Ystävä sä lapsien : Lasten virret ja hengelliset laulut suomenkielisissä kokoelmissa 1824-1938 ja niiden vaikutus vuoden 1938 virsikirjaan

Ystävä sä lapsien. Collections of Finnish language children s hymns and spiritual songs from 1824─1938 and their influence on the Hymnal 1938. The Hymnal has been the common song book of Lutheran parishes since the 1500s. In the beginning, the congregations sang the hymns from memory led by the choir or the church musician. The fundamentals of Christian faith are taught through the hymns, both in church and in family devotions. The Hymnal was the only song book of the church in Finland until the end of the 1800s. This study attempts to clarify when and by who were spiritual songs and hymns for children written in Finland. Research materials used were all the books I could find (approximately 200), whose headings were for pupils and young children in the home and school circles. The method of study is historical and analytical. In the first chapter, it is explained that children s literature in Finland differentiated from other literature at the end of the 1700s. Eric Juvelius published a small prayer book in 1781 with the prayer Gud, som hafver barnen kär / Jumala joka Lapsia rakasta. From that, after many Finnish translations, the first verse of the hymn Ystävä sä lapsien took shape. The second chapter considers singing instruction in the folk school from the beginning of the 1860s. Textbooks, including songbooks, were produced for the pupils. Some of the first pioneers in producing these materials were the teachers P.J. Hannikainen, Sofie Lithenius, Mikael Nyberg, Anton Rikström and Aksel Törnudd, as well as Hilja Haahti, Immi Hellén and Alli Nissinen, who were all teachers gifted in writing poetry. Several new spiritual songs appeared in the folk school songbooks. Hymns were sung often, especially in connection with church year celebrations. Children s songs in Christian education are discussed in the third chapter. The Lutheran Evangelical Association of Finland recognized children already in its early song collections. The illustrative teaching methods in the folk school influenced the Sunday school activities and especially the Sunday school hymns. Hymns introduced as exclusively for children and pupils which appear in the Hymnal from 1886 and the supplement to the 1923 Hymnal are explored in the fourth and fifth chapters. The study shows that the renewal of church life at the beginning of the 1900s also resulted in an increase of the number of spiritual songs for children. This is also seen in the diverse choice of songs in the supplementary materials from 1923. The final chapter deals with the School and Childhood section of the 1938 Hymnal. The Hymnal committee did not think that the already well known folk school and Sunday school songs received enough attention in the Hymnal. Those songs were, among others, Kautta tyynen, vienon yön, Oi, katsopa lintua oksalla puun, Olen Luojani pikku varpunen, Rakas Isä taivahan ja Tuolla keinuu pieni pursi. Heikki Klemetti, Ilmari Krohn, Armas Maasalo and Aarni Voipio influenced the opinion that the spiritual songs still were not suitable to be sung in church. Hymns for children and pupils were brought into the same line as the entire Hymnal. The same hymn tunes, which were mainly old ones, were used as common settings for numerous hymn texts. No special type of melody emerged for the children s hymns. It was still notable that hymns for children and pupils were collected at all. In addition, the Hymnal committee marked those verses suggested for singing in both the folk school and Sunday school with an asterisk (*) throughout the entire Hymnal.

