point, it is maybe interesting to mention the recent debate about getting icons off
the classroom walls, seeing them as offensive for non-Christian pupils. In the end, icons
were not removed, as they were not present in schools as objects of worship but rather
as a cultural element. Of course, Romania is still a country with a great majority of
religious population, but similar conflicts have shown up in the more secularized Western
Europe – as, for example, the discussion about prohibiting Muslim female students to
wear their specific clothes when attending classes. These and many others are proof
that religion still plays an important part in the life of Europeans – and what better way to
prevent these kinds of conflicts than by education to provide objective knowledge and
understanding of others’ as long as our own traditions.

To conclude, my view is that the current Western civilization, based on pragmatism and
efficiency, can very much benefit from the active role of the church as a provider of
spiritual values; in fact, I see the presence of such institutions necessary and don’t find
any secular ones being able to fully cover this function. A society that has all the needed
legal, institutional and physical framework will not become truly inclusive unless there is
a higher motivation to accept “the other” as an equal. And religions that teach love as a
supreme value seem to be the best answer here.

However, if this role is to be played in the future by the traditional Christian churches or
by others (Eastern religions or new ones), depends a great deal on how the traditional
church will respond to the social changes of our times.

-6-
 Religion in Europe – fighting for or against social inclusion?

References

[***] “The Bible” (both a Romanian edition and the English translation found at
http://www.biblegateway.com)
[***07] *** (2007), “European Values Study”
http://www.europeanvalues.nl
http://www.jdsurvey.net/web/evs1.htm
[Die03] Dienel C, Wisch F.-H. (2003), “Visions of Europe”, text book for the
“European Perspectives on Social Inclusion” Master study programme, 2003
[Hal05] Halman L., Luijkx R., van Zundert M. (2005), “Atlas of European Values”
[Nak86] Nakamura, H. (1975, 1986), “Orient si Occident: o istorie comparata a
ideilor” (Romanian translation of “A Comparative History of Ideas”),
Bucharest, Humanitas, 1998
[Tur06] Turner B.S. (2006), “Religion”, SAGE Publications – “Theory, Culture &
Society”, 2006
http://www.sagepublications.com
[Vou02] Voula E. (2002), “Remaking Universals?: Transnational Feminism(s)
Challenging Fundamentalist Ecumenism”, SAGE Publications – “Theory,
Culture & Society”, 2002
http://www.sagepublications.com
[Wil81] Wilson, B. (1981), “Religia din perspectiva sociologica” (Romanian
translation of “Religion in Sociological Perspective”), Bucharest, Editura
Trei, 2000

-7-