A/HRC/34/50/Add.1 14. Apparently, the Danish population generally appreciates the Folkekirke within a positive narrative of national identity, liberalization and democratization. Within that narrative of State and Church, Nikolai Fredrik Severin Grundtvig (1783-1872), a philosopher, theologian, poet, educationalist and liberal politician, plays an outstanding role. According to Grundtvig, the State should respectfully serve the Church and keep it open for a broad participation of the people, which mainly takes place at the parish level. Without abolishing the clerical hierarchy within the Church, culminating in the 10 Bishops of the Folkekirke, the State is supposed to ensure that Church affairs remain in line with the general democratic development of the country and to facilitate active participation of the people in decision-making procedures, especially at the parish level. The idea seems to be that the democratic State legitimized by the Danish people has the mandate to uphold the inclusive nature of the Danish Folkekirke against possible tendencies of sectarian closure. 15. A main factor that might have enabled the survival of the Folkekirke into the twenty-first century is its culture of broad consultation. While the formal responsibility for church affairs rests with the State — i.e., Parliament and the Ministry for Ecclesiastical Affairs — theological authorities, in particular the Bishops, and the representation of parishes, have generally been consulted before decisions affecting the Church have been taken. 16. In keeping with article 4 of the Constitution, the Folkekirke receives financial support directly from the State budget. While the bulk of the Folkekirke’s budget rests on the Church tax, which is paid only by members of the Church, around 10 per cent of the Church’s annual resources stem from the general State budget, to which members and nonmembers contribute. The assumption underlying this regulation is that taxpayers should finance certain public functions that the Church undertakes for society as a whole, including birth registrations and the management of cemeteries, almost all of which are owned by the Church. The Church also celebrates marriages, which have direct legal effect under the Danish (secular) marriage law. As already mentioned, however, the right to conduct legally valid marriage ceremonies is not a privilege of the Folkekirke alone; it is an option for all those religious communities that enjoy the status as a “recognized” or “acknowledged” community. 17. While a move towards the complete separation of Church and State does not seem to be a priority demand by society, discussions have taken place both within the political arena and within the Church itself. Those defending the existing system of an established Church in politics may do so from different motives. Whereas more conservative-leaning people may wish to preserve the cultural identity of the country, not least as a reaction to immigration and pluralization, people with more liberal or socialist views may appreciate the structure of the Folkekirke as an interesting model to keep the State’s control over the Church as a way to encourage liberal and democratic developments (such as same-sex marriages) within religious communities. Paradoxically, some even see the State-controlled Lutheran Folkekirke as a guarantor of the “secular” nature of the State — in keeping with Luther’s clear conceptual separation between spiritual and temporal authorities as laid down in his doctrine of the “two regiments”. However, the Special Rapporteur also met with politicians, including members of Parliament, who criticize the existing involvement of the State in Church affairs as an irregularity that they think should be corrected in the long run. Reportedly, such critical views are more widespread among the younger generation of politicians in various political parties. 18. The fact that Denmark as a whole has become more pluralistic owing to immigration, diversification, secularization and other factors can play into the hands of both sides. Those in favour of upholding the existing structure may further appreciate the Folkekirke as an anchor of stability, identity and a model for preventing sectarian radicalization, while those advocating for a reform may argue that, in an increasingly 6