Is there hope for lutherans? For swedes especcially, please read.

[Antisnygg]

Please bear with all the swedish and my poor translations. This matter is of principal nature and concerns ALL lutherans, especcially swedes.

Im a student of theology since three years, with the goal of becoming ordained as priest in the swedish church.

On the sunday of the pentecost this year, i was listening to a sermon in the cathedral of Uppsala.. as far as i know the biggest cathedral in scandinavia. First off, there was some controversy about this sermon. A friend of mine commented the sermon in the newspaper (i think there was other people writing in to different papers aswell) and the dean of Uppsala cathedral wrote a response to this at the website of her congregation. To this response the manuscript of this sermon was added, so that people who didnt listen to it could read it for themselves.

I dont have over 50 post counts, so i cant paste the links to the three publications (comment to newspaper, the deans response to this, the sermon manuscript). The stuff is in swedish anyways, so i guess most of you cannot use it. It is too much to be pasted into this thread (it is already quite long) but if you send me a PM i will give you the links. Alternatively, maybe a moderator could paste them into this thread.

About the sermon:
The topic of the sermon was marriage, and basically the priest is describing what he regards as the biblical view of marriage and then proceeds to say we must turn away from the "biblical marriage" in order to be good christians.

The priests view of the biblical marriage.. all of it my translations:

*About the marriage one could read in the Bible, that the judge Gideon in the Old Testament had seventy sons together with his many wives ("Om äktenskapet i allmänhet kan man i Bibeln t.ex. läsa att domaren Gideon i Gamla Testamentet hade sjuttio söner tillsammans med sina många hustrur.")

*There is quite alot of odd descriptions of marriage in the Bible, many of them emphacising the importance of taking a wife only from the right family ("Det finns rätt många underliga beskrivningar av äktenskap i Bibeln - inte minst om vikten av att bara gifta sig med personer från rätt släkt.")

* Paul says some things regarding marriage and family which mostly are concerned with the superiority of the husband - but lastly he just sighs and concludes that the best thing probably would be if they all did like him; lived without being married ("Paulus har en del funderingar om äktenskap och familj som huvudsakligen går ut på att reglera mannens överhöghet - fast till [wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth][wash my mouth] suckar han att det bästa nog vore om alla gjorde som han, dvs levde ogifta.")

* None of us would recognize [as in; be familiar with] the marriage that the Bible describes, from either the Old Testament or the New Testament. I think that it is hardly the same thing as what we mean, when we think of todays weddings [or "pentecaust-weddings". The day for this sermon was the day of the pentecaust] ("Ingen av oss skulle känna igen sig i det äktenskap som Bibeln beskriver, vare sig i Gamla eller Nya testamentet. Jag tror knappt att vi ens kan hävda att det är fråga om samma sak som det vi menar, när vi tänker på pingstbröllop.")

*This [he is here referring to what the swedish law says about marriage, as an equal partnership and shared responsibility] is far from the marriage of the 19th-century, with roots in the Bible, in wich the husband ruled with force [literally: cane/rattan] ("Det här är långt ifrån 1800-talets äktenskap med rötterna i Bibeln, där husfadern styrde med rottingen.")

*And herein lies the big change in our view of the traditional marriage; in the equalness of the partners and the shared responsibility. The marriage is not described like that [again reffering back to the swedish law regarding marriage] at all in the Bible. ("Och det är här som den stora förändringen i synen på det traditionella äktenskapet ligger: i jämbördigheten och det delade annsvaret. Så beskrivs ett äktenskap inte alls i Bibeln.")

*Just now i said that a christian must break from/stay away from the biblical view of marriage and family - otherwise it is not possible to live as christian. ("Nyss sa jag att en kristen måste bryta med den bibliska synen på äktenskap och familj - annars går det inte att leva kristet.")

