One pope, two churches: Refugees, human rights and religion in Croatia and Italy

Abstract

This article analyses the responses of the Catholic Church in Croatia and Italy to the refugee crisis, particularly the churches’ discourses on human rights issues and positions in public debates on refugees and migrants. Although both Catholic churches followed the Church’s teachings on ‘strangers’, associated with providing concrete help to people in need, the Catholic Church in Croatia pursued what can be classified as a charitable approach, while the Catholic Church in Italy followed solidarity and utilitarian approaches. Equally, the Catholic Church in Croatia remained a silent public actor in the refugee crisis, while the Catholic Church in Italy became a prominent actor in public debates, engaging with human rights discourses. The selective and ambivalent uses of human rights discourses emerged as a factor in understanding these two churches’ different positions on refugees and migrants.

Measuring the Social Perception of Religious Freedom: A Sociological Perspective

“…The normative and legal nature of rights distanced sociology from engagement with human rights research until recently (Somers and Roberts 2008;Morgan 2009;Breskaya et al 2018). However, exactly from the study on human rights and religion through approaching the topics of gender, peacebuilding, and legal pluralism (Possamai et al 2015;Durham and Clark 2015;Giordan and Zrinščak 2018;Giordan and Breskaya 2018), the sociological dimensions of religious freedom analysis are evolving focused on pluralism policies, interfaith dialogue, empowerment of women, and sustainable development.…”

What a Difference Does Time Make? Framing Media Discourse on Refugees and Migrants in Croatia in Two Periods

“…This route, called "the Balkan route", opened when the Hungarian government decided to close its border with Serbia and lasted until March 2016, when Macedonian government closed its border with Greece (D'Angelo et al, 2017). In the case of Croatia, 658,068 refugees entered its territory between 16 September 2015 and 5 March 2016 (Šelo Šabić & Borić, 2016;Giordan & Zrinščak, 2018). During this phase, the priority of both refugees and the Government was to ensure their speedy and safe transit through Croatia.…”

“…Humanitarianism developed as a reflection of invisibility of migrants due to the so-called closed transit system the Croatian authorities provided, which prevented almost any contact between refugees and the Croatian population (Čapo, 2015). With some notable examples, civil society organizations, including various religious organizations, worked in complete silence, providing humanitarian help and not framing themselves as public actors on behalf of migrants/refugees and their rights (Giordan & Zrinščak, 2018. ) Hence, it is relevant that the perception of immigrant workers and asylum seekers as threats were recorded even before large scale public encounters with migrants and refugees since 2015 (e.g.…”

“…Positive articles were those taking the standpoint of humanitarianism. They referred to humanitarian aid and empathy towards refugees, issuing messages of tolerance and promoting values of multiculturalism, especially those associated with Pope's words and actions (Giordan & Zrinščak, 2018). The positive examples include: "We have proven ourselves in action by helping refugees" (U pomaganju izbjeglicama dokazali smo se na djelu); 8 "Croatia will support the new EU plan of acceptance 160,000 refugees" (Hrvatska će podržati novi plan EU za prihvat 160.000 izbjeglica).…”

Cibo e rifugiati nella città capitolina, tra pratiche di emergenza e tentativi di agentività

“…Per quanto riguarda il tema di rifugiati e richiedenti asilo in ambito socioantropologico, a livello internazionale si possono individuare alcune linee direttrici: 1) gli studi seminali di Harrell-Bond sui limiti del cosiddetto humanitarianism (Harrell-Bond, Voutira 1992, Harrell-Bond 2005, le ricerche di Liisa Malkki sulle forme di intervento umanitario (Malkki 1996 con lo scenario di Rwanda e Burundi e Malkki 1995a con lo scenario dei rifugiati in Tanzania) e la disanima critica sulla ragione umanitaria di Fassin e di Mariella Pandolfi (Fassin e Pandolfi 2010;Fassin 2012); 2) le difficoltà dell'Europa nel rispondere alle continue "crisi di rifugiati" (Green 2013;Facchini 2018) espresse da un respingimento di persone in aree a rischio attraverso accordi con regimi repressivi che minano la tradizione umanitaria europea (Webber 2017;Schiocchet 2018); 3) una ricerc-azione su forme di advocacy in favore di rifugiati e richiedenti asilo (Taran et al 2016) e movimenti di visibilità messi in atto da parte di rifugiati (Napuli 2015 e Borri 2017 su Berlino); 4) ricerche su accampamenti informali (Agier 2018 sulla Jungle a Calais; Queirolo Palmas 2017 sulla bulle a Parigi; Martinelli a Roma, 2008), su campi di rifugiati (Terzioglu 2018;Melissa Wall et al 2017) e sugli hotspots (Dimitriadi 2017 per la Grecia; Sciurba 2017 sulla Sicilia); 5) la criminalizzazione della solidarietà da un lato (Liz Fekete 2018) e la risposta delle Chiese e di parte della società civile dall'altro (Giordan, Zrinsčǎk 2018;Schmidt, Palutan 2018). Infine, vanno rilevate proposte costruttive come quelle di Stefano Allievi relative alla necessità di un ritorno alla ragionevolezza nella gestione della questione migratoria riaprendo canali regolari e sottraendo il settore alle mafie transnazionali (Allievi 2018) e riflessioni impietose come quelle di Zygmunt Bauman che assegna agli stranieri venuti da lontano il compito di ricordarci in modo esasperante quanto sia fragile il nostro benessere (Bauman 2016) 2 .…”