Why so many Christians are self-censoring in Europe
Photo canva.com
Opinion
A growing part of the European population, and especially Christian students, are afraid of sharing their beliefs and expressing an opinion that is regarded as "offensive".
Stay up to date with Christian news in Europe? Sign up for CNE's newsletter.
"Any diversion from the accepted line means you are a bad person rather than someone who disagrees". In addition to this, it takes courage and understanding to overcome the terrible ideology behind "hate speech". "When I first came to Europe, I thought there was an unwritten law somewhere: if you believe, let it just be between you and your God."
With these words, Yusuf – one of the nine students featured in OIDAC's documentary "Self-Censored" – captures what many Christian university students feel: It's okay to be Christian, as long as you don't talk about it. His words carry weight – not only because they express a common feeling but also because Yusuf is from Nigeria and now studies in Budapest.
Since the production of this film, I have met with many Christian university students who have told me the same thing: they are afraid to share their faith for fear of negative consequences. As I started researching, I realised this fear is much more widespread than I thought. Not just Christians but a growing part of the European population is censoring itself.
Worst year on record
In Germany, for example, the annual Freedom Index found that in 2023, for the first time since the index started in the 1950s, more Germans thought it was "better to be careful" about expressing their political opinions in public than those who said they felt free to speak their minds. The number of the latter group fell from 78 per cent in the 1990s to 40 per cent in 2023.
In the university context, censorship is an even bigger problem. Disinviting or cancelling speakers and staff has become an integral part of student life. In the United States, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) has just released new research showing that 2024 was the worst year on record for free speech on campus since the survey began in the 1990s, with 164 deplatforming attempts.
The Times Higher Education academic freedom survey 2024, which surveyed 452 academics from 28 countries (most of which came from the UK), found that a full 77 per cent of respondents felt that academic freedom of speech was more restricted in their country than it was 10 years ago and 68 per cent of respondents admitted to censoring themselves, rising to even 74 per cent among women.
Young Christians are among those who are particularly affected by self-censorship. According to a recent Voice for Justice UK study, which surveyed more than 1,500 Christians in the country, only 36 per cent of younger respondents said they felt free to express their views on sensitive issues at work or in other public places. But what exactly do those who self-censor fear?
Causing offence
There could be many answers to this question. Still, one in particular struck me: When asked why they censor themselves, respondents from surveys in Germany, the UK, and various other countries all said they feared being seen as "offensive."
Among the younger generation, this fear might be attributed to a greater sensitivity to the emotional needs of others and a desire to avoid hurting someone's feelings. However, according to a recent study, even among professors, "fear of causing offence" was one of the main reasons for censoring their views on specific issues.
"Causing offence" has become a question of morality. One of the professors who responded to the recent Times Higher Education survey put it well when he pointed out that "any diversion from the accepted line is seen as meaning you are a bad person rather than just someone who disagrees".
For Christians, this dynamic is particularly challenging. We hate being seen as a bad person. Knowing that we are called to witness God's love, most try to avoid being seen as hateful or offensive at all costs. But what do we do when the Bible is labelled as hate speech?
The Bible as "hate speech"
For many students, the harm of feeling offended by what someone else says is not just a question of morality but something that should be sanctioned. Indeed, students are increasingly calling for university authorities to enforce speech restrictions and for sanctions against those who do not comply. According to a recent study by King's College, 41 per cent of students agreed that academics who teach material that offends some students should be sacked.
The main problem with this demand is that "offence" is based entirely on subjective experience. Those pushing for restrictions on offensive speech usually see nothing but their feelings as the standard "offence" should be defined.
One of the students who succeeded in shutting down an Oxford University debate about abortion argued in the Independent that "the idea that in a free society, absolutely everything should be open to debate has a detrimental effect on marginalised groups. (…) As a student, I asserted that [this debate] would make me feel threatened in my university."
Another problem is that some of these highly subjective concepts, such as "causing distress" or committing "hate speech," are not defined but have nevertheless been introduced into criminal law by many states, against all good legal practice.
While Western states fought hard against these concepts when Communist states pushed them during the drafting of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, today, there seems to be nothing left of this determined fight for freedom of expression.
Indeed, the concept of "hate speech", as currently promoted by international institutions, has little or nothing to do with the Declaration's compromise to limit restrictions on speech to that which incites imminent violence.
The Council of Europe, for example, states in a handbook on hate speech that "[hate speech] does not necessarily manifest itself through the expression of hatred or emotions. It can also be concealed in statements which at first glance may seem rational or normal". In a similarly absurd proposal, the EU Fundamental Rights Agency called for a binding instrument to effectively combat "expressions of negative opinions against LGBT people," deemed "hate speech".
Dr Joe Wenke, an author and contributor to HuffPost, even argued that the way Christian organisations use the word family "as an exclusively heterosexual social unit" and "the phrase 'traditional family values' is itself a form of hate speech".
In light of these developments, it is hardly surprising that Whitestone Insights found in a 2023 survey that 23 per cent of Brits between the ages of 18 and 34 expressed support for a ban on the general sale of the Bible "unless the offending parts" that "some perceive as hate speech" can be edited out.
Nor should we be particularly surprised by the fact that some Christians have been investigated and even prosecuted for alleged "hate speech" when expressing their religious views in public.
Speak the truth
With an increasing number of countries passing ambiguous and ill-defined "hate speech" laws, the EU is preparing a similarly ill-defined law to restrict "disinformation" and other "harmful material" online. When a generation wants to be protected from emotional distress rather than be challenged by differing viewpoints, there are many challenges to navigate as we seek to share the Gospel and speak the truth in today's societies.
However, none of these challenges are insurmountable. As we can see from current developments in the U.S., restrictions on speech can be lifted almost as quickly as they are imposed. But more than that, the thirst and receptivity of the human heart for truth is not so easily quenched. The past has taught us that even the most terrible ideologies can be overcome. For this, understanding the blindness of our times is a necessary step. So is courage.
Related Articles