--------------------------------------------------------------------

The priest said more things about the bibilical marriage, all of them depicting it as a genuinely bad thing because it appearantly would be unequal. This is why he proclaims that one must take distance from it. If you look at the last quote ive given here and translated (the one in bold) within its context in the manuscript, you will see that he hasnt just said "a christian must stay away from the bibilical view..." as he claims to. When you read this ("a christian must stay away from the biblical view..."), it is the first and only time it is written in the manuscript (and likewise said during the sermon). Therefore this saying is no doubt to be considered, not just as a saying but as an urge. The priest is urging and requesting the listeners in the biggest church in scandinavia to distance themselves from central Biblical teachings regarding marriage (regarded as a sacrament by "some") during a sermon at the sunday of the pentecost!!

And what are the reactions like? The dean from the cathedral is defending this in her response to the critics of this sermon. She writes that the priest presented the lutheran view of marriage, in wich marriage is not regarded as a sacrament. ("[prästen ifråga] presenterade den lutherska äktenskapssynen, enligt vilken äktenskapet inte betraktas som sakrament.")

Is this sermon teaching the "lutheran view of marriage"?

I wrote a letter to the bishop of Uppsala, and it was forwarded to our archbishop. He (Anders Wejryd) confirmed; his opinion is that the manuscript is written in the context of an evangelical-lutheran hermeneutical tradition which belongs in the swedish church. ("Min Uppfattning är att manuskriptet står i en evangelisk-luthersk tolkningstradition som hör hemma i Svenska kyrkan.")

In the letter he sent me he added a document presented by the lutheran world-federation regarding sex, family and marriage. The document mentioned the principle of sola scriptura briefly and otherwise was contradicting the teachings of this sermon quite massively (for those of you interested, you can find the document - wich by the way is regarded as a summarisation of some discussion, not as an official teaching - on the website of the lutheran world-federation). I think he added this document because it describes the lutheran view of marriage as an affair of the world (as opposed as an affair for the heavenly/spiritual domain) and therefore must be considered with observance of context and such. This is probably what they regard as the lutheran view they claim to represent - that (the institution of) marriage isnt regarded as gospel, and therefore is subject to context and different sort of hermeneutical approaches to the Bible (namely: "we understand it as we feel like"), legitimating this type of GROSS teachings.

A few questions of mine:

How is it possible to claim sola sciptura (~ "the Bible is all we need for getting full knowledge of how to live a good christian life") and at the same time saying that one must stay away from biblical teachings regarding marriage? Is marriage not to be regarded as a part of a christian life, and if so.. why does the majority of christians regard it as a sacrament?

Why should they stop at that point? If they can effectively nullify all biblical teaching regarding such a central thing as marriage, why on earth wouldnt they want to nullify other things wich may - now or later - become an obstacle for their own agendas?

If one wanted to take this further, who would stop him when the archbishop himself has legitimized this type of heresies in the name of lutheran hermeneutics/theology? A lutheranism that makes affairs-of-selection a matter of the worldly domain (such as this one, the homosexual marriage one, the female clergy one.. (not that im against female clerics), and therefore subject to their own interpretations and agendas ("context" if you will..). How can i have faith in that the people-in-power are presenting reasonable interpretations? Mind you, archbishop Anders Wejryd is probably to be regarded as more conservative than the majority of swedish bishops.. not to mention the politicians, who have the power in theese (and probably most other) matters.

And from a broader, lutheran perspective; if youre not confessing faith in the authority of Tradition in any sense, what exacly makes this type of decisions and views wrong?
Are they wrong according to the Bible? I cannot present an argument like that, because biblical interpretation is left for the individual to form opinions about (within a context that seems to grow increasingly disturbing). This is basically what the priest said when i talked to him after his sermon. He has his opinion, and he is entitled to it just the way i am entitled to mine. So where does authority comes from? Answer: from people who, in the same way, have different opinions and interpretations based on various contexts - all claiming the right to their own opinion and perspectives. Be it politicians or bishops, they vote and off we go.

