The Ecumenical Movement and The Schuman Plan, 1950-5

The Ecumenical Movement and the Schuman Plan, 1950–54
Author(s): Lucian N. Leustean

Source: Journal of Church and State , Summer 2011, Vol. 53, No. 3 (Summer 2011), pp.
442-471
Published by: Oxford University Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.com/stable/24708195
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
Oxford University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Journal of Church and State
This content downloaded from

213.55.244.38 on Tue, 28 Jul 2020 19:44:42 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
The Ecumenical Movement
and the Schuman Plan, 1950-54
Lucian N. Leustean
At the Quai d'Orsay, on May 9, 1950, Robert Schuman, the Fre

Minister of Foreign Affairs, made a public declaration wh
would fundamentally affect the future of postwar Europe.
He proposed that,
Franco-German production of coal and steel as a whole be placed under a

common High Authority, within the framework of an organisation open to
the participation of the other countries of Europe. The pooling of coal and
steel production should immediately provide for the setting up of
common foundations for economic development as a first step in the
federation of Europe.1
The Schuman declaration was prepared by a team of experts

working in the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs under the
LUCIAN N. LEUSTEAN is lecturer in politics and international relations at Aston

University, UK. He is author of Orthodoxy and the Cold War: Religion and Political
Power in Romania, 1947-65; editor of Eastern Christianity and the Cold War,
1945-91, and co-editor of Religion, Politics and Law in the European Union. I
am grateful to the staff at the Archives of the World Council of Churches,
Geneva (AWCC); the National Archives of the Netherlands, The Hague (NAN);
and the Library of the London School of Economics and Political Science
(BLLSE) for their help in sourcing documents used in this article. As these docu
ments are not catalogued, a full description of each document has been given. In
addition, special thanks to the late Max Kohnstamm, who, at the venerable age
of 96, recalled in an interview his active engagement in the process of European
cooperation as a founding member of the Ecumenical Commission on European
Cooperation. This study has been supported by a Research Grant from the Eco
nomic and Social Research Council (RES-000-22-3821). I am grateful to Lambeth
Palace Archives and Alpha Photo Press Agency for copyright permission to
reproduce the photograph in this article and to J.M. Dawson Institute of
Church-State Studies at Baylor University for the financial support related to
reproduction costs. In particular, I would like to thank Professor Christopher
Marsh, Patricia Cornett and Clare Brown.
1. Pascal Fontaine, Europe, a Fresh Start: The Schuman Declaration, 1950-90

(Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities,
1990).
Journal of Church and State vol. 53 no. 3, pages 442-471; doi:10.1093/jcs/csr031

Advance Access publication July 7, 2011
The Author
© The Author 2011.
2011.1
Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the J. M. Dawson
Institute of Church-State Studies. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail:
journals.permissions@oup.com
442

213.55.244.38 on Tue, 28 Jul 2020 19:44:42 UTC
The Ecumenical Movement and the Schuman Plan, 1950-54
leadership of Jean Monnet, the French Planning Commissioner.

Schuman's political authority ensured that the plan gained interna
tional recognition. Konrad Adenauer, the German Chancellor,
showed immediate support although he was consulted on the text
only the day before. The Italian and Benelux governments were, in
principle, in favor of the plan and began negotiations to establish
supranational institutions. Britain was the only invited country
that declined to sign up. The governing Labor Party argued that
the plan did not reflect British interests and that surrendering sov
ereignty on its coal and steel production would not have public
support.2 The declaration would lead to the establishment of the
European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), composed of France,
Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and Belgium, who
signed the Treaty of Paris on April 18, 1951.3
Although the political and economic impact of the Schuman dec
laration would become more evident in the coming years, religion
was not associated with the emergence of the ECSC and remained
outside the jurisdiction of the Treaty of Paris. How did the Roman
Catholic and Protestant churches act at national and supranational
levels in the aftermath of the Schuman declaration? Did they
welcome bringing the coal and steel industries together in France
and Germany? Why did religious communities refrain from publicly
mobilizing the faithful after the Schuman declaration?
This article examines the political mobilization of Protestant pol
iticians and churchmen from the Schuman Plan in 1950 to the
failure of the European Defense Community in 1954. Despite wide
spread perception that the Roman Catholic Church was the most
active promoter of European cooperation in postwar Europe (and
six years before a Catholic office monitoring the work of European
2. For reactions from other European capitals, including the refusal of the
British government, see Peter M. R. Stirk, A History of European Integration
since 1914 (London: Pinter Publishers Ltd., 2000), 122-23; Stephen George,
An Awkward Partner. Britain and the European Community (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1990); David Russell, '"The Jolly Old Empire': Labour, the
Commonwealth and Europe, 1945-51," in Britain, the Commonwealth and
Europe: The Commonwealth and Britain's Application to Join the European Com
munities, ed. Alex May (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2001).
3. Ernst B. Haas, The Uniting of Europe. Political, Social, and Economic Forces,
1950-1957 (Stanford: Cornell University Press, 1958); Walter Lipgens, ed.,
Documents on the History of European Integration (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter,
1991); Andrew Moravcsik, The Choice for Europe. Social Purpose and State
Power from Messina to Maastricht (Stanford: Cornell University Press, 1998);
Piers Ludlow, ed., European Integration and the Cold War: Ostpolitik-Westpolitik,
1965-1973 (London: Routledge, 2007); Wolfram Kaiser, Brigitte Leucht, and
Morten Rasmussen, eds., The History of the European Union: Origins of a
Trans- and Supranational Polity, 1950-72 (London: Routledge, 2009).
443

213.55.244.38 on Tue, 28 Jul 2020 19:44:42 UTC
institutions was opened in Strasbourg in 1956), the ecumenical

movement of the interwar period and the newly created World
Council of Churches (WCC) led to the establishment of a transna
tional reflection group composed of leading Protestant politicians
and churchmen to offer expertise on European issues for Protestant
churches. This reflection group, known as the Ecumenical Commis
sion on European Cooperation (ECEC), met regularly from 1950
until 1974 and represented the first organized Christian response
to the Schuman Plan advising churches on the process of European
integration. This article focuses on the first four years of this com
mission, which had an impact on Protestant reaction to European
cooperation and eventually led to the emergence of a distinct Prot
estant vision of Europe.
The primary significance of this commission lies not only in its
early organization but also in the prestige of its membership. It
brought together politicians from Western European countries that
would not join the European Community until a few decades later,
such as Britain, the Scandinavian countries, Greece, and Austria,
while some of its members would achieve the highest positions of
political offices in postwar Europe, including Jean Rey, European
Commissioner in charge of External Relations (1958-67) and presi
dent of the European Commission (1967-70); Gustav Heinemann,
president of the Federative Republic of Germany (1969-74), and
Max Kohnstamm, general secretary of the High Authority of the Euro
pean Coal and Steel Community (1952-56), vice-president of the
Action Committee for the United States of Europe (1956-75), and
president of the European University Institute, Florence (1976-81).
The members of the commission would become highly influential
in defining relations between churches and European institutions.
Furthermore, the establishment of institutionalized bodies in
charge of dialogue between religious communities and European
institutions in Brussels and Strasbourg would develop from the
expertise of politicians and churchmen of this commission.4
This article investigates Protestant mobilization at the suprana
tional level focusing on its leadership and the ECEC meetings.
While Protestant churches followed national perceptions of Euro
pean cooperation and refrained from promoting a distinct view of
European cooperation, the ECEC brought together the Protestant
leadership both from Western Europe and the United States. The
first meeting of the executive members of the ECEC was held a rel
atively short time after the Schuman declaration in September 1950
4. William Diebold, The Schuman Plan. A Study in Economic Cooperation,

1950-1959 (New York: Praeger, 1959).
444

213.55.244.38 on Tue, 28 Jul 2020 19:44:42 UTC
demonstrating the rapid Protestant elite mobilization in postwar

Europe.5
The Ecumenical Commission on European

Cooperation
The majority of the population in the six ECSC member states were
Catholic. In predominantly Protestant Great Britain and Scandina
via, various voices claimed that the ECSC resembled a Catholic
project. Despite their limited presence in the ECSC, Protestant
churches were interconnected through a significant network of ecu
menical transnational relations. In Germany, the Evangelical Church
(Evangelische Kirche in Deutschland), which was established in
1946, had the highest number of faithful in Europe; however, the
largest group under communist control was in East Germany, and
amounted to approximately 82 percent of the population, while
about 50 percent of the population of the Federal Republic belonged
to the EKD.6 In France, Protestants numbered about 2 percent of the
population with communities most visible in the Alsace region and
the Rhone valley. After the war, its churches maintained an interna
tional voice under the leadership of the Protestant Federation of
France (Fédération Protestante de France), which dated back to
1905. In Italy, around 1 percent belonged mainly to the Evangelical
Waldensian Church (Chiesa Evangelica Valdese e Metodiste) while
there were also small Baptist, Adventist, and Lutheran communities.
In Belgium, around 1 percent of the population was Protestant,
grouped into two main communities, the Union of Protestant Evan
gelical Churches of Belgium (Union des Eglises Evangeliques
5. Due to pressure from the leadership in the World Council of Churches, the
commission would have to change its name twice: in 1953 to the Committee
on the Christian Responsibility for European Cooperation (CCREC) and in
1966 to the Christian Study Group for European Unity.
6. For statistics, see Dieter Rohde,"Kirchliche Statistik," in Kirchliches Jahrbuch
für die Evangelische Kirche in Deutschland, 1981 -1982, ed. Wolf-Dieter Haus
child and Erwin Wilkins (Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus Gerd Mohn,
1985), 1089, 306; Wolfgang Büscher, "Unterwegs zur Minderheit: Eine Auswer
tung Konfessionsstatisticher Daten," in Die Evangelischen Kirchen in der DDR:
Beiträge zu einem Bestandsaufnahme, ed. Reinhard Henkys (Munich: Kaiser
Verlag, 1982), 423; and John P. Burgess, The East German Church and the End
of Communism (New York: Oxford University Press, 1997), 48. In particular,
the significant increase of the Catholic presence was due to migration after
the Second World War from around 1 million to 2.7 million people. Victor Con
zemius, "Eglises chrétiennes en socialisme démocratique. Protestants et catho
lique en RDA, 1945-1990," in Churches in the Century of the Totalitarian
Systems. Proceedings of the Commission Internationale d Histoire Ecclésiastique
Comparee, Lublin 1996, ed. Jerzy Koczowski, Wojciech Lenarczyk, and
Sawomir ukasiewicz (Lublin: Instytut Europy Srodkowo-Wschodniej, 2001), 225.
445

