Religion and European Integration: Predominant Themes and Emerging Research Priorities

Religion and European Integration: Predominant Themesand Emerging Research Priorities

Kenneth Houston*INCORE, University of Ulster

Abstract

Even before the controversy over the Invocatio Dei, proposed for inclusion in the preamble to theEuropean Union’s defunct Draft Constitution, the role of religion in European integration hadmoved toward the centre of political consciousness. As early as 1992 the then European Commis-sion President, Jacques Delors, had stated that ‘If in the next twenty years we have not given asoul to Europe, given it spirituality and meaning, then the game will be up’.1 Throughout theremainder of his tenure, and beyond it, corporate religion was given an increasingly prominentrole in strategic and affective considerations of further European integration. This new role forreligious associations has now been incorporated into the recently ratified Lisbon Treaty, where‘open, transparent and regular dialogue’ has been formally established. The article will considerthe question of European integration and the role of ‘public’ religion within this by disentanglingtwo predominating thematic approaches, and thereafter discussing their inter- (and intra-) thematictensions along with the potential avenues that they offer for future research.

Introduction – Religion in ⁄ and European Institutions

At the turn of the new millennium Europe was still classified as a region of the world whichexhibited little of religious tensions; it was, as Crouch noted, the ‘quiet continent’.2 How-ever, from 2001 until the financial crisis of 2008 the quiet continent had engaged in a pro-longed argument with itself about the appropriate role of religion in politics and society.The apparently disparate research fields of European Union studies (also European integra-tion studies) and the study of religion in politics and society would appear to strain at theedges of even the most capacious analytical framework. The secular (or perhaps a-religious)European integration process unfolded largely without any overt input from religious insti-tutional influences up to and including the European Commission presidency of JacquesDelors.3 However, only with the ratification of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) didreligion – along with civil society generally – assume greater influence within the EU.4 De-lors had also, in 1992, spelt out an urgent need to engage with the affective dimension ofEurope’s integration process in order to shore up waning support for further interdepen-dence. Since that time, religions, specifically religious organisations, have become markedlymore involved in policy consultation. The mainstream Christian churches have establishedliaison offices in Brussels and have explicitly pursued pre-legislative consultation with pol-icy- and decision-makers (on this see Schlesinger and Foret 2006).

This article seeks to undertake an analytical overview of the question of religion’s placeand role in European construction. The article disentangles two distinct and predominantstrands, which inform and infuse one another. The first strand, the empirical-analytical,draws out the relevant elements of EU studies as it pertains to the place of religion withinEuropean integration. The second strand, the normative dimension, considers the impact

Religion Compass 5/8 (2011): 462–476, 10.1111/j.1749-8171.2011.00291.x

ª 2011 The AuthorReligion Compass ª 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

of normative political theory in combination with insights from the sociology of religion.The article then considers the emerging research priorities that emanate from these fre-quently overlapping disciplinary divisions and associated tensions.

European Integration Processes and Religion

Navigating the maze of accumulating research on European integration by itself is adaunting task. Complicating any consideration of religion’s role in European integrationis the complexity of the political entity within which analysis takes place and the almostesoteric political processes peculiar to it. The study of European integration is an entiresubfield of International Relations, comparative politics and policy studies combined. TheEU’s policy areas (known as competencies) are extensive, its mechanisms of policy for-mulation, decision-making and regulation are complex, and research into each of these isvast. However, as far as the role of religion is concerned, there is a more limited – andmanageable – cluster of relevant research areas. Crucially, any engagement with the placeof religion in the EU must include an understanding of how the EU functions. Despitethe ongoing evolution of political practice this component of EU studies is well eluci-dated by several prominent scholars in the field of EU research.5 European Union deci-sion-making and regulation encompasses a complex relationship between all the maininstitutions, particularly the European Commission, the European Parliament and theEuropean Council (also the Council of Ministers).6

The theoretical approaches to EU integration are numerous, the most prominent beingthe concepts of federalism, neo-functionalism, liberal inter-governmetalism, Europeangovernance, policy networks, new (also neo) institutionalism, social constructivism, politi-cal economy and discursive readings.7 Much attention is now being paid to the concep-tual shift from traditional ideas of government to those of governance, and insights fromthis research are indispensible for understanding contemporary EU politics.8 The Euro-pean Commission’s 2001 White Paper on European Governance was explicit aboutaccording ‘civil society’ bodies a voice in decision-making.9 This has become a salientfeature of advanced democracy but is acutely relevant in the context of EU studies. The‘multi-level’ nature of European Union governance10 and the uneven nature of the pro-cesses of integration are further complicating factors. The field of political sociology,which examines the relationship between political institutions and citizens, is a usefulframework from which to explore the role of non-state and civil society actors in politicaldecision-making.11 This has given rise to an expansive literature on policy-making, neo-corporatism and lobbying or interest representation.12 We might note here a normativedimension, which is reflected in ‘third way’ politics and the proliferation of what havebecome known as public–private partnerships (PPPs).13 The role of churches as legitimateinterests in European politics and policy-making was formally enshrined in the LisbonTreaty of 2007 under Article 17 (of the Functioning of the Lisbon Treaty).14

In addition to these perspectives on the EU’s structure, processes and the role ofreligion in policy, another pertinent component of the field has emerged around theaffective dimension to European construction. This is concerned with the nature of therelationship between European institutions and Europe’s citizenry and the notion of aEuropean identity.15 Since the difficult ratification process of the TEU in early 1990s theEU has struggled with questions of political legitimacy and a perceived ‘democratic defi-cit’.16 The relevance for the subject of religion in Europe is the potentially legitimisingrole that faith associations offer to the EU’s political and bureaucratic institutions.17 Thescholarship has tended to subsume the role of churches within the broader civil society

Religion and European Integration 463

ª 2011 The Author Religion Compass 5/8 (2011): 462–476, 10.1111/j.1749-8171.2011.00291.xReligion Compass ª 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

stratum and this has obscured the specific nature of religion’s political impact in Europe.The hazy dividing line between empirical-analytical and normative-analytical approachesis thrown into sharp relief here. The bulk of normative-analytical approaches begin fromthe premise that increased participation by religiously motivated actors in politics is intrin-sically good as part of a wider inclusion of civil society in decision-making.18 Some havechallenged the potential of civil society to offer a panacea for perceived deficiencies inEurope’s political system as it is currently configured (for discussion, see Hix 2005;Steffek et al. 2007; see also Sudbery 2003). It is here that the first strand of scholarshipopens the door to the second. Empirically led analysis of EU decision-making and policymaking has merged with normative concerns about the opaque nature of decision-making, the lack of public participation and the necessity for greater political legitimacyand accountability. Arguably, the most relevant approach to the study of the role ofreligion in European or EU politics is to concentrate on the role of organised and associa-tional religion and the impact of personal religious convictions held by key political andbureaucratic decision-makers.19

Normative Political Theory

In theoretical terms, Habermas, through both his scholarship on the public sphere and theimperatives of communicative action along with his increasing interest in religion and Euro-pean integration, has spearheaded a broader argument about the role of civil society and reli-gion in politics.20 Habermas articulates the conviction that religions contain importantcritical resources and should not be excluded from the public sphere. Much of the norma-tive literature expends considerable energy arguing in favour of a (sometimes prominent)role for religiously motivated voices in politics. An underlying assumption feeding into this,which is informed by the sociology of religion, is that popular religion (the level of religiousbelief and practice among the masses) is in decline in Europe, and that this decline has seri-ous and negative consequences.21 The sociology of religion as an analytical prism is con-cerned with the analysis of trends in religious observance and practice.22 The secularisationthesis23 and the question of de-secularisation, de-privatisation and ‘resurgent’ religious beliefin late-modernity are pervasive themes (on these themes see Juergensmeyer 1993, 2000; Ke-pel 1995; Westerlund 1996). This importance rests on an underlying axiom, or challengesto it, prominent within prevailing scholarly opinion: the peculiarity – or ‘exception’ – ofthe European context vis-a-vis patterns of religious belief. Europe is by far the most secularof the world’s regions.24 Casanova’s study of ‘public’ religions has been influential, andembodies a normative perspective that seeks to establish a legitimate space for religion insociety (see Casanova 1994). Casanova argued for the necessity of revising the secularisationthesis and abandoning the implicit insistence of liberal democratic politics that religionshould remain privatised. He argued that the ‘de-privatisation’ of religion was a necessarycorrective, and that, in light of the shift towards the growth of the ‘public sphere’, religionhad a place in socio-political debate.25 Casanova marks an important scholarly meetingpoint: the empirical and the normative. He explicitly invokes Habermas’s discourse ethic inorder to underpin the justification for public religion.26

