Refine Search

German High Court Rules on Full-Time Ministers

By “Awake!” correspondent in West Germany

JEHOVAH‘S WITNESSES are well known in Germany for not having compromised for the sake of expediency during Hitler’s Reich. People of other religions, including clergymen, heiled Hitler, saluted the Nazi flag, and supported Hitler’s armies in their aggressive warfare. Nearly all Catholic priests and Protestant ministers were guilty of compromising with Hitler’s regime. These clergymen were granted exemption from military service during that time.

But Jehovah’s witnesses steadfastly refused to heil Hitler, salute the Nazi flag, or support his armies. They too claimed exemption as ministers of religion. But they were refused exemption and were persecuted. Thousands of them were sent to Nazi death camps and many were killed.

No Exemption

After World War II, military conscription was again introduced in Germany, in 1956. Catholic priests and clergymen of other religions were again given exemption. At first, Jehovah’s witnesses were also exempted. But then alternative service requirements were introduced, and Jehovah’s witnesses were not granted exemption from this service.

In 1962 the first sentence under this new law was pronounced upon a young minister of Jehovah’s witnesses. He had refused to report for service alternative to military conscription. But since ministers of state churches and other denominations were not required to perform this service, this minister of Jehovah’s witnesses claimed that he was also eligible for exemption under the West German constitution. However, his appeal was rejected. He was sentenced to four months in prison.

Many similar cases followed, with jail sentences given. Among those sentenced were ministers of Jehovah’s witnesses who devoted full time to ministerial activities. An appeal for constitutional rights was submitted in an attempt to reverse these decisions and obtain legal recognition as ministers exempt from all conscription.

In October of 1963 further evidence was submitted to the court. This outlined in great detail the fact that full-time ministers of Jehovah’s witnesses are ordained ministers entitled to the exemption provided by the constitution.

The appeal was not acted upon. The case remained pending for seven years. During all that time full-time ministers of Jehovah’s witnesses continued to be sentenced to prison for periods of from one to sixteen months.

Also, a new situation arose. Upon release from prison, these ministers were again called up for alternative service. When they refused, they were imprisoned a second time. Some were imprisoned a third time. Hence, a further appeal for constitutional rights was submitted to the Federal Constitutional Court of West Germany. The appeal contested the constitutionality of repeated convictions for the same violation.

High Court Decides

On March 7, 1968, the Federal Constitutional Court handed down its decision. It declared that repeated sentencing in these cases was indeed unconstitutional. It noted that no one can be punished twice for the same act according to basic law.

Yet, this did not entirely solve the problem. Jehovah’s witnesses continued to be jailed the first time for refusing conscription and alternative service not required of ministers of other religions.

Finally, on December 11, 1969, in Berlin, the 8th Senate of the Administrative Court of the Federal Government handed down a decision. It was of great significance regarding the status of full-time ministers of Jehovah’s witnesses serving as special pioneers and overseers of Christian congregations.

This highest administrative court of Germany declared these full-time ministers exempt from military service and alternative service as well. This reversed the decision taken by the 7th Senate of this same court several years earlier.

Arguments Against

Previously, the 7th Senate had contended that such full-time ministers of Jehovah’s witnesses did not merit exemption because they did not fill a position similar to that of ministers of other religions. It upheld a lower court’s decision that the positions did not “correspond” because of the differences in study and instruction given Catholic or Protestant ministers.

The court had also maintained: “A minister is only deserving of protection, according to the law, when his position before the congregation of believers stands out in that he alone is allowed to perform the ceremonies of the religious cult and he is conferred a special dignity, which belongs exclusively to the profession of minister; in contrast to this, the religious group of Jehovah’s witnesses do not recognize any class as laity, nor any clergy class.”

The court had also stated: “Decisive is the image that a denomination normally has of a minister; this image is in the larger denominations the position of a minister who as a pastor of his flock does a pastoral work, without which the ceremonial life practically succumbs.”

Hence, these previous decisions had maintained that Jehovah’s witnesses who were serving full time did not have the “image” of a clergyman. That was, and is, certainly true. And Jehovah’s witnesses do not want that “image.” But this did not mean that they were not ministers in the true sense of the word.

Court Upholds Rights

In its final decision of December 11, 1969, the 8th Senate disagreed with these previous interpretations. Instead, in the case at issue of a special pioneer and overseer, it upheld the rights granted by law to other ministers serving full time regardless of their religion. It stated: “The neutrality of the State toward the religious comprehensions of its citizens prohibits the State from evaluating the teaching and institutes of religious associations and other denominations.”

The court showed that the accepted “image” was not the important thing, but the duties performed were. It said: “From the principle of religious parity, however, it is inferred that here, for reasons founded on constitutional rights, the ‘pattern’ or ‘vocational image’ of a minister of both large ‘Christian denominations [Roman Catholic and Evangelical] as developed through their church order and theological interpretation may not be used as a measuring rod for the ministers of other denominations. Differences in faith and dogmas, which are understood as peculiar to the self-representation of both large Christian denominations, are not to be taken into consideration.”

Thus, the court declared that it would not be possible to force a minister of a religion other than the two large denominations to conform to a certain standard that these churches had built up for themselves. Religious equality and exemption could not be made dependent upon any particular religion’s idea of the office of minister. With Jehovah’s witnesses, it is not an “office” of “title” or “image” that is vital in establishing their ministry, but the spiritual services that they perform.

In regard to what constitutes a full-time minister, the court said: “Whether a ministerial activity . . . ‘corresponds’ to the activities that are assigned to the [Roman Catholic and Evangelical] ministers can only be decided upon according to outward characteristics, without taking into consideration a certain ‘pattern’ determined theologically or by church law.” It was pointed out that ministerial activity would be considered a “full-time” activity when the minister devoted his full labor to ministering.

Nor should just one type of schooling or preparation be the determining factor. The court decided that “what preparatory instruction and verification are required when someone is assigned to a permanent full-time activity as a minister and how this assignment is made is also of no special significance. The State leaves it up to the religious convictions and teachings of all religious associations to determine under which circumstances duties are assigned, the same as these are correspondingly attended to by the named ministers of the large churches.”

This firm decision by the German high court for freedom of religious conviction is commendable. It is similar to the noteworthy decisions of other countries where the rights of the individual are highly held.

However, long before this decision was handed down, Jehovah’s witnesses had shown that they are indeed ordained ministers of the Most High God Jehovah. They have long been known throughout all of Germany for their zealous ministerial work. That activity has helped tens of thousands of righteously disposed persons in Germany to gain a knowledge of God’s Word, the Bible, and has enabled them to serve their Creator.

Nevertheless, the court’s decision is a fine legal acknowledgment of the God-given ordination of such full-time ministers of Jehovah.