As society change, contexts will change, wills and agendas will change and therefore interpretation will change. From a lutheran (i think "lutheran" here would mean "theology from persons who regards themselves as lutherans"... i dont want to offend other lutherans around here) perspective, can enough ever get enough? I mean, here they are already urging people to stay off the entire biblical view of marriage with the authority of the archbishop.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As for me, im probably not going to write back to him. Im in the process of being tried as a priest-candidate and this whole thing probably isnt going to help me becoming accepted in the church. Most of all, i wonder where all the responsible and learned lutherans are. I dont think i am the person who should take this further, as im 22, not very learned and additionally jeopardizing my eventual entire career as priest in this church.

... your thoughts/comments?

Thanks for your time.

[Edial]

Dear Antisnygg, welcome to the forums.

This is a very interesting post coming from Sweden.
I did a quick Wikipedia search on it (I am not a Swede :)) and found some very interesting facts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_Sweden

- Until 2000 it held a position of a state church.
- As of 2006 75.6% of the Swedes were members of the church. However, only approximately 2% of the church's members regularly attend Sunday services.
- The reason for the large number of inactive members is that until 1996, all children automatically became members at birth, if at least one of their parents was a member.

In my opinion a state church would reflect the philosophy of a state, not that of a Bible.

Good example of it would be the Russian Orthodox Church whose few priests during the Soviet Union regime were practically all KGB informants.

United States has a wise law that separates church and state. The purpose of it is that the state would not influence the church.

You are choosing a very interesting position of a priest in that church while accepting sola scriptura.
I would suggest you would not get too far in your career with Biblical thoughts like these.
You will either become corrupt as they are or will have a very difficult if impossible trek as a priest who believes sola scriptura in the Church of Sweden.

However, with the Lord all things are possible. :)
He watches after His own.

To answer your questions.

...
A few questions of mine:

How is it possible to claim sola sciptura (~ "the Bible is all we need for getting full knowledge of how to live a good christian life") and at the same time saying that one must stay away from biblical teachings regarding marriage? Is marriage not to be regarded as a part of a christian life, and if so.. why does the majority of christians regard it as a sacrament? .
Biblical marriage IS a Christian marriage.

Although it is not a sacrament in a Lutheran view it is definitely one of the biggest mysteries in the Bible considering that God created Eve out of Adam and put them together in order to procreate and fill the earth, and in the end, in Heaven there will no longer be male nor female.

If one claims to be a Christian yet freely and with no bother "marries" a person of own gender, that person certainly does not have the thoughts of God in his or her heart nor mind.

Why should they stop at that point? If they can effectively nullify all biblical teaching regarding such a central thing as marriage, why on earth wouldnt they want to nullify other things wich may - now or later - become an obstacle for their own agendas?

They will not stop.
It is a slippery slope.

If one wanted to take this further, who would stop him when the archbishop himself has legitimized this type of heresies in the name of lutheran hermeneutics/theology? A lutheranism that makes affairs-of-selection a matter of the worldly domain (such as this one, the homosexual marriage one, the female clergy one.. (not that im against female clerics), and therefore subject to their own interpretations and agendas ("context" if you will..). How can i have faith in that the people-in-power are presenting reasonable interpretations? Mind you, archbishop Anders Wejryd is probably to be regarded as more conservative than the majority of swedish bishops.. not to mention the politicians, who have the power in theese (and probably most other) matters.
A title of archbishop has no Biblical meaning in a context of such heresies.
He will be accountable the most for the sins of his people.

Please understand, if out of 76% of professing Lutherans only 2% attend church, the church wants to "attract" the masses (it has to do with money), so it adapts her sermons to reflect that what the masses want to hear.

We also have liberal congregations here. Even synods, although they did not go that far.
They attract people by preaching that what secular people want to hear and not what they ought to hear.


