November 5, 2026 (Edward J Barr):
Vatican City (Monday, March 26, 2103): “The great feast had gone off flawlessly. The civil authorities provided more security than was necessary to allow the final Mass to be celebrated peacefully. There was no real threat, the Church had been a respectful friend of the government. Francis II breathed heavily as he stood on one of the round stones in St. Peter’s square that allowed pilgrims to align all the columns into one. He sighed. That is what happened to the Church in Europe. Once there were many, now there is one. Barely. He had done all he could to ameliorate the Islamic government. Restrictions were followed carefully. He even selected a name that connotated an openness to all religions. His namesake had preached often on the need to welcome the marginalized, as he had done to support the Muslim majority’s ancestors. Couldn’t they – the then minority whom the Church worked so hard to welcome – do the same for his flock? What is there to do now? Where should I go? It happened so quickly. God, have mercy on us all.”
Recent riots in Europe have caused many to recognize a fact – The Islamification of Europe is increasing. The influx of Muslims that exploded from 2014 to 2016 has continued. The growth has been steady, and now Muslims make up slightly more than six percent of Europeans. The reason they are expanding their percentages is based on several factors. European nations have been exceedingly open to allowing migrants that fled conflicts in the Middle East. That included both traditional refugees and so-called “economic migrants.” If needed, European nations made changes to existing law to bring in migrants, such as when Germany suspended European Union (EU) rules on allowing Syrian nationals to be granted entry. Church leaders were equally as welcoming. Pope Francis was a vocal supporter of welcoming everyone that wanted to enter Europe, asking that they be supported both by the state and local Catholic parishes.
The inability to recognize the fractures that occur when populations that are opposed to the dominant culture extended throughout the Western Catholic world. St. Thomas’ guidance that the integration of foreigners should be gradual and measured and consider the common good of society was largely ignored. It resulted in the opposition by Church leaders of any objective means to distinguish who to let enter a country, such as refusing to call people who are in a country illegally, illegal. It was, and continues to be, a case of misguided compassion at best, societal suicide at worst.
Secular reasons for allowing the influx are based on more practical reasons. Europe was caught in a trap. They trained their citizens to expect more “free” stuff (we will ignore the reality that nothing from the government is free; rather, it is based on funds confiscated from its citizenry). Intent on living the “good life,” most Europeans abandoned their Christendom roots and embraced a materialist mindset. Part of their strategy to make life easier and have more money to maintain their lifestyle was by killing their heritage. But there was a problem. Contraception and abortion on the continent have led to all European nations falling well below the repopulation fertility rate of 2.1 children per woman. Without new workers, EU nations would be unable to continue to fund their social programs at current levels. So, they opened the door for the Muslim invasion, couched in compassionate terms of the need to “welcome the newcomer.” They thought it could work, as the newcomers are much more open to life. The Muslim fertility rate in Europe is 2.7 children per woman, while the non-Muslim rate is 1.6.
Given the current environment, let us consider what will happen to the Vatican if the trend of Islamization in Europe continues. One snapshot fact comes from the British Isles. From 2023 the most popular baby boys’ name in the UK has been Mohammad. How long will it take to be the same on the rest of the continent? What options does the Vatican have when a hostile culture dominates Christians? Should the Church be planning to re-locate the Pope to another country? If so, where? What if he stays in a Muslim majority nation that embraces Sharia law?
There are few options if the Church was to move the Pope’s location from Rome. The selected nation would have to be amenable to the move and capable of protecting the papal household. That would mean a large percentage of practicing Catholics in the country and a government willing to provide security. Based on the countries with the highest percentage of self-identified Catholics, there are a handful of possibilities.
First is Poland. It ranks fifth regarding percentage of Catholics; first of any nation with more than five million citizens. Its percentage of Muslims is 0.1%. Poland also has the highest Mass attendance in Europe and has the best retention rate. The negative is it is a member of the European Union. The EU has been squeezing Poland and other countries that attempt to hold on to traditional values. Portugal is the other European nation that has some positives. It has the tenth highest percentage of Catholics and is 0.42% Muslim. However, it is more “cultural” Catholic than devout and is geographically isolated.