With regard to the normatively defined role of religion in politics, much of the con-ceptual and discursive currency in contemporary debate emanates from an amalgam oftwo principle developments, one historical and the other scholarly. First, the retrench-ment of democracy after the Second World War combined with the traumatic impact oftotal war and genocide, along with the prevailing hegemony of liberal political theory,facilitated the repudiation of eugenics and ‘race’ concepts in favour of ‘culture’.27 Second,

464 Kenneth Houston


even as liberal democracy continued to gain ascendency in what was then termed the‘free world’ in the face of totalitarian communism, a radical critique of liberal theory wasalready underway.28 Ethical individualism was faced with powerful arguments about theintrinsic value of communal attachments as a source of identity and morality.29 Contem-porary multiculturalism emerged as a result of the theoretical engagement between liberaland communitarian scholars, and the apparent ascendency of the latter.30 The languageand concepts of multiculturalism, the politics of identity or the politics of ‘recognition’combined with anti-racism, have now become hegemonic within the social sciences andhumanities.31 This multicultural critique of ethical individualism paralleled the politicalreality of increasing inward migration into western democratic states and the wholesaleabandonment of policies of assimilation by national governments in favour of varyingdegrees of accommodation.32 Normative scholarship on the role of religion in politics isconsiderable, and it is not confined to Europe.33 Nevertheless, familiarity with this sphereof research is vital in order to understand the vocabulary of current debate because theconcept of multiculturalism has provided faith-based organisations seeking relevance andinfluence in politics and society with an effective new discourse: multi-faithism.34

The European Union’s approach to integration and many aspects of its policy processeshas a close affinity with the Habermasian pursuit of socio-political consensus, at least atthe level of official discourse. Within the normative literature, much stress is placed onthe mutually distinct concepts of ‘deliberative’ and ‘participatory’ democracy, as an aug-mentation to traditional representative and parliamentary politics.35 This has been repli-cated in the EU’s conduct of dialogue with religious associations: it simultaneouslyaccords symbolic and tokenistic recognition to European religious pluralism, and emphas-ises the imperatives of ‘unity in diversity’.

Furthermore, within normative democratic theory there is also the tendency to viewreligious activism, insofar as it is a component of broader civil society, as a counterweightto overbearing state dominance. Relatively under researched are the emerging tensionsbetween associational or institutional religion (particularly its more conservative manifes-tations) and late-modern human rights and civil liberties discourses. The state’s role inproviding a bulwark against the oppressive tendencies among non-state actors, where thelatter may embody even less democratic accountability than state or European institutions,is not given extensive treatment. The antagonism between conservative or traditionalfaiths such as Christianity and Islam and other social movements, such as gender and sex-ual equality, is not prominent in the normative literature.36 Tying both the sociologyof religion and normative theory together is the issue of migration, both the inwardmigration into the EU from developing nations and the migration of labour forces acrossEurope under the common travel area (Schengen) agreement. Obviously, the dynamic ofmigration throughout the second half of the twentieth century has had a significant, ifnot the main, effect on Europe’s socio-cultural landscape.37 It is not merely that peopleare mobile – so are their beliefs. Furthermore, radically different beliefs are now coexis-ting within the same proximate social space in ways not envisaged before. This hasimpacted upon the affective dimension of European integration: how to conceptualiseand nurture a sense of commonality within the European space while managing increas-ing socio-cultural (and religious) pluralism.

Therefore, within the normative perspective an orthodoxy has now taken shape,whereby the combination of political imperatives to bridge legitimacy gaps, the pursuit ofidentitarian claims-making and the imperative to provide political space for pluralconcepts of the good are all pertinent to the religion-politics nexus. Additionally, asexemplified by Robert Putnam, a significant body of scholarly opinion in this field has



settled on the idea that the decline in religion amounts to a decline in social capital, andthat the social bonds of society are at risk as a result of eroding religiosity.38 The dilutionof faith is, in much normative theorising, a problem to be rectified.39 Relevant questionsfor this new consensus are: who is now marginalised, and whose interests are negativelyaffected by the re-emergence of faith and religion into politics?40

Conclusion – Themes and Priorities

Research into the contribution of religion to European integration is invariably complexand interdisciplinary, and although future analyses will be much more focused, an aware-ness of the various background themes and debates is essential. There are clear disparitiesbetween the normative justifications for increased participation by organised religion inthe public sphere on the one hand and the empirical instances of religious associationsengaged as lobbies in pursuit of interests. These are not necessarily incompatible or illegit-imate, but they are not the same. A second theme is the tension between the broad, ifuneven, decline in popular religious observance across Europe41 and the increasing moveaway from organised religion on the one hand and the galvanisation of organised religionand their assertive engagement in politics and policy-making on the other. The thirdmain theme lies within the dimension of normative political theory, which infuses bothof the previous spheres in different ways. The implicit assumption among many normativetheorists who engage directly with the question of religion and politics is that increasedreligiosity – including a corresponding increase in the role of faith bodies in politics – is apositive end in itself.42 Society, in their view, functions better with religion in a prominentrole, despite evidence to the contrary.43 This is in tension with the liberal democraticpremise that the political authority should not promote any one belief system – or beliefgenerally – above any other. Privileged interlocution between supranational politicalinstitutions and traditional corporate religions may be – and has been – in tension with themobilisation of other marginal groups in society who seek emancipation from structuralforms of oppression.

We drew attention to the analytical distinction between two principle research impera-tives. On the one hand the empirical-analytical, which endeavours to examine how reli-gion – in its tangible organised form – actually functions within the existing politicalsystem, and on the other the normative-analytical, which endeavours to justify why reli-gions should be permitted a role (often an elevated one) in a projected democratic (andEuropean) future. It does not help that some authors embody both imperatives simulta-neously. However, a clearer analytical distinction between these is required. Crucial tofuture analyses of religion in Europe and within the EU integration process is the recogni-tion that the role of ‘religion’ needs to be conceived in very specific terms. Broad infer-ences of religion’s expanding influence in European political integration is not aided bytraversing the analytically – and empirically – distinct spheres of micro level religiosity,organised or institutionalised faith and the religious adherence of prominent politicalactors.44 Arguably, it is the combined effect of mobilised religious biases and their interac-tion with sympathetic political or bureaucratic actors and the power relations betweenthese antipodes that will have far more immediate repercussions on policy. This com-ponent – let’s call it the dynamic of political ‘receptivity’ to religious organisational prefer-ences45 – was amply displayed by the controversy surrounding European Commissionnominee Rocco Buttiglione in 2004. The extent to which personal religious adherencemay affect political action – real or projected – is a significant element in the religion–poli-tics interplay. How, and to what extent, do corporate religious actors utilise the EU’s mul-

466 Kenneth Houston


tiple entry points46 in order to realise their interests. There is the related question of deter-mining the issues around which they mobilise. How is religious influence exerted at thepre-legislative agenda-setting stage47 of the Commission, or in the European Parliament,or at the European Council or Council of Ministers? To what extent is the ‘national’ routeutilised, and when and how are strategic alliances formed among the various associations?