213.55.244.38 on Tue, 28 Jul 2020 19:44:42 UTC
Protestantes de Belgique) and the Belgian Christian Missionary

Church (Eglise Chrétien Missionaire Belge).7 Belgian faithful were
spread throughout the country in small communities, while Luxem
bourg and the Limbourg region were virtually solely Roman Catho
lic. The Netherlands was the only ECSC member state in which
Protestants were relatively higher than the Catholics. The 1947
census revealed that 42.3 percent were Protestants, with the major
ity belonging to the Netherlands Reformed Church (Nederlandse
Hervormde Kerk), while 38.5 percent were Roman Catholics; both
numbers, however, would dramatically decrease in the next few
years with the spread of secularization across the continent.8
The ecumenical relations of the interwar period led to the estab
lishment of two major transnational Protestant organizations,
namely the International Missionary Council, which dated from
1921, and the World Council of Churches, established at the
Amsterdam Assembly in 1948. If the former organization was
aimed at developing Protestant missions in Asia and Africa, the
WCC and, in particular, its foreign ministry, represented by the
Commission of the Churches on International Affairs (CCIA),9
were in direct contact with the political leadership involved in the
United Europe Movement (UEM).10
While Catholic support for European federalism was evident in
the first few years after the Second World War, both Catholic and
Protestant churchmen failed to assign a spiritual significance to
the Schuman declaration. Instead, they fostered relations with the
Council of Europe and the United Nations, which had on their
agenda issues that were significant for churches, such as refugees
and human rights.11 The lack of response to the Schuman
7. Michel Dandoy, ed., Le Protestantisme. Mémoire et Perspectives (Brussels : Edi

tions Racine, 2005); Daniel Vanescote, ed., A la Découverte du Monde Protestant
en Belgique (Brussels: n.p., 1994).
8. The other Protestant churches were the General Mennonite Society
(Algemende Doopsgezinde Societeit), the Union of Free Evangelical Congrega
tions (Bond van Vrije Evangelische Gemeenten in Nederland), the Evangelical
Lutheran Church (Evangelisch Lutherse Kerk), and the Union of Baptist Congre
gations (Une van Baptisten Gemeenten in Nederland).
9. For the early history of the Commission of Churches on International Affairs,
see William Inboden, Religion and American Foreign Policy, 1945-1960 (Cam
bridge: Cambidge University Press, 2008).
10. For the Protestant view of European unity in the interwar period, see Jurjen
A. Zeilstra, European Unity in Ecumenical Thinking, 1937-1948 (Zoetermeer:
Uitgeverij Boekencentrum, 1995).
11. The Floly See sent Inter-nuncio Mgr. Jobbe as representative to the Hague
conference that established the Council of Europe in May 1948. Douglas Wood
ruff, "Focus on Current Affairs: The Holy See and United Europe," The Sword
154 (1952): 88-92. British churches were also interested in the Hague Confer
ence and were represented by Canon Herbet Waddams. See Philip
446

213.55.244.38 on Tue, 28 Jul 2020 19:44:42 UTC
declaration was evident between the Second Congress of the

European Union of Federalists in Rome on November 11, 1948,
and the speech to Pax Christi pilgrims in Rome on September 13,
1952.12 During this time, Pope Pius XII issued only two short state
ments referring to the Council of Europe (a speech at the Interna
tional Congress of Private Law on July 15, 1950,13 and a letter to
Gerta Krabbel, chairman at the Xlllth Congress of the Catholic
German Women's Federation on July 17, 1952).14
In general, French and German churches welcomed the Schuman
Plan as it promoted reconciliation between their countries—there
being a direct link between churchmen and UEM party leaders.15
A leading UEM figure was André Philip, the French Economic Min
ister (1946-47) and head of the French delegation to the Euro
pean Economic Commission of the United Nations in 1947.
Philip was well known in Protestant circles as president of the
Commission on International Affairs of the Fédération Protestante
de France and one of the most active socialist politicians support
ing a European federation.16 Therefore, it was no surprise that
after the Schuman declaration, some Protestant churchmen
claimed that the plan followed Philip's ideas. In an article in
May 1950, for example, Reverend Maurice Voge suggested that
the plan had its origins in the Economic Commission of the
Council of Europe and that, in fact, André Philip was behind the
Schuman declaration.17
M. Coupland, Britannia, Europa and Christendom. British Christians and Euro

pean Integration (Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2006), 107-10.
12. "Discours aux pelerins de Pax Christi," September 13,1952, Documentation
Catholique, 1411.
13. For Pope Pius's speech at the International Congress of Private Law, see
Arthur Utz and Joseph Groner, eds., Aufbau und Erhaltung des gesellschaftli
chen Lebens, 3 vols. (Freiburg: Paulusverlag, 1956), 426. For the Catholic posi
tion on peace and reconstruction, see Arthur F. Utz, ed., La doctrine sociale de
l'église à travers les siècles. Documents pontificaux du XVème au XXème siècle
(Textes originaux et traduction) (Paris : Beauchesne, 1970).
14. For a list of Pope Pius XII's speeches on Europe, see Pietro Conte, I Papi e
I'Europa. Documenti (Pio XII - Giovanni XXIII - Paolo VI) (Torino: Editrice Elle
De Ci, 1978); and Jürgen Schwarz, Katholische Kirche und Europa. Dokumente
1945-1979 (München: Kaiser, 1980).
15. For party networks within the framework of Christian democracy, see
Wolfram Kaiser, Christian Democracy and the Origins of European Union (Cam
bridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007).
16. André Philip was a professor of economics in Lyon and a Socialist deputy
since 1936; during the war he escaped to London, joining de Gaulle. See
W. D. Halls, Politics, Society and Christianity in Vichy France (Oxford: Berg
Publishers, 1995), 194.
17. Maurice Voge, "Le Plan Schuman," Le Christianisme social, no. 5-6
(May-June 1950), 286.
447

213.55.244.38 on Tue, 28 Jul 2020 19:44:42 UTC
Philip's political networks in the European Movement were con

siderable both within the French elite (including Schuman and
Monnet) and also within European circles.18 In 1950 he was
elected president of the Socialist Movement for the United States
of Europe and general delegate of the European Movement in
charge of the Youth European Campaign, holding the latter position
until 1964.19 In a UEM report presented at the European Economic
Conference at Westminster in March 1949, Philip made a number
of proposals which would later become integral sections of the
ECSC, such as the establishment of a unified European market
with the "free circulation of goods, people and capital."20 In con
trast to other politicians, Philip did not hesitate to publicly
declare the significance of his Christian faith, claiming that "I am,
in this order, a Christian, a politician and an economist."21 He was
one of the strongest enthusiasts of the plan, which he regarded as
closely connected with both his religious and political beliefs. The
shift from the figure of Schuman to that of Philip was crucial to
the way in which Protestant churchmen regarded the process of
European cooperation.
From April 11 to 17, 1950, in the month before the Schuman dec
laration, the CCIA and the WCC Study Department organized a con
ference on "The Church and International Law," held at the
Ecumenical Institute in Bossey. The conference brought together
churchmen, lawyers, theologians, and politicians and issued a
final report, which encouraged churches to contribute towards
18. Robert Frank and François-Xavier Lefféach suggest that in the papers of
Etienne Hirsch at the National Archives of France there are many references to
Philip's speeches both from the European movement and those published in
newspapers. Robert Frank and François-Xavier Lefféach, "André Philip et
l'Europe," in Christian Chevandier and Gilles Morin, André Philip, socialiste,
patriote, chrétien, (Paris: Comité pour l'histoire économique et financière. Minis
tère de l'Économie, des Finances et de l'Industrie, 2005), 411. The authors even
claim that Phillip could be seen as the first inspiration for the ECSC and Euro
pean Community of Defense. After Churchill's discourse in the Consultative
Assembly of the Council of Europe on August 11,1950, in which he encouraged
the rearmament of Germany, Philip proposed the establishment of German
units on the condition that they are part of a "unified European army, under
the direction of a European minister of defence under the democratic control
of a European Assembly." See Assemblé consultative du Conseil de l'Europe,
2nd session, August 11, 1950, 229.
19. Loic Philip, André Philip (Paris: Beauchesne, 1988); André Philip, André
Philip par lui-même, ou Les voies de la liberté (Paris: Beauchesne, 1971).
20. Mouvement Européen. Commission Économique et Social Française.
Préparation de la Conférence Economique Européenne de Westminster,
Rapport Général établi par M. André Philip (Paris : Imprimerie spéciale, 1949).
21. Antoine Prost, "Conclusion," in Chevandier and Morin, André Philip, social
iste, patriote, chrétien, 420.
448

