Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 06 March 2019
Approximately ten to fifteen years ago the “danger of Europeanization” of the German law on churches and religion was hotly debated. The churches in Germany feared that the influence of the European Union would dramatically change their legal framework. But also academic writers worried about the influence of the common market law or European antidiscrimination law on the legal situation of the churches in the member states – sometimes in rather shrill tone. One almost got the impression that Brussels replaced the Marxist Ideologiekritik (critique of ideology) as the main enemy of Christianity in Europe.
1 Kirchenamt der EKD/Sekretariat der Deutschen Bischofskonferenz (eds.), Zum Verhältnis von Staat und Kirchen im Blick auf die Europäische Union(1995).Google Scholar
2 Hollerbach, A., Europa und das Staatskirchenrecht, 35 ZevKR (1990), 250; Streinz, R., Auswirkungen des Europarechts auf das deutsche Staatskirchenrecht, 27 Essener Gespräche zum Thema Staat und Kirche 53 (1993); Robbers, G., Die Fortentwicklung des Europarechts und seine Auswirkungen auf die Beziehungen zwischen Staat und Kirche in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, id., 81; Link, C., Staat und Kirche im Rahmen des europäischen Einigungsprozesses, 42 ZevKR 130 (1997).Google Scholar
3 Hillgruber, C., Staat und Religion, DVBl. 1155 (1999).Google Scholar
4 See Wall, H. de, Neue Entwicklungen im Europäischen Staatskirchenrecht, 47 ZevKR 205 (2002); Heinig, H. M., Öffentlich-rechtliche Religionsgesellschaften 380 (2003); Mückl, S., Europäisierung des Staatskirchenrechts 410 (2005); C. Walter, Religionsverfassungsrecht – in vergleichender und internationaler Perspektive 403 (2006).Google Scholar
5 See e.g. D. Kehlen, Europäische Antidiskriminierung und kirchliches Selbstbestimmungsrecht 9 (2003); M. Triebel, Das europäische Religionsrecht am Beispiel der arbeitsrechtlichen Anti-Diskriminierungsrichtlinie 2000/78/EG 55 (2005); Reichegger, H., Die Auswirkungen des Richtlinie 2000/78/EG auf das kirchliche Arbeitsrecht unter Berücksichtigung von Gemeinschaftsgrundrechten als Auslegungsmaxime 29 (2005); Heinig, H. M., Art. 13 EGV und die korporative Religionsfreiheit nach dem Grundgesetz, in Religion und Weltanschauung im säkularen Staat, 215 (A. Haratsch et al. [eds.], 2001).Google Scholar
6 See M. Vachek, Das Religionsrecht der Europäischen Union im Spannungsfeld zwischen mitgliedstaatlichen Kompetenzreservaten und Art. 9 EMRK 77 (2000); Weber, H., Geltungsbereiche des primären und sekundären Europarechts für die Kirchen, 47 ZevKR 226 (2002); Heinig (supra note 4), 396; Mückl (supra note 4), 459; Walter (supra note 4), 425; M. Söbbecke-Krajewsi, Der religionsrechtliche Acquis Communautaire der EU 41 (2006); see esp. the helpfull documentation Religion-Related Norms in European Union Law, ed. by G. Robbers, available at: http://www.uni-trier.de/~ievr/EUreligionlaw/index.html.Google Scholar
7 Art. 17(1) lit. c) Directive 2003/88/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the organization of working time, O.J. L 299, 18/11/2003, p. 9.Google Scholar
8 Art. 4(2) Council Directive 2000/78/EC of 27 November 2000 establishing a general framework for equal treatment in employment and occupation, O.J.L 303, 02/12/2000, 16.Google Scholar
9 Annex III Chapter 4, No. 7 Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 laying down specific hygiene rules for food of animal origin, O.J.L 139, 30/04/2004, 55; Art. 4 Council Directive 95/23/EC of 22 June 1995 amending Directive 64/433/EEC on conditions for the production and marketing of fresh meat, O.J. L 243, 11/10/1995, p.7; Art. 5(2) Council Directive 93/119/EC of 22 December 1993 on the protection of animals at the time of slaughter or killing, O.J. L 340, 31/12/1993, p. 21; for further references see “Religion-Related Norms” (supra note 6).Google Scholar