There is a need to examine the EU’s role in upholding religious freedom and equality,particularly with regard to non-traditional belief systems, personal creeds and explicit non-belief.48,49 There is some evidence that the European Commission does include some non-traditional faiths (see Pastorelli 2009). However, given the prominence of mainstream faiths,especially the monotheistic traditions, in the EU’s ‘structured dialogue’ process, it is legiti-mate to enquire whether a hierarchy of religious traditions is now emerging, and whetherthis will adversely impinge on the freedom of conscience and belief. Future research needsto consider the degree to which this normatively appealing discourse of ‘common values’and ‘ethical consensus’ has been instrumentalised by the churches as a strategy to secureinfluence and pursue interests. Empirically, a deeper exploration is needed of the attitudinalsimilarities and distinctions between representative samples of adherents on the one hand andformally established religious institutions and associations on the other.50 Manifestly underresearched to date is the rise of non-belief 51 and the mobilisation of secular humanist groupswithin the European sphere.52 They have frequently been the object of critical – even hos-tile – commentary by religious leaders, but there is a need to explore their mobilising imper-atives, their objectives, interests, activities and levels of influence more systematically.

Although noting, as Massignon does,53 that the EU has no competence in the area of reli-gion this does not preclude the likelihood that its existing competencies are of interest toreligious associations. Issues such as bioethics, gender and sexual equality, freedom ofthought and belief, freedom of expression and others have already gained salience. Withinthe normative dimension two key issues stand out in need of further research. First, a deeperexamination of the issues that preoccupy organised religions at particular periods iswarranted, especially with regard to the extent to which their interests are antithetical to theegalitarian objectives of other social movements, or indeed the EU itself. It is now legitimateto ask whether minority religious associations, by virtue of being minorities, are exemptfrom critical scrutiny when the tenets of their faith are in tension with liberal democraticand human rights principles. A wider critique of multiculturalism has gathered momentum,particularly since 2000.54 Second, invoking scholarship sensitive to the discursive dimensionof European integration (for example Diez 1999) we might also consider the utility of suchideas as multiculturalism, civil society, deliberative or participatory democracy or ‘demo-cratic deficit’ as situated strategic devices. In this sense we sidestep the question of theiressential truth, and engage with the idea that – for religious interests – they are also useful.

At its root, the tension within normative scholarship is located in the emerging incom-patibility between the pursuit of emancipation from structural forms of oppression on theone hand and the tendency to advocate for accommodation of difference on the other.The problem lies in the inevitable fact that accommodation of tradition and socio-culturalconservatism may entrench oppressive structures within distinct cultural groupings. Thisincompatibility becomes particularly acute in the European context, where individualfreedom of choice is elevated to the extent that it has been (on this conceptual tensionsee Rostbøll 2008).

Acknowledgement

Many thanks to the anonymous reviewer for suggestions on this paper.



Short Biography

Kenneth Houston recently graduated with a PhD from the School of Criminology,Politics and Social Policy at the University of Ulster. He is currently a researcher at theInternational Conflict Research Institute (INCORE), based at the University of Ulster’sMagee Campus. His doctoral research examined the manifestation of social conflictwithin Europe over the role of religion in politics and policy making. His research inter-ests centre on the role of power in conflict, the antagonisms between religion and politicsand the role of religion in European integration. He has published in a special issue ofReligion, State and Society on the subject of ‘structured dialogue’ between EU institu-tions and religious associations. His latest article in the Journal of Critical GlobalisationStudies examined the use of global and international discourses by the Roman CatholicChurch in Ireland and the United States.

Notes

* Correspondence address: Kenneth Houston, MI105 Aberfoyle House, INCORE, University of Ulster, MageeCampus, Londonderry, Northern Ireland BT48 7JL, UK. E-mail: [email protected]

1 Cited in Nelsen et al. (2001).2 See Crouch (2000). For a multidisciplinary analysis of the general subject area see Leustean and Madeley (2009).3 That is not to say that religion was irrelevant. Indeed, some of the most prominent architects of the Europeaninterdependence project were explicitly religious. These included Schuman, de Gespari, Adenauer and Monnet. Onthis subject see Gehler and Kaiser (2004), Kaiser (2007) and Duchene (1994).4 Catholic social teaching had provided the origin for the crucial ‘subsidiarity’ principle demarking the parameters forsupranational intervention in national policy-making. On the Subsidiarity principle in EU politics see Europa (2010).5 The volume of scholarship is considerable, but required texts include Nugent (2008), Dinan (2005), Hix (2005),McCormick (2008), Bomberg and Stubb (2003), Bache and George (2006). On the specific question of policy-making in the EU see Richardson (2005), Heritier (1999), Wallace et al. (2005).6 On the functioning of each of the institutions see the following: The European Commission – Nugent(2000a,b), Rippert et al. (2010); the European Parliament – Judge and Earnshaw (2008), Jacobs et al.(2005), Hixet al. (2007); The European Council ⁄ Council of Ministers – Hayes-Renshaw and Wallace (2006), Naurin andWallace (2008). Each of these institutions, and also the European Court of Justice and the European Central Bank,have garnered significant independent scholarship in their own right. It should also be noted that, while not a regu-lar occurrence, it is not unheard of for new students to the field to confuse the Council of Europe with institutionsof the EU, such as the European Council or the Council of Ministers. The Council of Europe is not a componentof the EU. It is, in fact, a distinct international body comprising of 47 member states including Russia. Confusionis not impossible given that its headquarters are in Strasbourg (also the location of the European Parliament’s plenarysession) and it uses the same flag as the EU.7 Required reading on the central theoretical debates in EU studies are Eilstrup-Sangiovanni (2006) and Wienerand Diez (2009).8 On the study of ‘governance’ see Kooiman (1993, and particularly 2003), Kjær (2004, esp. Ch. 4), Treib et al.(2007) and Sibeon (1999).9 The Churches are mentioned specifically in this regard. This document is available on the European Commis-sion’s website (European Commission 2001). For an interesting discussion on the competition among EU institu-tions for civil society input see Bouwen (2007).10 On multi-level governance within the EU see Bache and Flinders (2005), Hooghe and Marks (2001) andBernard (2002).11 See Janosky et al. (2005) and Faulks (1999). For a seminal discussion of ‘civil society’ from the perspective ofpolitical theory see Cohen and Arato (1992), and for a useful introduction see Harris (2006).12 See Greenwood (2003, 2007), Greenwood et al. (1992), Richardson (2005), Woll (2006), Warntjen and Wonka(2004) and Lorenzo (2003).13 See Giddens (1998). Within this scholarship, explicit and lengthy treatment of churches as lobby groups (or civilsociety partners, in normative terminology) is comparatively sparse but has commenced. This is undoubtedly due tothe fact that church bodies have only adopted a lobbyist mindset relatively recently. On this change towards a lob-bying trajectory see Steven (2009). See also Pastorelli (2009) and Houston (2009a).14 On the provision for structured dialogue between churches and the EU, now Article 17 (formerly Article 52 ofthe Draft Constitution) see Jansen (2000), Ferrari (2005), Steven (2009), Houston (2009a), Foret (2009), Foret and