213.55.244.38 on Tue, 28 Jul 2020 19:44:42 UTC
reconciliation and to "help the Governments to overcome their atti

tude of mutual distrust and the bias imposed on them by the sup
posed demands of national policy."22 During the sessions, André
Philip discussed with Willem A. Visser't Hooft, general secretary
of the WCC, the possibility of engaging the ecumenical movement
in a closer analysis of European affairs.
After the Schuman declaration, Philip convinced the WCC leader
ship of the need for a rapid response and proposed the establish
ment of a reflection group, the "Ecumenical Commission on
European Cooperation," which would bring together Protestant pol
iticians and churchmen. The WCC Study Department was headed by
Nils Ehrenström, a Swedish pastor who worked in the ecumenical
movement from the early stages of the Life and Work movement
and was sent to Geneva by the Swedish Archbishop Nathan
Söderblom.23 Ehrenström and Visser't Hooft committed to help
Philip establish the commission and assigned to the task Paul
Abrecht, a young American pastor who joined the WCC staff in
August 1949.24 Abrecht was appointed secretary of the commission
and acted as a liaison between Protestant politicians and church
men. The unusual nomination of a young scholar in his thirties to
such a position was due to his interdisciplinary studies in econom
ics at the University of California, Berkeley and his theological train
ing at the Union Theological Seminary in New York, where he
studied Christian Ethics with Professor Reinhold Neibuhr and
John Bennett.
Philip and Abrecht began by contacting a number of Protestant
politicians known for their political and economic expertise, some
of whom were already affiliated with the national representations
of the CCIA. Members of the commission already knew one other,
and, from the start, its aim was to form a cohesive group that
could influence the position of churches at the European level. Note
worthy to its composition was the presence of Protestant politicians
not only from France and Germany but also from Britain and the
Scandinavian countries, despite the reluctance of their govern
ments to support the Schuman Plan.
On June 20, 1950, Philip sent a letter to Martin Wight, lecturer at
the London School of Economics and Political Science and an
22. "The Church and International Law. Report of Conference on the Founda
tions of International Law," Bossey, April 11-17, 1950, Archives of the World
Council of Churches (AWCC), Commission of the Churches on International
Affairs (CCIA), Meetings, 1947-52.
23. John Nurser, For All Peoples and All Nations. Christian Churches and Human
Rights (Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 2005), 64.
24. Letter from Visser't Hooft to Abrecht, February 26, 1949, AWCC, Church
and Society, Correspondence, 1949-1954.
449

213.55.244.38 on Tue, 28 Jul 2020 19:44:42 UTC
influential intellectual historian of Christianity and international

relations, in which he explained his idea of establishing the commis
sion and invited him to become a member. Philip asked him to
produce a draft on the spiritual implications of European coopera
tion. His paper would be circulated among the members of the com
mission, a pattern that would remain with scholars and/or
politicians producing a paper that was distributed in advanced
and debated in closed meetings. Protestant interest in analyzing
the political developments of postwar Europe was exemplified by
the rapidity of reactions from those who were invited to become
members of the commission. In his letter, Philip mentioned that
the following members already had agreed to convene the first
meeting of an executive committee in the autumn of 1950:
himself as the ECEC chairman; Connie L. Patijn, the ECEC vice
chairman and the Dutch delegate to the United Nations Economic
and Social Council;25 Max Kohnstamm, counsellor in the Dutch Min
istry of Foreign Affairs; Gustav Heinemann, German Minister of
Interior, member of Bundestag representing the Christlich Demok
ratische Union (CDU), and president of the Synod of the Evangelical
Church of Germany; Kenneth Grubb, chairman of the CCIA office in
London; Denis de Rougemont, a writer and leader of the cultural
section of the European Movement; and Pierre Mahillon, a Belgian
magistrate. Their transnational distribution indicated the efficiency
of the ecumenical dialogue within the WCC framework, which
encouraged the mobilization of the religious and political elite in
a short period of time.
Philip pointed out that the establishment of the WCC in 1948 had
not analyzed the most significant development in postwar Europe,
namely European political cooperation. He expressed concern that
"in spite of the fact that a number of their outstanding lay leaders
are in the forefront of movement for cooperation, the Churches
have so far remained silent on this burning subject."26
Indicating that he had the support of the WCC Study Group, Philip
put forward three proposals. First, he suggested the establishment
of an Ecumenical Commission of European Cooperation, which
should bring together leading Christian politicians and economists
working on European issues. In order to have a broad representa
tion, the commission required two representatives from each
country in Western Europe. Second, Philip pointed out that
despite having WCC support, the commission would be active
25. C. L. Patijn was a member of the Reformed Church of Holland and was active
in the ecumenical movement since the 1930s.
26. Letter from Philip and the WCC Study Department to Wight, June 20, 1950,
BLLSE, Wight Papers.
450

213.55.244.38 on Tue, 28 Jul 2020 19:44:42 UTC
outside its authority. The commission was only a regional organiza

tion of churchmen and politicians and not an ecumenical group
with a global representation. Third, the commission would
produce an annual report to be sent to all Protestant churches in
Western Europe "for consideration and possible endorsement."27
However, this report would not represent the official policy of
churches towards European cooperation, but only the views of its
authors.
The establishment of the commission was extremely timely. On
August 2, 1950, the second session of the Consultative Assembly
of the Council of Europe discussed the Schuman Plan and the idea
of establishing a European army. The assembly proposed that the
forthcoming High Authority derived from the Schuman Plan
would consider the inclusion of other Western countries in addition
to the first six member states, while national parliaments were
asked to ratify the plan in the autumn.28
Wight's draft was discussed by the WCC Study Department at a
meeting of its steering committee in Treysa (Germany) on August
11. The meeting reinforced the need for establishing the commission
and provided an informal forum at which further thoughts were
expressed on launching the initiative. The idea of organizing the
commission as soon as possible was further emphasized after Paul
Abrecht attended a series of sessions of the Consultative Assembly
of the Council of Europe in August 1950. Upon his return to
Geneva, he was extremely enthusiastic in trying to find a commonly
agreed upon date for all members29 of the commission and proposed
that the first meeting should take place at Hotel Terminus, near Saint
Lazare railway station in Paris, on September 13-14, 1950.30
The executive meeting in Paris brought together the initial
members as in Philip's letter to Wight. In addition, four
members attended, namely Mario Rollier, professor of chemistry
from Milan representing Protestant churches in Italy, Nils Ehren
ström and Paul Abrecht as staff members of the WCC Study
Department, and Reverend Pierre Maury, president of the French
27. Ibid.
28. The plan was rejected by UK Labor, while the Conservatives asked for an
amendment in which other European countries could be part. Macmillan
claimed that British people would not abandon control of their coal and mine
industries to an international authority. See "Britain and the Schuman Plan.
Mr Macmillan at Strasbourg," The Times, August 16, 1950.
29. Letter from Abrecht to Grubb, August 21,1950, AWCC, CCIA 1950-54, Ecu
menical Commission on European Cooperation (ECEC).
30. Letter from Abrecht to Wight, November 13,1950, BLLSE, Wight Papers; and
Letter from Abrecht to Grubb, September 6, 1950 and Letter from Philip to
Grubb, September 25, 1950, AWCC, CCIA 1950-54, ECEC.
451

213.55.244.38 on Tue, 28 Jul 2020 19:44:42 UTC
Reformed Church, who joined the discussion only in the after

noon of September 14.31
The commission issued a short statement that was circulated
among prospective members; a larger meeting was proposed
take place in the spring of 1951. The statement defended the re
tionship between religion and politics claiming that "there
nothing very mysterious about politics." The Christian Chur
was encouraged "never to turn its back on politics," indicating a
the same time that the support of a particular civilization or po
ical system was "not the Church's job." In underlined letters, th
statement asserted the importance of deepening analysis of relig
in Europe, emphasizing that "the present form of organization
Europe is no longer able to give man the material prosperity an
security for which he longs."
As the statement indicated, the Schuman Plan was aimed at
strengthening economic cooperation, and churches needed to
have a common view on how to deal with economic progress. The
economic situation of postwar Europe was extremely difficult,
with rationing of the basic items, and churches could not disregard
this situation. Without going into great detail, the statement encour
aged further reflection on the idea of a European defense and on
relations with the United States and the Soviet Union. The statement
proposed a re-examination of "fundamental theological convic
tions," stating that,
This commission has been established to mobilise the churches to act on

the problems of Europe.
The churches of Europe have been inarticulate regarding questions of
European cooperation. That is due partly to the fact that the issues are
complex and it is frequently impossible for the average Christian to
know what is the right action. In some instances our churches are tied
closely to national traditions and they have not been able to think in
terms of the larger European community of Christians. Finally, many of
our churches do not have a tradition for seeing the relationship of the
Christian message to the problems of the social order and they need
help in finding the right methods by which the church can make its
witness on social issues without creating new confusion.!"
In order to examine further the means of achieving a European

consensus, Paul Abrecht invited all members of the commission
to express their personal views on what European cooperation
meant for them.
31. "Preliminary Statement of the Spiritual and Ethical Problems of European

