In the 19th century in many Western states, the close relationship between Church and State came to an end and the Roman Catholic Church developed into a major and active player on social and educational level in society separate from the State.
This was due, on the one hand, to the constitutional changes in the Western states from the end of the 18th century, which led to the gradual introduction of the formal principle of separation of Church and State. On the other hand, it was a result of the search for a new position of the Roman Catholic Church in society that also influenced the theological reflection of the Church on society.
The ecclesiastical reflection on the ideal relationship between Church and State took shape in the course of this process in the Ius Publicum Ecclesiasticum. The ecclesiastical view on the relationship between believers/citizens, society and State simultaneously took shape in Catholic social doctrine, which today still offers a model for modern society. In Catholic social doctrine, the believer/citizen is the connecting element between Church and State in a secular society. The ‘state doctrine’ of the Catholic Church is presented in Catholic social doctrine as an ideal image of the democratic constitutional state in which man is central and forms the central link between Church, society and secular State.

Politics and law are not in essence about knowledge, good sense and learning, but about wisdom. Good legislation requires wisdom and the wise judge is also the ideal when it comes to good adjudication. But what is wisdom actually and who is the sage? To answer these questions, this article departs from the views of the Stoa (of Seneca especially) which has been of fundamental significance for the development of law and which still continues to influence it. It shows how the philosophical views of the Stoics included an objective view of law and cultivated a subjective impassibility and apathy that were associated with steadfastness or constancy. Stoic wisdom was (and still is): virtuous obedience to the objective laws of nature. In modern Stoics like Spinoza and Justus Lipsius we find these same elements. But in modern times Stoicism is wrapped in the veil of a Christian vision of life, which (as such) serves as a seductive legitimation of its principles. In this guise Stoicism has been of enormous significance in the history of Christianity. However, their historical relationship is based on a major misunderstanding. In fact, Stoicism is Christianity’s most extreme alternative, as Erasmus already pointed out. For the Stoic sage a theoretical and practical wisdom applies that is not (in any way) in accordance with the courageous foolishness of Christianity. It is through the prism of this foolishness that we come to appreciate that the eternal Stoic attitude is odious when it comes to law and politics. Stoicism is a recurring crisis phenomenon: a cultural sickness, for which the wisdom of Christianity still offers a very effective medicine.

A medical doctor in The Netherlands is not punishable under the law for assisting in a patient’s self-chosen death as long as (s)he has fulfilled the conditions of the Euthanasia Law of 2002. This law regards patients with unbearable and hopeless suffering who request an end to their life. This article will regard euthanasia from the perspective of Roman Catholic church law: if a Catholic doctor in The Netherlands ends the life of a patient in conformity with the Euthanasia Law, could this nevertheless be considered a crime of manslaughter as stipulated in Canon 1397 of the Code of Canon Law (1983)? And is that doctor then punishable under that law? It will be demonstrated that this is not the case, because the church law does not regard a crime similar to euthanasia under Dutch law, even though the killing of an innocent person is considered a sin. Against the background of the logic in church law, this article will make a comparison with the crime of abortion as stipulated in Canon 1398 of the ecclesiastical Code. It will be demonstrated that manslaughter and abortion share a different but illuminating history and topicality.

The article is a plea to reconsider the new impetus that the second Vatican council in the catholic church has brought about, and to give it shape in the ecclesiastical administration of the catholic church. After a period of strong renewal this movement seems to be evaporated in the Netherlands, whereas this council and the code of 1983 have a lot of opportunities to offer. On the basis of a number of concrete examples of administrative reforms that Pope Francis and some of the newly appointed bishops have realized, the author offers some concrete proposals.

John Calvin had the view that church and state formed a spiritual unity. His followers accepted step by step the equal right for protestants and catholic in public society. Their arguments for this were mainly practical. Biblical arguments, as the parable of the tare in the field, played a minor role. Not earlier than in the 19th century public tolerance was a fundamental choice for neo-calvinists.

The authors establish that in the West mercy in public life, in particular as acts of judges and governors, underwent a wrongful decline. This decline is an effect of the tension between mercy and justice that grew during the transition of medieval, Christian into modern, secular law and justice. To prove this, the authors present a broad historical overview. Eventually, they argue in favour of an incidental application of mercy in public life, under strict conditions. However, in a secular society and law system mercy can be made acceptable only for the political and public debate. In this situation, an appeal to a more neutral sounding virtue such as compassion will be more convincing.

