Lewi Pethrus romantiska ecklesiologi

The ecclesiology of Lewi Pethrus has been the object of a number of studies, most recently a chapter in Sune Fahlgren’s dissertation Predikantskap och församling (2006) and the dissertation Lewi Pethrus’ Ecclesiological Thougth 1911–1974 by Tommy Davidsson. In the present study, I argue that Pethrus’ ecclesiology is best understood in light of ideals shaped by romanticism, particularly a dualism between spiritual essence and material form. This is the key to understanding the conflicts between Pethrus and the Baptists in the 1910s, which eventually lead to a breach and the formation of Pentecostalism as a separate denomination. In the first conflict, Pethrus’ gave inner, spiritual affiliation priority over outer, formal membership, and was willing to allow non-Baptists to partake of the Eucharist in his congregation. The result of this was that his congregation was expelled from the Baptist Society. The breach became permanent when Pethrus rejected the denominational organization model in favor of a radical congregationalism. This, too, was motivated by a romantic idealism. According to Pethrus, outer formal organization was a threat to the inner life of a movement. The investigation ends with a comparison which notes that romantic ideals were present in both liberal theology and the high church movement of the early 20th century. Through his strong dualism, Pethrus comes particularly close to the ecclesiology of the liberal theologians of his day

Populismens existentiella dimensioner : Sverigedemokrater och kyrkor i den flytande moderniteten

Rightwing populism is characterized by critique of immigration, but populist parties also address existential anxieties of late or liquid modernity. I argue that regular churchgoers reject the Sweden Democrats not only because they hold different opinions on immigration, but also due to their strong social capital. The latter helps them cope with modern anxieties, and this makes them less inclined to accept the message of the populists

Of the World? : Emil Gustafson, Modernity and Evangelicalism

The aim of this thesis is to investigate the relationship between evangelicalism and modernity with the Swedish holiness preacher Emil Gustafson (1862–1900) as a case. This is achieved by comparing Gustafson’s spirituality with Charles Taylor’s characterization of modernity. The investigation identifies five central themes in Gustafson’s spirituality: conversion, calling, suffering, sanctification, and spiritual experience. With regard to these themes paral-lels with modernity are noted. For example, the analysis shows that modern individualism influenced Gustafson’s view of conversion, and that instrumental rationality informed his evaluations of his own work as a preacher. But there are also instances where he distanced himself from modernity. He did not embrace a modern optimistic anthropology, or the view of suffering as purely negative. It is concluded that Gustafson is neither anti-modern, nor identical to Taylor’s depiction of modernity. He represents one kind of modernity. One that is theocentric rather than anthropo-centric. In order to uphold this theocentric character Gustafson’s opposition to the basic struc-ture of modernity had to be grounded in social practices. For instance, his negative anthropol-ogy was grounded in the revival-meeting where outsiders were called to repent and rely on God rather than themselves. Based on the results from this study it is suggested that evangelicalism should be inter-preted as neither in conflict with modernity, nor in continuity with it, but rather as a kind of modernity. There are multiple modernities, and evangelicalism is one of them

Storytellig and Evangelical Identities

In this chapter, I discuss autobiography in the Evangelical tradition, and how thisgenre can help us understand Evangelical identity. Conversion – the experience of“new birth”, or being born again – was the center of these stories. The emphasis on personalstorytelling (witnessing) united Evangelicals, but the way they told their storiesdivided them. As the movement grew more fragmented over the centuries, this patternbecomes more evident. Personal storytelling was part of what made this a modernmovement, but the way they told their stories set it apart as a distinct modernity