 | This article has multiple issues. Please helpimprove it or discuss these issues on thetalk page.(Learn how and when to remove these messages) (Learn how and when to remove this message)
|
| Freedom of religion |
|---|
| Religion portal |
Freedom of religion in Germany is guaranteed by article 4 of theGerman constitution. This states that "the freedom of religion, conscience and the freedom of confessing one's religious or philosophical beliefs are inviolable. Uninfringed religious practice is guaranteed." In addition, article 3 states that "No one may be prejudiced or favored because of his gender, his descent, his race, his language, his homeland and place of origin, his faith or his religious or political views." Any person or organization can call theFederal Constitutional Court of Germany for free help.[1]
The German system of state support for otherwise independent religious institutions assists all religions equally in principle, though in practice it has been unable to fully encompass someminority faiths.[2] The government has granted most of the country's major religious communities "public law corporation" (PLC) status –Körperschaft des öffentlichen Rechts in German – which allows for numerous benefits. Traditions that lack a centrally organized national structure – most notablyIslam – have had difficulty attaining PLC status and the benefits that come with it.[2]
In 2023, the country was scored 4 out of 4 for religious freedom.[3]
The freedom of religion in the Grundgesetz (Basic Law) means one may adopt any kind of religious or non-religious belief, practice it in private or in public, confess it, or keep it for oneself. The state does not identify with any religious organization. This distinction of church and state originated in what is now called thetwo kingdoms doctrine.
Religious freedom, like the other basic rights of the Grundgesetz, is limited where it collides with the core value ofhuman dignity or with the basic rights of others, or if it is misused to fight against the basic constituency of free democracy.
Art. 4 sec. III provides for the right to refrain frommilitary service in the name of religion (lit. "conscience").[4]
Besidescollective, German law protectsindividual freedom of religion, which is to be distinguished intopositive andnegative freedom of religion.Negative freedom of religion covers the rightnot to confess your faith unless legally required (i. e. registration forchurch tax) and the rightnot to be exposed to religion while in a position of "subordination" where one is legally required to attend. Landmark decisions are the Crucifix Decision[5] and the Headscarf Decision.[6]
In the Crucifix Decision[7] the German Federal Constitution Court in 1995 decreed a law that insisted on the presence of religious symbols (crucifixes) in public institutions to be illegal, excluding in some Roman Catholic elementary schools. The court further demanded that the symbols must be removed if a parent does not agree with them. In 1973, a Jew complained successfully that his freedom of religion was violated by the obligation to speak in a German courtroom decorated by a cross.[8]
In 2004, the German Supreme court denied[9] aMuslim teacher the right to wear aheadscarf in class, on the basis that she had to representneutrality. In this case, freedom of religion (of teachers) had to be brought into "balance" with the state's authority over schools (art. 7), the freedom not to be exposed to religion while in a state of subordination (art. 4), resp. the parents' rights to raise their children (art. 6), and the specific duties of teachers as state servants (art. 33). German courts rarely hold the freedom of religious and non-religious belief to be infringed, as freedom of religion is limited by the exertion of other basic rights (and duties) guaranteed by theGrundgesetz. Already in the late 1970s, a teacher had also been denied the right to wear the distinct clothing of his religion at the workplace.[citation needed] In 2007 the Bavarian Constitutional Court upheld the ban on teachers with headscarves but affirmed that nuns could continue to wearhabits while teaching.
In Germany, high school students are not excused from classes onsexual education[10] andevolution theory on the basis of religion, as it collides with the state's authority over schools (art. 7) and the legal duty to attend schools. However, according to the case law of the Federal Administrative Court, a claim for exemption from sports or swimming lessons on religious grounds may be made for Islamic schoolgirls if they can concretely demonstrate credible convictions or bans in religious conflicts and there is no reasonable and non-discriminatory alternative for them. As a result, girls may be exempt from swimming due to modesty concerns.[11]
Homeschooling for religious reasons is illegal.[12] German laws against homeschooling are the strictest among all developed countries.[13] The Romeike family[14] sought asylum in the United States in order to homeschool, but their case is currently subject to pending legislation.[15]
To leave a church or an officially registered religious group, authorities in almost all states demand citizens to pay an administrative fee between €30 and €60. It is not possible to leave an officially registered religion (and to end the tax duty on the income) by just declaring the rejection of the belief to this religious group.[16]
Some religious writings are cataloged in theIndex of Harmful Materials, which outlaws all sales except those made under-the-counter. Organized religious bodies are given representation on the 12 person panel which votes on censorship. Although the list of censored websites is kept secret from the public, one of the more prominent cases involved the traditionalist Catholic blog kreuz.net, which has since been shut down.[17] It has since been replaced with kreuz-net.at which is run by another individual.