Cooperation, Ecumenical Commission for European Cooperation, Confidential,
Not for Publication," December 1950, AWCC, CCIA 1950-54, ECEC.
32. Ibid.
452

213.55.244.38 on Tue, 28 Jul 2020 19:44:42 UTC
As chair of the commission and directly involved in the Council of

Europe, André Philip was the first to respond. He began by indicating
that a united Europe could be achieved only by integrating the
continent "economically, militarily and spiritually,"33 suggesting
that only the federal unification of Europe and European rearma
ment were solutions to postwar problems.
The issue of European rearmament provoked a strong reaction
among participants, particularly after a European Army was pro
posed by Churchill at the Council of Europe in the summer of
1950. Furthermore, the start of the Korean War in June 1950 led
to security concerns and questions regarding Europe's position in
the conflict between the world superpowers, the U.S. and the USSR.
Gustav Heinemann, German Interior Minister, responded to
Philip's comments on rearmament by claiming that the idea of a
united Europe, as promoted by the Schuman Plan, was diminished
by two main factors. First, the division of Germany remained a con
tested issue. Second, the process of rearmament only a few years
after the end of the Second World War was misleading. He pointed
out that perhaps only churches could provide a solution, suggesting
"Should we not rely more on God then on arms?"
Mario Rollier developed Heinemann's ideas further and, after a
short summary of the religious and political situation in Italy, pre
sented his view on how churches could contribute towards Euro
pean unification. He made reference to the mobilization of over
half a million Italian citizens who recently signed a declaration for
a federal Europe. In his opinion, churches could support this
process by establishing a "European Council of Churches."
In presenting the British view on European cooperation, Kenneth
Grubb expressed his scepticism of any plan involving his country.
His comments followed the official political line, indicating that
Britain was more interested in maintaining close relations with
the Commonwealth rather than developing its ties with the
continent.
Max Kohnstamm changed the topic from social and political
issues to focusing on a theological perspective. In his opinion, Euro
pean unity could be achieved only by addressing the moral issues of
international cooperation and by emphasizing the concept of
"responsibility... for our neighbour."
Denis de Rougemont was the most reticent participant. He argued
that the commission somehow implied "a conception of a Christian
Europe," which did not take into account its other religious confes
sions. The other participants disagreed with him, arguing that they
33. Minutes of the meeting of the Provisional Steering Committee,

September 14, 1950, AWCC, CCIA 1950-54, ECEC.
453

213.55.244.38 on Tue, 28 Jul 2020 19:44:42 UTC
were not promoting a Christian Europe but instead were searching

for the means by which churches could help to deal with
contemporary European affairs.34
After the politicians had expressed their views on Europe, Nils
Ehrenström presented the Scandinavian response to the process
of European cooperation. Most of its countries preferred the estab
lishment of an independent European political bloc, while Norway
and Denmark were more interested in joining a wider Atlantic
community.
The Executive Committee agreed that a primary importance for
future meetings would include a discussion of the spiritual and
ethical implications derived from the process of European coopera
tion. The committee emphasized that in order to tackle political and
economic issues, churches had to build on the "experience of ecu
menical unity and fellowship." The committee entrusted Max Kohn
stamm with the writing of a short memorandum for analysis in an
enlarged meeting of the commission.
Despite the small number of politicians and churchmen who par
ticipated, the meeting in Paris represented the beginning of the
most significant Christian commission to analyze the impact of
European integration for churches. Some of its members would be
influential in defining official contacts between churches and the
European Community. What emerged most clearly from the
meeting were competing visions of European cooperation and
how the commission could help churches.
What is Meant by European Unification?

The commission assembled for its first "official" meeting in Frank
furt on January 13-14, 1951. The meeting represented a direct con
tinuation of the points raised in Paris with almost the same
membership configuration. In addition to some members of the
executive committee,35 Martin Wight from the London School of
Economics attended as a full member, while five churchmen associ
ated with the WCC were "guests," namely Theodore Bachmann,36
34. Denis de Rougemont, Vingt-huit siècles d'Europe. La conscience européenne

à travers les textes. D'Hésiode à nos jours (Paris: Payot, 1961).
35. The following attended the Frankfurt meeting: Kenneth Grubb, Gustav
Heinemann, Max Kohnstamm, Pierre Mahillon, Connie L. Patijn, Mario Rollier,
and Paul Abrecht.
36. E. Theodore Bachman was a Lutheran theologian and church historian. He is
known for his Lutheran Churches in the World: A Handbook (Augsburg: Augs
burg Fortress Publishers, 1989). He held a master's degree from Harvard Univer
sity and a doctorate in church history from the University of Chicago.
454

213.55.244.38 on Tue, 28 Jul 2020 19:44:42 UTC
Nils Ehrenström, Reverend W. Menn, A. 0. Olsen, and Willem Visser't

Hooft.
The Frankfurt meeting was an opportunity to combine the
political expertise of the commission with the ecumenical experi
ence of the WCC churchmen. The commission decided to publish
a leaflet, entitled European Issues, which was distributed to Euro
pean churches. On the first page, it mentioned that the ideas
expressed inside were endorsed by a large number of Protestant pol
iticians, namely Jean Rey, Belgian MP; Ingvar Svennilsson, professor
of economics at the University of Uppsala working at the United
Nations in Geneva; Denis de Rougemont; Eric Fletcher, a lawyer
and Labor British MP; Ole Björn Kraft, a member of the Rigsdag
and former Minister of Foreign Affairs in Denmark; Christian
S. Oftedal, chief editor of Stavanger Aftenblad and Norwegian rep
resentative to the General Assembly of the United Nations; Erling
Wikborg, Norwegian lawyer in the Supreme Court, and René
Courtin, professor of law at the University of Paris and a leading
member of the European Movement.
The participants focused their attention on events that had
emerged since the previous meeting. In particular, the issue of Euro
pean rearmament had increased its international significance, as of
October 24, 1950. On that date, French Prime Minister René Pleven
proposed a European Defense Community for the six countries that
had agreed to be part of the Schuman Plan. Pleven put forward the
idea of establishing a European army in charge of the defense of
Western Europe that would work together with the American and
British divisions in NATO.37
Regarding the situation in France, the contrast between the poor
standard of living in the country at that time and the increasing
communist presence had an impact on European cooperation. In
Philip's opinion, only the establishment of an enlarged market
and closer cooperation of European industry could prevent a com
munist takeover in France. Many Frenchmen supported their coun
try's neutrality and considered that the war in Korea increased the
chance of another war in Europe. Most participants in the commis
sion agreed that, without rearmament, Western Europe "would be
Sovietized within three years." In their opinion, the most significant
issue was not to reach an agreement on European rearmament but
to reach a consensus on how it should take place and convince
the United States on the matter.
The commission agreed that Protestant politicians should meet
every four or five months to discuss the latest political events and
37. For more on the Pleven plan, see Edward Fursdon, The European Defence
Community (London: Palgrave Macmillan, 1980).
455

213.55.244.38 on Tue, 28 Jul 2020 19:44:42 UTC
their impact for churches. An enlarged membership was proposed

in order to have a wider representation of European countries.
Thus, the commission should add members from Switzerland,
France, Germany, and even Austria and Greece. Although some of
these countries were not involved in the Schuman Plan, the partici
pants regarded them as intrinsically linked to the process of Euro
pean cooperation.
The commission produced a statement presenting its member
ship and work to a large audience. The statement publicly
announced the establishment of the ECEC and was circulated
among political and religious circles in major European cap
as well as the United States. In addition, some paragraphs of
statement were reprinted in church periodicals in the West an
newspapers with a large circulation.38
In order to understand how ordinary citizens and churc
regarded the project of European cooperation, the statem
included a series of questions to be discussed by churchmen
the national level. These questions represented the most signifi
contact between Protestant politicians and European churches
large scale.
The questions to people in France, Italy, and other West Europ
countries addressed reconciliation between France and German
public perception of European unity and national institutions,
American role in the West, and how these countries perceived
British hesitation to join the European project.
Germans were urged to consider if the separation of their coun
between East and West could be viewed as a "contribution to the
peace of Europe"; the idea that "the unity of Germany is almost a
divine ordinance"; nationalism versus internationalization; and
the unification of Europe versus the division of Germany.
Britons were asked to reflect upon their country's unique position
in Europe, having survived the war without a "military and political
catastrophe"; their passive position towards European unification;
the effect of their geographical distance from other European coun
tries; their relationship with Europe versus that with the Common
wealth; their perception of other European people compared with
Americans; the issue of national loyalty as a thing of the past com
pared with the new European political project; and their obsessive
focus on domestic issues rather than European relations.
Americans were encouraged to consider their responsibility
towards Europe; the connection between European independence
and unification; and European perception of the American role in
fostering European unity.
38. European Issues, NAN, Patijn Collectie 616: 1820, July 1951.
456

