A great debate ” “

The session of the Convention on the future of Europe that ended last Friday was the occasion formally to begin the discussion on the question of the reference to God and to religion in the future European Constitution. The controversy arose after it emerged that article 2 of the draft presented by the Presidium, dedicated to the Union’s values, made no mention at all of the Christian roots of Europe. Some amendments posed the question anew, even if the most likely solution would seem to be the insertion of the religious reference in the Preamble – still to be written – of the future constitutional Treaty. To review the question SirEurope sounded out the views of some members of the Convention, including its President Valery Giscard d’Estaing , the Spanish MEP and member of the Presidium Inigo Mendez de Vigo , the French Senator Hubert Haenel , and the German Senator Erwin Teufel , and also provides a brief fact file on the “Michalski Group” set up by the President of the Commission, Romano Prodi, to discuss the fundamental values of Europe. President, did you expect so heated a debate? What developments are possible? “Not only did I expect it, but I hoped that the debate would assume such proportions. I have always wanted discussion on this point, and in fact we are insisting on it. I can say that general consensus is being registered within the Assembly on two points: the first is that the guarantees conferred by the Treaty of Amsterdam on the status and role of the Churches within our society will be resumed point by point in the second part of the future Constitution. The second is that it’s not in article 2 that the reference to religious values should be inserted. That article is aimed at providing a list of those values which, if violated by a member state, may give rise to their expulsion from the Union. The reference to religion will find a more appropriate place in the Preamble, which still has to be drafted. We could resume the text of the Charter of Rights, or reconsider the history of European civilization”. Inigo Mendez, what will be the fate of religion in the Constitution? “An agreement in principle already exists, even if not in writing. The Charter of Fundamental Rights will be inserted in toto in the body of the Constitution, in such a way that the articles on religious freedom will be reinforced. The function of the Churches within the member states – including the definition of their juridical status – and the relevant provisions of the Treaty of Amsterdam, will be confirmed, given that no member of the Convention wishes the Amsterdam provisions to be excluded from the future Constitution. As regards the thorny question of the reference to the values and principles of religion (thorny, because to exclude nominally one or more religions might not be welcome to some), I believe that the most logical and least controversial solution would be to insert a reference to the values of religion in the Preamble”. Senator Haenel, what reference should there be to religious beliefs and where should it be inserted in the Treaty? “I gave a speech on the reference to religious beliefs during the last session. First, the EU ought not to intervene in matters pertaining to the status of the churches and the religious communities in the member states; it is bound to respect the fragile balances that exist, and hence the Amsterdam clauses – the so-called “Christophersen clause” – must be explicitly enshrined in the Treaty. In the second place, the Charter of Rights guarantees freedom of conscience and religion, as also does the European Convention of Human Rights. To avoid further discussion being devoted to this point, I think that the Charter and its Preamble should be integrated just as they are in the future Constitution of the Union. The third question concerns the European identity. It does not just consist in our common values, which have a universal vocation and hence are not limited to Europe. The European identity consists, therefore, in large measure in the legacies which we have in common, and which we are called to defend. Whether we like it or not, these legacies have a religious dimension. How can European culture be understood by ignoring Christianity, Judaism, Islam, or even secular humanism? So if we want Europe to have an identity, we must accept and recognize the cultural, humanistic and religious legacies of Europe, without privileging or prejudicing one belief over another. That’s why I believe that this recognition should be affirmed in the Preamble of the future European Constitution”. Senator Teufel, you are among those who signed the amendments proposing a formulation similar to that of the Polish Constitution… “The European Constitution must also reflect the values and spiritual foundations on which Europe is founded. A former German federal president affirmed that the West derives from three hills: Golgotha, the Acropolis and the Capitol. If that’s the case, the EU Constitution must contain a reference to God, source of universal values: a reference for believers, but one which must at the same time recognize other sources from which non-believers derive their values. In this respect the formulation of the Polish Constitution is excellent. Moreover, the defence of marriage and the family ought to be integrated in article 3 as an objective of the Union”.