In 2012, aCologne regional court ruled childcircumcision to be illegal when not medically necessary.[18] This ruling proved to be controversial; on the one hand, surveys found most Germans to be in favor of the decision, while on the other hand, the ruling sparked debate over religious freedom due to circumcision's importance in Judaism and Islam.[19][20] Critics of the ruling, such as Germany'sCentral Council of Jews and Religious Community of Islam, argued that the ruling was insensitive and counterproductive to religious freedom and integration, while supporters of the decision, such as criminal law professorHolm Putzke of theUniversity of Passau, argued that circumcision was physically harmful and that parents did not have the legal authority to consent to such a procedure when not medically necessary.[19][21] ChancellorAngela Merkel opposed the ruling, saying “I do not want Germany to be the only country in the world where Jews cannot practice their rituals. Otherwise we will become a laughing stock.”[22] The German Parliament ultimately reversed the court's decision, passing legislation that legalized non-therapeutic circumcision of underage boys even though it is medically harmful.[23][24]
Some persons in Germany do not practicecontraception for religious reasons.
In 2002 the Federal Constitutional Court struck down a ban on ritual slaughter.
German law on freedom of religion distinguishes betweenindividual andcollective freedom of religion. Collective freedom of religion additionally covers the legal statutes of religious organizations, but this freedom only applies to religious communities "whose constitution and number of members ensure the guarantee of continuity."[25] Of special interest is the statute ofcorporate body under public law, which allows the organization to collect the four percentchurch tax and hold religious education in state schools.
Areligious group in Germany can be formed under all legal statutes. It can be organised as acompany underCorporate law, but tax regulations, company duties, and responsibilities are often seen as disadvantages. Avoluntary association can be formed by anybody. Registration as an "eingetragener Verein" (abbreviated e.V.) gives the advantage of legally functioning as a corporate body (juristic person), rather than a simple group of individuals. It can by used by any secular or religious group.
Two other types of organizations are often employed: the most frequent aregemeinnützigenot-for-profit corporations, which can be companies or registered associations. This status requires not only limitation to noncommercial activities, but similar to American nonprofits, it is limited to those whose primary objective is to support an issue or matter of private interest or public concern for noncommercial purposes. Like many other countries, nonprofits may apply for tax exemption status, so that the organization itself may be exempt from taxes. In some cases, financial donors may claim back anyincome tax paid on theirdonations, or deduct from their own tax liability the amount of the donation.
The second is aKörperschaft des öffentlichen Rechts (corporate body under public law), a status which is specifically granted to religious groups. Some smaller communities may have this status in one state, while they maintain a different status in another. The status has a string of benefits attached. Religious communities which are organized under public law have the right to collect contributions (church tax) according to laws which are similar to general tax laws. Religious communities enjoy further privileges regarding building and tax regulations, the ability to teach religion as a regular course in state schools, and the ability to be represented in media consulting committees.
The so-called "church tax" (German:Kirchensteuer) forcorporate bodies under public law is collected with the regular state tax by the state from all registered members of these denominations.[26][27] On the basis of tax regulations within the limits set by state laws, communities may either request the state to collect fees from members in the form of a surcharge of the income tax assessment (the authorities would then withhold a collection fee), or they may choose to collect the tax themselves. Not all bodies entitled to collect church tax actually collect it, as someOld Confession Churches believe it to be contrary to the separation of church and state. Also, organizations belonging to theConfederation of Free-thinking Communities of Germany[28] are also entitled to collect the four percent "church" tax, although not all of them do.
In the first case, membership to the community is registered onto a taxation document (Lohnsteuerkarte). The member's employer must then withhold church tax prepayments from the income of the employee in addition to the prepayments on the annual income tax. In connection with the final annual income tax assessment, the state revenue authorities also finally assess the church tax owed. In case of self-employed persons or other tax payers not employed, state revenue authorities collect prepayments on the church tax together with prepayments on the income tax.
In case of own collection, collecting communities may demand the tax authorities to reveal taxation data of their members, in order to be able to calculate the contributions and prepayments owed. In particular, smaller communities (e.g. the Jewish Community ofBerlin) chose to collect taxes by themselves in order to save the collection fee[citation needed]. Collection of church tax may be used to found institutions and foundations or to pay ministers. Seminary training at state universities is funded by the government instead of through church tax.