213.55.244.38 on Tue, 28 Jul 2020 19:44:42 UTC
After the statement was widely circulated, the commission met in

Bièvre, near Paris, on July 20,1951, just a few weeks after two Euro
pean events that had a wide impact on the European project: on
April 18, 1951, the Treaty Establishing the European Coal and
Steel Community (ECSC) was signed in Paris, which led to the estab
lishment of new supranational institutions (the High Authority, the
Council of Ministers, the Common Assembly, and the Court of
Justice), and in July 1951, Britain and France formally ceased their
state of war with Germany.39
In addition to those members who attended the previous meet
ings, new names joined the commission, namely James Dickson,
Conservative member of the Swedish Parliament; Robert Kerber,
former Austrian Minister; Heinrich Kopf, the First Minister of
Lower Saxony;40 Pierre Mahillon, a Belgian magistrate; Roger Mehl,
professor of theology and philosophy at the University of Stras
bourg; Jean Rey; and Werner Kagi, professor of law and constitu
tional history at the University of Zurich.41
The members at the meeting assessed the impact of the previous
statement, to which reaction in Western religious and political
circles had been immediate. In particular, articles published in Euro
pean Issues were discussed at the World Council of Churches Euro
pean Laymen's Conference, which met in Bad Boll, Germany in July
1951. This conference attracted over a thousand participants from
all major Protestant churches and examined the role of the laity in
Europe. The timing was extremely significant as in the following
years the resolution of the Bad Boll conference would be considered
as a reference document regarding the Protestant view of the role of
its laymen.
A number of newspapers and church journals in the U.S., Britain,
and Germany reported on the establishment of the ECEC. In most
cases, it was welcomed as a positive development, but there was
also substantial criticism, and many points presented at the time
would remain until its dissolution in 1974. In Britain, The Guardian
claimed that,
There is a danger that the Churches of one region may be invited to but
tress the political development of that particular region in a way which
is not easily compatible with the Christian vocation to unite all men of
good will everywhere and to preach the Gospel in all lands.42
39. Britain on July 9, 1951; France on July 14, 1951; the United States on
October 24, 1951; the USSR in January 1955.
40. Heinrich Kopf (1893-1961), later president of the Bundesrat (1951-52).
41. The following attended the Bièvre meeting: André Philip, Connie L. Patijn,
René Courtin, Gustav Heinemann, Max Kohnstamm, Mario Rollier, and Martin
Wight.
42. The Guardian, February 9, 1951.
457

213.55.244.38 on Tue, 28 Jul 2020 19:44:42 UTC
A comparable perception was held by The Frontier—A Christian

Commentary on the Common Life, the monthly journal of the Chris
tian Frontier Council in England, which was established by
J. H. Oldham, one of the leading pioneers of the ecumenical move
ment in the interwar period. The journal pointed out that "The
inhibitions about European cooperation that are actually felt in
the countries concerned are of a less heavenly origin" and that the
questions seemed to reflect only "a little psycho-analysis of the
actual fears and mental resistances that are aroused by the idea
of closer unity in each country."43
Across the ecumenical movement the criticisms were three-fold:
first, by supporting European cooperation, churches could
become over engaged in political disputes; second, the term ecu
menical in the title of the commission gave the idea that it was
part of the World Council of Churches and represented the
official position of churches; third, and the strongest criticism,
Evengelische Welt stated that some members of the Berlin
Brandenburg Lay Assembly viewed in the establishment of the
commission the idea of a "Catholic French Western Europe
masked beneath a veneer of Christian pathos." The fact that the
commission was composed mainly of Western politicians and
churchmen without representatives from Eastern Europe, particu
larly from East Germany, was controversial among German Prot
estant churches.
In private conversations with members of the commission, some
churchmen had suggested that the reference to rearmament was
problematic. Churches had to be cautious in adopting a military
position and should focus instead on those initiatives that made
references to "peace" rather than "army."
The most challenging issue faced by the commission was the
widespread perception regarding the meaning of "European unifica
tion." As Paul Abrecht mentioned at the Bièvre meeting,
Some asked, What is meant by European unification? It was felt that to

suggest political unification at the moment is defeatist because most con
ceivable forms of political unity are impossible to realize in the near
future. If we do not mean some form of political unity, then what do we
mean? (...] There is a considerable confusion about the goal of military
and political policy in Europe today, and about the meaning of European
union in relation to this policy.44
43. The Frontier —A Christian Commentary on the Common Life 2, no. 3 (March
1951): 97.
44. Paul Abrecht, "A Report from the Ecumenical Commission on European
Cooperation," June 26, 1951, BLLSE, Wight Papers.
458

213.55.244.38 on Tue, 28 Jul 2020 19:44:42 UTC
In order to dispel confusion, the commission issued a further

statement explaining its composition and work.45 The independ
ence of the commission from any ecclesiastical affiliation was
emphasized in order to reinforce a wider impact on the faithful,
stating that the commission's intention was to discover "new and
creative solutions for [the] problems of the European community,
and to stimulate the Churches to act constructively in this realm."
The statement claimed that "Europe is a spiritual, traditional and
historical unity, moulded by Christian influences."46 Therefore,
European integration was a response to the desuetude of the
nation-state, which could not provide the solution for transnational
European issues. The Bièvre statement showed an advanced under
standing of the role of politicians and churches in postwar Europe.
Churches were asked to engage in transnational issues and become
active at the European level. This type of discourse, combining reli
gion and European issues, was extremely innovative and attempted
to mobilize churches in European cooperation. However, despite the
enthusiasm and the success of bringing together politicians and
churchmen, Protestant churches continued to remain largely
silent with regard to European issues. The only newspapers that
wrote positive comments on the work of the commission were the
The Frontier, The Church of England Newspaper, and The Tablet
in Britain and Reformée in Paris. Timid references to engaging
churches on European issues, in particular, were due to the increas
ing tension between East and West and the dramatic changes pro
posed by the rearmament of Western Europe.
The High Authority of the European Coal and Steel

Community
On August 10,1952, in a public ceremony, the High Authority of the
European Coal and Steel Community was inaugurated in Luxem
bourg. Jean Monnet was appointed president (a position he held
until June 3, 1955) and Max Kohnstamm was appointed general
secretary.47
45. The statement was much sharper suggesting that, "The Commission is an
independent Commission of Christians drawn from various European countries
and from different fields of social and political life who desire to help the Euro
pean Churches in the spirit of the Ecumenical Movement to explore the special
responsibility of Christians with regard to the problems of European
cooperation."
46. European Issues, NAN, Patijn Collectie 616: 1820, July 1951.
47. Dirk Spierenburg and Raymond Poidevin, The History of the High Authority
of the European Coal and Steel Community. Supranationality in Operation
(London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson Ltd., 1994).
459

213.55.244.38 on Tue, 28 Jul 2020 19:44:42 UTC
Kohnstamm realized the significance of bringing churches closer

to the decision-making supranational body. In a conversation with
Visser't Hooft, he proposed that Protestant churches should estab
lish an ecumenical representation to the High Authority of the
ECSC. His suggestion seemed to have Visser't Hooft's support,
whom in turn discussed the matter with Paul Abrecht. In October
1952, Abrecht contacted Kohnstamm mentioning that he would
like to convene a meeting of six or eight members of the commis
sion and some top Protestant churchmen as soon as possible to
discuss the latest events on European integration. He preferred
that the meeting be held in November 1952, as in early 1953 a
large number of WCC staff members would be traveling to Asia to
a meeting of the WCC Central Executive Committee.48
The idea of opening an official ecumenical representation in Lux
embourg was extremely enterprising giving the impact of discus
sions within the ECEC. However, reaching an agreement on
opening such an office in Luxembourg was difficult. Abrecht's pro
posed meeting in the autumn of 1952 to discuss this issue did not
take place. Patijn, the ECEC vice-president, was in the United States
at the time, and the meeting at such short notice could not be
organized.
The next ECEC meeting did not take place until spring 1953, when,
instead of discussing Kohnstamm's proposal, new circumstances
affected the nature of the commission.49 Protestant politicians
had to convince churchmen of the necessity to continue further
analysis of European integration while churchmen were worried
that the commission was regarded as representing an official ecu
menical body, which could be detrimental to dialogue between
both sides of the Iron Curtain. Even if Abrecht's meeting would
have taken place in the autumn of 1952, it was most unlikely that
Protestant churches would have decided to establish an ecumenical
representation in Luxembourg, as Protestant churches were reluc
tant to offer support for a regional political initiative. It would
take until 1964, when churches agreed to open an official body,
(the Consultative Committee of Churches for the European Com
munities) at the headquarters of the European Commission in Brus
sels. Neither Catholic nor Protestant churches opened a religious
representation at the High Authority. Religious issues continued
to be discussed at the national level, with the ECEC remaining the
only transnational reflection group on the role of churches in
48. Letter from Abrecht to Kohnstamm, October 24, 1952, AWCC, CCIA
1950-54,ECEC.
49. Letter from Abrecht to Eastman, November 18,1952, AWCC, CCIA 1950-54,
ECEC.
460

