Religionsunterricht und Religionsfreiheit

Far-reaching changes in the sociology of religion have consequences and, in particular, challenges for religious education within the meaning of Article 7 (2) and (3) of the Basic Law. While new interdenominational and interreligious models have long since established themselves in school practice, their recognition under constitutional law is (still) being called into question by the currently prevailing dogmatism. It is largely based on a leading decision of the Federal Constitutional Court from 1987, the sustainability of which must be questioned for the present and the future. Peter Unruh therefore suggests a dogmatic opening: By systematically drawing on Article 4 of the Basic Law as the central norm of constitutional law on religion, new perspectives for interpreting Article 7(2) and (3) of the Basic Law can be developed. Elements of the dogmatics of Art. 4 GG are made beneficial for the (extended) interpretation of Art. 7 para. 2 and 3 GG. The interdenominational and interreligious models of religious education encountered in practice can thus be fundamentally exonerated from the verdict of unconstitutionality. Overall, the work shows a constitutionally sound way in which the dogmatics of Article 7 (2) and (3) of the Basic Law can be adapted to social realities and the future of religious education can be secured under religious constitutional law.