Tila tilassa : Liturgian ja tilan dialogi alttarin äärellä

This study examines the organisation and transformation of altar space in the modern Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland in liturgical and architectural perspective. The research data consists of 65 altar spaces in The Finnish Evangelical Lutheran church buildings. All of these were characterised in Church Government records as churches , built 1962 1999 and had been consecrated. The main data was collected by means of observation, photographing, and drawing sketches of altar spaces. The focus of this study concerns the organisation of modern Finnish Evangelical Lutheran altar spaces and, in particular, their changes also in relation to the liturgical movement. The challenge of this approach was especially in discovering the spatial identity of an altar space in terms of unequivocal boundaries. The analysis was realised in three stages. Interiors, the organisation of altar space, as well as architectonic qualities of altar spaces in terms of floor elevations, shapes of ceilings, lighting, and openings in the altar space were analysed. Moreover, attention was focused on furnishing and fixed versus movable pieces of furniture (such as the altar, altar rail, the pulpit, the baptismal font, and lectern). Finally, the potential qualitative and quantitative changes in altar space were examined. All in all, the majority of churches in the data featured elongated church halls with an altar at the end of the nave. To look at the data in chronological perspective, increasingly wide church halls had been built since the 1980s (yet there was only one central hall in which the altar was placed at the middle point of the church). Every third church altar was movable. As for the focal point of this study and the altar in particular, it was my aim to pay attention to the versus populum altar and its development in relation to the (Lutheran) liturgy. Hence, it was meaningful to determine, in terms of interior design, whether liturgists were able to celebrate facing the people attending the service. In the 1960s and 70s, a versus orientem altar featured in more than half of all new Finnish Lutheran churches, yet in 2000 two out of three churches featured a versus populum altar. For architectural and esthetic reasons (and not primarily due to liturgical ideas), also altars standing freely off the walls had been constructed. In terms of the liturgy, versus populum altars had been realised in expectation of increased communication between liturgist and worshippers. However, the analysis indicated that the altar could also become a divider of space. This aspect is a novel finding in relation to earlier and concurrent discussions concerning the liturgical movement. This study concluded, all in all, that altars had been increasingly constructed closer and closer to the worshiping parish and, accordingly, used increasingly often in the versus populum manner. Lecterns were often movable until the millennium this was the case in most altar spaces. Baptismal fonts did not have a permanent place in this data, and the data even included altar spaces with no baptismal fonts in the choir, nor the church hall. The position and status of fonts was generally weakened even if baptism in the Lutheran Church was regarded as one of the two sacraments together with the eucharist. The study concluded that even if baptism is regarded as a sacrament in the church, the position and status of baptismal fonts had weakened overall in newer church architecture. In other words, the tendency of the liturgical movement to emphasise the service and its celebration had obviously had its effect on the placement of baptismal fonts in the church hall. This research indicated that the pieces of furniture that mostly involved (many kinds of) visual and spatial changes included the altar and the lectern. In certain instances, fixed furnishings had been substituted by movable pieces or, moreover, new pieces of furniture and paraphernalia such as music instruments, pieces of art, tables, chairs and plants were brought in. In the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland, liturgical changes were principally inspired by the Catholic Church, in which liturgical changes are essentially based on Canon Law. Unlike Finnish Lutheranism, Catholicism provides detailed rules and principles even regarding the design of an altar space. According to this study, in the Finnish Lutheran Church, the primarily functional nature of given guidelines and instructions characterises several practical solutions in furnishing.

Kansankirkko, uskonnonvapaus ja valtio : Suomen evankelis-luterilaisen kirkon kirkolliskokouksen tulkinta uskonnonvapaudesta 1963-2003

