Should Sweden Change Its Flag

biko wrote: »

Eva Brunne, the lesbian bishop, again:
'More in Common with Muslims than Right-Wing Christians'

She has also said Muslim worshippers in churches are "angels" and that churches should remove all crosses that might offend them and instead mark the direction to Mecca for prayers.

This follows a trend in the Swedish Church to find common ground with Islam.
During a church meeting last November, a motion to ban the Islamic call to prayer in Swedish cities was voted down, with some church officials saying it would be an "amazing" opportunity for more people to meet the "love of Allah."

https://www1.cbn.com/cbnnews/world/2019/june/swedish-bishop-has-more-in-common-with-muslims-than-right-wing-christians

Unsurprisingly, the Christian Broadcasting Network have misconstrued nearly aspect of the stories linked in that article.

Even when read through Google Translate, Brunne's comments were considerably more nuanced when speaking about the commonality she feels towards the other religious groups mentioned...

"I say that I sometimes have more in common with Muslims, those I meet, than with the right Christians...

Every religious community has extremes. As Christians, we sometimes get accountable for the Crusades many hundreds of years ago because it was after all the Christian church. We can say "but there is nothing we stand for today, there were extremes then". Or the witch burns, and I say "but it's nothing I stand for or would even think of saying it's good"...

And there are among Muslims, there are among other Christians, there are among all religious communities. The whole spectrum really. We hear a lot about terrorism and think that it is Muslims who practice this - which it is - but it is nevertheless a small, small minority of all the Muslims we know. We must remember this and must also problematize and talk about...

I do not want to be bundled with all Christians and with the right-wing Christians just because I am a Christian, and be introduced to a union. Just as little Muslims want it.

The "angels" comment and Christian symbols stories are linked. They involve Brunne speaking about the Seamen's Church, an independent non-diocesan Mission located in the Port of Stockholm, via a blog post she wrote for the Church of Sweden website. The context was, as stated, a conversation which arose about what the Mission could do to accommodate the crews of the ships who visit who are of a different faith.

My suggestion was to temporarily make the room available by, for example, marking the direction towards Mecca and moving Christian symbols. Just as is already done in common prayer rooms at airports and in some hospital chapels.

It is important that there are places for praying sisters and brothers and we show hospitality and tolerance regardless of faith. Good and praying people of different faith must be able to meet and help each other.

Temporarily letting a room for people of different faith does not mean that we back off our own faith. Priests are called to proclaim Christ. We do this every day and in every meeting with people. But that also does not mean that we are stingy towards people of other faiths.

There was no mention of the word offense. The Mission itself isn't part of her diocese so not only does it remain a suggestion but was also made in the context of it being a chapel. Lastly, the move itself was repeatedly referred to as temporary. The best part is the source of the "angels" comment, which came from her quotation of Hebrews 13:2 - "Remember to show hospitality, for it has happened that those who have done so have had angels to guests without knowing about it."

Finally, we have the bit about the call to prayer in Swedish cities. This stems from the bi-annual meeting of the Kyrkomötet, the highest decision-making body within the Church of Sweden. The makeup of this body consists of both clergy and layman, with those elected coming from a number of nomination groups, many of which are drawn from political organisations in the country. The Sweden Democrats (not those kind of Democrats, the other kind), who have 24 seats on the body, put forward a motion which would have called on the Swedish Church to officially adopt a critical attitude to Islamic prayer calls across the country. Note, not to ban it, to just adopt the above stance.

The result of the vote was 206 against and 26 for. The CBN story which attributed the quote it used to being from "some church officials" came, in actual fact, from a single representative from the Open Church group whose opening speech was summarised by the Christian newspaper, Dagen, as follows [via Google Translate]...

"We are all aware that the exercise is a direct part of SD's strategy of dehumanizing other people, denying freedom of religion for those who do not fit into their worldview," the opening speech said.

Instead, he meant, the church would spread the gospel and talk about God's love in both words and deeds.

"Imagine what fantastic that more people can meet both the love of Allah and God, and what we get in the encounter with each other", rounded Artemis Lumarker.

Now, all of the above aside, I was able to look into that over a coffee on a lazy Sunday afternoon. A more interesting question is why did the CBN, the sources they used and a slew of other online publications I came across while looking this stuff up, run with their version of the events?

To be offended now is a fashion activity. People seek proactively to be offended. Take up tennis or something useful instead. Offence used to be caused by words or actions of note.. such as someone saying... “women are idiots”, “men are Neanderthals” etc...

Now it’s something gets said that somebody disagrees with and they are ‘offended’...

“ I think the current governments attitude towards homelessness is inadequate “

Reply :

“ how dare you, Leo is the first, homosexual head of state we’ve seen, is very nice to his mother, is trying his best and and and...”

Passion is a fashion, so is fûcking being offended, in 2019, about a flag.