Political and Legal Perspectives: The Dynamics of Religious Reform in Northern Europe, 1780-1920

Political Reform in Sweden

Political Reform in Sweden 225 och upplysningens tid; Bexell, Folkväckelsens och kyrkoförnyelsens tid; and Brohed, Religionsfrihetens och ekumenikens tid. 2 Österlin, Churches of Northern Europe, 172. Political Reform in Sweden Anders Jarlert The End of the Mediaeval Parliament On 22 June 1866, Archbishop Henric Reuterdahl of Uppsala (1795-1870), Speaker of the Estate of Clergy in Parliament, faced with the fact that the four-estate parliament was to be abolished and replaced by two elected chambers, gave vent to his feelings about this step - the greatest political change of the position of the church in Sweden since the Middle Ages: “When I say that our work is forever ended, I say this without delight, but without sadness as well. I cannot delight in changes which interrupt the whole development history of an old people to start a new one. And still less can I delight if it would be the obvious or veiled purpose of the new order to separate from state affairs all direct influence of positive Christian religion and its guardians. [...] The Lord has allowed this to take place. In this He has had His ends. If He thereby would let some blessing reach our people - and who would deny the possibility of this? - why should we then feel sadness? And if He thereby wants to discipline and punish, let us be submissive and grateful. Discipline and punishment do not come undeserved.”1 In Reuterdahl’s view, “State and Church in Sweden formed an indissoluble unit, and in this inherited system he found indispensable values. He felt almost physically sick at the thought of some people considering themselves to be better Christians than others, more virtuous than others, and in consequence deliberately cutting themselves off from the community of the ordinary parish.”2 1 Quotation translated from Jarlert, Romantikens och liberalismens tid, 211. This whole chapter is built on the recent multi-volume history of Swedish Christianity: Lenhammar, Individualismens Anders Jarlert 226 3 Jarlert, Romantikens, 63. The consequences of the parliamentary reform were more far-reaching for the clergy than for the aristocracy since, over the decades that lay ahead, many of the latter managed to get themselves elected to the new First Chamber. As a result of the Reformation, bishops had been required to vacate their places on the King’s Council . However, since the Estate of the Clergy had been preserved, the bishops and the higher clergy had still kept their influence on political matters at the national level. Now this changed. Under the new system, only a couple of bishops were elected to parliament, though those few were very influential. Archbishop Anton Niklas Sundberg was elected Speaker of the Second Chamber (1867-1872) and of the First Chamber (1878-1880), and in the early twentieth century Bishop Gottfrid Billing chaired the State Committee. The change had an impact on another level as well. The ideal concept of a bishop was remoulded. During the years 1809-1862, demands for the abolition of the bishop’s office had been discussed at eleven different parliamentary sessions. These demands did not so much have an anti-clerical as economic basis, and - especially from the estate of the farmers - bishops were criticised for being absent from their dioceses and spending most of their time in parliament. It was claimed that the salary of one bishop was equivalent to the pay of 400 elementary school teachers. After the parliamentary reform, most of the bishops stayed resident in their dioceses for the whole year, and their interest in pastoral inspections and other ecclesiastical matters increased. So did their impact as theologians. Before 1865, it was a self-evident matter that a professor in, say, mathematics, could be elected bishop. Now, theological knowledge and pastoral experience were more appreciated. However, the bishop’s position as eforus (supervisor) for the grammar schools in the diocese continued, and the senior masters of the grammar schools in the diocesan centres were still members of the domkapitel (diocesan chapter), together with the bishop and the dean.3 After the Reformation, the domkapitel ceased to be a cathedral chapter and was turned into an ecclesiastical board for the diocese. The dean was rector of the cathedral parish, but simultaneously deputised for the bishop in the whole diocese. With regard to marriage, until 1918, all divorces required the authorisation of the domkapitel. The bishops retained their leading position in the grammar schools for a further four decades, and, in legal terms, the domkapitel remained a public authority...