And from a broader, lutheran perspective; if youre not confessing faith in the authority of Tradition in any sense, what exacly makes this type of decisions and views wrong?
Are they wrong according to the Bible? I cannot present an argument like that, because biblical interpretation is left for the individual to form opinions about (within a context that seems to grow increasingly disturbing). This is basically what the priest said when i talked to him after his sermon. He has his opinion, and he is entitled to it just the way i am entitled to mine. So where does authority comes from? Answer: from people who, in the same way, have different opinions and interpretations based on various contexts - all claiming the right to their own opinion and perspectives. Be it politicians or bishops, they vote and off we go.
I could just imagine Apostle Paul hearing of a "vote" to do away with marriage or to marry people of same gender. :D :)

He would just show up. Take this piece of paper. Tear it up in small pieces in front of the Archbishop and simply fire him. :)


As society change, contexts will change, wills and agendas will change and therefore interpretation will change. From a lutheran (i think "lutheran" here would mean "theology from persons who regards themselves as lutherans"... i dont want to offend other lutherans around here) perspective, can enough ever get enough? I mean, here they are already urging people to stay off the entire biblical view of marriage with the authority of the archbishop.

Liberalism means taking the Bible lightly.
It is a slippery slope.


As for me, im probably not going to write back to him. Im in the process of being tried as a priest-candidate and this whole thing probably isnt going to help me becoming accepted in the church. Most of all, i wonder where all the responsible and learned lutherans are. I dont think i am the person who should take this further, as im 22, not very learned and additionally jeopardizing my eventual entire career as priest in this church.

... your thoughts/comments?

Thanks for your time.
Well, my guess would be, since you already wrote to him, your name might already be "on the file" someplace.

Please understand. Such people are corrupt politicians. And corrupt politicians are cowards by nature.
Look at Pontius Pilate. Although he wanted to help Christ he got scared of the political pressure of the Jews and the fact that they said he is no longer a friend of Caesar.

Corrupt politicians, especially corrupt church politicians are cowardly, are incredibly proud of their views and keep track of anyone they see as a threat.

I do not know what our Lord's will is in your life, but you certainly have a correct attitude. :)
And with The Lord you cannot go wrong.

Thanks, :)
Ed

[MarkRohfrietsch]

Welcome!

It's my understanding that the State Church of Sweden has been deviating from Scripture and the confessions in many ways for many years.

There is a conservative Synod in Sweden, independent of the State Church. It's my understanding that they uphold Scripture and the Confessions. It might be worth a look.

http://www.missionsprovinsen.se/#

Blessings to you in your vocation,

Mark

[LilLamb219]

Most of all, i wonder where all the responsible and learned lutherans are. I dont think i am the person who should take this further, as im 22, not very learned and additionally jeopardizing my eventual entire career as priest in this church.

You can find a couple responsible and learned Lutherans HERE on this forum!! :D

Welcome to the boards!

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Welcome!

It's my understanding that the State Church of Sweden has been deviating from Scripture and the confessions in many ways for many years.

...

with " Why should they stop at that point? If they can effectively nullify all biblical teaching regarding such a central thing as marriage, why on earth wouldnt they want to nullify other things wich may - now or later - become an obstacle for their own agendas?"

and "they won't stop"

note that every state church of the you ess aya, britain, china, russia, france, and every other country
"has been deviating from Scripture in many ways for many years"
(I don't know or care at this point if they are deviating from the confessions, deviating -being directly opposed to Scripture is "more than enough", eh?)

the ones in control in every/any country are allowed by Yahweh, but not following nor obeying Him (unless like Esther, quietly for now).
there is not one righteous country, no not one.

so the state [approved] church[es] likewise cannot be righteous, it simply is not permitted.

[Antisnygg]

You are choosing a very interesting position of a priest in that church while accepting sola scriptura. I would suggest you would not get too far in your career with Biblical thoughts like these.
You will either become corrupt as they are or will have a very difficult if impossible trek as a priest who believes sola scriptura in the Church of Sweden.