A national church, freedom of religion, and the state The interpretation of freedom of religion formulated by the Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland in reference to the relationship between the Church and the state from 1963 to 2003 This paper discusses the interpretation of freedom of religion formulated by the Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland during the years 1963-2003. The effect of these formulations and decisions made by the Synod on the relationship between the Church and the state is also discussed as the relationship has been a central issue in the debate about freedom of religion in Finland. Active co-operation with the state caused a dispute in the Church during this period. Another cause for concern for the Synod, a strong defender of the national church, was the weakening position of the Church in a society undergoing many changes. As the Synod of 1963 discussed the status of the Church, the Church began to reflect upon its identity as a national church, and to evaluate freedom of religion in the country, as well as the relationship between the Church and the state. Some of the radicals of the 1960s and 1970s presented the Church as an obstacle to freedom of religion. The Synod was keen to emphasize that, in accordance with international agreements on human rights, freedom of religion means the freedom to have and follow a religion, and also that freedom of religion was a right of the majority in Finnish society. As an active guardian of the rights of its members, the Synod defended such issues as the teaching of religion in schools. Throughout the dispute, the Church focused on its right to act freely and, according to its identity, to express spirituality in the society. At the end of the 1960s, several efforts to reform the law on the freedom of religion and the relationship between the Church and the state gained favour in the Synod. These formulations of the Church were the basis for the work of a parliamentary committee in the 1970s, but no significant changes resulted. Instead, freedom of religion in Finland was judged to be fairly good. The committee paper did, however, lead to preparations for greater independence of the Church. The Synod at the time chose to react to the changes presented to it, but it was not before the 1990s that the Synod became an active force of reform in these matters. Though the Synod, particularly from the 1970s onwards, began clearly to favour the improvement of the position of other religious communities in Finland, it felt it had reason to be cautious as each church and religious community had the freedom to decide individually its relationship with the state. Any changes that would have weakened the position of the Church in Finnish society were met with disapproval in the Synod. Even though some theological concerns regarding the national identity of the Church were raised, the Synod emphasized issues of church policy. Keen to preserve and protect its legal status in society, the Synod judged that this status supported the freedom of action enjoyed by the Church as well as the freedom of religion.

Mikä on ihme ja mitä ihmeistä voidaan tietää? : Keskustelu ihmeistä uusimmassa englanninkielisessä uskonnonfilosofiassa

What is a miracle and what can we know about miracles? A discussion of miracles in anglophone philosophy of religion literature since the late 1960s. The aim of this study is to systematically describe and philosophically examine the anglophone discussion on the subject of miracles since the latter half of the 1960s. The study focuses on two salient questions: firstly, what I will term the conceptual-ontological question of the extent to which we can understand miracles and, secondly, the epistemological question of what we can know about miracles. My main purpose in this study is to examine the various viewpoints that have been submitted in relation to these questions, how they have been argued and on what presuppositions these arguments have been based. In conducting the study, the most salient dimension of the various discussions was found to relate to epistemological questions. In this regard, there was a notable confrontation between those scholars who accept miracles and those who are sceptical of them. On the conceptual-ontological side I recognised several different ways of expressing the concept of miracle . I systematised the discussion by demonstrating the philosophical boundaries between these various opinions. The first and main boundary was related to ontological knowledge. On one side of this boundary I placed the views which were based on realism and objectivism. The proponents of this view assumed that miraculousness is a real property of a miraculous event regardless of how we can perceive it. On the other side I put the views which tried to define miraculousness in terms of subjectivity, contextuality and epistemicity. Another essential boundary which shed light on the conceptual-ontological discussion was drawn in relation to two main views of nature. The realistic-particularistic view regards nature as a certain part of reality. The adherents of this presupposition postulate a supernatural sphere alongside nature. Alternatively, the nominalist-universalist view understands nature without this kind of division. Nature is understood as the entire and infinite universe; the whole of reality. Other, less important boundaries which shed light on the conceptual-ontological discussion were noted in relation to views regarding the laws of nature, for example. I recognised that the most important differences between the epistemological approaches were in the different views of justification, rationality, truth and science. The epistemological discussion was divided into two sides, distinguished by their differing assumptions in relation to the need for evidence. Adherents of the first (and noticeably smaller) group did not see any epistemological need to reach a universal and common opinion about miracles. I discovered that these kinds of views, which I called non-objectivist, had subjectivist and so-called collectivist views of justification and a contextualist view of rationality. The second (and larger) group was mainly interested in discerning the grounds upon which to establish an objective and conclusive common view in relation to the epistemology of miracles. I called this kind of discussion an objectivist discussion and this kind of approach an evidentialist approach. Most of the evidentialists tried to defend miracles and the others attempted to offer evidence against miracles. Amongst both sides, there were many different variations according to emphasis and assumption over how they saw the possibilities to prove their own view. The common characteristic in all forms of evidentialism was a commitment to an objectivist notion of rationality and a universalistic notion of justification. Most evidentialists put their confidence in science in one way or another. Only a couple of philosophers represented the most moderate version of evidentialism; they tried to remove themselves from the apparent controversy and contextualised the different opinions in order to make some critical comments on them. I called this kind of approach a contextualising form of evidentialism. In the final part of the epistemological chapter, I examined the discussion about the evidential value of miracles, but nothing substantially new was discovered concerning the epistemological views of the authors.