10 Art. 3(2) Directive 2002/14/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2002 establishing a general framework for informing and consulting employees in the European Community, O.J. L 080, 23/03/2002, 29.; Art. 10(2) Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2000 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by the Community institutions and bodies and on the free movement of such data O.J. L 008, 12/01/2001, 1; Art. 8(2) lit. d) Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, O.J. L 281, 23/11/1995, 31.Google Scholar
11 Art. 11(5) Directive 97/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 June 1997 amending Council Directive 89/552/EEC on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the pursuit of television broadcasting activities, O.J. L 202, 30/07/1997, 60.Google Scholar
12 In more then 20 legislative acts – for references see “Religion-Related Norms” (supra note 6).Google Scholar
13 Art. 3 Council Regulation (EC) No 1659/98 of 17 July 1998 on decentralised cooperation. Official Journal L 213, 30/07/1998, 6; Art. 2(1) lit. a) Council Regulation (EC) No 550/97 of 24 March 1997 on HIV/AIDS-related operations in developing countries O.J. L 085, 27/03/1997, 1.Google Scholar
14 E.g. Art. 132(1) lit. k) and l) Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax O.J. L 347, 11/12/2006, 1.Google Scholar
15 Walter (supra, note 4), 404; Heinig (supra, note 4), 390, with further references.Google Scholar
16 Heinig (supra, note 4) 158; Walter (supra, note 4), 540; M. Morlok, Art. 137 WRV, in: Grundgesetz – Kommentar (H. Dreier ed.), Vol. 3, margin number 53; for a critical view, see Mückl (supra, note 4), p. 259 (citing B. Grzeszick, Staatlicher Rechtsschutz und kirchliches Selbstbestimmungsrecht, 129 AöR 168 [2004]).Google Scholar
17 The author has explored this concept in Heinig (supra, note 4), 405; Heinig (supra, note 5) 243; H. M. Heinig, Die Stellung der Kirchen und Religionsgemeinschaften in der europäischen Rechtsordnung, in Kirchen und Religionsgemeinschaften in der Europäischen Union, 125 (P.C. Müller-Graff/H. Schneider [eds.] 2003), with further references.Google Scholar
18 For an introduction to the extensive body of literature on this topic, see in German view Wahl, R., Internationalisierung des Staates, in Verfassungsstaat, Europäisierung, Internationalisierung 17 (2003); Wahl, R., Der einzelne in der Welt jenseits des Staates, in id., 53; U. Di Fabio, Der Verfassungsstaat in der Weltgesellschaft (2001); A. v. Bogdandy, Demokratie, Globalisierung, Zukunft des Völkerrechts, 63 Heidelberg Journal of International Law 853 (2003); for an overview of the debate, see also Heinig, H. M., Offene Staatlichkeit oder Abschied vom Staat, 52 Philosophische Rundschau 191 (2005).Google Scholar
19 From the abundance of German literature, see Walter, C., Die Folgen der Globalisierung für die europäische Verfassungsdiskussion, DVBl. 4 (2000); Morlok, M., Grundfragen einer Verfassung auf europäischer Ebene, in Staat und Verfassung in Europa (P. Häberle et al. eds., 2000), 73; Peters, A., Elemente einer Theorie der Verfassung Europas 76 (2001).Google Scholar
20 For a critical viewpoint on the relativization of the term “constitution” through a focus on the constitutions functions, see Möllers, C., Pouvoir Constitution – Constitution – Constitutionalisation, in Principles of European Constitutional Law 183 (A. v. Bogdandy & J. Bast eds., 2006); Haltern, U., On Finality, in: id., 727.Google Scholar
21 Pernice, I., Multilevel Constitutionalism and the Treaty of Amsterdam, 36 Common Market Law Review 703 (1999); Pernice, I., Europäisches Verfassungsrecht im Werden, in Ius Publicum im Umbruch: 25 (H. Bauer et al. eds., 2000); Pernice, I., Europäisches und nationales Verfassungsrecht, 60 Veröffentlichungen der Vereinigung der Deutschen Staatsrechtslehrer 148 (2001). For a critique of this concept, see Jestaedt, M., Der Europäische Verfassungsverbund – Verfassungstheoretischer Charme und rechtstheoretische Insuffizienz einer Unschärferelation, in Gedächtnisschrift W. Blomeyer, 637 (2004).Google Scholar