Thanks for your answer! I did'nt write i accept sola scriptura, i was saying that they themselves are claiming the principle of sola scriptura judging from the document the archbishop sent me. My personal view of this would be that while you will find all teachings and dogmatics that is necessary for your salvation in the Bible, i think a sound theology (i.e. not only the basics of salvation and such) also must consider the Tradition. Luther for instance said himself (if im not mistaken), that he couldnt find arguments for the necessity of monogamy from the Bible. I know in some christian cultures polygamy is still practiced, i however think that God created man and woman to live as a pair and eventually become not two, but one. I believe the view of monogamy as prefered, as opposed to pologamy, hardly can be motivated from the Bible alone. This is an example that can show, that extra-biblical material is needed to form a theology that fully reflects Gods intentions. This is my belief and as such i cannot say i believe in sola scriptura in its true sense. I however believe in the primacy of scripture over Tradition.



I do not know what our Lord's will is in your life, but you certainly have a correct attitude. :)
And with The Lord you cannot go wrong.

Thanks, :)
Ed


Thank you Edial :)
I believe what you say is mostly true about state and church etc. Please take note though, and i write this for all of you. The swedish church is not a state church any longer, and there has been some success for the conservative members of the church. Since '96 you get registered to the church when you are baptized, there is more communions and high-masses. We've had a few big and sound profiles, and there still is alot of people that really wants to work for a better balance in the church. I do think it is apparent, that the bishops do NOT reflect the opinion of your average-joe, and i know there was alot of people who couldnt believe their ears when they heard this sermon who didnt consider themselves to be especcially conservative.

I believe better times will come for the swedish church. At this point we are loosing 1-2% of our members every year (wich is alot, considering there is like 5-7 millions of members). Houndreds of churches are being sold and left behind because the church cannot afford to keep them. The few organisations and congregations that grow in the church are the ones that profess their faith and stands behind our confessions. This trend has as far as i know, been quite solid for the last years and i believe we will eventually come to the point where the church cannot any longer support its dead-weight.

Thanks again Edial for your post, God bless! I do not know what God holds for me in the future, we will see :)

[RadMan]

Thanks for your answer! I did'nt write i accept sola scriptura, i was saying that they themselves are claiming the principle of sola scriptura judging from the document the archbishop sent me. My personal view of this would be that while you will find all teachings and dogmatics that is necessary for your salvation in the Bible, i think a sound theology (i.e. not only the basics of salvation and such) also must consider the Tradition. Luther for instance said himself (if im not mistaken), that he couldnt find arguments for the necessity of monogamy from the Bible. I know in some christian cultures polygamy is still practiced, i however think that God created man and woman to live as a pair and eventually become not two, but one. I believe the view of monogamy as prefered, as opposed to pologamy, hardly can be motivated from the Bible alone. This is an example that can show, that extra-biblical material is needed to form a theology that fully reflects Gods intentions. This is my belief and as such i cannot say i believe in sola scriptura in its true sense. I however believe in the primacy of scripture over Tradition.





Thank you Edial :)
I believe what you say is mostly true about state and church etc. Please take note though, and i write this for all of you. The swedish church is not a state church any longer, and there has been some success for the conservative members of the church. Since '96 you get registered to the church when you are baptized, there is more communions and high-masses. We've had a few big and sound profiles, and there still is alot of people that really wants to work for a better balance in the church. I do think it is apparent, that the bishops do NOT reflect the opinion of your average-joe, and i know there was alot of people who couldnt believe their ears when they heard this sermon who didnt consider themselves to be especcially conservative.

I believe better times will come for the swedish church. At this point we are loosing 1-2% of our members every year (wich is alot, considering there is like 5-7 millions of members). Houndreds of churches are being sold and left behind because the church cannot afford to keep them. The few organisations and congregations that grow in the church are the ones that profess their faith and stands behind our confessions. This trend has as far as i know, been quite solid for the last years and i believe we will eventually come to the point where the church cannot any longer support its dead-weight.

