Luke de Pulford

In The Idea of a University John Henry Newman argued that the purpose of higher education was 'to open the mind, to correct it, to refine it, to enable it to know, and to digest, master, rule, and use its knowledge, to give it power over its own faculties.' I often wonder what he would make of modern campus culture. No-platforming. Tearing down statues. Fostering victim culture. Right-on academics so adorned with the Emperor’s New Clothes that they are unable to distinguish the work of their peers from parody. Degree titles so niche that they have the future employment benefit of a semester of all-night sessions on the After Shock. It can’t get worse, can it? Step forward Anglia Ruskin University (ARU). It’s a respectable University.

Suspend your disbelief for a moment, and try to imagine you’re an Iranian, in Iran. You were born into an observant Muslim family and brought up with all the customs of your inherited faith. In late adulthood you met some Christians - a tiny minority who suffer for their religion. You were inspired by them, became attracted to their way of life and decide you wanted to become a Christian too. But then you watched as they were imprisoned for suspected proselytism, disappeared, faced bogus criminal charges and lived in desperate poverty, shunned by their families and communities. Realising that your life was in danger, you fled the country leaving behind everything you know.

This week Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt launched his Independent Review into Christian Persecution. Except nothing was actually launched. Nothing published, precious little announced, and it doesn’t look like much has been agreed between Foreign Office officials and the Bishop of Truro, Philip Mounstephen, who Hunt appointed to chair it. Instead a picture is emerging of a Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) stitch-up. Don’t get me wrong, I think the Foreign Secretary actually wants to do this. It won’t have been easy to get his new department to go along with the idea, and even harder to make the review independent. But government sponsored reviews are never truly independent.

There's one headline you didn’t read in the aftermath of the Manchester attack:  Isis celebrates ‘crusaders’ attack and vows further violence against Christians Sounds silly, I know. But look at what Isis actually said in their statement after the bombing: I have not seen the word ‘Christian’ mentioned in a single report since this statement was published. Not surprising in itself, as mainstream hacks can be relied upon to avoid the ‘C’ word wherever possible. In this context, though, it’s a serious oversight.   For Isis, the West is a Christian construct. In their astonishingly retro outlook, we’re all under the religious authority of Rome - and that makes us all followers of the Cross.

Christians continue to be slaughtered in the Middle East. But as reports of genocidal atrocities mount up, our governments have found a new reason to sit on their hands. Christians, the theory goes, don't have it as bad as the Yazidis. As 'people of the book’, Christians enjoy privileged status. Rather than suffering the full extent of Islamic State's depravities, they can pay a tax (Jizya) in return for protection. It sounds credible and contains just enough theology to bamboozle the secular population of the international community. Here's the Office of the UN's High Commissioner for Human Rights: 'While Christian communities still living in Daesh controlled territories live difficult and often precarious existences...