The Nordic Churches and the Ecumenical Movement

Until 1998 the consultant to the minister of ecclesiastical affairs on the question of whether a religious community was genuine was the Lutheran bishop of Copenhagen. Now this advice comes from a commission made up of specialists in law, theology and science of religion. This signals a break with the tradition since 1683 of giving the Lutheran bishop of Copenhagen the status of a consultant to the minister. This tradition was criticized by scholars of religion, who argued that the bishop was not an expert on religions outside the established church, and that he might undeniably have subjective interests in an administrative decision that might facilitate competition for his own church.(8)

Seen in historical perspective, the establishment of this special commission on the recognition of religious communities in 1998 indicates that Danish society is becoming more and more pluralistic, which challenges the state to loosen its ties to the established church. Interestingly, this development has not been followed by the loosening of the established church from its ties to the state. The church still depends on the state and the minister of ecclesiastical affairs. All important decisions on its structures and finances are taken by the minister of ecclesiastical affairs and the civil servants of the ministry in Copenhagen.

The Nordic pattern

Dag Thorkildsen sets the Danish discussion on church-state relations within a wider Nordic pattern:

   In simple terms one could say that in Denmark and Norway religious
   tolerance came as a result of an interaction between liberalism and
   revivalism, whereas a high-church and conservative political line
   predominated in Sweden. In spite of this, one might conclude that a special
   Nordic pattern was created during the religious modernization of the 19th
   century, and it consisted in combining a state church with freedom of
   religion.(9)

Thorkildsen calls this Nordic pattern a "functional anachronism", maintaining that "nobody could claim that it has led to less freedom of religion than one will find in nations where state and religion have formally separated".(10)

In this context it is important to note that in the discussion leading up to the vote on the Danish constitution in 1849, the state was not regarded as neutral but as Christian. The majority of members of the constituent assembly in 1849 thought that a Christian state has a special duty to ensure freedom of religion, because Christianity is basically about love and freedom in the Holy Spirit. An example is found in the work of H.L. Martensen, Mynster's successor as bishop of Sealand. In his Ethics (1878) Martensen says freedom of religion is demanded by Christianity itself, because Christianity maintains the right of the individual and autonomy in matters of conscience and salvation.(11) He also calls on the Protestant state to maintain its Christian character and support the national church through legislation on holidays and education. His appeal to the state to protect both the established church and freedom of religion by adopting an act that would limit the number and activities of non-conformists echoed a widespread feeling at that time.