Abstract
This chapter supplies a deficiency of Norwegian studies in the social sciences. Royce begins by surveying the Danish Reformation in Norway through the two major English-language accounts: Lord Robert Molesworth’s An Account of Denmark (1694) and Mary Wollstonecraft’s Letters from Sweden, Norway, and Denmark (1796); and on this basis he argues that the Norwegian Reformation was “absolutist, centralist, and obscurantist.” He identifies each of these three tendencies in the Constitution of 1814, and then explains how the Norwegian Constitution has consistently interposed against supranational European integration.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Henrik Ibsen, Four Great Plays (New York: Bantam, 1959), 95.
- 2.
Although see also Ole Peter Grell, The Scandinavian Reformation: From Evangelical Movement to Institutionalisation of Reform (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995).
- 3.
Molesworth does explain on the same page however that the Danish clergy have a unique respect for the Church of England, primarily on account of its inherent royalism.
- 4.
“The Reformation in Norway: A Political and Religious Takeover,” Nordost-Archiv. Zeitschrift fuer Regionalgeschichte 8 (2004): 133.
- 5.
The History of Norway (London: Sampson Low, Marston, Searle, & Rivington, 1886), 489–490.
- 6.
Norwegians achieved their own constitution in 1814, but the separate thrones of both Norway and Sweden were to be occupied by the same person, Charles XIV John (Bernadotte), who maintained a Swedish viceroy in Oslo. Subsequently, however, “the remnants of subordination in Norway’s relationship to Sweden were one by one removed during the reign of Charles John’s son, Oscar I (1844– 1859). He gave to Norway a flag of her own…and practically abolished the viceroyalty” (Ibid., 527–528). Norway would therefore appear to have enjoyed de facto independence throughout the nineteenth century.
- 7.
He is Harald V (1991–).
- 8.
Kongen har rett til å innkalle tropper, begynne krig til forsvar av landet og slutte fred, inngå og oppheve forbund, sende og motta sendemenn.
- 9.
Kongen kan gi og oppheve anordninger som angår handel, toll, næringsveier og offentlig forvaltning og regulering.
- 10.
Enhver som har sete i statsrådet, er pliktig til med frimodighet å si sin mening, som kongen er forpliktet til å høre. Men det er denne forbeholdt å fatte beslutning etter sitt eget omdømme.
- 11.
Kongen velger og beskikker, etter å ha hørt sitt statsråd, alle sivile og militære embetsmenn…Statsministeren og statsrådets øvrige medlemmer samt statssekretærene kan uten foregående dom avskjediges av kongen etter at han har hørt statsrådets betenkning derom. Det same gjelder for de embetsmenn some r ansatt ved statsrådets kontorer eller ved diplomatiet eller konsulatvesenet, sivile overøvrighetspersoner, sjefer for regimenter og andre militære korps, kommandanter på festninger og høystbefalende på krigsskip.
- 12.
It would be interesting to investigate—as is habitually done regarding the American case—the intentions of the framers of the Norwegian Constitution, as explained through letters, private journals, or pamphlets; but no such data are readily available. It is also possible, of course, that the astonishing absolutist clauses discussed above are no longer respected; but once again, pursuing potential discrepancies between constitutional law and political practice is not and cannot become the concern of this research. One might reasonably observe in passing, however, that no free people would for two centuries leave intact constitutional articles that the current majority found deeply inconvenient or highly offensive.
- 13.
Den norske kirke, en evangelisk-luthersk kirke, forblir Norges folkekirke og understøttes som sådan av staten.
- 14.
In 1972, “no” was 53.5% of a 79.2% turnout, and in 1994 it was 55.2% out of a record 89% turnout (Sciarini and Listhaug 1997). Additionally, Denmark’s Faroe Islands have never belonged to the Community, while Greenland exited in 1985 (Bjørklund 1996: 35). Are Denmark’s former European colonies—Norway, Greenland, and the Faroes—thus uniquely prone to Euro-skepticism?
- 15.
The EEA and the Single Market 20 Years On (2012), 13.
- 16.
Ibid., 42–43.
- 17.
Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Norway and the EU: Partners for Europe (2015), 5.
- 18.
“Integrating an Outsider: An EU Perspective on Relations with Norway,” Europautredningen Rapport 16 (2011): 15.
- 19.
In contrast, the United States has one lawyer for every four hundred citizens. The Nordic countries as a whole have the fewest lawyers in Western civilization (Hirschl 2011: 468).
- 20.
Tuomas Ojanen, “From Constitutional Periphery Toward the Center: Transformations of Judicial Review in Finland,” Nordic Journal of Human Rights 27 (2009): 197– 207.
- 21.
Joakim Nergelius, “Judicial Review in Swedish Law: A Critical Analysis,” Nordic Journal of Human Rights 27 (2009): 142–160.
- 22.
“The Nordics, the EU and the Reluctance Towards Supranational Judicial Review,” Journal of Common Market Studies 48 (2010: 1053).