22 BVerfGE 89, 155 (195).Google Scholar
23 See e.g. Jachtenfuchs, M. & Koch-Kohler, B., Regieren im dynamischen Mehrebenensystem, in: Europäische Integration 15 (M. Jachtenfuchs & B. Koch-Kohler eds., 1996).Google Scholar
24 Along the same lines, see also Walter (supra, note 4), 403; Kraus, D., Schweizerisches und europäisches Religionsrecht im Dialog, Schweizerisches Jahrbuch für Kirchenrecht 11 (2002); but see Mückl, (supra, note 4), 563, whose skepticism is difficult to comprehend, since calls the “Europeanization of law on churches” into question but titled the article with that very term.Google Scholar
25 For more detail on the term and the concept, see Heinig (supra, note 4), 414.Google Scholar
26 For more detail, see Mückl, (supra, note 4), 422.Google Scholar
27 Heinig (supra, note 4), 421; the effects of the principle of subsidiarity can also work directly against the interests of churches, as for example when the ECJ (properly) strikes down limitations on Sunday working hours in the directive on work times due to a violation of the principle of subsidiarity (ECJ, ECR 1996-I, 5755 [5805]; see also Heinig, , [supra, note 4], 487; Walter [supra, note 4], 23).Google Scholar
28 Heinig, (supra, note 4), 417.Google Scholar
29 Heinig, (supra, note 4), 418; Walter, (supra, note 4), 410; Mückl, , (supra, note 4), 453.Google Scholar
30 For more on the Declaration, see Grezeszick, B., Die Kirchenerklärung zur Schlussakte des Vertrags von Amsterdam, 48 ZevKR 284 (2003); Heinig, (supra, note 4), 415; Walter, (supra, note 4), 410; Mückl, , (supra, note 4), 453; Triebel, (supra, note 5), 277, with further references.Google Scholar
31 For approaches with partly very divergent accents but a similar result, cf. Walter, (supra, note 4), 411; Heinig, (supra, note 4), 421; Mückl, (supra, note 4), 413; Triebel (supra, note 5), 255; A. Uhle, Staat – Kirche – Kultur 150 (2004); for a skeptical point of view as to the inclusion of the law on church and religion under “national identity,” see also Vachek (supra, note 6), 271. The term “identity” relates to collective entities, and article 6(2) TEU deliberately introduces it into the treaties as a legal term for pragmatic, political purposes. Political theory and cultural theory, of course, will diagnose an enormous potential for conflict in the tension between collective identity and (religious) pluralism in a democratic constitutional state. Inasmuch, sufficient consciousness of issues involving the downtrodden in Christian cultural history is often lacking; see e.g. Uhle, , supra; A. Uhle, Freiheitlicher Verfassungsstaat und kulturelle Identität, esp. 473 (2004); the same accusation can be made against J. H. H. Weiler, Ein christliches Europa (2004), whose focus on Roman Catholic official documents seems strongly alienating—as though Christianity had no internal pluralism that is even actually constitutive of modern Europe.Google Scholar
32 For an informative survey of the law on religion in each and every Member State of the EU, see G. Robbers ed., Staat und Kirche in der Europäischen Union, 2d ed. 2005. As informatively saturated as the volume is, it still lacks in terms of actual comparative law. But, for selected examples of comparative legal analysis, see Mückl, (supra, note 4) (Great Britain, France, Spain, Germany); Walter, (supra, note 4) (France, Germany, USA).Google Scholar
33 For detailed analyses of the issue, see Walter, (supra, note 4), 369, 419; Mückl, , (supra, note 4), 427; Grabenwarter, C., Die korporative Religionsfreiheit nach der Menschenrechtskonvention, in Festschrift W. Rüfner 147 (2003); Wall, H. de, Von der individuellen zur korporativen Religionsfreiheit, in Die EMRK im Privat-. Straf- und Öffentlichen Recht 237 (J. Renzikowski ed., 2004) with further references.Google Scholar
