Fr Jacques Hamel

The murder of Fr Jacques Hamel as he celebrated Mass with the congregation in the church of Saint-Etienne-du-Rouvray near Rouen shocked decent people of all faiths in many parts of the world. The age of the priest, and especially the fact that he was killed while standing at the altar of the church while presiding at the Eucharist, have added to the outrage. It is right that people have been horrified, but there are also grounds to reflect carefully on our reactions.

We live in a world in which religiously motivated violence seems increasingly endemic. The confluence, and at times the confusion, of religious, racial, cultural, and political identity, the complexities of history in post-colonial societies, and the economic, political, and military conflicts of the present day have undoubtedly all contributed to the toxic and volatile climate in which such crimes are even conceivable. As we struggle to understand what has happened, we must not overlook the fact that “we”, i.e. Christians, are not the only victims.

What took place at Saint-Etienne-du-Rouvray, however horrific, was not an isolated or unique event. Similar atrocities have been perpetrated against other Christians in many parts of Asia, and in some parts of Africa, all too frequently in recent years. We need to consider very carefully why the persecution of Christians outside Europe is not merely of less interest to the media, but why the media judge the murder of Christians and the destruction of church buildings to be of less interest to us than when the victim is a white man. Attacks against Jews are a shameful, bloody, and recurring stain on Christian history, and one which elements in western secular society have been all too willing to continue. Violence against Muslims has become increasingly prevalent in Europe, North America, Australia, Israel-Palestine, and in Burma, Sri Lanka, and China. These attacks, including those which end in the deaths of religious and community leaders, of the elderly or of children, receive little attention in the media. We need to ask why these lives are calculated to be of little value to subscribers.

There have been strident calls for greater “security” for church buildings, and “vetting” of those who come for worship. This can never be. The Church is not a Masonic Lodge or a private club which can restrict admission to members and carefully scrutinised and specially invited guests. Insofar as a Synagogue may have these characteristics, this is on account of the ethnic dimension to Jewish identity which, however ambiguous, nevertheless provides a rationale for restricting access to meetings of the community. The Church is a universal community, of which the local congregation is a manifestation; all Christians are members of the same body, and the SEC in particular is committed to being welcoming and inclusive: the Rector holds the keys to open the doors to all people, as the liturgy of Institution states quite clearly.

The dedication of Fr Hamel’s church, Saint-Etienne – St Stephen, the first Christian martyr, provides a further and important clue. The Church is in the world to bear witness to the Gospel of Christ. This requires that all are welcome to hear the Gospel proclaimed, and nobody is excluded from Christian worship. There have been times when the Church has excluded non-Christians, and also unbaptised catechumens and seekers or enquirers, from the Eucharist, but never from the proclamation of the Word which precedes the celebration of the sacrament. The vulnerability of open doors and an unqualified welcome to all is a non-negotiable part of our Christian vocation. St Stephen was the first of many, and it is through their witness that God’s Church has been built.