Abstract
In this article I call for a reconceptualization of space in relation to the ecclesial parish system through differentiating between “space”, “place”, and “territory”, suggesting that the last term has been instrumental in introducing an ideological notion of space – in short, the reduction of place and space to administrative territory – into the ecclesiological self-understanding of the Church of Sweden. For my analysis of “territory” as an ideological notion and for a more productive understanding of what I call “existential space”, I refer to contemporary spatial theory in philosophy. The object of study is several paragraphs in the statutes of the Church of Sweden. Several empirical examples – the suburban areas of Rosengård and Flemingsberg – help to further the analysis and substantiate my theoretical argument. Finally, I offer some thoughts toward a more constructive theology of space than that provided by the territorial understanding of the parish. Although concerned with the understanding of parish within the Church of Sweden, the ultimate aim of this article is to contribute to a more general discussion of theological understandings of spatiality.
Highlights
The parish system has a long history in Sweden and elsewhere
In this article I call for a reconceptualization of space in relation to the ecclesial parish system through differentiating between “space”, “place”, and “territory”, suggesting that the last term has been instrumental in introducing an ideological notion of space – in short, the reduction of place and space to administrative territory – into the ecclesiological self-understanding of the Church of Sweden
One may still suspect that the identification of the territory of the state church with the borders of the nation state led to a certain emphasis on territory as such, or perhaps to a transformed understanding of the territory involved in the parish system
Summary
In the official statutes of the Church of Sweden, The Church Ordinance of the Church of Sweden [Kyrkoordning för Svenska kyrkan], chapter 2, §1, establishes that the “parish is the local pastoral territory” and that the “parish is responsible for the ecclesial functions for all who reside in the Sigurdson STJ 2015, Vol 1, No 2, 87–111 parish”.1 We may begin by noting that “parish” is understood in two ways in this passage: as identified with a particular territory, and as an agent able to take responsibilities upon itself. British social scientist and geographer Doreen Massey writes that one characteristic of the history of modernity is “an assumption of isomorphism between space/place on the one hand and society/culture on the other. There is a certain assumption of “spatial coherence” that more or less took for granted two things: first, that the divisions of territory were somehow already there from the beginning and, second, that they corresponded to some kind of cultural, ethnic, and/or religious homogeneity. Such notions of “spatial coherence” are active even today, but Massey regards them as nostalgic, domesticating, and potentially imperialist. It might well be that early modern endorsers of the parish system were more aware of “spatial discordance” than the image of “spatial coherence” allows for; be that as it may, in early modernity the “assumption of isomorphism” was at least relatively easier to make in many places than it is today, given the current pluralization of societies
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