- 23.
Ibid., 1057. One might also note that the Norwegian ([1814] 2014: 5, 37), Danish (1953:03.13), and Swedish (Instrument of Government: 5.8) constitutions exalt their respective monarchs above all human law, provisions incommensurate with the notions of universal jurisdiction preferred among many European legal, diplomatic, and political elites.
- 24.
Entschlossen, dieses demokratische Land als lebendiges Glied der Bundesrepublik Deutschland in einem vereinten Europa, dessen Aufbau föderativen Prinzipien und dem Grundsatz der Subsidiarität entspricht, zu gestalten und an der Schaffung eines Europas der Regionen sowie der Förderung der grenzüberschreitenden Zusammenarbeit aktiv mitzuwirken, hat sich das Volk von Baden-Württemberg in feierlichem Bekenntnis zu den unverletzlichen und unveräuβerlichen Menschenrechten und den Grundrechten der Deutschen kraft seiner verfassunggebenden Gewalt durch die Verfassunggebende Landesversammlung diese Verfassung gegeben.
- 25.
Las Corted de Aragón participarán en los procedimientos de control de los principios de subsidiaridad y proporcionalidad que establezca la Unión Europea en relación con las propuestas legislativas europeas cuando afecten a competencias de la Comunidad Autónoma.
- 26.
Bayern bekennt sich zu einem geeinten Europa, das demokratischen, rechtsstaatlichen, sozialen und förderativen Grundsätzen sowie dem Grundsatz der Subsidiarität verpflichten ist, die Eigenständigkeit der Regionen wahrt und deren Mitwirkung an europäischen Entscheidnungen sichert.
- 27.
Lidia Puka, Ole Gunnar Austvik, and Aleksandra Gawlikowska-Fyk, “Norwegian Energy Policy in the Changing EU Environment: What Poland Can Learn for Developing its Shale Gas Industry,” Strategic File 4 (2015): 3.
- 28.
“Landlord and Entrepreneur: The Shifting Roles of the State in Norwegian Oil and Gas Policy,” Governance: A Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions 25 (2012): 327.
- 29.
This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2014), 130.
- 30.
The Alternative Report (2012: 3.2.3).
- 31.
E.G. Rikheim, “Homogeneity and Supremacy of the European Law of Free Movement of Financial Services,” in European Law in an Era of Crisis, ed. P.C. Müller-Graff and E. Selvig (Berlin: BWV Berliner-Wissenschaft, 2012), 65–66.
- 32.
“Norway’s Planned Reservation of the Third European Postal Directive and the Future of the European Economic Agreement,” Transatlantic Technology Law Forum: European Union Law Working Papers 5 (2012): 18–19.
- 33.
“The Nordic States and European Unity,” Cooperation and Conflict 36 (2001): 92.
- 34.
“Norway: Numerical Democracy and Cooperate Pluralism,” in Political Opposition in Western Democracies, ed. Robert A. Dahl (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1966): 70–115.
- 35.
“Are Norwegians European?” (2004: 254). Ibsen himself was a prototypical Norwegian European, who relocated to Italy in 1864 when his genius had gone unrecognized at home. His plays communicate the stifling intellectual and moral atmosphere of independent, bourgeois Norway.
- 36.
“The Three Nordic 1994 Referenda Concerning Membership in the EU” (1996). With regard to the results for 1972, there is little to no existing qualitative or quantitative research.
- 37.
Forskjellene på EU-medlemskap og EØS-avtalen. Faktaark 5 (2010): 1–2; Hvilken innflytelse Kunne Norge få i EU? Faktaark 5 (2010): 1–2; Grunnlovens § 93 og EU-medlemskap. Faktaark 7 (2011): 1–4; EØS-avtalen og Grunnloven. Faktaark 6 (2013): 1–3; Stortingets syn på seks spørsmål om EU og EØS. Arbeidnsnotat 10 (2013); EØS uthuler Grunnloven (2014); Jubileumsstafetten 2014: Aksjonskokebok (2014); Kjære nei-venn bli jubileumssamarbeidspartner! (2014); Vi feirer folkestyret (2014); and M. Harper and E.M. Mathisen (eds.), Knaker det i konstitusjonen? (Oslo: Interpress, 2014).
- 38.
Nei til EU arbeider for at Norge fortsatt skal være et land tufta på folkestyre, nasjonal suverenitet og internasjonal solidaritet. Vi vil forsvare Grunnloven på dette grunnlaget, vi vil avvise norsk EU-medlemskap og vi vil at Stortinget skal si opp EØS-avtalen.
- 39.
“Treaties on matters of special importance, and, in all cases, treaties whose implementation, according to the Constitution, necessitates a new law or a decision by the Storting, are not binding until the Storting has given its consent thereto.”
- 40.
