Scholars from 17 Member States of the European Union gathered in the Hungarian capital of Budapest at the Péter Pázmány Catholic University in order to attend the twenty-fourth Annual Congress of the European Consortium for Church and State Research, to debate The Mutual Roles of Religion and the State. The President of the Consortium, Professor Mark Hill QC, officially opened the conference, recalling the establishment and development of the Consortium, which from an initially Spanish–Italian co-operation became a truly European project. He also noted that commencement of the conference coincided precisely with the announcement by the Prime Minister in Downing Street of the appointment of the next Archbishop of Canterbury: a uniquely British example of the complex and sometimes anachronistic arrangements of Church and state.

The introductory lecture was prepared by Professor Norman Doe, Director of the Centre for Law and Religion at the University of Cardiff. As he was not able to attend the conference, his paper, ‘The state from the perspective of religious laws: a global approach with particular reference to Christianity’, was presented by Professor Merilin Kiviorg. Professor Doe offered an extensive overview of the internal provisions of various Churches and religious communities as regards their reference to the state and to state law. There are far-reaching differences between Churches: for example, while the Roman Catholic Church prohibits its ministers from assuming public office, that is not the case for Protestant Churches. Professors Jose Sousa de Brito and Francis Messner underlined that the lecture presented an overview based on the wording of legal instruments but not necessarily reflecting the existing practice: given that, in many Member States, fewer than half of the citizens are believers, a more practical and less theoretical evaluation in terms of pluralism might be useful. Professor Rik Torfs pointed to an important clause of the Catholic Code of Canon Law whereby Canon 22 leaves open the possibility of non-compliance with state law should it be contrary to the divine law (‘quatenus iuri divino non sint contrariae’).

The afternoon session was devoted to ‘The state's understanding of the role and value of religion: political perspectives’. The topic was introduced by Professor Marco Ventura (University of Siena, University of Leuven), who, in an innovative and graphic way, showed links and interactions: in particular, the attitude of mainstream/established Churches, minority religions and new religious movements towards the state's tradition, legacy, identity, social cohesion, welfare and human rights. At the political level, Professor Ventura explained the attitudes of the main European political families (Christian democrats, socialist, greens, liberals etc) towards key notions of security, equality and the secular society. The roles of Churches and of religion vary significantly: in some states the dominant Church unifies the citizens, while in others it plays a divisive role, marginalising minorities. In terms of welfare, churches do not carry out the same work: in some countries, charitable bodies are financed by the state, but run by religious organisations; in other states the churches themselves provide the funding to run charitable institutions. The picture of political interactions between the state and religion is indeed multifaceted and very colourful. Professor Ventura concluded that this variety demonstrates that in a ‘post-secular society’ neither God nor religion is dead, and a multiplicity of religions manifest themselves in every European country.

The discussion following the lecture was very lively. Professor Torfs underlined that human rights provisions are limited in their protection: if someone wishes to follow a religious doctrine, he or she will be readily confronted with the limitations of public order, public security or public health. Mr Lars Friedner recalled a case where two fundamental rights were in opposition. The case concerned a Pentecostal priest in Sweden who was dismissed because he talked disrespectfully about homosexuals; however, the Supreme Court found the dismissal unlawful because he included these statements in a sermon, while exercising his religious function: hence the freedom of religion prevailed. Finally Professor Zaboj Horak underlined that the law is in a continuous state of development: in the Czech Republic an important law on restitution of ecclesiastical properties was adopted just a day before the Consortium met in Budapest, on 7 November 2012, more than twenty years after the Velvet Revolution of 1989.

The third session was devoted to the state's understanding of the role and value of religion from the legal perspective. The introductory lecture, prepared by Professor Richard Potz (University of Vienna), was presented by Dr Wolfgang Wieshaider. Professor Potz underlined the importance of history in shaping the contemporary Church–state law of the various European countries; but he also discussed the role played by human migration and the resultant changes in religious demographics. He emphasised that ‘The state and its institutions … must enable and facilitate legally and factually existing religious diversity in a strictly neutral manner’. After an in-depth look into the debate on religious pluralism and the role of a religion in a democratic society, he concluded that ‘the loss of religion as a resource for reflecting on transcendence could hardly be compensated by any other institution’.

In the ensuing discussion, Professor Miguel Rodriguez Blanco asked a fundamental question about the value of religion. Why does the state support religion and why should it do so? Does religion constitute a benefit for society? Or is it rather a danger, as some states see it? Professor Gerhard Robbers disagreed, underlining that religion does not have to be useful or helpful; it can exist for its own sake. It is merely a modern belief that everything has to be useful, and that therefore even a religion should, in the opinion of many, serve a pragmatic purpose; but that is not the true role of a religion.

The concluding remarks were presented by Professor Rik Torfs of the University of Leuven, who agreed that religion does not have to be useful and does not have to be understood – like art, which is often appreciated even if it does not fulfil the criteria of usefulness or clarity. He also referred to various emotions that are connected to faith and that play an important role in legal discussions, even though they are not legal arguments in themselves: for example, enthusiasm or fear (in relation to migrant communities and non-traditional religions). Professor Torfs underlined that, although we believe we live in a state of continual transformation, there are many constant and unchanging elements of our religious and social landscape, which deserve to be valued and appreciated.

The Congress closed with the General Assembly, at which Professor Hill presided, where Mr Lars Friedner, previously Secretary General of the Church of Sweden, was elected President of the Consortium for 2013.