468 Kenneth Houston


Schlesinger (2007) and Schlesinger and Foret (2006). On the specific relationship between the EU and Islamic faithgroups, see Silvestri (2009).15 On this latter concept see Delanty (1995) and Rose (1997). Other pertinent analyses are Kantner (2006) andKostakopoulou (2001). For an interesting empirical analysis see Lutz et al. (2006). Another useful discussion isWood (1998).16 This issue has generated significant scholarship, including a critical engagement with the prima facia assumptionthat there is a democratic deficit. The more prominent discussions include: Norris (1997), Beetham and Lord(1998), Banchoff and Smith (1999), Zweifel (2002), Door (2008), Bekkers et al. (2008), Kammel (2010) andJancarik (2009). There is a useful survey article by Føllesdal (2006) and other interesting discussions by Goodhart(2007) and Decker (2002). Scholarly articles include Eriksen and Fossum (2004), Estella (2005), Fossum (2003) andTsakatika (2005, 2007).17 Nelsen et al. (2001) have presented an interesting analysis of the correlation between religious adherence andsupport for the EU.18 Bartley (2006) has conducted an analysis of how the Church of England in the UK, by becoming moreentwined with ‘Third Way’ politics and public-private partnerships, has allowed itself to become an instrument ofthe state to the detriment of its critical social function.19 Micro level instances of antagonism over religious symbolism and practices, such as industrial disputes over thewearing of religious dress or the display of religious symbols, do garner attention grabbing headlines in the popularmedia. However, the real significance of religion for European integration lies in the EU’s political interaction withassociational and institutional – or mobilised – forms of faith.20 This included a well-known exchange with then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI). Haber-mas is undoubtedly the most influential theorist across this broad subject area and is invariably cited in most if notall discussions on Europe’s legitimacy question. For the exchange with Cardinal Ratzinger see Habermas and Ratz-inger (2007). Habermas’s primary discussions on the subject are Habermas (2002, 2006, 2008) and on Europe thereis the more recent Habermas (2009). For secondary discussion of the subject of religion in the public sphere see therecent special issue of Philosophy and Social Criticism, introduced by Boettcher and Harmon (2009). See also Lafont(2007, 2009) and Yates (2007).21 A broad view of change in European society is Crouch (2008), which includes a section on the decline in religion(p35ff). For a useful set of discussions on Europe’s public sphere, see Fossum and Schlesinger (2007).22 On the subfield of the sociology of religion see Christiano et al. (2001) and Davie (2004, 2007). For a seminaldiscussion on this subject see Berger (1969).23 On the subject of the secularisation thesis and secularisation as a social phenomena see Swatos and Christiano(1999) and Norris and Inglehart (2004). For a revision of the secularisation thesis see Yamane (1997). Many scholarswithin the sociology of religion have refuted the secularisation thesis and the main cleavage within the sociology ofreligion appears to centre on this issue. See, for example, Stark (1999). Davie (2000) attempts to show that Europe-ans believe but no longer ‘belong’ to organised or institutionalised forms of faith. Contradicting this see EVS (2004)and Voas and Crockett (2005). See also Stark and Finke (2000), Norris and Inglehart (2004) and Bruce (2002).24 See the European Values Survey (EVS, 2004) and special Eurobarometer 225.25 Another influential voice, although grounded in the US debate, is Stephen L. Carter (Carter 2000).26 However this is conceivably an argument in search of a problem. At the national level, European states haveextensive and long standing formal or informal arrangements with religious institutions. See Madeley and Enyedi(2003) and also Fox (2007) on the relationship between states and religious bodies. For a broad and important over-view see Robbers (2005).27 This has its roots in the ‘UNESCO Statement on Race’, 1950.28 Rawls (1999 [1971]) was a particular target of criticism, which informed is revised liberal theory in Rawls(1996). Criticism emanated from (inter alia), Sandel (1982), Walzer (1983), McIntyre (1984) and Young (1989,1990, 2000).29 This was identified by Cohen (1999) as the ‘social constitution thesis’.30 For a concise and accessible overview of ‘multiculturalism’ see Song (2010).31 On identity politics or the politics of identity see Taylor (1989, 1994); on the concept of ‘recognition’ seeHonneth (1995); on anti-racism see Lentin (2004, 2005).32 An exception within the normative literature specifically dealing with the role of religion in society, in particularthe separation principle, is Audi (1989).33 For European based scholarship see Modood and Werbner (1997), Modood (2002, 2007), Parekh (2006) and Bader(1999, 2003a,b, 2007a,b). For arguments from a North American perspective see Young (1989, 2000), Kymlicka(1995), Taylor (1989, 1994), Spinner-Halev (2000), Eisenberg and Spinner-Halev (2005) and Tully (1995). See alsoBaumann (1996, 1999) for constructivist-based arguments.34 On this concept see Hasan (2009) and for critique from a feminist perspective see Patel (2008).35 On Deliberative Democracy see Bohman and Rehg (1997), Elster (1997, 1998), Elstub (2006), Fishkin (2009),and for critique see Shapiro (1999), Sunstein (2000) and Baccaro (2006). On participatory democracy see Zittel andFuchs (2006). Bellamy and Warleigh (1998) have conducted an extensive examination of the potential for citizen



participation in the European context. On the tensions between interest group representation and deliberativedemocracy see Curtin (2003).36 On the potential for some social movements to exhibit less emancipatory imperatives see Pichardo (1997).Rosenblum (2000) has alluded to the existence of tensions between religion and liberal egalitarian principles butdoes not expand on the subject.37 On the siuation of Islam ⁄ Muslims in Europe see Shadid and Van Koninsveld (1996), Allievi (1996), Allievi andNielsen (2003), Brown (2000), Buijs and Rath (2002), Byrnes and Katzenstein (2006), Cesari (2005a,b), Cesari andMcLoughlin (2005), Haddad (2002), Leggewie (2007), Luyckx (2000), Marechal (2003), Marechal et al. (2003), AlAzmeh and Fokas (2007), Potz and Wieshaider (2004), Samad and Sen (2007), Fetzer and Soper (2004), Soper andFetzer (2007), Vertovec and Peach (1997), Zubaida (2003) and De Ruiter (2000). Gerholm and Yngve (1988) isobviously more dated, but still has some interesting insights.38 See Putnam (2000) and Putnam and Campbell (2010).39 For examples of this tendency see Berger (1999) and Weigel (2005).40 For an overview of the ‘backlash’ against multiculturalism, see Vertovec and Wessendorf (2010).41 On this subject see Luckmann (1967, 1999, 2003), Davie (2000), Knoblauch (2003) and Bruce (2002).There is more recent discussion in Halman and Draulans (2006) and Voas (2009). Heelas and Woodhead(2005) have argued that spirituality is replacing religion in Europe. For statistical data on European religiositylevels see the Special Eurobarometer 225 study (Eurobarometer 225, 2005) and the European Values Study(EVS 2004).42 Plant (2001) offers a useful overview of the debates about the broad question of religion in politics. Stepan’s(2000).argument has been influential. Carter (2000) and Trigg (2007) argue from an explicitly Christian perspective.43 On the correlation of popular religiosity with societal dysfunction see Paul (2005, 2009). On the subject of athe-ism and its impact on society see Zuckerman (2007, 2008).44 Here, we distinguish between popular religiosity, political and bureaucratic actors with strong religious orienta-tions, and the institutional and associational forms of religion that operate as mobilised biases. This term is borrowedfrom E. E. Schattschneider’s analysis of power in American democracy. See Schattschneider (1960).45 This is elaborated on more fully in Houston (2009b) especially in Chapter 7.46 Whether this is the European Commission, the European Parliament or the Council, for example.47 On the issue of agenda setting there is a highly relevant study by Kingdon (1995), a well-known study of powerby Lukes (2005) and important articles by Bachrach and Baratz (1962, 1963).48 Individual European (and other) countries were examined in Boyle and Sheen (1997), but the literature here isdated and no further up to date equivalent report could be located. However, the US State Department websiteregularly posts reports on religious freedom. Richardson and Introvigne (2001) present a critical appraisal of theEuropean Parliament’s perception of ‘cults’.49 On humanism see Davies (1997), Todorov (2002) and Norman (2004).50 On the fraught issue of the ‘representative’ capacity of religious organisations in the German context see Legge-wie (2007).51 I use the term to include: atheism, agnosticism, humanism or personal creed.52 The most prominent humanist activist group in the EU context is the European Humanist Federation (EHF)based in Brussels. For a recent articulation of secularist principles see Cliteur (2010).53 See Massignon (2003). Massignon has conducted several very useful studies on the subject of religion and politicsin the European context, although her normative-analytical framework is frequently apparent. See Massignon(2003, 2007a,b,c, 2008). Massignon (2007c) is in her native French and as yet no English translation is available. Areview is available in the 2009 Special Issue of Religion, State and Society, 37(1 ⁄ 2): 226–8.54 In addition to those already cited, see also Barry (2001) and his exchange with noted multicultural theorists inKelly (2002). Critical commentary on multiculturalism, the idea of community, or identity has also emanated froma wide variety of other scholars including: Cohen (1999), Delanty (2003), Sen (2006), Jacoby (1999), Appiah(2005), Fraser (2000), Kukathas (1998), Fukuyama (2006), Bauman (1993, 2001), Hollinger (2006), Brubaker(2004), Brubaker and Cooper (2000), Rorty (2000, 2003) and Malik (1996).

