(ZENIT News / Brussels, 07.30.2025).- On June 26, inside the halls of the European Parliament, a report was launched with a title that sounded like a warning: “The Next Wave: How Religious Extremism Is Reclaiming Power.” Its language, bold and alarmist, aims to ring bells across European democracies. But for many observers—particularly those in the religious and academic communities—it also rings hollow.
Produced by the European Parliamentary Forum for Sexual and Reproductive Rights (EPF), and backed by major progressive donors like the Gates Foundation, Open Society, and the United Nations Population Fund, the report attempts to map what it describes as a “coordinated effort” by Christian actors—mainly Catholics, Evangelicals, and Orthodox groups—to infiltrate democratic institutions, undermine reproductive and sexual rights, and roll back gender equality.
What makes this initiative all the more remarkable is not just its conclusions, but the political consensus that supported its release. Members of four major groups in the European Parliament—ranging from center-right to Green progressives—co-sponsored the event, giving the impression of unified alarm in Brussels.
Yet, beneath the rhetoric and statistics, a different story emerges: one of blurred definitions, sweeping accusations, and what critics call an ideologically-driven attempt to discredit traditional Christian voices in public life.
At the heart of the controversy lies a fundamental question: when does the public defense of religious values become “extremism”? For centuries, Christian communities in Europe have participated in social and political debates—often from moral positions rooted in the defense of life, the integrity of the family, and the role of conscience in education. These views may be unpopular in secular circles, but they are neither violent nor antidemocratic.
The report, however, draws no such distinctions. It labels as “anti-rights” or “anti-gender” a wide variety of organizations, from academic institutions to humanitarian foundations. In Spain, the list includes the University of Navarra, the Universidad Francisco de Vitoria, the Fundación Universitaria San Pablo CEU, CitizenGO, and even pregnancy support centers funded by public money. Their “crime”? Promoting natural family planning, supporting pro-life events, encouraging parental rights in education, and defending ethical bio-research grounded in Catholic moral theology.
This sweeping classification raises eyebrows. None of these groups advocate violence. None reject democratic participation. Their mission statements focus on dialogue, education, research, and humanitarian work. By lumping them together with alleged agents of religious radicalism, the report appears less like a sober analysis and more like a polemic.
And it is not just about labels. “The Next Wave” goes further, pointing to nearly 1.2 billion dollars allegedly funneled to such groups between 2019 and 2023 from donors in Europe (73%), Russia (18%), and the United States (9%). The implication is that these funds serve a hidden, coordinated agenda. Yet, the report offers little evidence of orchestration. In fact, most of the donations cited come from independent foundations with divergent motives—many focused on demographic concerns, education, or public ethics.
Even more troubling is the report’s silence on its own funding and ideology. It fails to acknowledge that its main supporters—some of the wealthiest philanthropic actors in the world—also promote specific agendas, including abortion access, gender theory in schools, and restrictions on religious-based dissent. While warning about “institutional capture” by religious conservatives, the report glosses over the possibility of progressive overreach.
Ironically, it is the report itself that risks undermining democracy. In equating legitimate religious advocacy with extremism, it stifles pluralism and poisons public debate. It sends a dangerous message: that to question certain progressive narratives is not only backward, but subversive.
Critics from across Europe’s faith-based institutions have been quick to respond. They insist that defending unborn life, upholding the natural family, or supporting ethical alternatives to controversial sexual education are not signs of extremism but expressions of moral conscience. And they warn that if such voices are excluded from the democratic conversation, the result will not be harmony—but deeper polarization.
In its zeal to expose a “rising tide” of religious radicalism, The Next Wave may have overlooked the real risk: mistaking disagreement for danger, and dissent for disloyalty. European democracy thrives not when voices are silenced, but when they are heard—even, and especially, when they challenge the prevailing winds.
In the end, the report does serve a purpose—it forces society to confront its own definitions. What kind of pluralism are we building? One where people of faith are invited to the table, or one where they are branded and dismissed before they even speak?
That is the real next wave to watch.
Thank you for reading our content. If you would like to receive ZENIT’s daily e-mail news, you can subscribe for free through this link.