Luterilaisen maailmanliiton käsitys pappeudesta 1983-2007

Tämän tutkimuksen tehtävänä oli selvittää, miten Luterilaisen maailmanliiton (LML) käsitys pappeudesta voidaan ymmärtää LML:n vuosien 1983, 1992, 2002 ja 2007 julkilausumien perusteella. Tutkimuksessa kiinnitettiin erityisesti huomiota siihen muutokseen, jota LML:n papinvirkaa koskevissa käsityksissä on vuosien 1983 ja 2007 välillä tapahtunut. Tutkimuksen lähtökohtana oli oletus, että julkilausumissa painopiste on siirtynyt vuosien 1983 ja 2007 välillä yleisen pappeuden korostamisesta kohti vihityn pappeuden ja erityisesti kaitsentaviran korostamista. Tutkimuksen metodina oli systemaattinen analyysi. Myös historiallisiin seikkoihin kiinnitettiin huomiota. Tämän tutkimuksen lähteinä käytettiin LML:n kirkollista virkaa käsitteleviä julkilausumia: The Lutheran Understanding of Ministry (1983), The Lutheran Understanding of Episcopal Office (1983), Women in the Ministries of the Church (1983), MINISTRY -Women -Bishops (1992), The Episcopal Ministry within the Apostolicity of the Church (2002) ja Episcopal Ministry within the Apostolicity of the Church (2007). Tutkimuksen taustaluvussa (2.) esitellään kirkollisen virkakäsityksen kehittymistä Saksan, Pohjoismaiden sekä Pohjois-Amerikan luterilaisissa kirkoissa reformaation ajalta vuoteen 1983 saakka. Taustaluvun jälkeen alkaa tutkimuksen pääluvut (3, 4, 5), joissa tutkitaan julkilausumia aikajärjestyksessä (luku 3: 1983, luku 4: 1992, luku 5: 2002 ja 2007). Viimeiseksi esitellään tutkimustulokset sekä tutkimuksessa käytetyt lähteet ja kirjallisuus (luvut 6 ja 7). Tämä tutkimus paljasti, että LML:n käsitys pappeudesta muuttui vuosien 1983–2007 välillä näkemyksestä, jonka mukaan yleinen pappeus on vihityn pappeuden ensisijainen muoto, näkemykseksi, jonka mukaan yleinen ja vihitty pappeus ovat erillisiä pappeuden muotoja. Tutkimus paljasti myös, että kaitsentaviran arvostus kasvoi vuosien 1983 ja 2007 välillä. Tämä kasvu ei kuitenkaan ollut tasaisen lineaarista nousua, vaan huippuarvostuksen vuosista (1992 ja 2002) oli vuonna 2007 laskeuduttu hieman maltillisemmalle tasolle. Samalla kuitenkin vihityn pappeuden arvostus kasvoi. Tutkimus paljasti myös, että LML on suhtautunut jo vuodesta 1983 lähtien sekä naisten vihittyyn pappeuteen että kaitsentavirassa toimiviin naisiin hyvin positiivisesti. Naisten vihityn pappeuden perustelut olivat kuitenkin muuttuneet 25 vuoden aikana. Käytännön hyötyjä tai muita kirkon käytäntöihin liittyviä perusteluja ei tuotu enää vuoden 1983 jälkeen ilmestyneissä lähteissä esille. Vuoden 1983 julkilausumassa ja vuoden 1992 raportissa naisten vihkimistä perusteltiin yleisen pappeuden kautta. Tätäkään ei esiintynyt enää 2000-luvun julkilausumissa, joissa keskityttiin ainoastaan raamatullisiin perusteluihin. Tutkimus paljasti myös, että kaikissa lähteenä käytetyissä LML:n julkilausumissa apostolinen seuraanto nähtiin BEM-asiakirjan mukaisesti laajassa mielessä. Konsekraation seuraantoa ei nähty missään vaiheessa kirkon apostolisen seuraannon kannalta ehdottoman välttämättömänä. Konsekraation seuraannon arvostus oli matalimmalla vuonna 1983, korkeimmalla vuosina 1992 ja 2002 sekä maltillisemmalla tasolla vuonna 2007. Vihityn pappeuden seuraannon merkitystä korostettiin erityisesti vuoden 2007 julkilausumassa. Tutkimus paljasti myös, että luterilaisten kirkkojen hallinnolliset rakenteet olivat tässä tutkimuksessa käytettyjen lähteiden ajalla (1983–2007) LML:n näkemyksen mukaan asteittain yhdenmukaistuneet luterilaisissa kirkoissa. Vuonna 1983 luterilaisissa kirkoissa vallitsi lähes lukematon määrä erilaisia hallinnollisia malleja. Vuoden 1992 julkilausuman mukaan piispa-nimike oli yleistynyt, samoin synodaalisten rakenteiden ja henkilöityneen kaitsentaviran yhdistelmästä koostuva kirkkohallinnon malli. Vuoden 2002 julkilausuman mukaan tällainen hallinnollinen järjestelmä oli jo lähes kaikissa LML:n jäsenkirkoissa ja vuoden 2007 Julkilausuman mukaan kaitsentaviran ja synodaalisten rakenteiden yhdistelmä oli ainoa luterilaisissa kirkoissa käytetty kirkkohallinnon malli. Tämä kehitys koettiin LML:ssa positiivisena.

Paimen vailla hiippakuntaa : Kenttäpiispan viran synty ja vaikutus sotilaspapiston asemaan Suomen puolustusvoimissa ja kirkossa vuosina 1939 - 1944

