Recently there’s a lot of debate within the Netherlands about the criminality of assistance by someone who’s not a doctor towards the death of a loved one. In the Heringa lawsuit a son has helped his (step)mother who wished to no longer live (considered her life to be ‘completed’) to die at an age of 99. The helper non-doctor risks criminal pursuit and punishment. The central argument of the lobby to establish a more humane approach towards the persevered need is personal autonomy. This article aims to clarify the debate and to stimulate another way of thinking towards the situation of, mostly, elderly who want to decide and act independently regarding their death.

What freedom of speech do religious leaders have when their religious speech discriminates others? Freedom of religion and freedom of expression may collide with the right to equality (including the principle of non-discrimination). Religious plurality and social polarization in Dutch society induce conflict between these fundamental rights.
This article reviews two legal cases where an imam and a minister were accused of discrimination of homosexuals. From this jurisprudence the authors deduce three principles in judicial decisions weighing freedom of religion and freedom of speech against equality rights: interpretative reluctance, cautiousness and the position of the religious leader.

The integration policy of the Dutch government encourages the development of a society where members of ethnic minorities can fully realize their civil rights and can fulfill their social rights and duties. The same is true for priests and clergymen who come to the Netherlands on behalf of the ethnic minority groups that live in the Netherlands. They will have to be prepared for Dutch society and their role as clergymen within the Dutch secular nation. The specific integration programme that the government introduced in 2002 for this particular target group will end in 2014. During the last 12 years this programme has changed considerably as a result of developments in the social and political context that influenced the integration policy of the government. In this paper the considerations and policy changes towards integration in general and more specific towards the integration of immigrant priests and clergymen in the Netherlands are pointed out, together with the changes in the programme entailed by these policy changes.

The European Court of Human Rights has accepted the French ban on the wearing of a full face veil (burqa) in public based on the notion of ‘living together,’ which in the particular case of France is considered an essential part of the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.
In the author’s view, this ruling is problematic as it elevates local – in this case French – customs of the majority to a legal norm. The law is to protect general freedoms, including the freedom to be different from the majority; the law is not to protect certain majority customs. Prescribing what is or is not culturally suitable may be expected from a theocracy or dictatorship, but is not what a legislator in a democratic society should do.

In the summer of 2014 a book was published at the request of a group of the Church of England’s bishops. It aims to develop strong theological foundations for understanding social engagement as integral to the churches’ theology and spirituality. In doing so it takes, among others, it’s cue predominantly from Catholic Social Teaching. This article provides a review of the book and indicates some important lessons that can be learned from the book for the work of the Dutch Christian-social movement.

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.

In its ruling of June 12, 2014, the European Court on Human Rights (Grand Chamber) concluded that no violation of the right to private life and family life under the European Convention of Human Rights had taken place in the case of the non-renewal of an employment contract of a Roman Catholic teacher of religion and ethics. The reason for this non-renewal was the withdrawal of the required ecclesiastical approval of the teacher. According to the European Court, church autonomy prevailed in this case over the right to private life and family life of the teacher, a married priest with five children and an active member of an organization promoting voluntary celibacy. This contribution analyses and discusses the ruling of the ECHR, also in the light of the main dissenting opinion. It supports the Court’s conclusion, but criticizes some of its reasoning. It also states that regardless of the extent of church autonomy, a clear and correct procedural approach to employment issues also does honour ecclesiastical authorities.

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.

In this article, the question is raised which constitutional answer to immigration is most sustainable with a view to future multicultural societies. I focus on the constitutional answers to immigration in France, Italy and Canada. In France, in 2010, legislation was adopted prohibiting the wearing of face-covering clothing in public. With this ban, the French intended to enhance the equal participation of citizens in society and to protect the equality of the sexes. In Italy, a heated debate took place about the display of crucifixes in (public) schools, which resulted in a restoration of the predominance of the Catholic religion. Across the ocean, in the Canadian province of Québec, the National Assembly of Québec has been discussing a ‘Charter’, whose prevailing idea is to enhance the neutrality of the state, among others by prohibiting religious clothing in public institutions. The question is which of these approaches is best defensible to regulate a society, which will undoubtedly become even more diverse in the near future.

This article compares the situation of religious education in the Dutch and German school systems against the background of the relationship between church and state. In the Netherlands most schools are confessional schools, whereas in Germany most schools are public schools. The way in which the school subject of religious education is taught differs in its form. In both countries difficulties arise in relation to religious education which leads to the future of the Dutch school system of public and confessional private schooling being disputed and in Germany the school subject of confessional religious education being under pressure. Despite laws concerning religion and education the theme of religious education is still debated in the public domain.

Government and church both have to practice mercy, but there is a difference in the way they can do this. That is explained proceeding from theological ethics. The social care of the government cannot relieve every need, because it has to act conform the principles of good governance. Therefore particular charity and social assistance of the church stay necessary.

In 2008 the Party for the Animals in Dutch Parliament submitted a bill on the slaughter of animals without stunning. Initially this bill was formulated as a ban of slaughter without stunning. But then an amendment was included with the clause that this form of slaughter was allowed, provided it can be proven that animal welfare is not more affected than in regular slaughter. This would result in a de facto prohibition. Although the House of Representatives (Tweede Kamer) voted in favor of this bill, it was rejected by the Senate (Eerste Kamer), much to the relief of the Jewish and Muslim communities in the Netherlands. Jews and Muslims must meet with several rules according to their faith while slaughtering animals. One of these rules is that animals are killed without prior stunning. This contribution focuses on arguments regarding animal welfare against and religious arguments for slaughter without stunning.

On the one hand, the religiously motivated circumcision of male minors is a manifestation of the right to freedom of religion. On the other hand, circumcision is an interference with the right to physical integrity. This article makes an effort to explain the fundamental rights’ position of male minor circumcision, dealing as well with the right to freedom of religion of the male minor, with some medical aspects, and with the difference between the circumcision of boys and girls. The article results in a discussion of the question, if specific regulation is required, in view of the recent discussion about the legitimacy of circumcision of male minors.