34 See Heinig, H. M., Die Religion, die Kirchen und die europäische Grundrechtscharta, in: ZevKR 46 (2001), 440; Robbers, G., Religionsrechtliche Gehalte der Europäischen Grundrechtecharta, in Festschrift H. Maurer 425 (2001); Hölscheidt, S. & Mund, E., Religionen und Kirchen im europäischen Verfassungsverbund, Europarecht 1087 (2003).Google Scholar
35 Heinig (supra, note 4), 381; Mückl, (supra, note 4), 447; but see Triebel, (supra, note 5), 263.Google Scholar
36 For more detailed references, see supra, note 5.Google Scholar
37 For an overview, see A. v. Campenhausen & H. de Wall, Staatskirchenrecht, 177 (4th ed. 2006); for more detail, see also Reichegger, (supra, note 5), 5; Heinig, (supra, note 5), 162; C. D. Classen, Religionsfreiheit und Staatskirchenrecht in der Grundrechtsordnung, 154 (2003), each with different emphases on scope.Google Scholar
38 See also Waldhoff, C., Kirchliche Selbstbestimmung und Europarecht, JZ 978 (2003); Germann, M. & Wall, H. de, Kirchliche Dienstgemeinschaft und Europarecht, in Gedächtnisschrift W. Blomeyer 549 (2004); Link, C., Antidiskriminierung und kirchliches Arbeitsrecht, 50 ZevKR 403 (2005).Google Scholar
39 For detailed references, see supra, note 8; see also Heinig, (supra, note 4), 472; Mückl, , (supra, note 4), 505; Walter, (supra, note 4), 427; Walter, C., Religion und Recht der Europäischen Union, in Religion und Internationales Recht 207 (ed, A. Zimmermann. 2006), with further references.Google Scholar
40 German: “Herstellung praktischer Konkordanz.” K. Hesse, Grundzüge des Verfassungsrechts der Bundesrepublik Deutschland 142 and passim (20th ed. 1995).Google Scholar
41 Walter, (supra, note 4), 433, 439; Mückl, , (supra, note 4), 462, 481, 485, 519; Heinig, (supra, note 4), 442, 451, 458, with further references.Google Scholar
42 For views of the Constitutional Treaty as a whole from the perspective of the law on established churches and the state, see Muckel, S., Die Rechtsstellung der Kirchen und Religionsgemeinschaften nach dem Vertrag über eine Verfassung für Europa, DÖV 191 (2005); Schnabel, P. R., Die Stellung der Kirchen im Verfassungsvertrag der EU, Kirche und Recht (loose-leaf collection) 140, 87; Heinig, H. M., Das Religionsverfassungsrecht im Konventsentwurf für einen “Vertrag über eine Verfassung für Europa,” in Religionsfreiheit als Leitbild 169 (H. Kreß ed., 2004); for a persuasive systemization and classification in entire corpus of European law on religion, see Wall, H. de, Das Religionsrecht der EU, 50 ZevKR 383 (2005); regarding the separate article on churches (very critically), see Triebel, M., Der Kirchenartikel im Verfassungsentwurf des Europäischen Konvents, 49 ZevKR 644 (2004).Google Scholar
43 Walter, (supra, note 4), 415.Google Scholar
44 This dialogue is carried out especially by church liaison bureaus in Brussels. See de Wall (supra, note 42), 387, with further references.Google Scholar
45 See esp. Robbers, G., Staat und Religion, 59 Veröffentlichungen der Vereinigung der Deutschen Staatsrechtslehrer, 232, 259 (2000); for a critical viewpoint, see Morlok, M., Diskussionsbeitrag, ibd. 341; for an instructive discussion of the topic, see generally S. Magen, Staatskirchenrecht als symbolisches Recht, in Koexistenz und Konflikt von Religionen 30 (H. Lehmann ed, 2004).Google Scholar
46 Robbers, G., Diskussionsbeitrag, 59 Veröffentlichungen der Vereinigung der Deutschen Staatsrechtslehrer 361 (2000).Google Scholar
47 See to this problem also Hölscheidt, & Mund, (supra, note 34), 1083, 1092; Bahr, P. & Heinig, H. M., Apologetik oder Analyse, ZEE 229 (2003); Heinig, (supra, note 42), 180.Google Scholar
48 F. W. Graf, Die Wiederkehr der Götter (2004).Google Scholar
You have
Access