Thanks again Edial for your post, God bless! I do not know what God holds for me in the future, we will see :)You might want to check into the definitions of Sola Scriptura. The reformed have their definition as well as the Lutheran, and RC/EO. Each one of them is different and the term Sola Csriptura cannot be used as a blanket statement for that term.

[Edial]

Thanks for your answer! I did'nt write i accept sola scriptura, i was saying that they themselves are claiming the principle of sola scriptura judging from the document the archbishop sent me. My personal view of this would be that while you will find all teachings and dogmatics that is necessary for your salvation in the Bible, i think a sound theology (i.e. not only the basics of salvation and such) also must consider the Tradition. Luther for instance said himself (if im not mistaken), that he couldnt find arguments for the necessity of monogamy from the Bible. I know in some christian cultures polygamy is still practiced, i however think that God created man and woman to live as a pair and eventually become not two, but one. I believe the view of monogamy as prefered, as opposed to pologamy, hardly can be motivated from the Bible alone. This is an example that can show, that extra-biblical material is needed to form a theology that fully reflects Gods intentions. This is my belief and as such i cannot say i believe in sola scriptura in its true sense. I however believe in the primacy of scripture over Tradition.

My understanding of sola scriptura is the following.

True Tradition is very important, since it reflects the history, practices and teachings of the Church, which naturally formed from a careful and studious application of the Bible by genuine people of God.
Such Traditions withstood the tests of time and have no difficulties whatsoever being in the light of the Bible - hence, a true and robust sola scriptura - Scriptures alone and Tradition as a proof that Scriptures alone are sufficient.

However, if Tradition contradicts or weakens the Scriptures, it is man-made and must be scrapped.

MK 7:9 And he said to them: "You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observeyour own traditions! 10 For Moses said, `Honor your father and your mother,'and, `Anyone who curses his father or mother must be put to death.'11 But you say that if a man says to his father or mother: `Whatever help you might otherwise have received from me is Corban' (that is, a gift devoted to God), 12 then you no longer let him do anything for his father or mother. 13 Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And you do many things like that."

Thanks, :)
Ed

[cerette]

Antisnygg,

I'd be very shocked if you'd find anything Biblical in the Church of Sweden ("Svenska Kyrkan"). Svenska Kyrkan has left the Bible ages ago, and I truly wonder if we should even call them "Christians", that's how bad their theology is. (If they even have a theology, perhaps it's only human thoughts and politically correct opinions.)

[Antisnygg]

Cerette, thats some incredibly bold statements. I challenge you to find support for anything of what you've written. Sure, you can find people with unorthodox opinions from any denomination/church... so?

Do you know any official writing of the Church of Sweden? For instance, the stance on marriage is described as an institution from God, between a man and a woman. This was written and accepted by all bishops in '99. You doubt this would be biblical? We profess one baptism in the name of the Triune God. We practice the Eucharist as it is understood from Luther and presented in Confessio Augustana. We preach the gospel through houndreds of priests weekly. Am i not right on this? If im wrong, please support your claims.

If you believe im right or if you cannot present an argument against my claims, listen to Melanchton when he writes; "the church is where the gospel is preached in clarity, and where the sacraments are being rightly administrated". Surely then, if you cannot oppose what im saying about the sacraments or the gospel, the Church of Sweden must be a church according to this lutheran understanding.

I whole-heartedly agree with anyone saying that there is bad theology coming from members and priests from the Church of Sweden. Admittedly, this trend is getting worse. And yes, the Church of Sweden probably stands out alot from most other churches. I think you are going extremely far in your accusations though. Could anyone say that their denomination/church is free from members and priests with unorthodox and outright bad theology? Theology that contradicts the confessions, the Word, Tradition. I dont think anyone at all, can make this claim.

Summary: The Church of Sweden are going a long way out, yes. But the basics of faith are still being administrated and teached by thousands of humble lutherans from our church. One can have alot of opinions about my church, i know i do, but as i said before... not all is lost. You are definately going too far.

