The article analyzes the legal integration of religion and worldview communication in secular care contexts in Germany and the Netherlands. The constitutional position of spiritual care and healthcare chaplaincy and the organization of the religious field are diverse in these states. This creates a variety of correlation between the religious and the medical domain within healthcare institutions in both countries. The analysis leads to the question, how the observed differences work out in organization and policy concretely. Finely, there are some conclusions drawn out of the comparison.

This contribution discusses two forms in which spiritual care in the Netherlands can be organized: in terms of a (church) office which reflects the current form, or as liberal profession which is a form to be conceivably pursued as an alternative proper to the sociocultural and institutional developments that this text indicates. The historical Dutch context of pillarization is tributary to a form of spiritual care that seems less apt to deal with the challenges ahead. The conditions and requirements of a liberal model are presented, but also put into perspective of the limited opportunities of the professional association of spiritual care to manoeuvre in politics and policies.

Ryan van Eijk reacts on a previously in this periodical published article on prison chaplaincy in the Netherlands. This article argued that the growing religious individualisation as well as a political rethinking of the role of religions institutions ask for system adaptations and that the denominational approach is subject to discussion. Van Eijk criticizes this thesis and presents arguments and reasons why the current model is a good one. According to Van Eijk prison chaplaincy cannot and should not be organized only from the right of the detainee, for also aspects like the task of the government and denominational organizations and the detention context have to be considered.

In 2005 and 2006 three state-funded Islam- and imam training programs started at Amsterdam Free University, Leiden University and Hogeschool Inholland, after more than two decades of political and public debate. These confessional programs were to educate a Dutch ‘polder imam’. Recently however, the closure of two programs was announced.
This article places the establishment as well as the closure of these programs in a historical perspective. It explores two striking parallels between the motivations in favor of an imam training and the ways the Dutch state has dealt with the institutionalization of religious plurality in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.

Spiritual assistance to people in an institute, was of old a task of churches and religious or philosophical communities. In the intramural health care more and more health care chaplains are working, the position of which is based only on an appointment of the management and not at the same time on a mission of a church or comparable community. This is experienced as a problem, because there is no supervision on the qualities of these health care chaplains. Therefore a committee recently proposed to establish a Council for Independent Spirituality, who tests the qualification and the competence of unattached health care chaplains and take care of their work.

The chaplaincy in penitentiary institutions shows a peculiar co-operation between the state and the religious communities. The chaplains provide a safe opportunity for supporting the detainees. The growing religious individualisation as well as a political rethinking of the role of religions institutions ask for system adaptations. In particular, the denominational approach is subject to discussion.

Which role do religious beliefs and practices play in radicalization processes of individuals and groups? In the Netherlands, the authorities are not entitled to interfere in religious content, given this content does not undermine democratic order. On the other hand religious orthodoxy is increasingly perceived as a source for violence and coercion in public discourse. Former minister of Justice Ernst Hirsch Ballin argued for a better understanding for the value of religion in society. ICCT-director Peter Knoope explained how the government can enable the development of counternarratives to violent jihadism within the civil society. James Kennedy criticised the fact that religion is increasingly problematized and politicized and argued for a more reluctant and relaxed view on religious radicalization.