European Christian Parties Research Paper

Sample European Christian Parties Research Paper. Browse other research paper examples and check the list of research paper topics for more inspiration. iResearchNet offers academic assignment help for students all over the world: writing from scratch, editing, proofreading, problem solving, from essays to dissertations, from humanities to STEM. We offer full confidentiality, safe payment, originality, and money-back guarantee. Secure your academic success with our risk-free services.

Christian (or Christian democratic) parties have been among the most successful political movements in Europe. Together with their Social democratic counterparts, they have dominated European politics.

They have been leading members of governmental coalitions in such countries as Italy, Germany, Austria, Belgium, and The Netherlands; they currently form (together with their conservative allies) the largest group in the European Parliament.

Christian democratic parties are not just parties that use this label (some do not). As a matter of fact, Christian democratic parties are hardly Christian. They are secular parties operating in highly secularized societies. Today they seem almost indistinguishable from conservative or liberal parties. However, they have a distinct history that both accounts for their particular nature and helps explain their major contribution to politics. This contribution can be articulated around two paradoxical outcomes: although they were formed initially to challenge the emerging European liberal democratic order, these parties eventually became pillars of secularism, liberalism, and democracy in Europe. Christian democratic politicians also pioneered the process of European integration, and although they fought hard against socialism, they ended up building vast welfare states. Their evolution is a stunning illustration of how democratization can be the contingent outcome of political strategies rather than result directly from the dissemination of democratic ideas and principles.

1. Origins

Contemporary Christian democratic parties evolved from the confessional parties that were created in the second part of the nineteenth century and were an expression of political Catholicism. These Catholic parties grew out of the largely ant liberal and ultramontane mass Catholic movement that challenged the ascendancy of liberalism in Europe from a ‘fundamentalist’ and theocratic perspective (as codified in the 1864 papal encyclical Syllabus of Errors). Indeed, Christian democracy was a concept coined in opposition to liberal democracy. Though spearheaded by the Catholic Church which feared for the loss of its privileges, especially in the field of education, Catholic movements won their independence from the church through their transformation into Catholic parties. The Catholic Church resisted this process, which robbed it from its monopolistic control over its flock, as much as it could; but it failed to thwart this development because democracy provided Catholic activists with a powerful source of power and legitimation. Although initially strongly opposed to democracy on ideological grounds, these activists quickly realized that their interests lay in its consolidation and further expansion (Kalyvas 1996).

The process through which confessional parties were formed had two important, though contradictory, consequences: first, it turned religion into the foundational element of confessional parties, the core of their identity; yet religion proved more of a hindrance than an advantage; second, the religious appeal produced a highly heterogeneous sort of party, composed of interest groups which had been united only by their adherence to the message of religious defense; yet this social heterogeneity increased the salience of class within these parties.

2. Religion

Confessional parties, albeit friendly to religion, wanted to disassociate themselves from too close a relationship with the church. Religion restricted their appeal as well as their autonomy. Likewise, the church could only protect its universalistic identity by moving away from these parties. However, the confessional character of these parties could not be shed because religion had become the cement that kept their heterogeneous social basis together. This quandary was solved in an ingenious yet momentous way. Confessional parties redefined religion into a nebulous humanitarian and moral concept that allowed them to be simultaneously Christian and secular. Vague formulations such as ‘religious inspiration,’ or ‘values of Christian civilization’ remain the only references to religion one finds in the official discourse of these parties. This led to a situation whereby it is perfectly possible to be simultaneously a Christian democrat and an atheist. In fact, this is not even perceived as a contradiction.

Hence, Christian democratic parties contributed in a fundamental way to the ‘desacralization’ and secularization of their countries’ politics. Paradoxically then, the politicization of religion contributed to the secularization of politics. In a perverse fashion, Christianity was drained of its religious content even while being legitimated as a political identity—and this feat was accomplished by its proponents rather than its opponents. The secularization of confessional parties was, thus, endogenous to these parties and took place well before World War II, rather than being a delayed adaptation to external societal developments as often thought. Besides consolidating democracy, this development further enhanced the position of Christian democratic parties by laying the path, after World War II, for interdominationalism, thus turning Christian democracy into a dominant party in confession-ally mixed societies such as Germany.