.jpg)
The church tax is only paid by members of the respective religiouscorporate body under public law . Those who are not members of a tax collecting denomination are not required to pay it. Members of a religious community which is acorporate body under public law may formally declare to state authorities that they wish to leave the community (this is commonly referred to as "leaving the church"). With such declaration, the obligation to pay church taxes ends. The concerned religious organisations usually refuse to administerrites of passage, such as marriages and burials of (former) members who had seceded. To rejoin a religiouscorporate body under public law one would get one's declaration of re-entry officially recorded. TheConference of the German Bishops, however, considers the declaration to "leave the church" to be aschismatic act to be punished automatically byexcommunication.
The church tax is historically rooted in the pre-Christian Germanic custom where the chief of the tribe was directly responsible for the maintenance of priests and religious cults. During the Christianization of Western Europe, this custom was adopted by the churches into the concept ofEigenkirchen (churches owned by the landlord), which stood in strong contrast to the central church organization of the Roman Catholics. Despite the resulting medieval conflict between the emperor and pope, the concept of church maintenance by the ruler remained the accepted custom in most Western European countries. In Reformation times,[29] the local princes in Germany officially became heads of the church in Protestant areas, and were legally responsible for the maintenance of churches; the aforementioned practice is legally referred to asSummepiscopat. Only in the 19th century did the financial flows of churches and state get regulated to a point where the churches became financially independent – the church tax was introduced to replace the state benefits the churches had obtained before.
In July 2008, theFederal Constitutional Court of Germany had to decide whether a fee for leaving a religious corporate body under public law ("leaving the church") was in accordance with the constitution. Ultimately, the court decided it was an unconstitutional infringement of religious liberty.[30][31] As the state of affairs in August 2008 noted, declaring that one is no longer a member of a church costs between 10 and 30 € in most federal states. It is free inBerlin,Brandenburg,Bremen, andThuringia; in somecommunities inBaden-Württemberg, in contrast, it may cost up to 60 €.[32] In its decision, the Federal Constitutional Court also clarified that the legislator is required by the constitution to reduce the fee, in cases where the person who wants to "leave the church" does not have any personal income.[33] The German atheist groupIBKA disagreed with the decision and took the issue to theEuropean Court of Human Rights.[34]
Education is the responsibility of the 16 federal states (Bundesländer), and each state can decide how to organise religious education.In most states, religious education is obligatory. The curriculum is provided by the churches and approved by the state. Usually the Roman Catholic Church and one Protestant Church each provide school lessons for members of their own denominations, and for members of other denominations that wish to participate. Smaller denominations and some other religious minorities either co-operate with one of the big ones or may decide to conduct classes outside school. In the latter case they can provide the school with details of pupils' performance, so that this information can be included in school reports.
Children who do not want to participate in religious education are obliged to attend an alternative class called "ethics", in which various issues of philosophy, society, and morals are discussed.
In most cases, even if pupils that stay in one class for almost all their lessons, they are divided into groups (Roman Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Islamic, Ethics) for their religious education, joining other pupils they might not know very well, but who belong to the same denomination.
The position is reversed in some states (Berlin, Brandenburg): the default option, similar to "ethics", is called "knowledge of life".[35] Pupils may choose instead to attend a denominational course, although in Berlin ethics is mandatory for all students starting in middle school in addition to an optional denominational course. Islamic classes are developed by the government because with the exception of theAhmadiyya, Muslim associations are notcorporate bodies under public law.[36]
Other states (Bremen, Hamburg) have different systems, which is permitted by theBremen clause.
