Some stories seem ripped from satire, but are, unfortunately, very real.
This far Finland was mostly known as the home of saunas, silence, world-class education (though under some scrutiny for some apparent failures) and the official Santa Claus village.
Yet, lately, the country has gained notoriety for another reason: prosecuting a grandmotherly ex–Minister of the Interior for quoting the Bible on Twitter.
If Kafka had lived in Helsinki, he’d probably had found the inspiration for his next novel.
It began back in 2019, when Päivi Räsänen, a member of parliament, doctor, and long-time Christian Democrat, posted a tweet asking why her church — the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland — was sponsoring a Pride event. Attached was a photo of a passage from the Book of Romans.
She wasn’t insulting anyone, she wasn’t threatening violence. In her own words, she was “defending biblical teaching”.
It went quickly downhill from there.
What began as a few lines of Scripture turned into pre-trial interrogations, thirteen hours of questioning, three separate charges, followed by two court proceedings.
The charge? “Agitation against a minority group,” a law originally crafted to protect minorities from persecution and genocide propaganda, fit snugly in the “war crimes and crimes against humanity” section of the Finnish criminal code.
Applying it to a Bible verse is a creative leap even the most flexible theologian would admire.
The first court case, in 2022, ended exactly as any reasonable observer might expect. The judges unanimously ruled that quoting the Bible is not a hate crime. In the District Court’s phrasing, “It is not for the court to interpret biblical concepts”.
One might think that the case would end here.
Finland’s Prosecutor General’s Office was unsatisfied with such judicial restraint and appealed the decision.
In 2023, the Court of Appeals, again, acquitted Räsänen and her co-defendant, Lutheran Bishop Juhana Pohjola.
Yet, the case is still ongoing.
In spite of two acquittals, it is now in front of the country’s Supreme Court. Apparently, the Bible hasn’t yet been fully cross-examined.
The Finnish Prosecutor General, Raija Toiviainen, who originally initiated the case, insisted she was not prosecuting the Bible. Now, that she’s retired, her successor still continues the fight.
Their argument goes: it’s not about Scripture itself, but about the way it’s used — whether it could spread contempt toward a minority group. In their views, Räsänen’s statements “were likely to cause intolerance, contempt, and hatred towards homosexuals”.
That distinction sounds tidy on paper, but its practical application raises far too many questions to ignore.
Meanwhile, one can’t help noticing that this fervor seems strangely one-directional.
Across Europe (and the world), people of various faiths express traditional beliefs, often in ways that offend modern sensitivities. Yet, in Finland, it’s Christianity, and Christianity only – the religion that built most of the country’s institutions – that finds itself summoned to the dock. Interestingly enough, no such case has ever been initiated against any Muslim or other religious group that offended or provoked Christian values.
Not only in Finland. Nowhere in Europe.
Alas, the case of Päivi Räsänen is more than a local oddity.
It’s a symptom of Europe’s ongoing identity crisis: the uneasy tension between protecting minorities and preserving the freedom to hold — and voice — traditional beliefs.
For decades, Europeans have prided themselves on tolerance.
But tolerance, once stretched too far, sometimes flips into its opposite.
At a point, it turned into its own mockery: we are now so terrified of offending anyone that we criminalize disagreement itself.
Thus happens, that we find ourselves in a world where quoting a verse written in ancient Greek is investigated under a law meant to fight against Nazi propaganda.
Where courts patiently explain, twice, that quoting Scripture is not an act of war — yet the case drags on because someone, somewhere, refuses to let go of the idea that believing in old moral codes is an act of hostility.
The strangest part of all this is that it’s happening in Finland.
A country that has, historically, embodied Lutheran moderation and pragmatism. A country where around two-thirds of the population belong (at least nominally) to the Evangelical Lutheran Church. A nation whose national anthem thanks God for its land and lakes.
Yet there, the Bible is being treated as a potential hate weapon.
It would be comical if it weren’t so terrifying.
Europe, after all, owes much of its human rights framework and its moral vocabulary to the Christian worldview it now seems embarrassed to acknowledge.
Even secular Europeans use phrases like “dignity,” “human worth,” and “forgiveness” — words that entered Western languages through the very faith now on trial. They celebrate Easter and Christmas or cry out “oh, my God”, when something shocking happens.
And it’s not that homosexuality should be condemned — far from it. Sexual minorities have suffered too much throughout history to be denied equality and respect.
But freedom of belief and freedom of speech must include the right to hold — peacefully, publicly — moral views shaped by faith. In Ms. Räsänen’s own words, “in the heart of this trial is the question: whether teachings related to the Bible can be presented, and whether it is still permissible to agree with the Bible even if it contradicts the main ideology of the society”.
Otherwise, “diversity” becomes uniformity with better branding.
In the United States, quoting a religious text is still considered free speech, not evidence in a criminal file. In much of Europe, too, debate remains open, passionate, and sometimes rude — but free.
That’s the point of democracy: not comfort, but coexistence.
When a Western democracy uses the language of human rights to prosecute religious expression, something has gone wrong.
When the law that was once used to protect minorities is used to silence moral dissent, the circle closes in on everyone. Paul Coleman, executive director of the Alliance Defending Freedom International (ADF) said, “criminalizing peaceful speech through so called ‘hate-speech’ laws not only silences important conversations – it endangers democracy itself”. As he put it, “a conviction would set a new European low bar for free speech standards”.
Maybe Finland’s Supreme Court will do what two lower courts already did: reassert common sense.
Maybe it will remind Europe that tolerance must include tolerance for faith — even faith that quotes verses some find outdated.
And maybe, just maybe, it will spare the next generation of Finns from growing up in a world where a prosecutor must first approve your devotional reading list.
If quoting the Bible really needs three court decisions to be declared legal, the problem isn’t with Scripture.
It’s with a culture that no longer trusts itself to read it.