[Till]

Hi Antisnygg,

It is interesting to see that you are referring to pastors in the Church of Sweden as priests. There is another thread going on about apostolic succession in the ELCA sub forum where this question came up. Maybe you could partake there and elaborate whether this is normal in Sweden and why you do it?

Many thanks,
Till

[Korah]

Hi Antisnygg,
It is interesting to see that you are referring to pastors in the Church of Sweden as priests. There is another thread going on about apostolic succession in the ELCA sub forum where this question came up. Maybe you could partake there and elaborate whether this is normal in Sweden and why you do it?
Many thanks,
Till
No, no, please discuss Apostolic Succession here!
I had been planning to open a thread here in the general Lutheran sub-forum on AS, just as I had done in the ELCA sub-forum. It seems to have finished over there, already having led us to the Swedish Church in which AS is claimed and pastors are called priests.
Only a few decades ago ecumenism had progressed in almost all Lutheran bodies here in the U. S. to the point where worship was going to be standardized upon the way the Christian Church did it in the first centuries and to seek to be re-connected to Apostolic Succession. The Swedish Lutherans never lost AS, we believe, but the breakdown of the ecumenical spirit among conservative U. S. Lutherans led the ELCA to pursue Apostolic from the Call To Common Ministry with the U. S. Episcopal Church and its AS obtained from decades of co-consecration of bishops by Old Catholics.
I doubt that we can discuss this civilly here, however, unless we make clear at the outset that none of us (certainly not I) are claiming that we have to have AS or we're not Christians or that we have to have AS or our Communion services are invalid. I would hope we could limit ourselves to discussing whether the Swedish Church has true Apostolic Succession, whether we want it for other Lutherans as well, and whether binding ourselves in common ecclesial structures (or at least mutual consecration of bishops) would advance our understanding of Christian truth. I for one say, "Yes"!
I am extremely pleased with the Christian spirit I see in Antisnygg, and I hope his balanced view of Scripture and Tradition can be fruitfully discussed here. On the one hand the apparently heretical members of the Swedish hierarchy seem to have renounced either Scripture or Tradition, but the sermons on marriage do seem to have exposed some difficulties in the practice of marriage in the Bible. I would hope we can establish that the New Testament view of marriage can get us above the problems with Old Testament marriage (and not just the polygyny). Likewise we may find that Tradition of the last 2000 years provides the answer.
I say let's continue discussing the sermons and the Swedish Church as such in this thread, but I will start a new thread here to discuss Apostolic Succession.
Korah

[Till]

I would hope we can establish that the New Testament view of marriage can get us above the problems with Old Testament marriage (and not just the polygyny). Likewise we may find that Tradition of the last 2000 years provides the answer.

Well, I do not believe that the theology of marriage as found in specifically Genesis is different from the theology of marriage as outlined in the NT, specifically by the teachings and actions of Jesus but also Paul.

The pratice of polygamy in the OT or the physical abuse of women by their husbands in the so-called bourgeois marriage in the 19th century was definitely NOT the will of God as outlined in Scriptures. It was not how God originally had planed marriage.

Critizing such abuses is right and necessary. But the preacher of that sermon obviously thinks that Scriptures are just a testimony of the cultural beliefs of people of a former age and are not having formative power for our way-of-life today. He feels that he has the right to critize the principles of marriage outlined in Scriptures, e.g. as to the submission of husbands to wifes in love and submision of wifes to husband in obedience. Such a view on and such an approach to Scriptures is wrong and this person should get corrected.


I say let's continue discussing the sermons and the Swedish Church as such in this thread, but I will start a new thread here to discuss Apostolic Succession.
Korah

I would say that the problem the Church of Sweden, just as the Evangelical Church in Germany or - to a lesser degree - the Church of England has, is essentialy the problem of the authority of Scriptures being denied in the church. The problem is not, as was suggested here, that they are state churches for - with the exception of the CoE - they are not. Even the CoE is not really a state church anymore even though the Queen is still the head of Church. But she is not the problem.