Church law as a ius sui generis in South Africa : a reformed perspective
Van Staden, Johannes Hendrik
English: The church-state relationship in South Africa was severely challenged in the wake of the 1994 constitutional dispensation. An analysis of the relationship between the church and the constitutional state reveals the unique position of church law in terms of the church’s self-understanding and the possibilities of the self-rule of the church, within the context of entrenched religious rights and a sound church-state relationship. This study sets out to contribute to a framework of understanding that provides the impetus necessary for the autonomy of the church in South African society, notably of the churches of Reformed descent and theology. Major events in the general history of the relationship between church and state, church-state relationships in other legal systems, and the relationship between the church and the judiciary in South Africa, have shaped church governance and influenced the self-expression and legal status of churches. The study investigates the impact of these influences on church law. The right to freedom of religion (buttressed by related rights and the diversity demands of a pluralistic society), as a quintessential fundamental right, essentially warrants a strong presumption in favour of the church. To disregard the uniqueness of church law may even be contra bonos mores. The pertinent issue is the status of church law as a ius sui generis and the freedom of religious institutions (including churches) to promulgate and enforce their own rules, standards, and regulations. The influence the inimitability of church law has on churches’ right to regulate their own affairs pertaining to focus areas such as doctrine, offices, authority of church assemblies, ecclesiastical tribunals, property, membership, discipline, and labour relations is examined in this study. Internal arrangements contained in church books of order ought to survive constitutional analysis – provided they conform to the church’s own tenets and are officially endorsed. The legal position of churches in South Africa and the consequence of this position in terms of the Constitution were reviewed critically and the content, application, and limitation of religious rights, as far as these issues pertain to church law, were explored and evaluated. It is shown that the state and civil courts should not become entangled in matters of religious doctrine. The concept of “doctrine” should of necessity be extended to include interpretation of church orders and constitutions, and indeed be construed to include the whole body of established church law. The courts, in general, must accept the church’s analysis of its own statutes and the state should not be involved in matters of church law at all, owing to the contiguity between doctrine and church order. As the church is the embodiment of exercised fundamental rights, church law is shown to be an interest worthy of protection. The doctrine of positive neutrality is considered as a feasible model for a sound church-state relationship. Churches have both rights and responsibilities vis-àvis the state, while the state’s minimum duty towards the church is to afford it ample opportunity to function without being burdened by limitations and coercion relating to its core tenets and practices. The courts and authorities need to be mindful of the church’s self-understanding as elucidated by its self-definition in terms of the Bible and its settled tenets. Churches, as associations sui generis, have a reciprocal duty to act within the dictates of human dignity, public policy, and the law, while maintaining the right to claim their Biblical-prophetic autonomy and constitutional sanction. In drawing all the observations and conclusions together it is revealed how church and state can exist complementary alongside each other – each sovereign in its own domain – pursuing the same goals of advancing justice and the common good.
Afrikaans: Die kerk-staat-verhouding in Suid-Afrika het onder groot druk gekom in die nadraai van 1994 se oorgang na ’n grondwetlike bedeling. ’n Ontleding van die verhouding tussen die kerk en die regstaat toon die unieke posisie van kerkreg in terme van die kerk se selfverstaan en die potensiële selfregering van die kerk, binne die konteks van grondwetlik verskanste godsdiensregte en ’n gesonde kerk-staat-verhouding. Hierdie studie poog om by te dra tot ’n verstaansraamwerk om die outonomiteit van die kerk in die Suid-Afrikaanse samelewing, veral met betrekking tot die kerke van Reformatoriese herkoms en teologie, te verseker. Belangrike gebeure in die algemene geskiedenis van die verhouding tussen kerk en staat, die kerk-staat-verhouding in ander (vergelykbare) regstelsels, en die geskiedenis van die verhouding tussen die kerk en die regbank in Suid-Afrika, het kerkregering bepaal en die selfverstaan en regstatus van kerke beïnvloed. Hierdie studie ondersoek die impak van hierdie invloede op die beoefening van die kerkreg. Die reg tot godsdiensvryheid (gerugsteun deur verwante regte sowel as die diversiteitseise van ’n pluralistiese samelewing), as ’n wesenlike fundamentele reg, regverdig ’n sterk voorkeur ten gunste van die kerk. Die minagting van die eiesoortigheid van kerkreg mag selfs contra bonos mores wees. Die saak onder die loep is die status van kerkreg as ’n ius sui generis en die algemene vryheid van godsdiensinstellings (insluitend kerke) om hulle eie reëls, standaarde en regulasies te promulgeer en toe te pas. Die invloed van die eiesoortigheid van kerkreg op kerke se reg om hul eie sake rakende fokusterreine soos belydenis, ampte, gesag van kerkvergaderings, kerklike tribunale, eiendom, lidmaatskap, dissipline en arbeidsverhoudinge te reguleer, word in die studie ondersoek. Interne reëlings soos vervat in kerkordes en ander amptelike kerklike dokumente, behoort grondwetlike ontleding te deurstaan – mits dit aan die kerk se eie leerstellinge voldoen en amptelik bekragtig is. Die regsposisie van kerke in Suid-Afrika, en die gevolg van hul status in terme van die Grondwet, is krities ondersoek en die inhoud, toepassing en beperking van godsdiensregte, in soverre hierdie kwessies verband hou met kerkreg, is ondersoek en geëvalueer. Die prerogatief van interpretasie van die kerk se interne orde is ook in die studie ondersoek. Daar word aangedui dat die staat en die burgerlike howe nie betrokke behoort te raak by kwessies rakende godsdienstige leerstellings nie. Die konsep “leerstelling” moet noodwendig uitgebrei word om ook die interpretasie van kerkordes en ander interne regulasies in te sluit, en behoort inderdaad so vertolk te word dat dit die hele korpus van gevestigde kerkreg insluit. Voortspruitend uit die noue verband tussen leer en kerkorde behoort die howe, in die algemeen, die kerk se interpretasie van sy eie verordeninge te aanvaar, en die staat behoort geensins betrokke te raak by kerkregtelike kwessies nie. Aangesien die kerk die beliggaming is van uitgeoefende basiese regte, word aangetoon dat kerkreg ’n belang is wat beskerm behoort te word. Die ondersoek dui verder aan dat “positiewe neutraliteit” beskou kan word as ’n geskikte model vir ’n gesonde kerk-staat-verhouding. Kerke het sowel regte as verantwoordelikhede vis-à-vis die staat, terwyl die staat minstens die plig het om aan die kerk voldoende geleentheid te bied om te funksioneer sonder om gebuk te gaan onder beperkings en dwang rakende sy kernbeginsels en -praktyke. Die howe en owerhede moet die kerk se selfverstaan soos toegelig in sy selfdefiniëring in terme van die Bybel en kerklike leerstellings in ag neem. Kerke, as verenigings sui generis, het die wederkerige plig om te funksioneer binne die voorskrifte van menswaardigheid, openbare beleid en die reg, terwyl hulle terselfdertyd die reg behou om op hul Bybels-profetiese outonomiteit en konstitusionele sanksie aanspraak te maak. Die navorsing en gevolgtrekkings dui aan dat die kerk en die staat komplementêr, met wedersydse respek, kan funksioneer – elkeen soewerein op sy eie terrein – in die nastreef van gemeenskaplike doelwitte, naamlik die bevordering van geregtigheid en die algemene welstand van die gemeenskap.