I’ve had a little ongoing dialogue with commenter “DNW” on this previous thread about eastern Europe vs. western Europe and the “migrants.” You can find the start of our back-and-forth here; just start reading and scroll down if you want to follow it closely.

But right now I just want to take up one small part of what we discussed, and that is my answer to DNW’s question:

How does [Merkel] ground that “obligation” [to take in all refugees] and where did she source it? Die Bibel? Nein? Wo dann?

A portion of my answer was as follows:

They ground it in guilt, some idea of human rights [the elevation of migration to a “human right”], leftism, anti-nationalism, and in some cases the Christian religion (that may be part of what’s going on with Merkel, who is a clergyman’s daughter; see this). Perhaps it’s just rhetoric, but Merkel has said it’s her duty as head of a Christian party.

The whole idea of a “Christian Party” is foreign to us in this country. But parties with the word “Christian” in the name are rather common in Europe and have a long history, mostly involving Catholicism. Their history is not the subject matter of this post, either, although it’s certainly an interesting one. Suffice to say that in recent years they have become markedly more secular, along with the whole of Europe and especially western Europe.

However, as with the watering-down of certain Christian denominations in this country, some of the “social justice” aspects of the religions remain, in somewhat distorted form from their original intent. The distortions are introduced by leftism, so it’s hard to say where a nominal religiosity leaves off and the leftism begins (or vice versa).

I’ve written previously about the Christian religion and the migrants here, in a more general sense. In that post I advanced some arguments as to why I believe that Christianity does not dictate the taking-in of all comers.

But back to Merkel. This article has an interesting take on the influence of religion on Merkel (comments in brackets are mine):

Merkel, herself the daughter of a Lutheran pastor, has explicitly countered the growing fear of Islam in Germany with the argument that, rather than fretting about other religions, Christian Germans should return to their roots and take their own faith more seriously. Rather than suspect Muslims of fanaticism for knowing the Koran by heart, they should take some inspiration from the example and firm up on the Bible. Merkel sees both Islam and Christianity as having a place in Germany and as springs of moral conduct. As some observers have put it, it is almost as if, after years of tranquilizing citizens through a carefully calculated politics of consensus, she has thrown down a moral challenge to her own people—and, in particular, for the 61 percent of Germans who identify as Christians actually to live their faith [or her idea of the Christian faith and its dictates re migrants].

Germany’s Catholic and Protestant churches—still of considerable political importance in the country—have tried to heed the call. The archbishop of Cologne has celebrated Merkel as a “Christian politician with a heart” and offered unconditional support of her policies. But some in Merkel’s own party have opposed her Willkommenskultur (culture of welcome): the chair of the “Working Group of Engaged Catholics in the CDU” has declared that an “uncontrolled influx of refugees” was “not Christian.”…

Merkel has been most harshly criticized by Catholics (and it was Catholics who, in the recent state elections, opted for internal CDU critics of Merkel’s course, whereas Protestants tended to give their vote to Greens and Social Democrats, who support her). Some Protestants, meanwhile, think Merkel might be renewing Christian Democracy on the basis of a specifically Protestant sensibility. The theologian Rainer Bucher has credited her with a “sober Christian realism” that takes on the challenges of violent global conflict and exploitative global capitalism.

You may be of the opinion that Merkel’s brand of Christianity is fake and just a screen for a social justice agenda destructive to nationalism (and even Christianity) in Europe. But if so, she certainly uses religion in the service of taking in the so-called migrants.

You may also think that Christianity in Europe is dead as a doornail—as does commenter “Cicero” in that same thread. My reply to him was as follows:

…Christianity in Western Europe is nothing like as common or as strong as it used to be. But it is not nothing. This is what I wrote:

Western Europe has had a very strong Christian sensibility until recently and many western Europeans still do, although far fewer than in the past.

I never said that many Western Europeans had anything like the religiosity these countries used to have. Nor did I say many of them were regular churchgoers. I chose the word “sensibility” carefully. I meant a general Christian self-identity, which does not necessarily include devoutness.

If you want to learn something about religious observance in western Europe, see this, for example. 81% of western Europeans were raised Christian and 71% consider themselves currently Christian. 22% attend services at least monthly. It affects their politics, too (which, after all, is the subject matter of my post):

…[I]f it sounds like Christian is a term with loose daily-life significance in Europe, that’s not the case. The Pew study included nearly 12,000 non-practicing Christians and found that self-identifying as a Christian—even among those who rarely participate in religious services—was still a “meaningful marker” in Western Europe.

“It is not just a ‘nominal’ identity devoid of practical importance,” stated Pew researchers. “On the contrary, the religious, political and cultural views of non-practicing Christians often differ from those of church-attending Christians and religiously unaffiliated adults.”

Non-practicing Christians generally do not believe in God as described in the Bible, but do generally hold positive views of church institutions. They also express nationalist sentiments, though Western European churchgoers have stronger views on both counts. Among Christians in every country analyzed, more said they are very proud to be a citizen of their nation (50% median) than said they were very proud to be a Christian (33% median).

There is no question, of course, that in the US there is a greater percentage of religiously observant Christians. And there is no doubt that in western Europe religious observance has fallen precipitously. I have actually written about that topic several times on this blog (see this, for an example).

So it depends on how religious affiliation is defined, but it is clear that as Europeans themselves define their religious connections and beliefs, those connections and beliefs affect their politics and in particular their feelings of nationalism, which in turn almost certainly affect their attitudes towards the “migrants.”

[NOTE: This post was originally on my older blog and had comments, but unfortunately the comments didn’t transfer over here.]