EU: Catholic construct or anti-Christian interference?

It should surprise nobody that the Tory MP Bill Cash has criticised Peter Sutherland's recent Heythrop lecture in which the latter argued Christians should support the EU (The Tablet, 26 October).

Cash was once described as the 'most eurosceptic' MP by Kenneth Clarke, one of the Conservative Party's more pro-European voices.

It is not the first time by any means that these prominent Catholics have crossed swords on the matter. As far back as 1988, in an article in The Times, Cash criticised Sutherland (then a Commissioner of the then-EEC) for claiming Europe was on its way to a federal formation.

At the heart of this latest round of conflict, however, is something less political and more theological. Cash is a proud Catholic, and is clear that his faith informs his politics. Accordingly, the idea that his faith should lead him towards advocating the EU, a cause he has opposed for decades, was sure to provoke some reaction. If nothing else, Sutherland's lecture has succeeded in what, one suspects, might have been its primary goal - a new debate has arisen, not a sterile economic debate but an interesting new one, particularly as MPs consider an in-out referendum: how should Christians respond to Europe?

One point in Sutherland's favour is an appeal to history. The early process of European integration was led by Catholic politicians - the likes of Konrad Adenauer, Alcide De Gasperi, Robert Schuman and Jean Monnet, who were not shy of expressing their Catholic motivations. Take De Gasperi: 'How could we conceptualise a European construction without taking into account the Christian element; how could we ignore the lessons of fraternity, unity, and social value that stem from it?'

It is those 'lessons' - a Union founded on the principles of supporting human equality, dignity and 'solidarity' - which seem most to inform Sutherland's understanding of what the EU stands for.

Cash's opposition seems to be based more on the practical consequences than on the ideological underpinnings. Back in a 1994 in a Catholic Herald article he warned of the eugenic policies of Europe on issues like abortion. Recent developments seem to support his view - on stem-cell research and abortion the EU has consistently gone against the main Catholic positions.

Cash's bigger opposition though, seems rooted in the very simple idea that he doesn't see why the EU should interfere in Britain. The centralising nature of the institutions is undemocratic and undermines British sovereignty. There is nothing Christian, for Cash, in depriving people of jobs due to European economic failings, or provoking the rise of the far right.

Herein lies the real tension of the debate. Sutherland tells Christians that, ideologically, the values of Europe correspond to Christian values - as the founders of the European project also argued. Cash on the other hand points to the failings of that ideology in practical terms. These failings, for Cash, amount to a holding back of Christians.

This tension between values and actuality is a familiar one in all politics. In recent EU debates in the UK it is the practical side that has dominated - questioning the efficacy of European economic policies and immigration laws.

It is about time values and ideology got a chance to make their case. In this regard Christianity clearly has a lot to say. Cash for all his 'euro-realism' has not yet properly engaged with Christian 'euro-idealism', and until he does so his case is not nearly as strong as he seems to believe it to be. Policies and practical effects can be addressed and changed; idealism and values are far trickier foes for the Euro-realists to deal with.

Ben Ryan is a research trainee at the Theos public affairs thinktank