In Germany, religious defamation is covered by Article 166 of theStrafgesetzbuch, the German criminal law. If a deed is capable of disturbing the public peace, defamation is actionable. The article reads as follows:[37]
In 2006, the application of this article received much media attention when a Manfred van H. (also known as "Mahavo") was prosecuted for defamation for distributing rolls of toilet paper with the words "Koran, the Holy Koran" stamped on them.[38][39][40] The defendant claimed he wanted to protest the murder of Dutch filmmakerTheo van Gogh in 2004 and theLondon bombings of 2005. Beyond the sentence he also received death threats from Islamists and needed a police bodyguard.[40]
In 2002, there was a legal controversy regarding the "Power for Living" campaign by theChristian Arthur S. DeMoss Foundation featuring celebritiesCliff Richard andBernhard Langer. The TV advertisings for their book were banned because they were considered as "advertising a worldview or religion", which is forbidden by § 7 section 8 of the state treaty on broadcasting (Rundfunkstaatsvertrag) and European laws on media. For its posters, newspaper adverts and leaflets, however, there was no such problem.[41]
The right of self-determination in Germany only applies to religious communities "whose constitution and number of members ensure the guarantee of continuity."[25]
The German government provides information aboutcults,sects, andnew religious movements. In 1997, the parliament set up a commission forSogenannte Sekten und Psychogruppen (literally "so-called sects and psychic groups") which delivered an extensive report on the situation in Germany regarding NRMs in 1998.[42]
The main point of critics againstSekten from the governmental side is that they propagate a concept of the ideal human (Menschenbildde:Menschenbild) which is very different of the concept underlying theGrundgesetz (Basic Law).[43] For example, some cults may stress the inequality of social groups, races or sexes, and foster a culture where blind obedience andfundamentalism are welcomed. TheGrundgesetz, however, says that all people are equal and envisages people who are open-minded, discerning and tolerant.[44]
In 2002, Germany's Federal Constitutional Court ruled that the German government had violated its constitution in its treatment of theRajneesh movement, using deprecating expressions about it that were not based on fact.[45] The Federal Constitutional Court took eleven years to come to its decision, and the overall duration of proceedings from the original complaint lasted over 18 years; Germany was subsequently fined by theEuropean Court of Human Rights for the excessive duration of the case.[45][46][47][48] Given the limits set by the Federal Constitutional Court on the permitted scope of government actions in 2002, the European Court of Human Rights found that Germany was not in violation of Article 9 (freedom of thought, conscience and religion), Article 10 (freedom of expression) and Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) of theEuropean Convention on Human Rights, but found that it had violated Article 6 § 1 (right to a fair hearing within a reasonable time).[48]
Since the 1990s, German courts have repeatedly denied the request of the Jehovah's Witnesses to become a corporate body under public law for various reasons, one of them being that theJehovah's Witnesses would discourage their members from taking part in state elections, and would not respect theGrundgesetz.
In March 2005, Jehovah's Witnesses were granted the status of abody of public law for the state of Berlin,[49] on the grounds that the alleged lack of fidelity towards the state had not been convincingly proven. The decision on the group's status in Berlin was upheld by the Federal Administrative Court in 2006.[50] In subsequent years, corresponding decisions were made in 12 other states.[51][52] In the states of Baden-Württemberg,[53] and Bremen,[54] the group was denied the status in 2011.
Due to their status of corporate body under public law (in some states), Jehovah's Witnesses in 2010 filed a complaint for broadcasting time at Germany's international broadcaster,Deutsche Welle.[55]
Concerning the issue of blood transfusions, the Federal Constitutional Court has held that transfusing blood to an unconsciousJehovah's Witness violated the person's will, but did not constitute abattery.[56]
German courts have come to different decisions on employees and members ofScientology regarding their religious status.[57] The German government considers Scientology "an organization pursuing commercial interests".[57][58]Scientology is not classified as anon-profit organization in Germany, and the current organizational form of Scientology is "Scientology Kirche e.V." (eingetragener Verein, or registered association). Germany has been criticized over its treatment of Scientologists in United States human rights and religious freedom reports, and the U.S. government has repeatedly expressed its concern over the matter.[59][60][61][62] Rebutting such accusations, and justifying its stance on Scientology, the German embassy in Washington has said that the German government believed Scientology's "pseudo-scientific courses can seriously jeopardise individuals' mental and physical health, and that it exploits its members."[60]
There have been cases of groups in Germany which practiceGermanic neopaganism facing legal sanctions because of their display of symbols, such asrunes or theCeltic cross, which prosecutors have deemed illegal under laws againstneo-Nazi propaganda. Using "unconstitutional symbols", namely theswastika, is an offense punishable by up to three years in jail or a fine[63] according to § 86a of theGerman Criminal Code.
The 1550 Magdeburg Confession developed the doctrine oflesser magistrates, which allowed for a limitedright of resistance to unjust rule, including with respect to faith. ThePeace of Augsburg in 1555 changed the legal situation from a uniform Roman Catholic area to theCuius regio, eius religio principle, which defined freedom of religion for territorial princes, while their subjects had to follow them[clarification needed]. Individuals had at best the possibility to move into an area where their confession was practiced. Others feigned belief in the dominant church (seeNicodemite andCrypto-protestantism). Depending on the reigning prince, there could exist a certain tolerance towards other denominations, but not as a common law.
In the first half of the 17th century, Germany was laid to waste by theThirty Years' War, where the lines between enemies within Germany followed mainly denominational borders between the areas of theCatholic League (German) and those of theProtestant Union. The followingSyncretistic controversy improved Protestant understanding of Catholicism, but risked schism between competing Lutheran factions. Pastor and hymn writerPaul Gerhardt was forced out of office in 1755 due to his staunch Lutheran convictions in a Berlin ruled by a Reformed prince.