The main purpose of this research is to shed light on the factors that gave rise to the office of Field Bishop in the years 1939-1944. How did military bishophood affect the status of the head of military pastoral care and military clergy during these years? The main sources of my research are the collections in the Finnish National Archives, and I use a historical-qualitative method. The position of the military clergy was debated within both the Church and the Defence Forces before 1939. At that stage, Church law did not yet recognize the office of the leading military priest, the Field Dean. There had been a motion in 1932 to introduce the office of a military bishop, but the bishops' synod blocked it. The concept of Field Bishop appeared for the first time in 1927 in a Finnish military document, which dealt with pastoral care in the Polish military. The Field Dean in Finland had regularly proposed improvements to the salary of the military clergy before the Winter War. After the Winter War, arguments were made for strengthening the position of the military clergy: these arguments were based on the increased respect shown towards this clergy, especially due to their role in the care of the fallen, which had become their task during the war. Younger members of the military clergy in particular supported the demands to improve their position within the Church and the army. The creation of a Field Bishop was perceived as strengthening the whole military clergy, as the Field Bishop was envisioned as a bishop within the Church and a general within the Defence Forces. During that time the Field Dean was still without any military rank. The idea of a Field Bishop was recommended to Mannerheim in June 1940, after which the Defence Forces lent their support to the cause. The status of the military clergy, in Church law, made it to the agenda of the Church council in January 1941, thanks largely to the younger priests' group influence and Mannerheim's leverage. The bishops opposed the notion of a Field Bishop mostly on theological grounds but were ready to concede that the position the Field Dean in Church law required further defining. The creation of the office of Field Bishop was blocked in the Church law committee report issued close to the beginning of the Continuation War. The onset of that war, however, changed the course of events, as the President of the Republic appointed Field Dean Johannes Björklund as Field Bishop. Speculation has abounded about Mannerheim's role in the appointment, but the truth of the matter is not clear. The title of Field Bishop was used to put pressure on the Church, and, at the same time, Mannerheim could remain detached from the matter. Later, in September 1941, the Church council approved the use of the Field Bishop title to denote the head of military pastoral care in Church law, and Field Bishops were assigned some of the duties formerly pertaining to bishops. Despite all expectations and hopes, the new office of Field Bishop did not affect the status of the military clergy within the Defence Forces, as no ranks were established for them, and their salary did not improve. However the office of the Field Bishop within Army HQ was transformed from a bureau into a department in the summer of 1942. At the beginning of the Continuation War, the Field Bishop was criticized by certain military and Church clergy for favouring Russian Orthodox Christians in Eastern Karelia. Björklund agreed in principle with most of the Lutheran clergy on the necessity of Lutheranizing East Karelia but had to take into account the realities at Army HQ. As well, at the same time the majority of the younger clergy were serving in the army, and there was a lack of parish priests on the home front. Bishop Lehtonen had actually expressed the wish that more priests could have been released from the front to serve in local parishes. In his notes Lehtonen accused Björklund of trying to achieve the position of Field Bishop by all possible means. However, research has revealed a varied group of people behind the creation of the office of Field Bishop, including in particular younger clergy and the Defence Forces.

The Church and Its Boundaries : A Study of the Special Commission on Orthodox Participation in the WCC

The relationship between the Orthodox Churches and the World Council of Churches (WCC) became a crisis just before the 8th Assembly of the WCC in Harare, Zimbabwe in 1998. The Special Commission on Orthodox Participation in the WCC (SC), inaugurated in Harare, worked during the period 1999 2002 to solve the crisis and to secure the Orthodox participation in the WCC. The purpose of this study is: 1) to clarify the theological motives for the inauguration of the SC and the theological argumentation of the Orthodox criticism; 2) to write a reliable history and analysis of the SC; 3) to outline the theological argumentation, which structures the debate, and 4) to investigate the ecclesiological questions that arise from the SC material. The study spans the years 1998 to 2006, from the WCC Harare Assembly to the Porto Alegre Assembly. Hence, the initiation and immediate reception of the Special Commission are included in the study. The sources of this study are all the material produced by and for the SC. The method employed is systematic analysis. The focus of the study is on theological argumentation; the historical context and political motives that played a part in the Orthodox-WCC relations are not discussed in detail. The study shows how the initial, specific and individual Orthodox concerns developed into a profound ecclesiological discussion and also led to concrete changes in WCC practices, the best known of which is the change to decision-making by consensus. The Final Report of the SC contains five main themes, namely, ecclesiology, decision-making, worship/common prayer, membership and representation, and social and ethical issues. The main achievement of the SC was that it secured the Orthodox membership in the WCC. The ecclesiological conclusions made in the Final Report are twofold. On the one hand, it confirms that the very act of belonging to the WCC means the commitment to discuss the relationship between a church and churches. The SC recommended that baptism should be added as a criterion for membership in the WCC, and the member churches should continue to work towards the mutual recognition of each other s baptism. These elements strengthen the ecclesiological character of the WCC. On the other hand, when the Final Report discusses common prayer, the ecclesiological conclusions are much more cautious, and the ecclesiological neutrality of the WCC is emphasized several times. The SC repeatedly emphasized that the WCC is a fellowship of churches. The concept of koinonia, which has otherwise been important in recent ecclesiological questions, was not much applied by the SC. The comparison of the results of the SC to parallel ecclesiological documents of the WCC (Nature and Mission of the Church, Called to Be the One Church) shows that they all acknowledge the different ecclesiological starting points of the member churches, and, following that, a variety of legitimate views on the relation of the Church to the churches. Despite the change from preserving the koinonia to promises of eschatological koinonia, all the documents affirm that the goal of the ecumenical movement is still full, visible unity.