Abstract
The subject of the paper is the issue of restrictions on religious freedom during the COVID-19 pandemic imposed by European countries. The period under examination covers the interval from March to December 2020. The issue is analyzed from the point of view of respecting human rights in a situation of conflict between the values of public health and religious freedom. In this context, the perception of importance and urgency regarding the values that should be protected and the concept of “essential goods”, which are understood differently in secular and religious perspectives, are of particular importance. Another essential issue is not only the scope but also the “depth” of state intervention in the life of religious communities. In Europe, there was a wide variety of national approaches to restricting religious freedom in order to ensure public health. Some of them pursued a very restrictive policy in this area, others moderate, and others very soft. One also could observe the difference in decisions made by most countries during the first and the second waves of the pandemic. A significant element enabling a possible evaluation of the applied solutions is the matter of their duration. Are the introduced limitations only temporary, implemented due to the extraordinary situation, or should they be view as a part of a “radical political experiment”, as a result of which the very understanding of religious freedom and its place in the hierarchy of human rights will change. The arguments of a philosophical, theological, legal and sociological nature are analyzed issuing methods appropriate to each of these disciplines.
Highlights
The subject of the paper is the issue of restrictions on religious freedom during the COVID19 pandemic imposed by European countries
The sanitary regulations introduced during the pandemic significantly influenced the experience of religious freedom
During the first wave of the pandemic, there were four types of governmental approaches to religious freedom, characterized by very high, high, moderate or low restrictiveness. This approach was corrected during the second wave of the pandemic; in others, the governments staunchly defended their original course
Summary
The pandemic has exposed the true face of our Western societies in many areas, which were previously somewhat hidden. The pandemic revealed the attitude of the rulers of respective countries towards religious freedom. This is because religious activity involves the organization of assemblies during which—regardless of their secular or religious nature—the virus spreads . The consonance of all these provisions is characteristic They guarantee the “freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching” This right manifests itself as freedom from coercion that would impair the freedom to have or to adopt a religion or beliefs (ICCPR, Art. 18, sec. 2)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
