The Old Rugged Cross: Ban or Cherish
Readers of Vista can hardly be unaware that over the last five years or so, the wearing of a cross in public or the displaying of a crucifix on the walls of a public school, hospital or office has become a focus for social policy legislators in a number of European countries.
It may be too early to predict future trends, but an anticipated ruling from the European Court of Human Rights about a pending Italian case will prove important to the ongoing debate. Lawyers from the EU countries with significant Roman Catholic majorities have made representations to the EU and the Council of Europe about these issues, touching as they do on the question of Church and State and questions of individual liberties in addition to secularisation.
In our last issue we investigated the banning of the wearing of burqas in public. There may be religious motivations for taking such measures but in most cases they are inspired by concerns to maintain a secular and level (so it is argued) playing field. This has also been extended to Christian religious symbolism in the public spaces of Europe and both crosses (plain) and crucifixes (adorned) have been banned for a variety of reasons. In some instances, health and safety reasons have been cited where the cross or crucifix is carried on a necklace.
Europeans may be willing to accept the banning of religious symbols in public as a way of avoiding the religious conflicts they are believed to provoke. But, when a Jewish lawyer advocates for the retention of a crucifix in an Italian classroom, Europe’s policy makers have to ask themselves whether a simplistic analysis of ‘fear of religious conflict’ is an adequate defense for removing all religious symbols from the public square. A more nuanced response is overdue.
Common arguments for retaining crosses
It reinforces national and cultural identity.
It confers similar rights to the wearing of Islamic and Sikh headdresses.
It is a symbol of ‘universal’ values.
Common arguments for banning crosses
Wearing them poses a health & safety risk.
Wearing them contravenes existing dress codes.
Displaying them in public buildings infringes individual freedoms.
Displaying them is inappropriate for a secular, non-confessional state
Darrell Jackson