Two other options are in South America. Paraguay is the seventh most Catholic country and a Muslim population of only 0.06%. The negative is Paraguay has less resources than the other potential locations. Argentina has the fourteenth highest percentage of Catholics. Its population of Muslims is 2.1%. However, Argentina’s percentage of Catholics has slipped from 77% in 2008 to 58% in 2024. Not a reliable option. Nor at this point, would be the African nations that retain Catholic orthodoxy. The countries on that continent with the highest percentage of Catholics are Burundi (64%), Angola (50%), and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (50%). Their cultural, historical, geographical, and economical profiles caution against their selection. In short, there will be no true “safe havens” for a future Pope if Europe in general, and Italy in particular, is lost.
Disregarding the massive practical barriers to moving the Pope’s physical headquarters (his apostolic see would still be Rome), there are psychological and emotional considerations that would impact the remaining Catholics around the world. So, what happens if he stays in Rome? History can provide some insight. The last time an Islamic regime took over a spiritual hub of Christian Europe was May 29, 1453, when the Ottoman Turks conquered the Byzantine empire and took control of Constantinople. Within days of the conquest, the Patriarchal Cathedral of Hagia Sophia was converted into a mosque. Initially, the new rulers attempted to co-opt the Greek Orthodox patriarch by giving him authority over all the Orthodox Christians in the Ottoman Empire. Alas, the Orthodox churches were no more united then than they are now; the Russian Orthodox Church had split with Constantinople five years before the Muslim victory.
The Islamic victors imposed their religious laws on their Christian subjects and the Greek Orthodox Church. The traditional policy of dhimmitude was imposed, whereby Jews and Christians are granted some rights yet live in a permanent state of subservience to Muslims. It is a legal option that circumvents the “convert or die” decision non Abrahamic faith peoples must make when conquered. The restrictions placed on the Christians covered both religious and civil aspects. The religious restrictions ranged from a ban on building new churches to banning crosses (even on churches) while societal restrictions included stipulating that Christian testimony against Muslims in court is inadmissible. Of course, the penalty for proselytizing or attempting to convert a Muslim was death. Similar laws remain in effect throughout the Islamic world.
Before the fall of Constantinople, the conquering armies of Islam raced from Arabia, across the Red Sea to Christian North Africa. Within two years (639-641) Egypt fell, and over time forced conversions and dhimmi like restrictions shrunk the Christian community. Despite the persecutions and burdens, one group of Christians held fast to their faith, the Copts. Nearly 1,400 years after in start of Muslim rule, the Copts continue to confront legal and societal subservience. Recent legal modifications designed to lessen their dhimmitude are frequently ignored. It is quite challenging to repair a church, and near impossible to build a new one. If built or modified, they must follow restrictions on building structure, so the final building doesn’t bear any overt resemblance to traditional Christian architecture (such as possessing bells and towers).
Historically, it has taken great skill to survive as a dhimmi in a Muslim administered land. Fortunately, some Islamic nations today provide more freedom for residents of other religions to practice their faith. However, these are limited to a few countries, and they all still have significant restrictions on Christians. These include the traditional prohibitions on building Churches, preaching Christianity, or violating Islamic law.
Islamic regimes always control religion when they are in power. Non-Muslims are always treated as second class citizens. Any person that experiences oppression must find a way to survive. A psychological response like the “Stockholm Syndrome” can occur over time. To survive, the dhimmi may consciously or unconsciously assume the perspective of the dominant religion. Once example is the recent comments by the Cardinal bishop of Algiers. Admittedly, he is in a similar situation of all dhimmis and must be shrewd to survive in his current role. Yet his dismissal of the need to convert Muslims and focus on fraternity rather than bringing the Gospel to the people of Algeria portrays the model that the Vatican has used over the last decade. It is also diametrically opposed to the objective analysis on the plight of Christians in Algeria offered by the European Center for Law and Justice.
There is still time for the Vatican to soberly and realistically view the challenge that Islam presents to the Church in Europe. Over the centuries, Christian Europe has fought off attempts by Islam to take over the continent. In 1653, King Jan III Sobieski of Poland led the largest calvary charge in history to halt the Ottoman advance during the battle of Vienna. The Vatican fully supported that effort, thanking the Mother of God for her intervention and establishing a feast in her honor. Today, the Vatican asks all to promote “dialogue and respect” with the Muslims coming into Europe. Perhaps it is time to open dialogue with them on a question that may arise sooner than we think, to where should the future Pope flee?
Edward J Barr earned a Master of Theology degree from the Augustine Institute. He is an attorney, a career intelligence officer, catechist, guest speaker and author. Mr. Barr is a contributing writer for the Roma Locuta Est blog (www.RomaLocutaEst.com)
.