213.55.244.38 on Tue, 28 Jul 2020 19:44:42 UTC
European cooperation. Kohnstamm's proposal reflected the inter

ests of Protestant laymen in establishing new forms of contact
between churches and the first European institutions.
After the WCC held its Executive Committee meeting in India in
January 1953, the ECEC members sought to meet again and
discuss the latest events in Europe. Visser't Hooft and Grubb pro
posed to bring together not only Protestant politicians at the
meeting but also some representatives of church leadership
behind the Iron Curtain. The decision to invite two Hungarian
bishops raised suspicion among some ECEC members and was
not generally welcomed.50 It was particularly feared that discussion
would be monopolized by Cold War issues rather than progress on
European cooperation.51
However, the invitation was made, and the ECEC held its fifth
meeting at the headquarters of the Fédération Protestante de
France in Paris from February 28 to March 1, 1953.52 Participants
agreed that progress on the European Coal and Steel Community,
the European Defense Community, and the European Political Com
munity (EPC) were "more apparent than real."53
Participants examined the role of churches in Europe, trying to
reach an agreement on the theological basis for European coopera
tion. Reverend Philippe Maury, who represented the voice of the
World's Student Christian Federation, was highly critical of the
ways in which discussions took place, arguing that they were politi
cized. He compared the work of the ECEC with that of the European
Student Christian Movement and indicated that the commission
seemed like a political party which drew Christians from various
churches rather than representing a united voice.
Responding to criticism, Philip replied that the commission was
not searching to establish a "Christian society." He thought that it
was the duty of all Christians to "be guided in their political
50. Letter from Patijn to Abrecht, February 16, 1953, AWCC, CCIA 1950-54,
ECEC.
51. See also Nicholas Hope, "The Iron Curtain and its Repercussions for the
Churches in Europe," Kirchliche Zeitgeschicte 12 (1999): 426-40; Dianne
Kirby, ed., Religion and the Cold War (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003).
52. Present: André Philip; Connie L. Patijn; Pierre Mahillon; Jean Rey; René
Courtin; Walter Bauer, Germany; Hermann Ehlers; Gustab Heinemann; H.W.
Kopf; Max Kohnstamm; Mario Rollier; James Dickson; Paul Abrecht. Guests:
Marc Boegner, France; Reverend Pierre Maury, France; Reverend Paul Conord,
France; Remold von Thadden, Germany; Volkmar Herntrich, Germany;
E. Emmen, Holland; Willem Visser 't Hooft, Geneva; Bishop A. Bereczky,
Hungary; Bishop J. Peter, Hungary; Reverend H. Waddams, UK. Other guests:
Nils Ehrenström; H. H. Harms; Philippe Maury, Geneva; Elfan Rees, Geneva;
Kenneth Johnstone, UK; N. O. Steenbeek, Holland; and Paul Porter, United States.
53. Minutes of the Meeting, AWCC, CCIA 1950-54, ECEC.
461

213.55.244.38 on Tue, 28 Jul 2020 19:44:42 UTC
actions by certain absolute principles derived from faith."

He emphasized that it was desirable to include all European coun
tries in the process of European integration, but the work of the
first six was crucial. He stated that "The Europe we desire as Chris
tians is a Europe free of certain injustices, free of a dependence on
colonialism, a Europe which has learned from the economic and
political experience of Russia and the USA but which is free of
their undesirable political and social characteristics." Philip's posi
tion was endorsed by the other participants, including Jean Rey,
who argued for making Europe a cardinal point in everybody's
life, claiming that "It is very important for us to emphasize in all
our work, that Europe is for us a means, and the means, of relaxing
the tensions in the present international situation."54
Another criticism came from Bishop Albert Bereczky who pre
sented a paper on the position of the Reformed and Lutheran
churches in Hungary. He indicated that although these churches
supported the WCC and the ecumenical movement, there was
concern regarding the work of the ECEC. He stated that the WCC
was not a transnational church representing all Protestant commun
ities "but the world council of the actual churches the unity of which
can only be secured by the brotherly ties binding the member
churches."55
In order to find a solution to this situation, Visser't Hooft decided
that all churchmen should hold a separate session without politi
cians to discuss their view of ECEC work.56 They reported back
their findings and stated support for the continuing activity of the
commission. However, they indicated that the commission was
not a spokesman for churches but only a reflection group. Church
men were particularly interested in three issues: first, further
thought should be given to defining the authority of any statements
of the commission; second, the commission should remain inde
pendent of the World Council of Churches; and third, in order to
avoid confusion of the ecumenical movement, they proposed to
drop the word Commission from the title and to rename it the "Com
mittee on the Christian Responsibility for European Cooperation"
(CCREC).
54. Ibid.
55. Ibid.
56. The following churchmen attended the meeting: P. Maury and P. Conord,
France; R. von Thadden and V. Herntrich, Germany; A. Bereczky and J. Peter,
Hungary; E. Emmen and N. O. Steenbeek, Holland; H. Waddam, UK; W. Visser't
Hooft, H. H. Harms; and E. Rees, Geneva.
462

213.55.244.38 on Tue, 28 Jul 2020 19:44:42 UTC
The decision represented a victory for the CCIA, which imposed

its authority over contact between CCREC and European churches.
Rather than working towards establishing a permanent representa
tion at the High Authority of the ECSC as suggested by Kohnstamm
only a few months earlier, the CCREC was recognized as a signifi
cant advisory body for churches; the CCIA, however, became the
official representation between politicians and churches. Changing
the term from Commission to Committee emphasized the authority
of the CCIA and overcame criticism from Eastern Europe that
CCREC statements reflected a united position within the ecumeni
cal movement.
Churchmen agreed that they needed the expertise on European
issues provided by the CCREC. They suggested that the CCREC
should establish contact with East European churches and that
"some kind of permanent organization of the European churches
was needed." German and Dutch churchmen showed their
support for establishing a "Conference of European Churches"
that would bring together churches from both sides of the Iron
Curtain; however, the French were reluctant. Instead, they decided
that the CCIA should continue to monitor the activities of the
Council of Europe in Strasbourg.
Churchmen convinced the CCREC that while Paul Abrecht
remained Secretary, Elfan Rees, British advisor on refugee issues
for the WCC, who had just been assigned the task to monitor Euro
pean affairs for the CCIA office in London, would liaise between
Protestant politicians and churches. Despite being nominated to
represent the CCREC to churches, Elfan Rees remained primarily
attached to the CCIA. In July and September 1953, he visited the
Council of Europe and endorsed Grubb's scepticism on the neces
sity to establish a permanent office in Strasbourg. In an ironic
note, he pointed out that the council was
a very dead place when no meetings are on... I am inclined to the view that
there is no hurry. There is no formal provision for consultation and we
would have no standing. Perhaps the best approach for the time being is
national church representation to governments before they instruct
their delegations. The Roman Catholics are represented there and com
plain that they are not being listened to because the Protestants are not
there!57
57. Letter fromElfan Rees to Dr. R. C. Mackie, "Brief Encounters," July 27,1953,
AWCC, CCIA, Brussels-European Centre, 1964-69.
463

213.55.244.38 on Tue, 28 Jul 2020 19:44:42 UTC
The meeting of the Committee on the Christian Responsibility for Euro

pean Cooperation, Lambeth Palace, London, 5-8 November 1953.
Front Row: Herbert Waddams, Reinold von Thadden; André Philip;
Archbishop Geoffrey Fischer; Kenneth Grubb; Jean Rey; Franklin Littell.
Back Row: Paul Abrecht; Gustav Heinemann; Pierre Mahillon; Kenneth
Johnstone; John Lawrence; Unknown person.
Diversity within Unity

On the invitation of Reverend Herbert Waddams, general secretary
of the Church of England Council on Foreign Relations, the CCREC
decided to meet at Lambeth Palace in London November 5-8,
1953. Discussions were opened by Mario Rollier, who presented a
resolution of the Federal Council of the Evangelical Churches of
Italy on October 25, 1953, to examine the evolution of European
Protestantism, deciding that "the constitution of a political Euro
pean Community, even if limited, constituted a positive contribu
tion to the maintenance of peace in the world."58
Participants also discussed the role of churches in the process of
European cooperation. Visser't Hooft argued that, in addition to
Protestant churches in the six ECSC states, the CCREC should also
maintain contact with those in Britain, the United States, and, if pos
sible, with countries behind the Iron Curtain, with those in Hungary
58. CCREC, Lambeth Palace, London, November 1953, AWCC, 24.2.028 CCREC,
Rengstorf, 1952-Brussels, 1954.
464

