Australia’s Largest Christian News Site

The beginning of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan was marked by Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer — not known for his religious sensibilities, indeed, rather the reverse – but also the Vatican, and even King Charles. The Supreme Governor of the Church of England, although speaking on Ash Wednesday – one of the most important dates in the Christian calendar – neglected to mention Lent. Even Sainsbury’s is asking customers, “Are you Ramadan-ready?”

This sudden preference for Islam over Christianity seems like yet another example of double standards in public life. Christians have been prosecuted for publicly preaching; silent prayer outside abortion centres has been banned; in the last decade, thousands of British churches have closed, some converted into mosques.

The word “Christmas” is now controversial, and in TV dramas, a crucifix on a character’s wall is a sure sign of a crazed killer. Jesus Christ is mentioned chiefly as a profanity. F-words abound, but ‘Oh my God’ has been replaced by the Bertie Woosterish ‘Oh my goodness’, ‘Oh my golly’, ‘Oh my gosh’.

And judging by the Western media’s lack of interest in the 70 Christians – including women, children and the elderly – found beheaded in a Congolese church, “black lives” no longer “matter” if they are Christian.

The Starmer government’s mooted “Islamophobia” law may designate open discussion of public security, and even the obvious point that most Muslims are law-abiding, as “hate crime“.

However, a campaign to ban Parliamentary prayers has been opposed by a Muslim MP; could it be that the impetus for this campaign is not Islam, but atheism?

Although seemingly growing in popularity, the number of truly devout atheists may be lower than supposed, and it is certainly easier to define oneself as atheist than Christian. While the latter may be lectured on the historical crimes of Christianity, the chance of self-described atheists being interrogated about their non-beliefs, or indeed the human rights record of atheist regimes, is small to vanishing.

Replacement

Historian Tom Holland has shown that overall, Christianity has been “an historical force for good in the world”, but the anti-Christian campaign marches on under the supremely ironic banner of “diversity”.

This leaves the field open to other religions, prompting some to describe themselves as “cultural Christians” – even prominent atheist Richard Dawkins:

“I’m not a believer, but there’s a distinction between being a believing Christian and being a cultural Christian. … I love hymns and Christmas carols, and I sort of feel at home in the Christian ethos. … We [in the UK] are a ‘Christian country’ in that sense.”

He was “horrified” to see Islamic holidays and mosques taking the place of Christian feasts and cathedrals in Europe, saying:

“If I had to choose between Christianity and Islam, I’d choose Christianity every single time. It seems to me to be a fundamentally decent religion in a way that I think Islam is not.”

And Christianity is far from irrational: in the thirteenth century, St Thomas Aquinas used reason to reach an understanding of God: in his “first three ways of proving God’s existence”, he established “that God is the unmoved mover, the first cause, and the necessary being whose necessity is uncaused.”

If nothing can come out of nothing, everything must come out of something – or someone. And science, which, it was once thought, would in time expose religion as mere superstition, now offers even more support for it. The sheer, mind-boggling complexity of our own biology throws doubt on the supposition that life somehow “evolved” out of far cruder elements, let alone inorganic matter – let alone nothing. Science also shows that much of the material world is invisible to the naked eye; just because you can’t see something doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.

Perhaps it is the dawning reality that science does not, after all, “rule out” God, which is re-energising the movement against Christianity. Indeed, science shows that it is possible to believe in God – and many scientists do believe in God, for not even scientists place all their faith in science.

Nonetheless, Marx saw religion as “the opium of the people“, with its promise of “Heaven tomorrow” rather than heaven on earth today, religion was an obstacle to socialism, jeopardising the “inevitable” revolution. Communist countries have tried to stamp out Christianity, but their (failed) attempts have inadvertently paid it the compliment of taking it seriously. However, with the fall of the Berlin Wall, the old crimes of Communism have been quietly forgotten, along with its critics. It is always harder to fight a ghost.

The old Left’s explanation for the persistence of religion was that poor people clung to it out of ignorance and desperation, although they could be “educated out of” it, coming to rely on the State rather than God. The fact that this has not happened – that “the revolution” has, it seems, been indefinitely postponed – may explain why the Left has largely embraced “multiculturalism” and the open-door immigration that promises greater electoral support.

However, those who accuse Christianity of perpetuating inequality should read the Old and New Testaments, especially Jesus’ teaching that it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God – while adding that for God, all things are possible. (Matthew 19:16-26) St Paul says that “there are no more distinctions between Jew and Greek, slave and free, male and female” – we are all “one in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians 3: 28) And what better motivation for human behaviour than the prospect of Heaven or Hell?

Of course, under Christian rule, injustice was not conspicuous by its absence, but as G. K. Chesterton remarked, the Christian ideal has not been tried and found wanting but has been found difficult and left untried.

There is, however, hope, since our eternal fate is not inevitable: it depends on us, because we are not animals, plants, or even robots, but human beings with free will and the capacity to choose our own fate.

Death and Resurrection

It is materialistic politics that avoids the existence of death, preferring to stick with that other inevitability, taxes. However, most normal people know only too well that death is a fact of life. They also know that life consists of more than the material – of much that is unseen, and even unseeable.

Ironically, but tellingly, there has been a flurry of news reports about Pope Francis since his latest health crisis, in stark contrast to an almost complete lack of media interest in his pronouncements. This is despite his leftish thinking on issues like migration, but his rejection of the culture of death – while making a distinction between the sin and the sinner – has ensured that his declining health is treated as a metaphor for declining Christianity.

Perhaps the real reason for the left-liberal preference for more “muscular” religions is that they perceive Christianity as weak; the answer to that is simply, “Try it.” But a religion that bows down to a helpless baby must be viewed with disdain in an age in which killing the babe in the womb is portrayed not as a human wrong but as a human right.

Some atheists may have reached their philosophical position after much thought, albeit without any prayer. However, those who attack Christianity have simply made a god out of their unbelief in God – a religion out of no religion.

Still, it may be argued that since religion is the cause of all human woes, all religions should be banned. One might as well ban all human beings, since they are the cause of all human woes. But if humans are to live together – if we are to have societies, rather than billions of isolated, self-centred individuals – we need a moral framework, and much depends on the kind of moral framework we choose. Paradoxically, Christianity’s success can be seen in the failings of Christians, for our opponents find their ammunition in the very religion that they are attacking. We stand accused by our own standards – hoist by our own moral petard.

The point is not dress codes, diet, etc., for all these things are outward expressions of inward faith. The question is whether that faith should remain inward, or be turned outward, serving all people, for all time.

It is true that men make religions to suit themselves; but Christianity is not a man-made religion, for man-made religions tend to die with the men who made them. Religions of power and strength, even secular ones, seldom end well – but they do end; and throughout history, while the empires of this world have fallen by the wayside, “dying” Christianity continues to be reborn.

The death of Christianity has been long predicted, but as G. K. Chesterton observed in The Everlasting Man, “Christianity has died many times and risen again; for it had a God who knew the way out of the grave.”

___

Image courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.