The European Union’s legal framework does not recognise the category of “traditional religion”. This means neither EU institutions nor influential interfaith networks — including platforms such as Religions for Peace — may restrict access to membership, dialogue, or cooperation based on whether a community is considered “traditional”, “historic”, or culturally familiar. The distinction has no basis in EU law and contradicts core principles of equal treatment and non-discrimination.
The question of who is invited into Europe’s institutional dialogues on religion and belief — particularly under Article 17 TFEU — has become a growing point of scrutiny. A recent analysis highlights a simple but consequential fact: EU law does not recognise concepts such as “traditional church”, “traditional religion”, “historic religion”, or “cultural religion”. Not one of these terms appears in Article 17 TFEU, Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights, Regulation 1049/2001, the case law of the Court of Justice of the EU, the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights, or the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights’ guidelines on freedom of religion or belief.
No legal basis for religious hierarchy
The EU’s non-discrimination architecture is explicit: public authorities cannot differentiate between communities based on how old, well-established, or socially familiar they are. As one legal formulation widely used by experts puts it: The EU has no legal basis to treat communities differently based on whether they are considered ‘traditional’. Such differentiation would be incompatible with the Charter and with the non-hierarchical approach to religion required by EU law.
This clarity creates a binding consequence for EU institutions. If the European Commission or any other EU body uses “traditional” as a justification to exclude certain religious or philosophical communities from consultation, recognition, or structured dialogue, this would:
- violate Article 21 CFR (non-discrimination based on religion or belief),
- breach the principle of equal treatment in EU law,
- contradict the non-hierarchical model embedded in Article 17 TFEU,
- conflict with ECHR case law affirming equal protection for both majority and minority religions.
In short, the EU cannot defend any practice that places “traditional” religions above others without contradicting its own legal order.
Implications for interfaith networks and civil society platforms
The debate does not stop at EU institutions. It also affects the legitimacy of large interfaith and multireligious organisations active across Europe. International platforms such as Religions for Peace — alongside similar organisations that play a significant role in policy dialogue — wield influence not only through their advocacy but through deciding who is included in their membership.
Legal experts emphasise that these organisations cannot deny access, participation, or cooperation on the grounds that a community is “not traditional”. While they are independent civil-society actors, they operate within an EU fundamental rights environment, particularly when participating in EU-funded programmes, Commission consultations, or Article 17 dialogues.
This forms part of a broader concern documented by civil-society observers and by several communities across Europe: that certain faith-based networks implicitly rely on historical familiarity as an informal gatekeeping tool. Yet such distinctions, once brought into EU processes, become legally untenable.
A growing insistence on equal treatment
Across Brussels, more organisations are increasingly pointing to this structural issue. The European Times has been approached by communities reporting unequal treatmen from EU agencies and officials based on not being traditional enough, as if tradition was something that has never evolved, creating barriers to fair participation of smaller or less mainstream faith communities in EU affairs, particularly regarding transparency and structured dialogue.
Stakeholders argue that relying on cultural familiarity to determine eligibility undermines what the EU itself promotes: inclusiveness, pluralism, and a civic conception of religious freedom. Several analysts warn that if the European Commission were ever to explicitly endorse a “traditional religion” criterion, it would expose the institution to legal challenge.
Towards a law-based approach to religious diversity
The message from the legal frameworks is unequivocal: religions and belief communities — whether centuries old or new, majority or minority, familiar or unfamiliar — must be treated equally when it comes to EU engagement. Tradition may be a sociological category, but it is not a legal one.
As the EU continues to expand its work on fundamental rights, social cohesion, and cooperation with civil society, this principle is becoming central. It shapes not only how the Commission must structure its dialogues but also how civil-society platforms operating in the EU space must ensure fairness, transparency, and openness.
