The theme of Marcello Pera’s Why We Should Call Ourselves Christians is that the modern, liberal, secular state that holds the individual’s rights as a given commits suicide if it forgets its religious foundation.
In the first chapter, Pera, a self-proclaimed atheist and president of the Italian Senate from 2001 to 2006, notes that in Europe a liberal is what in America would be called a conservative and what is called liberalism in America is called socialism in Europe. Modern European liberalism, he writes, is an apostasy from Christianity and is identified with secularism. Both of these phenomena are vestiges of anti-clericalism (some of it well-deserved; some not). The fathers of liberalism , among whom he counts John Locke, Immanuel Kant and Thomas Jefferson, all agreed that Christianity was the highest form of religion, despite their deism, and “Basic human rights must be seen as the gift of God, to use Jefferson’s phrase.”
This is something Europe has forgotten:
The main flaw of liberalism today is that it has retreated into a solely political and procedural dimension and has forgotten that it is also a tradition with a rich, specific ethical content rooted in European and American history — a history of which Christianity is an essential part. Modernity has resisted and waged war against the Church, while feeding abundantly on its Christian heritage. Its very exaltation of the individual pays secular homage to the Christian message that man was created by God in order to discover the truth about himself and the world.
Pera, who teaches at the Pontifical Lateran University in Rome, distinguishes between American and European understandings of liberalism:
In Europe, liberals favor the limiting of governmental powers, the autonomy of civil society, and the noninterference of the state in the market. They promote intermediary institutions and prize individual liberty above all. In America, liberals today either oppose all these freedoms of favor restricting and regimenting them for “the common good.” In Europe, where the state is padre padrone (father and master), liberals see it as the adversary. In America, where the state was traditionally viewed as a necessary evil, liberals now often see it as an ally. Politically speaking, liberals in Europe tend to the right, while in America they tend to the left. The European equivalent for the American term “liberal” is “socialist,” while the American equivalent for the European term “liberal” is “conservative.”
Pera describes how European philosophers and politicians have tried to forge European unity on the basis of anything but religion, mostly through such ideas as constitutional patriotism, a definition of which, he says, its proponents have not even been able to agree upon.
In the third chapter, he shows how, up to a point, multiculturalism is a good idea; but if the country trying it out does not have a strong sense of its own culture, it will wither in the face of stronger cultures. And besides, it doesn’t work — the minority cultures end up in their own ghettos, unwilling to integrate their religion into a workable civil relationship with the main culture. We have to be able to recognize and say that Western liberal culture is better than ones in which there is polygamy, female genital mutilation, and no respect for religious freedom and individual dignity.
In the end, Pera says, Europe must choose.
“As the history of liberalism and modernity shows, the Christian choice to give oneself to God, or to act, velut si Deus daretur, as if God existed, has yielded the best results.”
The only part he leaves out of his argument, though, is why Europe needs to be united in the first place. Europe would be less prone to turmoil if it practiced what it used to preach, but does that mean it has to have a common currency and parliament?
Despite this missing element, Pera’s book is well worth reading for anyone interested in the political situation in Europe these days.
Register correspondent Franklin Freeman writes from Saco, Maine.
WHY WE SHOULD CALL OURSELVES CHRISTIANS
The Religious Roots of Free Societies
By Marcello Pera
Translated by L. B. Lappin
Preface by Pope Benedict XVI
Encounter Books, 2011
220 pages, $23.95
To order: EncounterBooks.com
(800) 786-3839
SDG: The Quran, the Bible & the Flying Spaghetti Monster
Jimmy Akin: Are Babies Atheists?
Comments
Post a Comment
It seems that Satan’s chief MO is to resemble as closely as possible what Jesus came to bring to humanity…UNITY and PEACE and FORGIVENESS…!!! The ‘ONE WORLD ORDER’ movement, on its surface, seems very Christian, but I believe its main roots are in Satan…and the results of its spread are dissension, polarization of groups, chaos, denial of One God, secularism which exalts the state over humans, and breakdown of the family…!!! Christianity from the time of Christ has always been counter cultural, and still is today. Blessed Pope John Paul II explained it best with his ‘culture of death’ writings and sermons…!!!
