Finland is now openly persecuting Christians

Finnish MP Päivi Räsänen, who served as Finland’s interior minister from 2011 to 2015, | Alliance Defending Freedom International

The 18th-century Christian hymn “Be Still, My Soul” is a cherished favorite of my family. The lyrics are a comforting reminder that a loving and sovereign God both sees and understands what troubles us and will set all things right in His time.

The hymn is set to the tune “Finlandia” by Sibelius. I hummed this to myself to quiet the rage I felt when reading the news that Finland’s Supreme Court criminally convicted Päivi Räsänen and Bishop Juhana Pohjola on March 26.

The irony was so thick I could have choked on it.

Räsänen, a member of the Finnish Parliament, and Pohjola, a bishop of the Lutheran Church, were charged as criminals under the “war crimes and crimes against humanity” section of Finland’s criminal code for writing and publishing a pamphlet for church members more than 20 years ago, when Finland was considering redefining marriage.

The prosecution began in 2019 when Räsänen tweeted Romans 1:24–27 to question her church’s decision to sponsor the Helsinki Pride Parade. What followed was a grueling criminal investigation into her past statements, including hours upon hours of interrogation at the hands of the state.

She was criminally charged for the tweet, in addition to the 2004 church pamphlet and a 2019 radio discussion. Pohjola, who published the pamphlet for their church, was charged alongside her. Notably, the pamphlet was written years before the enactment of the law under which Räsänen and Pohjola were prosecuted.

Both the trial and appellate courts acquitted the two unanimously. The Finnish Supreme Court upheld the acquittals related to the tweet but, by a 3–2 vote, convicted both for publishing the pamphlet. (The acquittal for the radio show stood because it was not appealed.) While it is just that the acquittals have been upheld, the vigor with which the state pursued the entire case is cause for great alarm. The relentless fervor of the prosecution reveals the extent to which our Western democracies are comfortable punishing views that differ from the elite orthodoxy.

The conviction for the decades-old church pamphlet confirms what my colleagues at Alliance Defending Freedom have long warned: Vaguely worded “hate speech” laws are being used to criminalize peaceful religious expression. The court itself found no incitement to violence or hatred, yet convicted her anyway. This is a dark and foreboding day for Europe, with dire implications for free speech around the world. The court went so far as to order the destruction of the pamphlet and its removal from the internet. (Good luck with that last part, by the way.) Somewhere, George Orwell is wondering if his works have been forgotten or, worse, read as instruction manuals instead of satirical cautionary tales.

Regardless of whether the Finnish public agrees or disagrees with Räsänen’s views, they should be asking themselves, “What have I written over the last 20 years? A blog post, a comment, a pamphlet for my church, school, or civic organization?” Under a standard like this, even the most ordinary expression could become the target for investigation, criminal prosecution, and conviction. The scope of this travesty and injustice is not confined to Räsänen’s case, as it shows that all peaceful expression can fall prey to judicial erasure and penalty.

This case underscores why it is more important than ever to roll back vaguely worded or ill-defined “hate speech” laws, which chill public debate and pose a grave threat to free and democratic societies. Free speech in Europe will be a relic of the past if “hate speech” laws are not repealed across the continent. Every European deserves a robust free speech framework protecting this fundamental human right.

The threat of “hate speech” laws is not theoretical. This conviction makes clear how these laws are being used to investigate, prosecute, and convict individuals for benignly expressing their beliefs in the public square. This is not about whether one agrees with the views expressed. It is about whether the state should have the power to punish peaceful expression.

Europe risks replacing its democracies with authoritarian conformity, where only approved views can be expressed without fear. Those whose silence gives consent to the criminalization of speech with which they disagree will have no defense when their own beliefs fall out of fashion with the thought police.

For now, the future remains uncertain for Räsänen and Pohjola as they take counsel from their legal team. The future of free speech in Europe is buffeted by tempestuous waves of doubt as well. So, may this verse of “Be Still, My Soul” be of reassurance:

“Be still, my soul! Your God does undertake to guide the future as He has the past. Your hope, your confidence, let nothing shake; all now mysterious shall be bright at last. Be still, my soul! The waves and winds still know His voice who ruled them while He dwelt below.”