213.55.244.38 on Tue, 28 Jul 2020 19:44:42 UTC
and Czechoslovakia being the most relevant. Hermann Ehlers, pres

ident of the Bundestag, took this idea further and argued that the
results of recent elections in Germany represented his country's
commitment toward European unity. He referred to the ways in
which public opinion perceived the Protestant and Roman Catholic
churches, stating that "It is often said in Protestant circles that the
unity of Western Europe is a device of the Roman Catholic Church
which is not interested in the reunification of Germany. This is
not true."59
The CCREC decided to adopt two statements, the first addressed
to Christians in Britain and the second printed as a pamphlet on
"The Future of Europe and the Responsibility of Churches." The
pamphlet summarized the work of the CCREC since its establish
ment in 1950 and represented the climax of Protestant view on
European Cooperation. It offered an overview of the political situa
tion in Europe after the Schuman Plan. The ECSC was presented "not
as an end in itself, but as a way of thinking," and the union was
aimed to lead eventually to the "re-unification of Germany."60
It stated that "The European Community must be based on hope
and not on fear," dispelling criticism that the community was
created to oppose communism. It clearly argued that "The European
Community is being created not in response to any desire for a
crusade, but in response to a desire for peace. It is not to be identi
fied with any ideology." The pamphlet indicated that the absence of
Britain from the ECSC was "regretted in Europe but it should, on the
whole, be understood," and that the community was open to new
members when they felt that it was appropriate for them to join.
In addition to the survey of the political situation, a special section
was dedicated to the role of Protestant churches. It stated that
churches had two major responsibilities in Europe. First, they
were urged "to preserve and expand the religious liberties which
belong to our European spiritual heritage." In this regard, the
CCREC asked the Protestant churches to work together with the
Roman Catholic Church. Second, churches were obliged "to affirm
the need for diversity within unity as a fundamental characteristic
of the European community." This second point showed that,
despite confessional differences, churches should work together
and "oppose any attempts to restore the medieval pattern of a
Christendom in which one particular church has a place of exclusive
privilege and power." Without clearly stating the name of a church
which would claim "exclusive privilege and power," this point
59. Ibid.
60. The Future of Europe and the Responsibility of the Churches (Geneva: CCREC,
1954), in AWWC, CCREC, 1952-1966.
465

213.55.244.38 on Tue, 28 Jul 2020 19:44:42 UTC
directly referred to the Roman Catholic Church as the dominant

confession in the six ECSC member states.61 As the statement
would have a wide circulation, this point indicated that the religious
fundament of the European Community was recognition of the mul
titude of religious confessions in Europe. The reference to "diversity
within unity" was extremely symbolic, emphasizing the spiritual
composition of Europe. These ideas would become more pro
nounced in the life of the European Community in the following
years, culminating in the adoption of "diversity in unity" as the
motto of the European Union in May 2000.
The pamphlet was distributed to approximately fifty churches in
Western Europe and the United States62 and represented the culmi
nation of CCREC work over the previous three years. In February
1954, Paul Abrecht informed Patijn that his tasks at the WCC and
the CCREC were extremely demanding, proposing "to find a Euro
pean to be the official secretary, and more particularly someone
from one of the six countries."63
The CCREC attempted to meet again in early 1954, first in Italy
and then in the Netherlands;64 however, the changing scene of reli
gious and political events meant that the meeting would not be held
until the autumn. Protestant churchmen were involved in the
Second Assembly of the WCC in Evanston, Illinois, August 15-31
The assembly, under the theme of "Christ—the Hope of th
World," brought together 502 delegates from 161 member
churches. Discussions were dominated by Cold War tension, part
ularly in the Section of International Affairs, and the assemb
encouraged all Christians to reject the use of any weapons o
mass destruction and urged churches to work towards achieving
"a responsible society."65
The Evanston Assembly occurred at a time of radical transform
tion on European cooperation. On August 30, 1954, the Frenc
61. Fortunate) P. Mizzi, L'unione europea nei documenti pontifici. Da Benedet

XV a Giovanni Paolo //(Malta: Ed. Studia, 1979); Jürgen Schwarz, Katholische
Kirche und Europa. Dokumente, 1945-1979 (Munich: Grunewald, 1980).
62. Letter from Abrecht to Patijn, February 19, 1954, AWCC, CCREC,
1952-1966.
63. Ibid.
64. Letters from Philip to members of the Committee, May 4, 1954; June 11,
1954, AWCC, CCREC, 1952-1966.
65. Harold E. Fey, A History of the Ecumenical Movement, 1948-1968, vol. 2
(London: The Westminster Press, 1970); Kenneth Grubb, Crypts of Power: An
Autobiography (London: Hodder & Stoughton Ltd., 1971); Darril Hudson, The
Ecumenical Movement in World Affairs (London: Littlehampton Book Services
Ltd., 1969); Darril Hudson, The World Council of Churches in International
Affairs (Leighton: Faith Press for the Royal Institute of International Affairs,
1977).
466

213.55.244.38 on Tue, 28 Jul 2020 19:44:42 UTC
National Assembly rejected the European Defense Community with

a vote of 319 to 264, leading to the end of European military coop
eration and to NATO remaining the dominant military alliance in
Western Europe.
After almost one year without holding an official meeting, the
CCREC met again on October 2-3, 1954, at the Methodist church
in Brussels with a small number of participants. The meeting was
characterized by the tremendous disappointment of CCREC
members in the failure of the EDC.
André Philip was extremely virulent, accusing that French politi
cians were responsible for this drawback on European cooperation
and "blamed... the people, and not least, the French Protestants,
for the failure of EDC.. .[as] the latter had evaded their responsibil
ity and opted for neutralism."66 Walter Bauer, an industrialist from
Fulda, indicated that "the shock had been great in Germany and had
weakened Adenauer's position," however, the country remained
attached to West European values rather than establishing closer
relations with the Soviet Union.
At the end of the meeting, the CCREC sent a statement to Protestant
churches on "Europe after the Defeat of the EDC."67 The CCREC
stated that it was deeply concerned by some church publications
which regarded the EDC only in terms of ideas rather than as an
actual step towards European integration. The CCREC reinforced
its position that supranational organizations were the most signifi
cant actors which could help the reconstruction of postwar Europe.68
After the London and Paris conferences of October 1954, the
establishment of the West European Union, which replaced the
failed EDC with an international organization aimed at providing
military support for Western Europe, would lead to a new stage
in the Protestant view of European cooperation. After 1954, the
CCREC would continue to meet until 1974; however, the meetings
lacked the dynamism of the first years. Instead, the CCREC
would support a new generation of politicians and churchmen
working directly in European institutions in Paris, Strasbourg,
and Brussels and would lead to the emergence of regional Protes
tant organizations, such as a Conference of European Churches
in 1957, the Churches Commission for Migrants in Europe in
1964, the Consultative Committee of Churches for the European
66. CCREC, Brussels, October 1-3, 1954, AWCC, CCIA, ECEC, 1950-54.
67. EI, October 11, 1954.
68. Ibid.
467

213.55.244.38 on Tue, 28 Jul 2020 19:44:42 UTC
Communities in 1964, and the Ecumenical Centre in Brussels in

1966.
Conclusion
The response to the Schuman declaration among churches in

Western Europe was ambivalent. The Roman Catholic Church w
primarily involved in defending its communities against comm
nism. Its Strasbourg office, le Secrétariat catholique pour les p
lèmes européens, monitored the Council of Europe from 195
until 1952. The sudden closure of this office due to financial
restraints reflected the interest of local dioceses rather than re
senting a systematic approach towards the Schuman Plan.69 On
other hand, the ecumenical movement was divided with regard
the best means to approach the new proposal of European
cooperation.
Eurosceptic countries revealed that the majority of Protestant
churchmen remained attached to national politics concerning the
Schuman Plan. While those in ECSC countries supported the plan,
a small number of high ranking churchmen were favorable to a
wider involvement of churches to European politics. In Britain,
with the notable exceptions of Archbishop Geoffrey Fischer, who
hosted one of the CCREC's meetings, and J. H. Oldham, most clergy
men claimed that British interests would have been affected by
joining the ECSC. In addition, the reluctance to engage the CCIA
office in London closer to European political developments had
an impact on Protestant response to the Schuman Plan. In the first
months after May 1950, churches tended to view the Schuman
Plan as one of a number of proposals that were put forward after
the Second World War. At the same time, despite the establishment
of the ECEC (CCREC) and the distribution of its material in favor of
European cooperation, the purpose and shape of European integra
tion remained unclear to many clergymen.
The fear that the Schuman Plan was a Catholic "project" was
visible at parish levels rather than among the Protestant elite. Prot
estant leaders issued statements emphasizing the need for closer
cooperation between Protestant and Catholic churches, indicating
that the Catholicism of the ECSC countries mattered. The ECEC
(CCREC) had a limited impact at a local level and remained a
highly elite and selective group; this restricted its audience and its
contact with Protestant grass root communities.
69. The office was reopened on December 11, 1956, as l'Office catholiqu
d'information sur les problèmes européens (OCIPE).
468