Works cited

Al Azmeh, A. & Fokas, E. (2007). Islam in Europe: Diversity, Identity and Influence. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.

Allievi, S. (1996). Muslim Organisations and Islam State Relations: The Italian Case. In: W. A. R. Shadid and P. S.Van Koninsveld (eds.), Muslims in the Margin: Political Responses to the Presence of Islam in Western Europe, pp. 182–201. Kampen: Kok Pharos Publishing.

—— & Nielsen, J. (eds.) (2003). Muslim Networks and Transnational Communities in and Across Europe. Leiden: Brill.Appiah, K. A. (2005). The Ethics of Identity. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Audi, R. (1989). The Separation of Church and State and the Obligations of Citzenship, Philosophy and Public

Affairs, 18(2), pp. 259–96.

470 Kenneth Houston


Baccaro, L. (2006). Civil Society Meets the State: Towards Associational Democracy? Socio-Economic Review, 4(2),185–208.

Bache, I. & Flinders, M. (eds.) (2005). Multi-Level Governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.—— & George, S. (2006). Politics in the European Union, Second Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Bachrach, P. & Baratz, M. S. (1962). Two Faces of Power, American Political Science Review, 56(4), pp. 947–52.—— & ——. (1963). Decisions and Non-decisions: An Analytical Framework, American Political Science Review,

57(4), pp. 632–42.Bader, V. (1999). Religious Pluralism: Secularism or Priority for Democracy? Political Theory, 27(5), pp. 597–633.——. (2003a). Religious Diversity and Democratic Pluralism, Political Theory, 31(2), pp. 265–94.——. (2003b). Taking Religious Pluralism Seriously. Arguing for an Institutional Turn, Ethical Theory and Moral

Practice, 6(3), pp. 3–22.——. (2007a). The Governance of Islam in Europe: The Perils of Modelling, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies,

33(6), pp. 871–86.——. (2007b). Secularism or Democracy? Associational Governance of Religious Diversity. Amsterdam: Amsterdam Univer-

sity Press.Banchoff, P. & Smith, M. P. (eds.) (1999). Legitimacy and the European Union: The Contested Polity. London: Routledge.Barry, B. (2001). Culture and Equality. Cambridge: Polity Press.Bartley, J. (2006). Faith and Politics after Christendom: The Church as a Movement for Anarchy. Milton Keynes: Paternos-

ter Press.Bauman, Z. (1993). Postmodern Ethics. Oxford: Blackwell.——. (2001). Community: Seeking Safety in an Insecure World. Cambridge: Polity Press.Baumann, G. (1996). Contesting Culture: Discourses of Identity in Multi-ethnic London. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.——. (1999). The Multicultural Riddle: Rethinking National, Ethnic, and Religious Identities. London: Routledge.Beetham, D. & Lord, C. (1998). Legitimacy and the European Union. Harlow: Longman.Bekkers, V., Dijkstra, G., Edwards, A. & Fenger, M. (2008). Governance and the Democratic Deficit: Assessing the

Democratic Legitimacy of Governance Practices. London: Ashgate.Bellamy, R. & Warleigh, A. (1998). From an Ethics of Integration to an Ethics of Participation: Citizenship and

the Future of the European Union, Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 27(3), pp. 447–70.Berger, P. (1969). The Sacred Canopy: Elements of a Sociological Theory of Religion. London: Doubleday.——. (ed.) (1999). The Desecularisation of the World: Resurgent Religion in World Politics. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans

Publishing Co.Bernard, N. (2002). Multilevel Governance in the European Union. London: Kluwer Law International.Boettcher, J. W. & Harmon, J. (2009). Introduction: Religion and the Public Sphere, Philosophy and Social Criticism,

35(1 ⁄ 2), pp. 5–22.Bohman, J. & Rehg, W. (eds.) (1997). Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics. Cambridge: MIT Press.Bomberg, E. & Stubb, A. (2003). The European Union: How does it Work? Oxford: Oxford University Press.Bouwen, P. (2007). Competing for Consultation: Civil Society and Conflict between the European Commission

and the European Parliament, West European Politics, 30(2), pp. 265–84.Boyle, K. & Sheen, J. (eds.) (1997). Freedom of Religion and Belief: A World Report. London: Routledge.Brown, M. (2000). Quantifying the Muslim Population in Europe: Conceptual Data and Issues, Social Research

Methodology, 3(2), pp. 87–101.Brubaker, R. (2004). Ethnicity without Groups. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.—— & Cooper, F. (2000). Beyond ‘‘Identity’’, Theory and Society, 29(1), pp. 1–47.Bruce, S. (2002). God is Dead: Secularisation in the West. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Buijs, F. J. & Rath, J. (2002). Muslims in Europe: The State of Research (IMISCOE). [Online]. Retrieved on 22 May

2011 from: http://dare.uva.nl/document/144737Byrnes, T. A. & Katzenstein, P. J. (eds.) (2006). Religion in an Expanding Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.Carter, S. (2000). God’s Name in Vain: The Wrongs and Rights of Religion in Politics. New York: Basic Books.Casanova, J. (1994). Public Religions in the Modern World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Cesari, J. (2005a). Mosque Conflicts in European Cities: Introduction, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 31(6),

pp. 1015–24.——. (2005b). Mosques in French Cities: Towards the End of Conflict? Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies,

31(6), pp. 1025–43.—— & McLoughlin, S. (2005). European Muslims and the Secular State. London: Ashgate.Christiano, K. J., Swatos, W. H. & Kivisto, P. (2001). Sociology of Religion: Contemporary Developments. Lanham,

MD: Alta Mira Press.Cliteur, P. (2010). The Secular Outlook: In Defence of Moral and Political Secularism. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Cohen, A. J. (1999). Communitarianism, ‘Social Constitution,’ and Autonomy, Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 80 pp.

121–135.



Cohen, J. L. & Arato, A. (1992). Civil Society and Political Theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Crouch, C. (2000). The Quiet Continent: Religion and Politics in Europe, The Political Quarterly, 71(s1), pp. 90–

103.——. (2008). Change in European Societies since the 1970s, West European Politics, 31(1 ⁄ 2), pp. 14–39.Curtin, D. (2003). Private Interest Representation or Civil Society Deliberation? A Contemporary Dilemma for

European Union Governance, Social and Legal Studies, 12(1), pp. 55–75.Davie, G. (2000). Religion in Modern Europe: A Memory Mutates. Oxford: Oxford University Press.——. (2004). New Approaches in the Sociology of Religion: A Western Perspective, Social Compass, 51(1), pp.

73–84.——. (2007). The Sociology of Religion. London: Sage Publications.Davies, T. (1997). Humanism. London: Routledge.De Ruiter, J. J. (2000). The Position of Muslim Migrants in the European Union: Emancipation or Marginalisa-

tion? Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 8(2), pp. 254–66.Decker, F. (2002). Governance beyond the Nation-State: Reflections on the Democratic Deficit of the European

Union, Journal of European Public Policy, 9(2), pp. 256–72.Delanty, G. (1995). Inventing Europe: Idea, Identity, Reality. Basingstoke: Macmillan.——. (2003). Community. London: Routledge.Diez, T. (1999). Speaking ‘Europe’: The Politics of Integration Discourse, Journal of European Public Policy, 6(4), pp.

598–613.Dinan, D. (2005). Ever Closer Union: An Introduction to European Integration the European Union Series, Third Edition.

Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Door, L. (2008). The Democratic Deficit Debate: Is There a Democratic Deficit in the European Union? Saarbrucken:

VDM Verlag.Duchene, F. (1994). Jean Monnet: The First Statesman of Interdependence. London: W. W. Norton and Co.Eilstrup-Sangiovanni, M. (2006). Debates on European Integration: A Reader. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Eisenberg, A. & Spinner-Halev, J. (2005). Minorities within Minorities: Equality, Rights, and Diversity. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.Elster, J. (1997). The Market and the Forum: Three Varieties of Political Theory. In: J. Bohman and W. Rehg

(eds.), Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics, pp. 3–32. Cambridge: MIT Press.——. (1998). Deliberative Democracy: Cambridge Studies in the Theory of Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.Elstub, S. (2006). A Double Edged Sword: The Increasing Diversity of Deliberative Democracy, Contemporary Poli-

tics, 12(3–4), pp. 301–19.Eriksen, O. E. & Fossum, J. E. (2004). Europe in Search of Legitimacy: Strategies of Legitimacy Assessed, Interna-

tional Political Science Review, 25(4), pp. 435–59.Estella, A. (2005). Constitutional Legitimacy and Credible Commitments in the European Union, European Law

Journal, 11(1), pp. 22–42.Eurobarometer 225 (2005). Social values, science and technology. [Online]. Retrieved on 29 September 2010 from:

http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/ebs/ebs_225_report_en.pdfEuropa (2010). Subsidiarity. [Online]. Retrieved on 29 September from: http://europa.eu/scadplus/glossary/

subsidiarity_en.htmEuropean Commission (2001). European governance: A white paper. COM (2001) 428 Final. [Online]. Retrieved on

29 September 2010 from: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/en/com/2001/com2001_0428en01.pdfEVS (2004). European Values Study 7: European Values at the Turn of the Millennium, W. Arts and L. Halman (eds.),

Leiden: Brill.Faulks, K. (1999). Political Sociology: A Critical Introduction. New York: New York University Press.Ferrari, A. (2005). Religions, Secularity and Democracy in Europe: For a New Kelsenian Pact. Jean Monnet Working

Paper 03 ⁄ 05, the Jean Monnet Program. [Online]. Retrieved on 29 September 2010 from: http://www.jeanmonnetprogram.org/papers/05/050301.pdf

Fetzer, J. S. & Soper, C. (2004). Muslims and the State in Britain, France and Germany. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Fishkin, J. S. (2009). When the People Speak: Deliberative Democracy and Public Consultation. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press.

Føllesdal, A. (2006). Survey Article: The Legitimacy Deficits of the European Union, Journal of Political Philosophy,14(4), pp. 441–68.

Foret, F. (2009). Religion: A Solution or a Problem for the Legitimisation of the European Union? Religion, Stateand Society, 37(1 ⁄ 2), pp. 37–50.

—— & Schlesinger, P. (2007). Religion and the European Public Sphere In: J. E. Fossum and P. Schlesinger (eds.),The European Union and the Public Sphere: A Communicative Space in the Making? pp. 187–205. London: Routledge.

Fossum, J. E. (2003). The European Union: In Search of an Identity, European Journal of Political Theory, 2(3) pp.319–40.

472 Kenneth Houston


—— & Schlesinger, P. (2007). The European Union and the Public Sphere: A Communicative Space in the Making?London: Routledge.

Fox, J. (2007). ‘ ‘‘Do Democracies Have Separation of Religion and State?’’ ’, Canadian Journal of Political Science,40(1), pp. 1–25.

Fraser, N. (2000). Rethinking Recognition, New Left Review, May–June (3), pp. 107–20.Fukuyama, F. (2006). Identity, Immigration and Democracy, Journal of Democracy, 17(2), pp. 5–20.Gehler, M. & Kaiser, W. (2004). Christian Democracy in Europe since 1945. London: Routledge.Gerholm, T. & Yngve, G. L. (eds.) (1988). The New Islamic Presence in Western Europe. London: Mansell Publishing

Limited.Giddens, A. (1998). The Third Way: The Renewal of Social Democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press.Goodhart, M. (2007). Europe’s Democratic Deficits through the Looking Glass: The European Union as a

Challenge for Democracy, Perspectives on Politics, 5(3), pp. 567–84.Greenwood, J. (2003). Interest Representation in the European Union. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.——. (2007). Review Article: Organised Civil Society and Democratic Legitimacy in the European Union, British

Journal of Political Science, 37, pp. 333–57.——, Grote, J. & Ronit, K. (eds.) (1992). Organized Interests in the European Community. London: Sage Publications.Habermas, J. (2002). Religion and Rationality: Essays on Reason, God and Modernity, Cambridge: Polity Press.——. (2006). Religion in the Public Sphere, European Journal of Philosophy, 14(1), pp. 1–25.——. (2008). Between Religion and Naturalism: Philosophical Essays. Cambridge: Polity Press.——. (2009). Europe: The Faltering Project. Cambridge: Polity Press.—— & Ratzinger, J. (2007). Dialectics of Secularisation: On Reason and Religion. San Francisco, CA: Ignatius Press.Haddad, Y. Y. (2002). Muslims in the West: From Sojourners to Citizens. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Halman, L. & Draulans, V. (2006). How Secular is Europe? The British Journal of Sociology, 57(2), pp. 263–88.Harris, J. (2006). Development of Civil Society. In R. A. W. Rhodes, S. Binder and B. A. Rockman (eds.), The

Oxford Handbook of Political Institutions, pp. 131–43. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Hasan, R. (2009). Multiculturalism: Some Inconvenient Truths. London: Politico’s.Hayes-Renshaw, F. & Wallace, H. (2006). The Council of Ministers, Second Edition. Basingstoke: Palgrave

Macmillan.Heelas, P. & Woodhead, L. (2005). The Spiritual Revolution: Why Religion is Giving Away to Spirituality. Oxford:

Blackwell Publishing.Heritier, A. (1999). Policy-Making and Diversity in Europe: Escaping Deadlock. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.Hix, S. (2005). The Political System of the European Union, Second Edition. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.——, Noury, A. G. & Roland, G. (2007). Democratic Politics in the European Parliament. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.Hollinger, D. A. (2006). From Identity to Solidarity, Daedalus The American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 135(4),

pp. 23–31.Honneth, A. (1995). The Struggle for Recognition: The Moral Grammar of Social Conflicts. Cambridge: Polity Press.Hooghe, L. & Marks, G. (2001). Multi-Level Governance and European Integration. London: Rowman & Littlefield.Houston, K. (2009a). The Logic of Structured Dialogue between Religious Associations and the Institutions of the

European Union, Religion, State and Society, 37(1 ⁄ 2), pp. 207–22.——. (2009b) Faith in dialogue: The conflict dynamics of public religion in European Union governance. Unpublished PhD

thesis, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Ulster.Jacobs, F., Corbett, R. & Shackleton, M. (2005). The European Parliament, Sixth Edition. London: John Harper

Publishing.Jacoby, R. (1999). The End of Utopia: Politics and Culture in an Age of Apathy. New York: Basic Books.Jancarik, P. (2009). Understanding Democracy in the European Union: Democratic Deficit as a Powerful Myth? Saarbrucken:

VDM Verlag.Janosky, T., Alford, R., Hicks, A. & Schartz, M. (eds.) (2005) The Handbook of Political Sociology: States, Civil

Societies, and Globalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Jansen, T. (2000). Europe and Religions: The Dialogue between the European Commission and Churches or

Religious Communities, Social Compass, 47(1), pp. 103–12.Judge, D. & Earnshaw, D. (2008). The European Parliament, Second Edition. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Juergensmeyer, M. (1993). The New Cold War? Religious Nationalism Confronts the Secular State. Berkeley: University

of California Press.——. (2000). Terror in the Mind of God: The Global Rise of Religious Violence. Berkeley: University of California

Press.Kaiser, W. (2007). Christian Democracy and the Origins of the European Union. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Kammel, A. (2010). The Democratic Deficit of the European Union: its Origins and the Role of the European Parliament.

Saarbrucken: VDM Verlag.