If he truly is an atheist, “to act as if god existed” is stupid beyond belief. As an atheist, I seek truth wherever it leads. Would iit be nice with a god?sure. Should we “pretend”? Not so much.
It’s very interesting that a self-proclaimed atheist is doing what a titular or practising Christian should do! This sure tells us that God and the God-Nature is in everybody, whether we like it or not. I quite agree that the obvious choice is for the Christian to ‘give oneself to God’. However, it is quite unfortunate that in many Christian countries of today, especially in Europe, Christianity and Christian beliefs have fallen flat and have been consigned away as ‘one of those fables told by our grandmothers’. Today, the various European States want to be politically correct and hence stop Christians from showing those signs that make them Christian and would rather allow the immigrating religions to hold sway! The Muslim usually says that Islam is a way of life; would many Christians say Christianity is a way of life? I doubt. An European airline had stopped a passenger from wearing a necklace with a crucifix pendant since such was revolting to people of other religions! Serious self-examination is urgently needed; Christianity should be the religion and our way of life. Period.
Rover serton,
I agree with you. The essence of things is defined by it’s purpose and end. This is classical natural law theory. Pope Benedict sees the natural law as the common ground between religious believers and secular rationalists.
One does not have to believe in God to acknowledge we live in a physical world.
There are no natural rights without a natural law.
http://libertylawsite.org/liberty-forum/natural-law-natural-rights-and-private-property/
“The only part he leaves out of his argument, though, is why Europe needs to be united in the first place. Europe would be less prone to turmoil if it practiced what it used to preach, but does that mean it has to have a common currency and parliament?”
## Been there, done that. Europe had centuries to try out being Christian - and very bloody and violent they were. It is anything but clear that going back to Christianity would make things significantly better than they are now; only the problems in society would change - for ther would still be problems. It’s very natural that people should back with longing to the past, and as natural that they should idealise it. Such fantasies would their attractiveness quickly enough, if they became reality, because they would always disappoint. Both Communism & Nazism are based on such fantasies - once they became realities in society, they turned out to be hells on earth.
“As the history of liberalism and modernity shows, the Christian choice to give oneself to God, or to act, velut si Deus daretur, as if God existed, has yielded the best results.”
—————————————————————————————
## This is trifling with God. “He who would come to God must believe that He exists, and is a Rewarder of them that seek Him” (Hebrews 11). One cannot live the life of faith, let alone bring forth its fruits, if one has no faith in God, as revealed in Christ, to begin with. To attempt to do so, is irreligious to the core. And is certainly not “seeking truth where it leads.”
His stance would be more understandable if he was not ...‘a self-proclaimed atheist’...so much as a self-proclaimed agnostic!
Atheists have closed minds. They choose to ignore so much scientific evidence, and compelling philosophical arguments (if they are capable of understanding them) that for many Catholic scientists and thinkers build up their faith.
He probably forwards his argument, realizing that any democracy built on true Christian values would be extremely civilized and of course be very socially responsible.
I imagine his book is written in fear of a Europe he sees losing those essential values..(lost already!)
He can see that compared to cultures based on other religions, especially Islamic societies, Christian values have led to the tolerance that underpins his brand of liberalism.
No doubt he is also aware how so far in history every strictly secular system has proved to be grim and far from ‘liberal’ indeed.
The way it is going Europe’s future will be far from liberal. I think Christianity will face much persecution in my lifetime in the so called liberal European democracies, and even in America.
Well Marcello Pera should wake up..ask himself why is it that Christianity gave us more humane societies..in his words the best.. and consider the honest answer..because maybe Christianity is true!
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give The National Catholic Register permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.