Last week’s momentous ruling [1] by the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights in 
the Italy v Lautsi case, which found in favour of Italy’s right to continue to place crucifixes in its State classrooms turned partly on the Court’s finding that Council of Europe member states have a “wide margin of appreciation” when it came to sensitive cultural matters.
This had been one of the points that the Italian government had argued before the Court. But the Italians also argued a number of other interesting points.
One of these was that the crucifix was a symbol which could be interpreted in a number of ways, including as “the symbol of the principles and values which formed the basis of democracy and western civilisation”.
To back this up, counsel for Italy referred to a judgement of the Italian Administrative Court in respect of the Lautsi case, a judgement to which the Grand Chamber ruling refers extensively.
The Administrative Court’s ruling is rather remarkable, as it displays a deep appreciation of the importance of Christianity in creating contemporary society. It is worth quoting at length.
At the outset, the Court notes that Christians have “placed tolerance towards others and protection of human dignity at the centre of their faith”.
It goes on to point out that “Christianity…..through its strong emphasis placed on love for one’s neighbour, and even more through the explicit predominance given to charity over faith itself, contains in substance those ideas of tolerance, equality and liberty which form the basis of the modern secular State, and of the Italian State in particular”.
The Court, displaying a rare amount of historical insight, discerns “a thread linking the Christian revolution of two thousand years ago to the affirmation in Europe of the right to liberty of the person and to the key elements in the Enlightenment (even though that movement, historically speaking, strongly opposed religion), namely the liberty and freedom of every person, the declaration of the rights of man, and ultimately the modern secular State”.
In other words, the Italian Administrative Court is making the point that the supposedly modern values of tolerance, inclusion and liberty, and even the secular state itself, are in fact inconceivable without Christianity.
Sensitive students of history, and of European civilisation in particular, know this already, of course.
But it is refreshing to see that leading jurists in a leading European country are familiar with such historical fact.