[ad_1]
Today begins the church meeting and the battle for power and money.
Of: Sofia Lilly Jönsson
Published:
This is a cultural article which is part of Aftonbladet’s opinion journalism.
Photo: Church of Sweden
Today opens the church meeting, the highest decision-making body in the Church of Sweden, which for crown reasons has been scaled down and digitized this year.
A couple of weeks ago I wrote on this page that Swedish intellectuals ignore tough questions for communities in favor of welcoming conversations about religion in general. But one does not despise the other, it was an objection. And existential problems concern many more than financial decisions in an organization?
To answer the first objection: well, one despises the other. Under a universal “we”, the journalist, the bishop and the academic end up together on the same couch. Ignore power issues and hurt criticism. When friendly conversations become the norm, the whistleblower constantly suffers from headwinds.
Second, structural problems are existential.
I go here go more specifically to an important political forum for decisions, namely the church meeting of the Church of Sweden. I can only choose one. But first we have to draw a background for church politics.
As early as the 1920s, the bishops of the Church of Sweden wanted the Church to be free from the state. The Riksdag said no. What would it have been like today if the bishops had gotten away with it? We probably would have had a smaller church, poorer in membership, theologically conservative. Without a social democratic parliament in the 20th century, there probably never would have been priestesses or church marriages between two women or two men.
A free church would also have been better organized for refugees and the poor, a more tumultuous voice from nature. Churches and parsons could be volunteer-run shelters, like St. Clara across from Stockholm Central. Less bourgeois reception, more Christian activism. We could have had more monasteries and communities, more services, more local prayer, open churches.
But so was then it is not so. In 1982, the Church of Sweden was fundamentally transformed into a picture of society’s partisan political choices on three levels. After the state’s divorce in 2000, politics has almost sharpened its grip on the largest organization in this country.
On the political cusp of today there are people from the closest circle of the Social Democrats. S’s group leader, Jesper eneroth, is the son of Thomas Eneroth, Minister of Infrastructure. Former Minister of Foreign Affairs Margareta Winberg and president of LO Wanja Lundby-Wedin sits on the church board, the prime minister’s wife Ulla Löfven is a member of the church council. At the local level, it is not unknown that the president of the municipal board is the same person who directs the council of the parish church. In right-wing municipalities, it can be moderate. Many collection lists appear without political color.
After the divorce from the state, politics has almost tightened its grip on the largest organization in this country.
The Church of Sweden is, therefore, politically organized but not ideologically aligned, which is confusing in a logic of debate in which two blocs confront each other. This is one of the reasons why the Church of Sweden, despite its political organization, is out of the reach of a program like SVT. Diary. Church issues must be addressed separately, right-left is not enough for analysis.
The opposition in the Church of Sweden wants to eliminate direct elections at the national level. Instead, congregations and dioceses can send representatives to a smaller congress. That would make the church of no interest to the parties. But as long as the majority of the few voters who go to the polls vote for parties, the system will stick.
Leads us to the current situation and to the meeting of the church that begins today, September 29 of this year, crown limo from 251 to 44 members who participate via the web. The motions, which are usually around a hundred, are only 26 this year and only concern the proposal of the church board. Most people are challenging a gigantic letter from the church board on financial direction through 2023. The reactions have been strong.
In motion number 9 summarizes Johan blix from the Open Church group: “It seems to be a change from a church where power in congregations is transferred to the national level and the church becomes more like a group in its organization.”
POSK, a non-partisan mixed compote that has at times pragmatically collaborated with S and C, takes up in motion 7 the old church fund that in 2000 was transferred from the state to the Church of Sweden. Three billion to nine have been financed, tripling in 20 years. The idea was a fund for congregations and dioceses. The church board now wants to use this huge sum for “limited time efforts.” What does that mean?
The church board wants to start several multi-year investigations of “widespread importance to the Church of Sweden.” Some athletes believe that such investigations should be postponed before a full church meeting has a chance to discuss them. For example, the church board wants to review “the most appropriate diocesan division.”
Bold Church, the classical church council theologians, propose in a motion that in that case more, not less, dioceses are needed: the bishops of large cities need to reach out to their priests. I have a feeling that Frimodig kyrka charms the church board and its bureaucratic vision of dioceses only as administrative units.
Changes can be noticed over time. SD is well formulated and delves into relevant and current topics. Gone are the affected motions to “stop Islamization” that occurred ten years ago. Is the ecological and spiritual sustainability that the Church teaches also theologically and economically sustainable? Should the Church of Sweden act as an authority and oversee the asylum law process? The party refers to the Lutheran doctrine of two regiments that separates church and state. On motion 26, the SD member defends Eric Westroth The journalists’ right to scrutiny and transparency against the proposal of the church board led by S and C to restrict the principle of openness for foreign collaborations.
If others want to keep the initiative, it is important to step forward.
Is existential that touches or is crucial to human existence, writes NE. Existence does not exist in a more beautiful spiritual reality than material reality, the one that concerns where the money goes and who has the power. Such a beautiful spiritual existentialism will sooner or later collapse under the pressures of life. Cultural advertising based on such ideas betrays man. We are called to disperse the veil of mist. Not to enchant a romantic Christianity that has been rightly established for a long time.
Published:
READ ON
Subscribe to the Kulturen newsletter
Aftonbladet’s cultural editorial staff guides this week’s biggest cultural events and most engaging discussion of ideas.