Det klare utgangspunktet i grunnloven er at dømmende, utøvende og lovgivende kompetanse med direkte virkning for bedrifter eller peronser i Norge ikke skal overføres til utenlandske organisasjoner.
- 41.
Dog må en slik forandring aldri motsi denne Grunnlovs prinsipper, men bare angå slike modifikasjoner I enkelte bestemmelser som ikke forandrer denne konstitusjons ånd, og to tredjedeler av Stortinget bør være enige i en slik forandring.
References
Austvik, Ole Gunnar. “Landlord and Entrepreneur: The Shifting Roles of the State in Norwegian Oil and Gas Policy.” Governance: A Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions 25 (2012): 315–334.
Bersagel, Annie Golden. “Norway’s Planned Reservation of the Third European Postal Directive and the Future of the European Economic Agreement.” Transatlantic Technology Law Forum: EU Law Working Papers 5 (2012): 1–19.
Bjørklund, Tor. “The Three Nordic 1994 Referenda Concerning Membership in the EU.” Cooperation and Conflict 31 (1996): 11–36.
Boyesen, Hjalmar H. The History of Norway. London: Sampson Low, Marston, Searle, & Rivington, 1886.
EFTA. “The European Economic Area and the Single Market 20 Years on.” EFTA Bulletin (2012): 1–46.
Grell, Ole Peter. The Scandinavian Reformation: From Evangelical Movement to Institutionalisation of Reform. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995.
Grell, Ole Peter. “The Reformation in Norway: A Political and Religious Takeover.” Nordost-Archiv. Zeitschrift fuer Regionalgeschicte 8 (2004): 121–144.
Hirschl, Ran. “The Nodric Counternarrative: Democracy, Human Development, and Judicial Review.” International Journal of Constitutional Law 9 (2011): 449–469.
Ibsen, Henrik. Four Great Plays. New York: Bantam, 1959.
Klein, Naomi. This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate. New York: Simon & Schuster, 2014.
Molesworth, Robert. An Account of Denmark. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2011 [1694].
Nei til EU. “Forskjellene på EU-medlemskap og EØS-avtalen.” Faktaark 5 (2010a): 1–2.
Nei til EU. “Hvilken innflytelse Kunne Norge få i EU?” Faktaark 5 (2010b): 1–2.
Nei til EU. “Grunnlovens § 93 og EU-medlemskap.” Faktaark 7 (2011): 1–4.
Nei til EU. The Alternative Report: Alternatives to the Current EEA Agreement. Oslo: Nei til EU, 2012.
Nei til EU. “EØS-avtalen og Grunnloven.” Faktaark 6 (2013a): 1–3.
Nei til EU. “Stortingets syn på seks spørsmål om EU og EØS.” Arbeidnsnotat 10 (2013b).
Nei til EU. “EØS uthuler Grunnloven.” (2014a).
Nei til EU. “Jubileumsstafetten 2014: Aksjonskokebok.” (2014b).
Nei til EU. “Kjære nei-venn bli jubileumssamarbeidspartner!” (2014c).
Nei til EU. “Vi feirer folkestyret.” (2014d).
Nergelius, Joakim. “Judicial Review in Swedish Law: A Critical Analysis.” Nordic Journal of Human Rights 27 (2009): 142–160.
Neumann, Iver B. “The Nordic States and European Unity.” Cooperation and Conflict 36 (2001): 87–94.
Ojanen, Tuomas. “From Constitutional Periphery Toward the Center: Transformations of Judicial Review in Finland.” Nordic Journal of Human Rights 27 (2009): 1974–2007.
Puka, Lidia, Ole Gunnar Austvik, and Aleksandra Gawlikowska-Fyk. “Norwegian Energy Policy in the Changing EU Environment: What Poland Can Learn for Developing Its Shale Gas Industry.” Strategic File 4 (2015): 1–8.
Rikheim, E.G. “Homogeneity and Supremacy of the European Law of Free Movement of Financial Services.” In European Law in an Era of Crisis, edited by P.C. Müller-Graff and E. Selvig. Berlin: BWV Berliner-Wissenschaft, 2012.
Rokkan, Stein. “Norway: Numerical Democracy and Cooperate Pluralism.” In Political Opposition in Western Democracies, edited by Robert A. Dahl. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1966.
Sabo, Anne G. “Are Norwegians European?: The Bohemians Say So!” Journal of European Studies 34 (2004): 247–266.
Wind, Marlene. “The Nordics, the EU and the Reluctance Towards Supranational Judicial Review.” Journal of Common Market Studies 48 (2010): 1039–1063.
Wollstonecraft, Mary. Letters Written During a Short Residence in Sweden, Norway, and Denmark. London: J. Johnson, 1796.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Royce, M.R. (2017). The Lutheran Intergovernmentalism of Norway. In: The Political Theology of European Integration. Palgrave Studies in Religion, Politics, and Policy. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-53447-3_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-53447-3_6
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-53446-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-53447-3
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)