The Netherlands has a unique educational system, based on freedom of education, that provides for public and denominational education both financed on equal terms by the state. Only schools belonging to formally recognized denominations are qualified for public finance. School education is one of the few policy fields in The Netherlands where a formal recognition of faith actually occurs.
A denomination is qualified for recognition when four formal conditions are met: (1) it is a fundamental orientation well founded on a specific faith or philosophy of life, (2) that is apparently entrenched in Dutch society, (3) distinguishable from other recognized denominations, and (4) implemented in the bye-laws that must safeguard the religious or philosophical character of the school. In the Roman Catholic denomination only the bishop is competent to recognize a school as Roman Catholic. This system is now under discussion in the political arena, where two alternatives are presented: extension as opposed to abolition of the concept of denomination. The present article concludes that denominational school education is rooted in the concept of civil society and argues the extension of the concept of denomination to include also pedagogical visions. But also in its extended application a connection with a shared contemplation of man should be put first and foremost.

The Roman Catholic Church experiences a transition from the highly centralized Church formation of Ultramontane Mass Catholicism into a more decentralized and pluralistic Choice Catholicism. With respect to governance, this transition concerns the increasing importance of the diocesan intermediate level in the Church on the one hand, and a transition from a union-oriented organization model into a network-oriented model on the other. The network model is catalyzed by the digitalization of daily life and its polycentrism. This contribution discusses these developments in a systematic way with the help of sociological and theological insights. By way of conclusion it summarizes some challenges from a policy and governmental point of view. They concern the ecclesial leadership style, membership and participation, catholicity, online community building, and self-presentation in the social media.

As a result of reported cases of child abuse by Roman Catholic priests and brothers in The Netherlands, a Dutch solicitor has formally accused the archdiocese of Utrecht and the diocese of Rotterdam of conspiracy. The charges being ill-founded were rejected by the public prosecutor. The present article points out that the charge of conspiracy was ill-considered and legally untenable under Dutch criminal law, because it could not be maintained that the archdiocese of Utrecht or the diocese of Rotterdam were parties to an agreement to commit the offences in question. Unfortunately child abuse and the tendency to keep it silent are a common problem in Dutch society, not only within the Roman Catholic Church, so it should be addressed accordingly. The Dutch Bishops’ Conference and representatives of congregations established in The Netherlands have set up a fact-finding committee under the expert guidance of the elder states-man Mr. Deetman to make an independent investigation into the facts and circumstances of sexual abuse of children within the ecclesiastical province of The Netherlands and to make recommendations for redress and compensation. The committee has submitted its report in December 2011. Like this the Dutch bishops and congregations have set an example how the problem of prescribed cases of child abuse within a complex social organization can be revealed and dealt with. For that purpose criminal law is a less appropriate instrument. It is satisfying to see that other organizations, religious and secular, have taken similar initiatives.

Calvinist politicians have traditionally rejected the principle of people’s sovereignty as contrary to God’s sovereignty. However, over time, the majority of these politicians have used the term democracy, which basically means the same, although there has always been a minority seeking a theocracy or a Christian government. Nowadays, Christian politics will not pursue a Christian state, but it pleads for the right to religious liberty in which it finds the key to thinking about human rights and the rule of law.

Governmental authorities have to deal with religion on a daily basis: via individual citizens or religious organisations, in the framework of subsidy applications or measures against the radicalisation of believers. More than a year after publication of ‘Religion and the public domain, guidelines for municipalities’, a joint production of the Association of the Netherlands Municipalities and the Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom relations, we discuss the room for cooperation between the government and religious organisations within the limits of the principle of separation between church and state. Both the legal framework and practical examples from different municipalities will be brought up. Three rules (of play) are exemplified in particular, namely that contacts between government and religious organisations or parties on an ideological basis do not lead to a substantive involvement with the faith itself, or with internal church matters, that the contacts serve to realise non-faith related public goals and that the government is held tot treat religious organisations or parties on an ideological basis equally. Having regard to those rules (of play) cooperation is very well possible.