3. Class

The social basis of confessional parties was made of numerous and often-conflicting interests: social heterogeneity was these parties’ hallmark from the outset. In this sense, Christian democratic parties were catch-all parties a ant la lettre (van Kersbergen 1994). This heterogeneity was the direct result of their ideological profile that emphasized religion at the expense of class. However, external ‘nonclassism’ produced internal ‘classism.’ Powerful Catholic Workers’ and Peasants’ associations had to be incorporated into the new parties which eventually adopted a peculiar confederate structure based on organizations defined in terms of class (standen or lager). The ensuing conflicts gave rise to intensely accommodationist and compromising practices that were necessary for ensuring the parties’ unity and cohesion.

Hence, mediation between these assertive and divergent interest groups became imperative. As a result, Christian democratic parties became particularly skilled in the exercise of the politics of mediation (van Kersbergen 1994), something their opponents have derided as opportunism and a belief ‘that the ends justify the means.’ The principle of subsidiarity (higher authorities, such as the state, should intervene only where individuals or smaller communities are not competent), a central concept in the process of European integration, can also be traced back to these developments.

Herewith (rather than in papal encyclicals, such as the 1893 encyclical Rerum No arum) lies the source of Christian democracy’s strong social component that distinguishes it from mainstream conservative or liberal parties. Indeed, a number of studies have found that Christian democratic strength is positively associated with high levels of welfare expenditure and high levels of unionization. Van Kersbergen (1995) has identified a distinctively Christian democratic core of social policies, which he calls social capitalism. This policy core differs significantly and systematically from both the liberal and social democratic conceptions of social citizenship. The Christian democratic welfare state is as large, in terms of expenditures and size, as its Social democratic counterpart; but it is quite different. It privileges families rather than individuals, cash benefits rather than social services, and seeks to preserve rather than subvert labor market outcomes. Following the end of World War II, social capitalism (along with political anticommunism), rather than religion, provided the foundation on which Christian democratic parties stood—and from which they ruled. Social capitalism was, thus, not only the outcome, but also the means of Christian democratic mobilization.

In the course of the 1990s, Christian democratic parties entered into a protracted and deep crisis. They have experienced steep electoral decline (Austria, Belgium, The Netherlands) or even total collapse (Italy); they have been implicated in major financial scandals (Belgium, Italy, Germany, Austria); and they have failed to expand, as expected, in Eastern Europe. Although the end of the Cold War can be partially credited for some of these developments, this crisis goes far deeper. The imperatives of global economic competition have undermined the social capitalist arrangements that had guaranteed both the parties’ cohesion and their electoral appeal. In other words, this is a crisis of Christian democracy rather than a crisis of Christian democratic parties. Christian democratic parties will have to reinvent themselves if they want to remain a relevant force in European politics. Yet if they look back, they will find that their often forgotten history holds a vast repertoire of frequently unintended but nonetheless ingenious practices of adaptation and reinvention.

Bibliography:

1. Buchanan T, Conway M 1996 Political Catholicism in Europe, 1918–1965. Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK
2. Irving R E M 1979 The Christian Democratic Parties of Western Europe. Allen and Unwin, London
3. Kalyvas S N 1996 The Rise of Christian Democracy in Europe. Cornell University Press, Ithaca and London
4. Kalyvas S N 1998 From pulpit to party: Party formation and the Christian Democratic phenomenon. Comparative Politics 30: 293–312
5. van Kersbergen K 1994 The distinctiveness of Christian Democracy. In: Hanley D (ed.) Christian Democracy in Europe: A Comparative Perspective. Pinter, London and New York
6. van Kersbergen K 1995 Social Capitalism: A Study of Christian Democracy and the Welfare State. Routledge, London and New York