Kantner, C. (2006). Collective Identity as Shared Ethical Self-Understanding: The case of the Emerging EuropeanIdentity, European Journal of Social Theory, 9(4), pp. 501–23.

Kelly, P. (ed.) (2002). Multiculturalism Reconsidered: Culture and Equality and its Critics. Cambridge: Polity Press.Kepel, G. (1995). The Revenge of God: The Resurgence of Islam, Christianity and Judaism in the Modern World. Pennsyl-

vania: Pennsylvania University Press.Kingdon, J. W. (1995). Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies, Second Edition. New York: HarperCollins.Kjær, A. M. (2004). Governance: Key Concepts. Cambridge: Polity.Knoblauch, H. (2003). Europe and Invisible Religion, Social Compass, 50(3), pp. 267–74.Kooiman, J. (1993). Modern Governance: New Government-Society Interactions. London: Sage.——. (2003). Governing as Governance. London: Sage.Kostakopoulou, T. (2001). Citizenship, Identity and Immigration in the European Union: Between Past and Future.

Manchester: Manchester University Press.Kukathas, C. (1998). Liberalism and Multiculturalism: The Politics of Indifference, Political Theory, 26(5), pp. 686–99.Kymlicka, W. (1995). Multicultural Citizenship: A Liberal Theory of Minority Rights. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Lafont, C. (2007). Religion in the Public Sphere: Remarks on Habermas’s Conception of Public Deliberation in

Postsecular Societies, Constellations, 14(2), pp. 239–59.——. (2009). Religion and the Public Sphere: What are the Deliberative Obligations of Democratic Citizenship?

Philosophy and Social Criticism, 35(1 ⁄ 2) pp. 127–50.Leggewie, C. (2007). Between national church and religious supermarkets: Muslim organisations in Germany and the problem

of representation. Eurozine article. [Online]. Retrieved on 29 September 2010 from: http://www.eurozine.com/articles/2007-10-19-leggewie-en.html

Lentin, A. (2004). Racism and Anti-Racism in Europe. London: Pluto Press.——. (2005). Replacing ‘Race’, Historicizing ‘Culture’ in Multiculturalism, Patterns of Prejudice, 39(4), pp. 379–96.Leustean, L. N. & Madeley, J. T. S. (2009). Religion, Politics and Law in the European Union. London: Routledge.Lorenzo, A. G. (2003). The Role of Interest Groups in the European Union Decision Making Process, European

Journal of Law and Economics, 15(3), pp. 251–61.Luckmann, T. (1967). The Invisible Religion. London: Macmillan.——. (1999). The Religious Situation in Europe: The Background to Contemporary Conversions, Social Compass,

46(3), pp. 251–8.——. (2003). Transformations of Religion and Morality in Modern Europe, Social Compass, 50(3), pp. 275–85.Lukes, S. (2005). Power: A Radical View, 2nd edn. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Lutz, W., Kritzinger, S. & Skirbekk, V. (2006). The Demography of Growing European Identity, Science: American

Academy of Arts and Sciences, 314 p. 425.Luyckx, M. (2000). The EU and Islam: The Role of Religion in the Emerging European Polity, Cambridge Review

of International Affairs, 13(2), pp. 267–82.Madeley, J. T. S. & Enyedi, Z. (eds.) (2003). Church and State in Europe: The Chimera of Neutrality. London and

Portland: Frank Cass.Malik, K. (1996). The Meaning of Race: Race, History and Culture in Western Society. Basingstoke: Macmillan.Marechal, B. (2003). Mosques, Organisations and Leadership. In: S. Marechal, S. Allievi, F. Dassetto and J. Nielsen

(eds.), Muslims in the Enlarged Europe: Religion and Society, pp. 79–151. Brill: Leiden.——, Alleivi, S., Dassetto, F. & Nielsen, J. (2003). Muslims in the Enlarged Europe: Religion and Society. Brill: Leiden.Massignon, B. (2003). Regulation of religious diversity by the institutions of the European Union: From confrontation of

national exceptions to the emergence of a European model. Paper presented to the annual meeting of the Associationfor the Sociology of Religion, Atlanta, Georgia. [Online]. Retrieved on 30 September 2010 from: http://hirr.hartsem.edu/sociology/massignon.html

——. (2007a). Islam and the European Commission’s System of Regulation of Religion. In: A. Al-Azmeh and E.Fokas (eds.), Islam in Europe: Diversity, Identity and Influence, pp. 125–48. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

——. (2007b). The European Compromise: Between Immanence and Transcendence, Social Compass, 54(4), pp.573–82.

——. (2007c). Des dieux et des fonctionnaires: Religions et laıcites face au defi de la construction europeenne. Rennes: PressesUniversitaires de Rennes.

——. (2008). The EU: Neither God nor Caesar. tr M. Young Eurozine Review, Original publication in Espirit3–4 ⁄ 2007 [Online]. Retrieved on 29 September 2010 from: http://www.eurozine.com/articles/2008-01-28-massignon-en.html

McCormick, J. (2008). Understanding the European Union: A Concise Introduction, Fourth Edition. Basingstoke:Palgrave Macmillan.

McIntyre, A. (1984). After Virtue. Notre Dame: Notre Dame University Press.Modood, T. (2002). Their Liberalism and our Multiculturalism? The British Journal of Politics and International

Relations, 3(2), pp. 245–57.——. (2007). Multiculturalism: A Civic Idea. Cambridge: Polity Press.—— & Werbner, P. (1997). The Politics of Multiculturalism in the New Europe. London: Zed Books.

474 Kenneth Houston


Naurin, D. & Wallace, H. (2008). Unveiling the Council of the European Union: Games Governments Play in Brussels.Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Nelsen, B. F., Guth, J. L. & Fraser, C. R.. (2001). Does Religion Matter? Christianity and Public Support for theEuropean Union, European Union Politics, 2(2), pp. 191–217.

Norman, R. (2004). On Humanism. London: Routledge.Norris, P. (1997). Representation and the Democratic Deficit, European Journal of Political Research, 32(2), 273–82.—— & Inglehart, R. (2004). Sacred and Secular: Religion and Politics Worldwide. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.Nugent, N. (ed.) (2000a). At the Heart of the Union, Second Edition. Basingstoke: Macmillan Press.——. (2000b). The European Commission. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.——. (2008). The Government and Politics of the European Union, Seventh Edition. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Parekh, B. (2006). Rethinking Multiculturalism, Second Edition. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Pastorelli, S. (2009). The European Union and the New Religious Movements, Religion, State and Society, 37(1 ⁄ 2),

pp. 193–206.Patel, P. (2008). Faith in the State? Asian Women’s Struggles for Human Rights in the UK, Feminist Legal Studies,

16(9), pp. 9–36.Paul, G. S. (2005). Cross-National Correlations of Quantifiable Societal Health with Popular Religiosity and Secu-

larism in the Prosperous Democracies: A First Look, Journal of Religion and Society, 7, pp. 1–17.——. (2009). The Chronic Dependence of Popular Religiosity upon Dysfunctional Psychosociological Conditions,

Evolutionary Psychology, 7(3), pp. 398–441.Pichardo, N. A. (1997). New Social Movements: A Critical Review, Annual Review of Sociology, 23, pp. 411–30.Plant, R. (2001). Politics, Theology and History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Potz, R. & Wieshaider, W. (2004). Islam and the European Union. Leuven: Peeters.Putnam, R. (2000). Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. New York: Simon & Schuster.—— & Campbell, D. E. (2010). American Grace: How Religion Divides and Unites Us. New York: Simon & Schuster.Rawls, J. (1996). Political Liberalism. New York: Columbia University Press.——. (1999). A Theory of Justice, Revised Edition. Cambridge Mass: Belknap Press.Richardson, J. (ed.) (2005). European Union: Power and Policy-Making, Third Edition. London: Routledge.Richardson, J. T. & Introvigne, M. (2001). ‘‘Brainwashing’’ Theories in European Parliamentary and Administrative

