A giant cross should be placed in every European capital

Should we negotiate with a minority ready to ruin our children in an obscene way?

To be or not to be on Gellért Hill? This question stirs up emotions in the heart of Europe, in Hungary in recent days. In South America, on the land of Brazil, in Rio de Janeiro, there is a sight that is one of the most famous in the world. The Christ the Redeemer statue, which is visible from every part of the city, and which was built on the top of Corcovado mountain. This monumental Jesus statue reaching towards the sky forms the cross, which captivates the attention of travelers approaching the city by boat and airplane, while its sight dominates the vast promenade along the coastline. The Christ statue representing the cross is clearly visible from both rich and poor quarters, and carries a clear message:

the power of Christian faith.

Millions of Christians make a pilgrimage here in their lifetime, just like Muslims to Mecca. The charm of the statue cannot be discredited by any malicious argument, while there may be no one in that continent who wants to question its existence. Not so in Hungary, where even a Jesuit monk is capable of speaking against the plan to build a cross on top of Gellért Hill in Budapest, Hungary. That is, in the middle of Europe, which is by no means a logistical mistake or exaggerated chauvinism, since in political terms Europe is located between the Atlantic coast of Portugal and the Pacific coast of Russia. In this Europe they argue about a plan to erect a cross that calls itself Christian, but at the same time visibly distances itself from its faith. In the midst of our debate, can we forget the sacrifice of our ancestors who gave their blood to preserve Europe against foreign – also spiritually foreign – invaders? How do we reconcile with this historical past when our faith has already disappeared?

When the question arises whether there should be a cross on Gellért Hill, many of the opponents have no religious convictions. So what motivates them to oppose? Obviously, they forget the not insignificant historical fact that the first crosses were taken to distant continents by missionaries from Europe. Those people, just like in South America, accepted the message of the cross, which has since given them strength, whether rich or poor.

Meanwhile, Europe has removed crosses from the walls of schools, offices, and family homes. They only did not remove them from the churches because they considered the sacred buildings themselves, while many of them have become cultural centers or Muslim prayer houses.

Obviously, the peoples who returned to their identity centuries ago are stable today, unlike Europe, the former bastion of Christianity, which is now struggling in the trap of woke ideology.

So this is why it is necessary to erect a cross in the heart of Europe, Hungary, Budapest, on top of Gellért Hill, to correct the ideological mistakes of our recent past. A cross reminds us of the martyrdom of Christ, but it also symbolizes reconciliation among people. Above all, it is a symbol of Christian values. It cannot be a source, goal, or participant of conflicts. The respect for Christian symbols is not a privilege of the “chosen ones”, but a solution representing the unity of our past, present, and future for everyone.

The cross is not just a moral compass, but an unavoidable value system.

The symbol of the crucifixion of Christ does not differentiate between religions, it does not judge, it only sympathizes if a prayer to God is not heard in a Christian church. However, it cannot symbolize senseless piety either, because those who want to tear down the crosses only prove their own human and spiritual crisis.

Of course, it may not be the best solution to have a cross on Gellért Hill. It would be much more appropriate to have a monumental basilica on the hilltop, for which a construction plan was already prepared, but was taken off the agenda, primarily due to the withdrawal of EU funds directed from Brussels. It’s strange that outraged Christian politicians do not plan mass events to silence those few, albeit loud speakers, who would not allow a cathedral, let alone a modest cross, to be erected on Gellért Hill.

For statesmen living in the mid-20th century, after the Second World War – seeing the immeasurable sacrifice and devastation – preserving and strengthening our millennia-old identity, Christian faith was natural and self-evident. (Well, where is last year’s snow?) The statesmen of the 50s and 60s, in the midst of conflicting opinions, unanimously agreed on the most important strategic issue without debate: “Europe will be Christian, or it will not be.” Since then, we have forgotten this warning. We are able to raise the issue of erecting a cross to a political level.

And if the provocation has taken shape and gained momentum, we will still not oppose it, and even ordained priests would resign from erecting the cross “for the sake of reconciliation.”

Reconciliation?! Should we negotiate with a vulgar, world-mocking minority ready to ruin our children? Not at all!

Perhaps it is time to erect a visible cross in every European capital to remind both those who keep their faith and those who want to abandon it that no matter what they do, the cross will never leave them, no matter how they try to escape from it.