In the 18th century, the idea of freedom of religion was promoted by cultural leaders like philosopherImmanuel Kant and dramatistGotthold Ephraim Lessing, but their stress was on the freedom of the individual to believe or to not adhere to the beliefs of a dominant state church.King Frederick William III of Prussia granted Jews in some areas citizenship in 1812 with hisJudenedikt. The 1817Prussian Union of Churches resulted in the persecution ofOld Lutherans. For example,Johannes Andreas August Grabau was stripped of his clerical office and imprisoned for one year.[64] Old Lutherans emigrated en masse from affected areas such asPrussia, Silesia, and Pomerania to North America and South Australia. This also spurred the emigration of sympathizers in nearbySaxony to Missouri. This conflict resulted in the eventual government recognition offree churches following the death of Frederick William III of Prussia. His successor,Frederick William IV, issued theGeneral Concession of July 23, 1845, granting toleration to Lutheran free churches. In 1847 he replaced the 1812Judenedikt with a broaderJudengesetz which gave citizenship and free rights of movement to Jews in all but one location. In 1852, he issued aDuldungsbillet granting toleration to Baptists and other Protestant dissidents to organize their own free churches. It was, however, only for those communities that have "formed since the Reformation" within the Protestant confession, and have proven to be safe and believing rather than radical. Toleration was limited in the event that "the decency" and "feeling and the security of the state mandate it."[65]
TheGerman Empire of 1871 recognized a basic religious freedom for individuals. During World War I, Jewish field chaplains[66] were used by the Army for the first time. The 1919 Weimar constitution recognized the freedom of religion in a manner similar to how it is today under the Basic Law. Individual freedom of religion was described in Article 136: the civil and civic rights and duties are neither qualified nor restricted by exercise of freedom of religion. No one can be forced to attend an ecclesiastical act or ceremony or be forced to take part in religious exercises or use a religious formula of oath.
Article 137 of the Weimar constitution was about religious associations. Main points include the omission of recognition of a state church. Religious associations manage their own affairs within the limits of general law. Religious offices are given without the influence of the state. Religious associations are legal entities. Religious associations which are "bodies of public law" keep this status. Other religious associations can request the same rights, if they can show by their constituency and number of members that they are permanently established. Associations with the purpose of cultivating a world view have the same status as religious associations.
During the time of the Third Reich, there was a very real danger of religious persecution for adherents of any religious association beside theProtestant Reich Church, such as members of theConfessing Church. For example, there werepriest barracks at Dachau Concentration Camp and theBruderhof colony was dissolved. Duringdenazification following the war, theologians and clergy who were accused of having supported the Nazis were removed from their positions.
In 1949, West Germany formulated religious freedom in the Grundgesetz. Although communist East Germany officially claimed religious freedom, the actual practice was to allow a low-key private exercise of religion that did not interfere with any duties towards the state. Outspoken pastors had to face prison in extreme cases, but the more frequent way of dealing with openly confessing Christians and clerics was subtle repression, like strict observance by the state security, or forbidding admission to college for their children. Only following the collapse of communism was theEvangelical Lutheran Free Church able to re-establish church-fellowship with theWisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod.
In the late 20th and early 21st century, free churcher and doctor of theologyJohannes Lerle was fined four times and twice sentenced (by the German government) to prison for making statements against abortion on the internet and distributing anti-abortion leaflets. Prior to this he had also served prison time in East Germany (where he had lived prior to 1988) for distributing Christian literature. Again in 2012 he also served one year for incitement for allegedly denying the Holocaust, which he contested in unsuccessfully in court. Although Lerle had claimed thatMein Kampf was "Satanic," he was targeted by the court for comparing abortion to the holocaust on his website.[67] Because the law againstHolocaust denial in Germany includes a prohibition on not just denying, but even downplaying "an act committed under the rule of National Socialism," Lerle's rhetoric comparing death tolls of the Holocaust and abortion was considered illegal.
Jews in Germany face acts ofantisemitic violence, but it is condemned by authorities. Muslims have encountered resistance tominaret and mosque construction, such as during theCologne Central Mosque controversy.
Although the church and state in Germany have been legally separated since theWeimar Republic, there remains the fact that each area of Germany has been under the dominating social and cultural influence of one singlelandeskirche, be itReformed,United,Lutheran, orRoman Catholic. Concentrating this influence, periods of religious cleansing during theCounter-Reformation saw populations of Protestants emptied out of some areas settled into others. This influence determined education, arts, music, customs, festivals, lifestyle, and even, to some degree, architecture. In eastern Germany and in urban areas, this cultural influence of religion has been substantially reduced; but, in rural areas, it still can be felt in Bavaria, and in some areas ofBaden-Württemberg and theSiegerland.