213.55.244.38 on Tue, 28 Jul 20hu, 01 Jan 1976 12:34:56 UTC
The emergence of the ECSC demonstrated that churches were

unprepared for a public presence in European affairs. Protestant
churches seemed to be bystanders to the process of European inte
gration with the ECEC (CCREC) alone examining in detail the impact
of European cooperation on churches. Despite the lack of public
engagement of churches, the ECEC (CCREC) was the first Christian
reflection group with a highly selective transnational membership
that brought together religious and political leadership from both
sides of the Atlantic.
The dominant divisions among the ecumenical movement in the
early 1950s reflected competing visions of Europe, namely Anglo
Saxon national interests (such as those promoted by Scandinavian
countries and the British interest in the Commonwealth, attenuated
after the Evanston Assembly), German reunification (diminished by
disputes on the process of de-Nazification and rearmament), and
French socialist pacifism. These divergent views and the fact that
the newly-established World Council of Churches aimed to be an
institution that transcended the interest of regional churches and
seemed to discourage regional cooperation were responsible for
the limited impact of ECEC statements and Protestant mobilization.
However, the most significant impact of the ECEC was in the long
term: some of its members would become associated with the
new European institutions and would use their experience of reli
gious reflection on European cooperation. This would become
clearly visible a few decades later when, on July 1, 1968, for the
first time in the history of the European Communities, a symbolic
statement was produced during Jean Rey's presidency that made a
specific reference to churches and religious reconciliation.70
Churches were kept outside the decision-making process of Euro
pean integration, a position dating back to the early years of the
postwar period. Rather than uniting communities, churches
remained attached to nationalism and supported the sovereignty
70. On July 1, 1968, President Jean Rey announced the completion of the
Customs Union. In an unprecedented public declaration the European Commis
sion made references to the role of churches stating that: "1 July 1968 will cer
tainly go down as a milestone in the history of Europe (...] Two great spiritual
developments dominate this second half of the twentieth century: the reconci
liation of the churches and the reconciliation of the peoples. The first is not a
political matter, but the second is our affair. The reconciliation of peoples has
been first and foremost the reconciliation of European nations, ravaged by the
two World Wars of 1914-1918 and 1939-1945, both born in Europe of the
clash of nationalisms: for the peoples of Europe these were genuine civil wars.
This time is now past. The moment has come to call the young and creative
forces of Europe to union, action and hope." Declaration by the Commission of
the European Communities, July 1, 1968. Full text available at: http://www.
ena.lu/, accessed January 2011.
469

213.55.244.38 on Tue, 28 Jul 2020 19:44:42 UTC
of ECSC member states. Therefore, the European Communities con

tinued to be predominantly political and economic projects with
limited reference to religion.
That the ECEC mattered considerably for the Protestant leader
ship of postwar Europe was evident in a letter written by Willem
A. Visser 't Hooft, general secretary of the WCC to Baron van
Asbeck, president of the CCIA in March 1953. Visser 't Hooft
argued that the commission had a number of invaluable tasks in
the framework of European cooperation. First, the informal discus
sions were extremely significant as they brought politicians from
various European countries and could offer a transnational per
spective to European affairs, transcending national disputes.
Second, the commission acted as a reconciliatory model between
politicians from opposite parties, such as Hermann Ehlers and
Gustav Heinemann, or René Courtin and Pierre Maury. Third, it
brought together politicians and churchmen from Western Europe
and encouraged an Eastern presence. In addition, referring to the
Hungarians at one of the CCREC meetings and summarizing the
overall environment, Visser't Hooft stated that,
it was not without importance to have the Hungarians with us. They had
obviously come to the Commission with the idea that here was a group of
dangerous conspirators who were planning to sell Europe to the American
imperialists and I think they were genuinely astonished when they came to
know the real opinions of the members of the Commission. [...] As you
know, the whole Christian situation in Europe is now characterized by
that great schism between those who are convinced that they must
build a new European structure and those who are filled with deep dis
trust toward any of these moves. For the health of the ecumenical move
ment it is absolutely indispensable to overcome the lack of confidence
between these two groups [...] It is especially in Germany and in France
that this division has become so very serious and I think this Commission
is practically the only body where the two groups meet and are kept within
the Christian context.71
At a time of uncertainty in the direction of the European project,

the ECEC (CCREC) proved to be a model for reconciliation between
churches and a place to present new ideas on European cooperation.
In particular, the theme of "diversity within unity" represented a
radical shift regarding the role of churches in postwar reconstruc
tion, a theme aimed at transcending national differences and over
coming divisions among Protestant churches.
71. Letter from Visser 't Hooft to Van Asbeck, March 25, 1953, AWCC, CCREC,
1952-1966. See also Martin Greschat and Wilfried Loth, Die Christen und die
Entstehung der Europäischen Gemeinschaft
(Stuttgart: Verlag W. Kohlhanxmer, 1994).
470

213.55.244.38 on Tue, 28 Jul 2020 19:44:42 UTC
The work of the commission was affected both by competing his

torical interests and by clashes between the type of ecumenism pro
moted by the ECEC (CCREC) and the CCIA. Kenneth Grubb, director
of the CCIA office in London, criticized Philip's anticommunist
ideas and considered that British churches should be kept outside
debates on European cooperation. He followed the official British
line on the Schuman Plan, while ECEC (CCREC) members encouraged
a closer union between British churches and those on mainland
Europe. The CCIA ecumenical stance was closer to that of the Interna
tional Missionary Council that promoted Protestant interests across
the world, while the ECEC (CCREC) focused mainly on Europe.
In contrast to the critical British view on European reconstruction
was the German model. Its position stemmed particularly from the
issues of rearmament and reunification that divided not only the
German political and religious elite but also its general public. A sig
nificant voice was that of Gustav Heinemann who, on many occa
sions, opposed European rearmament. He did not agree with the
military references in the most important pamphlet published by
the commission in 1954 and asked for a special paragraph to indicate
that the statement was endorsed by all CCREC members except him.
From the establishment of the ECEC (CCREC) in Paris in September
1950 until the 1954 Brussels meeting, Protestant politicians had
attempted to convince churches to take an active role in European
affairs. In particular, politicians believed that churches could have
an impact on the Schuman Plan, the ECSC, German rearmament,
and the EDC. However, the evolution of the Cold War and the
British refusal to join the ECSC led churchmen to refrain from
actively engaging in any particular project of European cooperation.
In this context, proposals to establish official representations at
European institutions were exceptional in the ecumenical movement.
These proposals did not have the endorsement of the World Council of
Churches, mainly because of increasing Cold War tension and fear that
churches could build "walls" between East and West.72 Any official
association with a regional political entity in the West seemed to
jeopardize the very nature and constitution of the WCC and, more
broadly, of the ecumenical movement. On the one hand, this refusal
proved beneficial as it continued to foster contact between the two
blocs; on the other hand, churches within the ecumenical movement
remained divided and unprepared for the process of European
integration. It would take almost half a century, until the end of
communism, when churches would become official partners in
dialogue with European institutions and would start to build a more
coherent vision of European integration.
72. Author's interview with Max Kohnstamm, July 20, 2010.
471

213.55.244.38 on Tue, 28 Jul 2020 19:44:42 UTC

The Ecumenical Movement and The Schuman Plan, 1950-5

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Ecumenical Movement and The Schuman Plan, 1950-5

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Ecumenical Movement and the Schuman Plan, 1950–54

Author(s): Lucian N. Leustean

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.com/stable/24708195

This content downloaded from

At the Quai d'Orsay, on May 9, 1950, Robert Schuman, the Fre

Franco-German production of coal and steel as a whole be placed under a

The Schuman declaration was prepared by a team of experts

LUCIAN N. LEUSTEAN is lecturer in politics and international relations at Aston

1. Pascal Fontaine, Europe, a Fresh Start: The Schuman Declaration, 1950-90

Journal of Church and State vol. 53 no. 3, pages 442-471; doi:10.1093/jcs/csr031

This content downloaded from

leadership of Jean Monnet, the French Planning Commissioner.

This content downloaded from

institutions was opened in Strasbourg in 1956), the ecumenical

4. William Diebold, The Schuman Plan. A Study in Economic Cooperation,

This content downloaded from

demonstrating the rapid Protestant elite mobilization in postwar

The Ecumenical Commission on European

This content downloaded from

Protestantes de Belgique) and the Belgian Christian Missionary

7. Michel Dandoy, ed., Le Protestantisme. Mémoire et Perspectives (Brussels : Edi

This content downloaded from

declaration was evident between the Second Congress of the

M. Coupland, Britannia, Europa and Christendom. British Christians and Euro

This content downloaded from

Philip's political networks in the European Movement were con

This content downloaded from

reconciliation and to "help the Governments to overcome their atti

This content downloaded from

influential intellectual historian of Christianity and international

This content downloaded from

outside its authority. The commission was only a regional organiza

This content downloaded from

Reformed Church, who joined the discussion only in the after

This commission has been established to mobilise the churches to act on

In order to examine further the means of achieving a European

31. "Preliminary Statement of the Spiritual and Ethical Problems of European

This content downloaded from

As chair of the commission and directly involved in the Council of

33. Minutes of the meeting of the Provisional Steering Committee,

This content downloaded from

were not promoting a Christian Europe but instead were searching

What is Meant by European Unification?

34. Denis de Rougemont, Vingt-huit siècles d'Europe. La conscience européenne

This content downloaded from

Nils Ehrenström, Reverend W. Menn, A. 0. Olsen, and Willem Visser't

This content downloaded from

their impact for churches. An enlarged membership was proposed

This content downloaded from

After the statement was widely circulated, the commission met in

This content downloaded from

A comparable perception was held by The Frontier—A Christian

Some asked, What is meant by European unification? It was felt that to

This content downloaded from

In order to dispel confusion, the commission issued a further

The High Authority of the European Coal and Steel

This content downloaded from

Kohnstamm realized the significance of bringing churches closer

This content downloaded from

European cooperation. Kohnstamm's proposal reflected the inter

This content downloaded from

actions by certain absolute principles derived from faith."

This content downloaded from