Reports on ‘‘Cults’’ and ‘‘Sects’’, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 40(2), pp. 143–68.Rippert, S., Cansevdi, H., Rupp, M., Sabathis, G. & Joos, K. (2010). The European Commission: An Essential Guide

to the Institution, the Procedures and the Policies. London: Kogan Page.Robbers, G. (ed.) (2005). State and Church in the European Union, Second Edition, Verlagsgesellschaft: Nomos.Rorty, R. (2000). Is ‘‘Cultural Recognition’’ a Useful Concept for Leftist Politics? Critical Horizons, 1(1), pp. 7–20.——. (2003). ‘Religion in the Public Sphere: A Reconsideration, Journal of Religious Ethics 31(1), pp. 141–9.Rose, R. (1997). What is Europe? A Dynamic Perspective. London: Longman.Rosenblum, N. (ed.) (2000). Obligations of Citizenship and the Demands of Faith: Religious Accommodation in Pluralist

Democracies. Princeton: New Jersey.Rostbøll, C. F. (2008). Emancipation or Accommodation? Habermas vs Rawlsian Deliberative Democracy, Philoso-

phy and Social Criticism, 34(7), pp. 707–36.Samad, Y. & Sen, K. (2007). Islam and the European Union: Transnationalism, Youth and the War on Terror. Oxford:

Oxford University Press.Sandel, M. (1982). Liberalism and the Limits of Justice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Schattschneider, E. E. (1960). The Semi-Sovereign People: A Realist View of Democracy in America. Hinsdale, IL: The

Dryden Press.Schlesinger, P. & Foret, F. (2006). Political Roof and Sacred Canopy? Religion and the EU Constitution, European

Journal of Social Theory, 9(1) pp. 59–81.Sen, A. (2006). Identity and Violence. London: Penguin.Shadid, W. A. R. & Van Koninsveld, P. S. (eds.) (1996). Muslims in the Margin: Political Responses to the Presence of

Islam in Western Europe. Kampen: Kok Pharos Publishing.Shapiro, I. (1999). Enough of Deliberation: Politics is about Interests and Power. In: S. Macedo (ed.), Deliberative

Politics: Essays on Democracy and Disagreement, pp. 28–38. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Sibeon, R. (1999). Governance and the Policy Process in Contemporary Europe, Public Management, 2(3), pp. 289–

309.Silvestri, S. (2009). Islam and Religion in the EU Political System, West European Politics, 32(6), pp. 1212–39.Song, S. (2010). Multiculturalism. Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy. [Online]. Retrieved on 29 September from:

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/multiculturalism/Soper, J. C. & Fetzer, J. S. (2007). Religious Institutions, Church-State History and Muslim Mobilisation in Britain,

France and Germany, Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 33(6), pp. 933–44.Spinner-Halev, J. (2000). Surviving Diversity: Religion and Democratic Citizenship. Baltimore: John Hopkins University

Press.



Stark, R. (1999). Secularization R.I.P., Sociology of Religion, 60(3), pp. 249–73.—— & Finke, R. (2000). Acts of Faith: Explaining the Human Side of Religion. Berkeley, CA: University of California

Press.Steffek, J., Kissling, C. & Nanz, P. (eds.) (2007) Civil Society Participation in European and Global Governance: A Cure

for the Democratic Deficit? Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Stepan, A. (2000). Religion, Democracy and the ‘‘Twin Tolerations’’, Journal of Democracy, 11(4), pp. 37–57.Steven, M. (2009). Religious Lobbying in the European Union: From Dominant Church to Faith-based organisa-

tion, Religion, State and Society, 37(1 ⁄ 2), pp. 181–91.Sudbery, I. (2003). Bridging the Legitimacy Gap in the EU: Can Civil Society Help to Bring the Union Closer to

its Citizens?, Collegium, 26(Spring), pp. 75–95.Sunstein, C. R. (2000). Deliberative Trouble? Why Do Groups Go To Extremes, Yale Law Journal, 110, pp. 71–

117.Swatos, W. H. & Christiano, K. J. (1999). Secularization Theory: The Course of a Concept, Sociology of Religion,

60(3), pp. 209–28.Taylor, C. (1989). Sources of the Self: The Making of Modern Identity. London: Cambridge.——. (1994). Multiculturalism and the Politics of Recognition. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Todorov, T. (2002). Imperfect Garden: The Legacy of Humanism. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Treib, O., Bahr, H. & Falkner, G. (2007). Modes of Governance: Towards a Conceptual Clarification, Journal of

European Public Policy, 14(1), pp. 1–20.Trigg, R. (2007). Religion in Public Life: Must Faith be Privatised? Oxford: Oxford University Press.Tsakatika, M. (2005). Claims to Legitimacy: The European Commission between Continuity and Change, Journal

of Common Market Studies, 43(1), pp. 193–220.——. (2007). Governance vs. Politics: the European Union’s Constitutive ‘Democratic Deficit’, Journal of European

Public Policy, 14(6), pp. 867–85.Tully, J. (1995). Strange Multiplicity: Constitutionalism in an Age of Diversity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Vertovec, S. & Peach, C. (eds.) (1997). Islam in Europe: The Politics of Religion and Community. Basingstoke: Macmil-

lan.—— & Wessendorf, S. (eds.) (2010). The Multiculturalism Backlash: European Discourses, Policies and Practices. London:

Routledge.Voas, D. (2009). The Rise and Fall of Fuzzy Fidelity in Europe, European Sociological Review, 25(2), pp. 155–68.—— & Crockett, A. (2005). Religion in Britain: Neither Believing nor Belonging, Sociology, 39(1), pp. 11–28.Wallace, H., Wallace, W. & Pollack, M. A. (2005). Policy-making in the European Union, Fifth Edition. Oxford:

Oxford University Press.Walzer, M. (1983). Spheres of Justice. Oxford: Blackwell.Warntjen, A. & Wonka, A. (eds.) (2004). Governance in Europe: The Role of Interest Groups. Baden Baden: Nomos

Verlagsgesellschaft.Weigel, G. (2005). The Cube and the Cathedral: Europe, America and Politics without God. New York: Basic Books.Westerlund, D. (eds.) (1996). Questioning the Secular State: The Worldwide Resurgence of Religion in Politics. London:

Hurst and Co.Wiener, A. & Diez, T. (eds.) (2009). European Integration Theory, Second Edition, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Woll, C. (2006). Lobbying in the European Union: From Sui Generis to a Comparative Perspective, Journal of

European Public Policy, 13(3), pp. 456–69.Wood, S. (1998). Building ‘Europe’: Culture, History and Politics, Journal of Historical Sociology, 11(3), pp. 397–416.Yamane, D. (1997). Secularisation on Trial: In Defence of a Neosecularisation Paradigm, Journal for the Scientific

Study of Religion, 36(1), pp. 109–22.Yates, M. (2007). Rawls and Habermas on Religion in the Public Sphere, Philosophy and Social Criticism, 33(7), pp.

880–91.Young, I. M. (1989). Polity and Group Difference: A Critique of the Ideal of Universal Citizenship, Ethics, 99(2),

pp. 250–74.——. (1990). Justice and the Politics of Difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press.——. (2000). Inclusion and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Zittel, T. & Fuchs, D. (2006). Participatory Democracy and Political Participation: Can Participatory Engineering bring

Citizens Back In? London: Routledge.Zubaida, S. (2003). Islam in Europe, Critical Quarterly, 45(1 ⁄ 2), pp. 88–98.Zuckerman, P. (2007). Atheism: Contemporary Rates and Patterns. In: M. Martin (ed.), The Cambridge Companion

to Atheism, pp. 47–68. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.——. (2008). Society Without God: What the Least Religious Nations Can Tell Us about Contentment. New York: New

York University Press.Zweifel, T. D. (2002). Democratic Deficit? Institutions and Regulations in the European Union, Switzerland and the United

States. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.

476 Kenneth Houston


Documents

Religion and European Integration: Predominant Themes and Emerging Research Priorities