Not another superpower

Where is Europe going today? asks Diarmuid Martin, Archbishop of Dublin. What are the signs of hope? Which are the signs which should cause us concern? On what principles will the Europe of the future base its values? What will be the contribution of faith and of men and women of faith to the construction of those values?

 Pope John Paul II, in Ecclesia in Europa, was moderately optimistic and hopeful in his analysis of some of the positive developments in Europe in recent years.
The first was reconciliation between countries which had been hostile and the progressive opening to the counties of Eastern Europe. This in its turn has led to what Pope John Paul called the creation of a European consciousness. This concept and culture of Europe, the Pope would note, draws from the fact that Europe must “be described as more than a geographical area, primarily as a cultural and historical concept, which denotes a reality born as a continent thanks also to the unifying force of Christianity, which has been capable of integrating people and cultures among themselves”.
The idea of a European consciousness was taken up in a talk given in 1991 by Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who spoke of the “the prestige of the idea of Europe”. Ratzinger also noted that, in our day, the ideal of Europe had become blunted.
Pope John Paul and his successor Pope Benedict XVI are both convinced Europeans. But this does not mean that they embrace any vision of Europe or that they are not aware of “the contradictions of history” or are uncritical of certain current expressions of the European ideal.
In Ecclesia in Europa, Pope John Paul had made a direct appeal to those who at the time were drawing up the European Constitutional treaty, as he had done in speaking to the Diplomatic Corps accredited to the Holy See earlier in 2003. He asked that the Constitutional treaty contain “a reference to the religious and in particular the Christian heritage of Europe”. This request was answered in part. There is reference – despite the initial objection of some countries – to the religious heritage, but not explicitly to the Christian heritage. The text does refer to the contribution of Churches to the construction of Europe – and only Christians have Churches!
It is useful to recall that the rejection of this appeal for an explicit mention of the Christian heritage of Europe was not some sort of a pan-European plot against religion, but de facto the result of the rigid and immoveable objection principally of one European nation.
In Ecclesia in Europa Pope John Paul did not make an explicit request for the inclusion of a mention of God in the Constitutional treaty.
Pope John Paul did mention a further series of values which the Union should address. One was respect for human rights, of individuals, minorities and peoples. The European Union considers respect for human rights as a fundamental foundational principle of its existence and policy. The difficulty here is to understand what is covered under the term “human rights”, and where human rights are grounded, especially in a period where juridical culture is dominated in Europe and elsewhere by legal positivism and by individualism.
This applies in particular to the right to life from the moment of its conception to natural death and to the family based on marriage. There is no doubt that decisions of both political and juridical organs of the European Union can be greatly influenced by ideological visions, but again it is often the case that these visions are present due to the strong influence of individual member states, which at times look on such an understanding of human rights as part of national policy.
The viewpoint of the Church enjoys a stronger adherence within the culture of some individual states than in the Union itself and it is feared that the European Union structures might be used to undermine such national cultures.
Recent events show that, with or without a European Union, individual countries can overnight radically change their policy on issues such as those of marriage and family.
There should be a greater alertness on national level – both within government and within civil society – in monitoring mechanisms of the Union if they push to a standardisation of issues and values which perhaps goes beyond the specific competence or mandate of the Union itself.
The structures of the European Union still have a democratic deficit, although efforts are being made to remedy this. In the interim period, not only are strong monitoring mechanisms required to identify overreach of competence but there is need to push for a priority option for subsidiarity rather than for centralisation, a priority option for what has been democratically established over the power of non-elected bureaucrats.
Europe has responsibilities worldwide. I have said on many occasions that it is not the task of the European Union to become a “mini superpower”, but to be maxi and super in its spirit of solidarity. I quote Pope John Paul: “Europe must moreover become an active partner in promoting and implementing globalisation ‘in' solidarity”. That programme requires a different style to that of a superpower. There is however a growing tendency of the EU in international negotiations to adopt some of the trappings of a superpower, especially in trade negotiations. Once again, the EU positions in trade negotiations, especially in agriculture and textiles and intellectual property rights, are very often subject of pressure from national governments and national interest groups. The Union is often held back from more enlightened positions by national interest.
What is the role of Christians in forming the new Europe? The first thing is that they be present, that they bring their voice to the table and ensure that it is heard.
This task should be undertaken with renewed vigour –also in an ecumenical context – by the Church as an institution and by individual Christians exercising their mission as lay persons in the structures of society.
It may not the task of the European Institutions themselves to build that religious dimension, but they should ensure that mechanisms are there to facilitate the contribution of religion and of believers and not become an obstacle.
The Gospel can elicit a new enthusiasm within Europe and bring a message of hope. All European Christians can make a contribution to this process. Christians, within Europe, have a responsibility to work to build a body of legislation which is consonant with the moral law and where possible to correct morally-defective laws.
The first step on this path is to stress the good news in the conviction that it is true and leads to freedom. The task is to challenge society anywhere with the message of Jesus Christ and the radical newness of his Gospel. A genuinely pluralistic system will not exclude religion from bringing its contribution to the public square, nor will it unfairly exclude from the public square those who profess their religious convictions openly.
On the other hand, the Church has no mandate to attempt to generally impose on believers – much less on those who do not believe – specific political solutions. The Church can only propose what is derived from her Gospel mandate and the founded tradition of the Church.
The role of the Christian in Europe is not simply to ascertain sociologically what are the current value systems of European citizens, but to influence European public opinion, to evangelise it, that is to bring to the emerging European society, together with its member states and component societies, that radical newness of the gospel.
Christians however can only use the instruments that are available and appropriate in this specific context, namely democratic means.
Diarmuid Martin is the Catholic Archbishop of Dublin and Primate of Ireland. This is the edited text of his speech to a public seminar at All Hallows College in Dublin on 26 September 2005
∏More The complete text, ‘The Future of Europe-Challenges for Faith and Values', is available at www.dublindiocese.ie